9000 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Rob Ep, I apprecdiated this post of yours, Rob, and the questions and comments raised. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for your help. I found it very clear. I do have a couple of > questions: > > Is there any reason given why only one citta can arise at a time? Why must > they > be sequential? If there is no 'mind' in which they are to occur, why or how > are > they coordinated in a tight sequential string? I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it is...and our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason why.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. So imagine a puppet on thousands of strings, each coordinated and having effect. The way the puppet moves sequentially is a result of these complex moves and adjustments (read conditions). Or to keep a lingering Indian thread alive, why does an Indian curry on any day taste just the way it does? Isn’t it because of the particular ingredients, the quantities of those ingredients on that day, the order and timing they are added and of course the nature of the tasting, the taste buds, the temperature, the previous experiences, the place and time of tasting and so on and so on. Only the Buddha can really see and understand all the conditions for a reality to arise at any time. However, by reading and considering a little more about conditions (I’m resisting from reminding you of more homework), it helps to see there is no mind, form or body as we usually understand. > If sati is an 'accompaniment' of a citta when it does occur, rather than a > citta > itself, what is it? Where or how does sati arise? Does it 'piggyback' on > its > associated citta(s)? Does it also last for specific number of cittas as a > rupa > does? How would you define sati? I always thought of mindfulness as being > 'an > awareness of being aware'. In other words, for those moments, one is aware > that > there is a process of consciousness taking place, rather than merely > participating > in the consciousness without realizing it. Is this a definition you would > accord > with? Excellent questions and considerations, Rob, but I’m not sure my answer will do them justice Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and is aware of the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for example, if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). As we’ve discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but of the characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware of a process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which thinks about a process of consciousness. In ‘Cetasikas’, Nina quotes from the Atthasalini: ‘...Mindulness has “not floating away” as its characteristic, unforgetfulness as its function, guarding, or the state of facing the object, as its manifestation, firm remembrance (sanna) or application in mindfulness as regards the body, etc., as proximate cause. It should be regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the object, and as a door-keper from guarding the door of the senses.’ Like all other cetasikas (mental factors), sati arises momentarily by conditions, performs its task and falls away. It’s not self, doesn’t last and is inherently unsatisfactory and not worthy of being clung to. However, when it is highly developed with panna, it is an indriya (controlling faculty) and ‘a “leader” of the citta and accompanying cetasikas in its function of heedfulness, of non-forgetfulness of what is wholesome.’ It is also one of the 8-fold factors and an enlightenment factor. > Would it be fair to say that the process that sati 'awakens' to in insight > moments > and eventually in Nibbana, is an awareness that all that seems to be a > relation > with real objects is really a relation of mind with objects of mind? I’m a little lost here. I think it’s most useful to consider what are the realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical phenomena) now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. > Gee, I really have no hesitation to give you a hard time while your dear > friends > and associates are away. If I'm being overly inquisitive, just let me know. > I > know you have a schedule beyond our little 'chats'! I hope to hear more of these questions. You’re not giving me a hard time at all and our little ‘chats’ are a joy, even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). I’m particularly interested in anything further you have to say on this thread which is so directly related to the present moment and realities to be known now. Sarah 9001 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 Hi Sarah > I’ll just add a couple of comments as I read this passage before adding > another > quote. > > The last phrase clearly applies to the unconditioned nature of nibbana. > It is > clear (to me) that nibbana is unconditioned, while being experienced by > the > conditioned. > > All the references to ‘penetration’, ‘hard to see’, ‘abstruse’, ‘logic’, > ‘wise’, ‘knowledge’,refer to the cittas and cetasikas (and in particular > to > panna) which have to be developed to ‘penetrate’ and ‘realise’ the > unconditioned ‘element’. Without this ‘ultra-profound’ development, > nibbana is > not experienced. > > Nibbana has its ‘own nature’ does not suggest any self, just as seeing, > hearing > and other realities have their ‘own nature’ which is not self too. K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. I hope I am being clear abt what I think. Kind regards Ken O 9002 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Erik] Erik, > > on Sunday I will be > > officially married > ============================= > Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. > May I also wish send my bery best wishes to you and Aert. I hope you both have a very memorable and happy day on Sunday with plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure we'll all be thinking of you then. Who knows, Aert may be able and willing to join us on the list as well in time too;-)) Your wedding day almost falls on our anniversary (20th) a few days later, but let me assure you that we're still learning;-) With metta and best wishes, Sarah 9003 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:47am Subject: Re: Hello...[Erik and Herman] Yes, congratulations and best wishes, Erik. Also Herman was married last month and I missed sending my good wishes. Congratulations, Herman. I'm sure your little "Brady bunch" is fortunate in having you as the father and husband. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Erik, > > > > on Sunday I will be > > > officially married > > ============================= > > Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. > > > > May I also wish send my bery best wishes to you and Aert. I hope you both have > a very memorable and happy day on Sunday with plenty of wise reflection and > mindfulness. I'm sure we'll all be thinking of you then. Who knows, Aert may be > able and willing to join us on the list as well in time too;-)) > > Your wedding day almost falls on our anniversary (20th) a few days later, but > let me assure you that we're still learning;-) > > With metta and best wishes, > > Sarah > 9004 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 6:01am Subject: Re: Hello...[Erik] > Fortunately you're in luck, Dan, because on Sunday I will be > officially married Sunday?! Wow! That was quick. I do wish you all the best, Erik. 9005 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 6:06am Subject: Re: Hello Welcome, Jesse! > Hello, > I just joined this list on the recommendation of a friend on IRC. I got > into Buddhism just a short while ago, and I am trying to read the various > suttas as I find them. I may not be very knowledgeable or useful in the > various discussions, so I will just watch for the time being. Thanks. > > Jesse Dhillon. > > "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out > your own salvation." 9006 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 1:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/30/01 8:12:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > > Hi Howard > > Thanks for you point of view. > > > > > > > > > >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because > > > > Nibbana is unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as > > > unconditionanal the first place. > > > > > > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > > posts’ > > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the > > conditioned > > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as > > indicated in > > > my previous quote. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > > it is found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended > to be a positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or > is "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse > > of what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way > things really are when seen truly? > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > k: Yes Howard we can see a glimpse of it is base on the definition of > Nibbana in Mahayana terms. > > > > > > > > > k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it > > difficult > > > to believe me. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Ken, what do you mean by "believe me"? Are you claiming to have a > > direct line to "The Truth"? The Buddha said quite clearly that all > conditions cease. Nothing lasts. Impermanence. Are you saying that you > have directly seen that to be false? > > As far as "believing" you is concerned, the Buddha said that even > > *he* should not be taken purely on faith. Now, all my direct experience > has confirmed to me the Buddha's teaching on impermanence. With all due > > respect, on what basis do you suggest we "believe" you? > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Howard you have misread me. I disagree with you that Buddha said that > all conditions cease means all things are destroyed. I have said a few > times that I disgree with you on the defintion of ceassation. Would you > like to quote me the Pali Cannon Suttas where Buddha said all cittas are > destroyed completely or annihilated. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: How's the following? *********************************************** Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 Anicca Sutta Impermanent Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. For free distribution only. From Contemplation of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication Society. Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are impermanent, compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to evanescence, to fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling and neutral feeling." **************************************** I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading away, to CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if all that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are no truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none to be destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have expressed it. If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used > > the > > > > basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned > > > cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta > > experienced > > > will be illusory. Because this "illusory experience" is due to the > > > speed of cittas which a self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana > > > cannot be substantiated on this basis because in Nibbana we see > > reality, > > > which mean anatta is fully understand, hence there is no "illusory > > > experience". > > > > > > > > S: I agree there is no ilusory experience. The cittas and nibbana > > are > > > > anatta. Anatta doesn’t mean illusory. Sorry I’m having trouble > > following > > > you here. Rob Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better > > > here. > > > > > > > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one > > leading to > > > > > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent > > on > > > > > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, > > we > > > > would not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas > > cannot > > > > > eradicate another cittas because they have the same > > charateristics. > > > > Citta is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually > > > > exclusive. Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting > > > rid, it is abt knowing its coming and going. No eradication because > > > eradication or getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept > > for > > > an "action" to be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as > > it > > > is, > > > > attachment to a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep > > > insisting that Nibbana to me is not eradication of defilements it is > > the > > > letting go of defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. > > One > > > let go of conditions to reach unconditional reality. > > > > > > > S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you > > are > > > > referring to here as I’m not clear where these ideas come from. > > May I > > > > just stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a > > reality > > > for a moment and then gone. There is no ‘one’ to let go of > > conditions or > > > defilements or anything else. If it is not the development of kusala > > > cittas (and in particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to > > > nibbana, then I wonder why the Buddha stresses this development so > > much? > > > > > > k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as > > > kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala > > cittas. > > > Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we > > have > > > kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. > > Because > > > kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to > > > replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and > > akusala > > > both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not > > permanent. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I won't argue about things not being permanent! ;-)) But, as far > > as > > kusala and akusala being mutually dependent, I believe you are mixing > > two > > different senses of 'dependent' here. For sure, the *concepts* of > > 'kusala' > > and 'akusala' are mutually dependent. But that does not, in and of > > itself, > > imply that any kusala dhamma arises in dependence on an akusala one or > > vice-versa. Dependent arising of specific experienced dhammas differs > > from > > the logico-semantic interdependence of concepts. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas cares > whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function as > cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala or > that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas again or > in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical and I > agree with him. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are, of course, conventional terms. Mind states are certainly just what they are. However, some are conducive to such things as calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, and others are not. It is useful to distinguish those which are from those which are not. We call the first group 'kusala'. ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > > peaceful > > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > > goodness > > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > > practise. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > > necessary > > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > > common to > > all religions. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention > > to > > > what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very > > difficult to > > > do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on > > > commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and > > > plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > When one's mind is not already reasonably free of the turmoil of > > akusala thought and emotion - and I do assume that your mind *is* free > > of > > such, at least to the same extent as the rest of us - there is rarely a > > solid > > enough foundation for the development of further calm and insight. > > Moreover, > > when one is tied to wrong view and filled with hate or craving, should > > one > > somehow be able to make progress in meditation, one is likely to > > misinterpret > > what one "sees" and to misuse the fruits of the practice. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to say > what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea on > other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone here. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I'm not saying anything along such lines, Kenneth. I'm simply disagreeing with you. Without a solid foundation of sila, the establishment of which is an essential part of the Buddha's prescription for curing dukkha, the mind is in too much turmoil for the other aspects of the training to be effective. At least a modicum of sila needs to be in place. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I > admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the > fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that > understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, but > as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things that > are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati > principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt kusala > or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This principle of > practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to say. > He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to both > ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference > between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and good > and bad" ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Right mindfulness is one factor out of eight in the noble eightfold path. To be sure, it assumes a royal position, a leadership position among the factors, but it is not the whole of the practice. ---------------------------------------------------- > > k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views which > sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: There's nothing at all akusala ;-)) in being forceful, and I see no reason whatsoever for you to see yourself as being unmindful or inconsiderate. I am simply expressing disagreement with you on a few points, and also expressing that it is not a matter of "believing" or "disbelieving", but simply a matter of agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on certain points - and maybe not even that, but, rather a matter of clarification of positions. ----------------------------------------------------- > > Kind regards > Ken O > > =========================== 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) 9007 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] Hi RobEp, I think you're right. And I also think that the reason some of us have become such hammerheads on the subject of satipatthaana is that all that other kusala, no matter how kusala, just leads to more sa.msaara--satipatthaana does not. That's how I understand it, anyway... mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > > ...I always come back > > to this point here, it seems. While we can talk > about anatta until > > the cows come home, even particle physicists know > that nothing has > > any intrinsic nature. And yet what does that do > for them in terms of > > eradicating the source of suffering? Seriously? > There is much more to > > the game than just the study of Right View, which, > as forerunner, may > > be key, yet it still plays a holistic role with > all the other path- > > factors like Right Speech, Right Resolve, Right > Effort, etc., and > > these operate at both the conventional and > supramundane levels. > > Erik, > I don't know if this applies to what you are saying, > but I would say there's a big > difference between understanding something as a > concept and experiencing it. But > they are related. > > I spent some time trying to directly contemplate > anicca and anatta the other week > and had a moment when I suddenly realized that what > I considered 'Robert' was just > a temporary collection of experiences. I had > understood this concept for a long > time, but the realization at that moment was that it > was not just right but > *actual*. It was quite a shock. Instead of having > the reaction I thought I would > have had, that I would be depressed at the sense of > temporariness and mortality > that this revealed, it was exciting and liberating. > So this to me was a direct > experience of anicca. Now I can't say what ultimate > effect it had. But when I > think back I now have this memory of a direct > experience of 'anicca' as it > pertains to my 'self' [just meaning the familiar > body, thoughts, etc. that I > associate with 'Robert']. These moments of direct > insight, whether they are > 'large' or 'small' have a very different flavour > from studying and understanding a > concept. And in that sense they seem to me to be > akin to the real workings of the > path. > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at > concepts and had *no* insights of > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that > there is any direct relation. > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative > relation between Right View and > the development of Insight. > > What do you think? > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9008 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 0:30pm Subject: Re: Re; Horses [Erik] Hi Rob E., > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* insights of > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct relation. > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between Right View and > the development of Insight. > > What do you think? Bingo. 9009 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard, > Howard: > How's the following? > *********************************************** > Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 > > Anicca Sutta > > Impermanent > > Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. > For free distribution only. > From HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel303.html">Contemplation > of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH > 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist > > Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication > Society. > Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are > impermanent, > compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to evanescence, > to > fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling > and > neutral feeling." > **************************************** > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading > away, to > CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if > all > that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are > no > truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none > to be > destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have > expressed it. > If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand > you. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ k: Yes that is what I meant all dhammas are empty by nature, so what is there to be destroyed. All dhammas are of one nature, what is there to destroyed. All are unborn, what is there to be destroyed since it was not born in the first place. Feelings can never be destroyed because it comes from nowhere and it goes to nowhere, how do we destroyed something that has no fixations. It is only when our "self" is involved, we though it has a fixations. Even when we talk abt feelings (cetasika), where does it go after it cease or where does it come out from? > > > > k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas > cares > > whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function > as > > cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala > or > > that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas > again or > > in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical > and I > > agree with him. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are, of course, conventional > terms. > Mind states are certainly just what they are. However, some are > conducive to > such things as calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > joy, > and equanimity, and others are not. It is useful to distinguish those > which > are from those which are not. We call the first group 'kusala'. > ------------------------------------------------------- k: Yes if we are talking conventional, they are impt bc they are fruits for peaceful mind. > > > > > > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > > > peaceful > > > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > > > goodness > > > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > > > practise. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > > > necessary > > > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > > > common to > > > all religions. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, also common to a lot of religion? > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to > say > > what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea > on > > other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone > here. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I'm not saying anything along such lines, Kenneth. I'm simply > disagreeing with you. Without a solid foundation of sila, the > establishment > of which is an essential part of the Buddha's prescription for curing > dukkha, > the mind is in too much turmoil for the other aspects of the training to > be > effective. At least a modicum of sila needs to be in place. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I > > admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the > > fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that > > understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, > but > > as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things > that > > are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati > > principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt > kusala > > or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This > principle of > > practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to > say. > > He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to > both > > ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference > > between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and > good > > and bad" > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Right mindfulness is one factor out of eight in the noble > eightfold > path. To be sure, it assumes a royal position, a leadership position > among > the factors, but it is not the whole of the practice. > ---------------------------------------------------- k: Yes I am more incline to say that the leadership of the whole practise is right understanding. I am not saying that we should not followed the eight noble path, what I am trying to point out is when we are mindful, sila is not a major factor anymore, it all falls in line. Just like when you are meditating. Are you concern abt right or wrong, or just pure attention. Even when anger arise, it will not affect you. You become an observer of anger, or greed. Similarily, when we are mindful, we cannot do things that are of wrong actions, all sila automatically falls in line. When we have right concentration, it is even better (conventional sense). > > > > k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views > which > > sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There's nothing at all akusala ;-)) in being forceful, and I see > no > reason whatsoever for you to see yourself as being unmindful or > inconsiderate. I am simply expressing disagreement with you on a few > points, > and also expressing that it is not a matter of "believing" or > "disbelieving", > but simply a matter of agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on > certain > points - and maybe not even that, but, rather a matter of clarification > of > positions. > ----------------------------------------------------- k: It could by my grasp of English is the problem bc I am brought up in another different culture. I would refrain from using this word. Kind regards Ken O 9010 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 7:26pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert] Robert, Thank you for your help. I will ponder your response, and Dan will explain it to me several times. (Thanks also for the endorsement of my husband!) Lisa 9011 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/30/01 8:15:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > > > Howard: > > How's the following? > > *********************************************** > > Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 > > > > Anicca Sutta > > > > > Impermanent > > > > Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. > > For free distribution only. > > From > > HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel303.html"> > Contemplation > > of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH > > 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist > > > > Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication > > Society. > > Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are > > impermanent, > > compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to evanescence, > > to > > fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling > > and > > neutral feeling." > > **************************************** > > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading > > away, to > > CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if > > all > > that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are > > no > > truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none > > to be > > destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have > > expressed it. > > If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand > > you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > k: Yes that is what I meant all dhammas are empty by nature, so what is > there to be destroyed. All dhammas are of one nature, what is there to > destroyed. All are unborn, what is there to be destroyed since it was not > born in the first place. Feelings can never be destroyed because it comes > from nowhere and it goes to nowhere, how do we destroyed something that > has no fixations. It is only when our "self" is involved, we though it > has a fixations. Even when we talk abt feelings (cetasika), where does it > go after it cease or where does it come out from? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahhh! Understood. No disagreement then on this. -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas > > cares > > > whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function > > as > > > cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala > > or > > > that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas > > again or > > > in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical > > and I > > > agree with him. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > The terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are, of course, conventional > > terms. > > Mind states are certainly just what they are. However, some are > > conducive to > > such things as calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > > joy, > > and equanimity, and others are not. It is useful to distinguish those > > which > > are from those which are not. We call the first group 'kusala'. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Yes if we are talking conventional, they are impt bc they are fruits > for peaceful mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > > > > peaceful > > > > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > > > > goodness > > > > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > > > > practise. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Howard: > > > > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > > > > necessary > > > > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > > > > common to > > > > all religions. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > joy, also common to a lot of religion? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are two exceptions, as I see it. Only through practicing the dhamma in its entirety, in my opinion, are the heights of insight and unshakable calm attainable. Through sila and concentration alone, which are the parts of the Buddha's path that appear elsewhere, only *limited* calm and insight are attainable. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to > > say > > > what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea > > on > > > other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone > > here. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I'm not saying anything along such lines, Kenneth. I'm simply > > disagreeing with you. Without a solid foundation of sila, the > > establishment > > of which is an essential part of the Buddha's prescription for curing > > dukkha, > > the mind is in too much turmoil for the other aspects of the training to > > be > > effective. At least a modicum of sila needs to be in place. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I > > > admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the > > > fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that > > > understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, > > but > > > as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things > > that > > > are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati > > > principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt > > kusala > > > or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This > > principle of > > > practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to > > say. > > > He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to > > both > > > ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference > > > between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and > > good > > > and bad" > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Right mindfulness is one factor out of eight in the noble > > eightfold > > path. To be sure, it assumes a royal position, a leadership position > > among > > the factors, but it is not the whole of the practice. > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > k: Yes I am more incline to say that the leadership of the whole practise > is right understanding. I am not saying that we should not followed the > eight noble path, what I am trying to point out is when we are mindful, > sila is not a major factor anymore, it all falls in line. Just like when > you are meditating. Are you concern abt right or wrong, or just pure > attention. Even when anger arise, it will not affect you. You become an > observer of anger, or greed. Similarily, when we are mindful, we cannot > do things that are of wrong actions, all sila automatically falls in line. > When we have right concentration, it is even better (conventional sense). > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Conventional right understanding is very important throughout, and when augmented by the other seven path practices, led by mindfulness, there eventually arises supermundane right understanding (or wisdom), which, in turn, leads to liberation. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views > > which > > > sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > There's nothing at all akusala ;-)) in being forceful, and I see > > no > > reason whatsoever for you to see yourself as being unmindful or > > inconsiderate. I am simply expressing disagreement with you on a few > > points, > > and also expressing that it is not a matter of "believing" or > > "disbelieving", > > but simply a matter of agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on > > certain > > points - and maybe not even that, but, rather a matter of clarification > > of > > positions. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > k: It could by my grasp of English is the problem bc I am brought up in > another different culture. I would refrain from using this word. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > ============================== 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) 9012 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 7:43pm Subject: Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > Hi Rob E., > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* > insights of > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct > relation. > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between > Right View and > > the development of Insight. > > > > What do you think? > > Bingo. Indeed Dan, but with a little illustration from my own limited experience as a middling practitioner of this path (who's trying hard to improve) that may or may not be of some benefit. I found the most important aspect of study for me several years ago was "trangye"--studying the Tibetan sage Je Tsongkhapa's various refutations of the other tenet systems held by some proponents of various schools over the millennia, such as the Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Yogacara, and "lower" Madhyamika. This was an in-depth of several flavors of wrong views that did more for my understanding of what is measnt by Right View than any other approach I'd come across in my study of thje Dharma. Of course, I could have never been ready for this without FIRST having practiced getting rid of my intense aversion to othjer sentient beings through the practice of tonglen (giving and taking compassion using the breath as object). All that study of Right View would have made no difference to me at the point my mind was filled with ill-will toward sentient beings, as it had been until I was set straight on the practice of tonglen and had practiced that for many, many months, until my heart turned from sour and cynical to being somewhat more open and accommodating. When these preparations were there--in terms of having cultivatad a somewhat kinder, gentler heart--not to mention the sila of having abandoned driking to the point of heedlessness, THEN (just looking back on my own mind-state) the study of Right View became the most important factor in my practice of the Dharma. Right View as taught to me by my lama through his presentation of Je Tsongkhapa's in his "Essence of Eloquence" showed me how to properly analyze positions (views) like "Mind Only". These etachings showed me where I'd been going wrong, and how to analyze and refute the view that "mind" exists as an absolute entity (the view I had been clinging to--nearly a solipisistic one). This study was still, of course, combined with ongoing tonglen (Tibetann metta-bhavana) with at least one hour a day of anapanasati meditation EVERY DAY WITHOUT FAIL, until mental and physical lightness and pliancy and tranquility became well-established, until even jhana while riding the subway was possible, and there was real viriya combined with real passadhi and upekkha at most times, and even greater piti in jhana meditation than normal throughout the day (not to mention I dropped about two hours of sleep a night because a few minutes in the rapture of jhana is like an hour or more of sleep). Mind you thhis is not even any kind of mastery of jhana, but "good enough" for a beginner, and good enough that within a few moments of sitting down, bodily fabrications were calmed and concentration firmly established, and within moments after that the "circulating fountain of bliss" arose, and then shortly thereafter, just calm, unshakeable concentration, taking emptiness of the "I, me, mine" as the object of meditation stepping in & out of the jhanas. In other words, a full combination of samatha and vipashayana, as taught in my system (which is based on Master Kamalasila's "Bhavana Krama" or the "Progressive Stages" [of meditation]). This practice was ALSO combined also with serious confidence in my ability to "get" Right View: strong faith (saddha) in the Buddha's teachings, as well as in my lama's understanding and that he was teaching Right View. My confidence grew after being shown, via reasoning and logic, how nothing has independent existence, that nothing exists absolutely (unestablished apart from conditions), that all things are composed of other things and therefore subject to cessation. Nagarjuna's "Verses from the Middle Way" were (and are) of immense help in this, I must say. Every waking moment of my life was centered on the Dharma in some way at this time, every contemplation a meditation on how things lack self-nature yet still exist by way of convention, and NEVER the discarding of conventions like accumulating wholsome kamma either-- working diligently on practices like tonglen, since my lama taught us that merit and wisdom are like "two wings on a bird" that work in tandem to bring to fruition the realization that destroys how we incorrectly hold to objects as being self-existent, and the direct realization of emptiness or anatta is the ultimate (and only) antidote to the sufferings of samsara. So not just the study of Right View, but many, many things that all come together at the same time, which for thse khandas involved at least two hours a day of the textual study of the Dhamma in addition to every moment I could recall practices like tonglen and the meditation on emptiness, along with jhana practice daily for at least an hour (preceded by mantra recitations--an excellent form of samatha meditation, BTW, not to mention great metta-bhavana cultivation with "OM MANI PEMA HUNG" and the like), until the aforementioned factors were all energized to the point they all came together in a flash of a single moment that changed everything. So while I agree with you that Right View IS forerunner, and I'd never deny that, and the study of Right View is key. AND YET, without the more mundane practices it would have been for me a worthless theoretical exercise by itself. That is a danger of clinging to the view of anatta often spoken of (Nagarjuna called those who take anatta/e,ptiness as a view as "incurable" for example)--that it becomes a VIEW in itself, that it becomes so important it makes things like cultivating a good heart seem like a pointless endeavor. The reason I spend so much time on this point here is that I really believe that the Middle Way propounded by the Buddha means just that: it's about finding the right balance, striking the "sweet spot"--like the lute-string: not too tight, nor too loose. And it is very easy to become too tight on the study of anatta to the exclusion of accumulating merit (or too loose), or too tight on the practice of accumulating merit to the exclusion of the study of Right View (or too loose). The Path is the Middle Way between these extremes. When there is too much emphasis on either Right View OR the accumulation of merit and wholesome states of mind (which by themselves we all know don't lead to anything other than pleasant results--they MUST be combined with Right View to actualize the Buddha's path), then practice becomes lopsided and yields no fruit, and one will never find the Middle Way between the extremes of no-existence and true existence. 9013 From: frank kuan Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:16pm Subject: unintentional humor often the best "Poetry is the art of substantiating shadows, and of lending existence to nothing." - Edmund Burke In other words, poetry is the exact opposite of cultivation :-) How deplorable the human state is! We want permanence when all signs indicate otherwise, we chase after happiness and multiply dukkha instead. -fk 9014 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello - Jesse Hello, Jesse, --- Jesse Dhillon wrote: > Hello, > I just joined this list on the recommendation of a friend on IRC. I got > into Buddhism just a short while ago, and I am trying to read the various > suttas as I find them. I may not be very knowledgeable or useful in the > various discussions, so I will just watch for the time being. Thanks. Thanks for joining us and sending this intro....I sincerely hope you find this list useful. Please ask any questions about the suttas and feel free to let us know if there is something being discussed that you'd like clarification on or if you have a comment of your own. Most of us are not very knowledgeable here, but we just try to give each other a little support and encouragement. > "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out > your own salvation." This is an important quote and reminder which is interpreted in different ways, I think.... Btw, I have two little questions: May I ask what IRC is? Where do you live, Jesse? (answers are optional;-)) Hope to hear from you later, Best wishes, Sarah 9015 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard > > > Howard: > > > How's the following? > > > *********************************************** > > > Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 > > > > > > Anicca Sutta > > > > > > > > Impermanent > > > > > > Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. > > > For free distribution only. > > > From > > > HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel303.html"> > > Contemplation > > > of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH > > > 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist > > > > > > Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication > > > Society. > > > Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are > > > impermanent, > > > compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to > evanescence,> to fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling and neutral feeling." > > > **************************************** > > > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading > > > away, to CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if all that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are no truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none to be destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have expressed it. If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand> you. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > k: Yes that is what I meant all dhammas are empty by nature, so what > is there to be destroyed. All dhammas are of one nature, what is there > to destroyed. All are unborn, what is there to be destroyed since it was > not born in the first place. Feelings can never be destroyed because it > comes from nowhere and it goes to nowhere, how do we destroyed something > that has no fixations. It is only when our "self" is involved, we though > it has a fixations. Even when we talk abt feelings (cetasika), where > does it go after it cease or where does it come out from? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Ahhh! Understood. No disagreement then on this. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- k: Then I think you are back to the same question, do cittas cease? I feel that the sutta defintion is not congruent with what you have agreed with my point of view. What is your point of view on cittas cease? > > k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > > joy, also common to a lot of religion? > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There are two exceptions, as I see it. Only through practicing > the dhamma in its entirety, in my opinion, are the heights of insight and unshakable calm attainable. Through sila and concentration alone, which are the parts of the Buddha's path that appear elsewhere, only *limited* calm and insight are attainable. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- k: Only through anatta then we are different from the rest of the religions bc most religions has a self attached view. Since all cittas are anatta, it does not care whether we infer it as kusala or akusala, it will still perform its role. By attached values on citta, is discrimination a self on anatta. Furthemore to explain why I say kusala depends on aksuala. Firstly, how do we not know what is detachment if we do not realised what is attachment. How do we know what is joy if we do not know what is sad? These discrimination arise bc of our condition thinking. Since cittas are anatta, it is us who "fixed" such a meaning. Paradoxically we need such a meaning to know what is good what is bad (it is like a reference book), but the practise I more incline to interpret is Buddha urges us not to attached to both sides. It is a practise of non fixations (sati) since cittas or cetasikas have no fixations. ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > k: Yes I am more incline to say that the leadership of the whole > practise is right understanding. I am not saying that we should not followed the eight noble path, what I am trying to point out is when we are > mindful, sila is not a major factor anymore, it all falls in line. Just like when you are meditating. Are you concern abt right or wrong, or just pure attention. Even when anger arise, it will not affect you. You become > an > observer of anger, or greed. Similarily, when we are mindful, we > cannot do things that are of wrong actions, all sila automatically falls in line.> When we have right concentration, it is even better (conventional > sense). > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Conventional right understanding is very important throughout, > and when augmented by the other seven path practices, led by mindfulness, > there eventually arises supermundane right understanding (or wisdom), which, in turn, leads to liberation. > ----------------------------------------------------------- k: I agreed with you on right understanding which I will describe as the steering wheel. Right Mindfullness is the engine. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9016 From: Jesse Dhillon Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:06am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] unintentional humor often the best >In other words, poetry is the exact opposite of >cultivation :-) How deplorable the human state is! We >want permanence when all signs indicate otherwise, we >chase after happiness and multiply dukkha instead. > >-fk Perhaps Bishop Berkeley put this in a good way. He said that empiricists, who pride themselves on making measurements and divisions out of the world cannot, in fact, justify the belief that there is a mind-independent world which exists outside of our consciousnesses. This is contradictory to the very logic they profess, as this would mean that there are "objects" in the "real world" which we believe to exist, even though we can never directly observe them; we only observe them through our grid of senses. He is really saying that there is nothing independent of ourselves, and that we forget this and believe that the world, our bodies, and our minds are real because we are ignorant of the fact that we can't justify our belief in this. We observe nothing. Nothing observes us. Just my humble opinion. Jesse Dhillon. "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out your own salvation." 9017 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question Dear Rob Ep and Lisa, Rob Ep wrote this post (below) recently and I thought it was beautifully written with a good explanation as to why some people like himself 'have been attracted to this list'.... I might quibble over a few minor points, but I thought the 'gist' was spot on and very sincere. Lisa, as I was clearing out old posts, I thought of your question and wondered if you might find it helpful. I know Rob Ep will be delighted if you wish to pursue any of his comments further..... Thanks Rob....;-) Sarah --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both > beings > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > anatta as > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > anything > to me. > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > nothing to > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > phenomena. > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the > factors > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, > and > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > co-arising > conditions. > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > impermanence > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a > real > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not > ordained > by some other action. > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > effort. > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good > medicine > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in > the > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > notion of > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the > rainbow > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self > or > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is > to > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is > just > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, > this is > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted > to > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good > dose of > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > substitute for > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to > be > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > Regards, > Robert > > =========================== 9018 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:31am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the > web? I > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure > poetry of the sound. I know the feeling:-) Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries are not translated into English at all. Out of those parts which have been translated into English, I'm always very out-of-date as to what is available on the web exactly. Perhaps Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely with links as I know they are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll find links to the Access to Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in English, but precious little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of the translations which are rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all the Access to Insight translations on the Web and to be able to give easy links, but generally I prefer to read other translations, such as those by B.Bodhi with Commentary notes where possible, which are mostly only in book form. None of the PTS translations are on Web either (as far as I know), but all of this is just a mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small publishers who would like the materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue to do their work without any income. Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I hope someone else will help with better information. Sarah 9019 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India Hi Jon, it's me;-) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another > world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours ago, > but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different > only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and anupayancanna > -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') appearing > through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through the > various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, and > it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding that > we are urged to develop. Would you kindly elaborate on the nimitta and anupayancanna as mentioned above and the distinction between them in this context. I'd also be interested to hear more about your discussion on characteristics of realities (as opposed to realities) to be known and the 'carbon paper' simile you mentioned briefly to me in the context of Howard's question on the timing of awareness. No rush.... Thanks.... see you after my yoga class;-)) Sar > Leaving the group was for me a classic example of 'sweet sorrow', that is, > both strong pleasant feeling (because of attachment to the good people and > the many fruitful discussions) and sadness (at the fact that it was all > coming to an end) arising alternately and apparently simultaneously. This > was a condition for tears to appear when saying my final goodbye to the > group, but since one still has so much accumulated kilesa, this is only to > be expected I suppose. And any embarrassment I may have felt at this > unseemly exhibition on my part is itself just another example of that > particular kilesa known as mana (seeing oneself as important)! > > There were many useful snippets that came up during the trip, and I will > try to bring these in to posts as and when appropriate. > > For anyone who has the slightest inclination, I would strongly recommend > taking any opportunity to visit the holy places or join any trip that Khun > Sujin is doing (and ideally, of course, to combine both of these if at all > possible). > > It's good to be back with you all. > > Jon > 9020 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 1:54am Subject: Concepts Hi all, Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to be directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment include awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? How can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is changing? There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality for the deduction of change to be made. Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to cling to and noone to do the clinging. So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? Regards Herman 9021 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 2:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Best wishes, Erik --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > > Hey, are you making moves on my wife?! > > Fortunately you're in luck, Dan, because on Sunday I will be > officially married, and my new bride will have none of that sort of > thing, so you're off the hook! I'm just trying to get my flirtation > in while I can still get away with it. Erik You sure are a fast mover! It seems only weeks ago that you were telling Sarah and me over breakfast at the Peninsular Hotel in Bangkok about this charming girl you had come across on an earlier visit to Cambodia, and were planning to visit some time soon. I remarked, only half jokingly, about 'carrying on the story', little thinking that the story would turn into reality (in a purely conventional sense, of course), and in such quick order too. Not a man to beat about the bush! Erik, I wish you and Aert all the very best for a long and happy life together. May you find the hapiness you seek, and may you also grow in understanding. Jon 9022 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 2:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Howard & others I have pasted below the entry from Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' on the subject of the stages in the life-span of a citta. Hope you find it of interest. Jon --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Howard and sarah, > In "A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhip156 Guide to > #6 'The life span of a citta is termed , in the Abhidhamma a > mindmoment(cittakhana). ..in a flash of lightning billions of mind- > moments can elasp. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinetesimal each > mind moment in turn consists of three sub-moments: arising(uppada) > presence(thithi) and dissolution(bhavanga). Within the breath of a > mindmoment a citta arises , performs its momentary function, and then > dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succesion"Endquote > robert Citta-kkhana: 'consciousness-moment', is the time occupied by one single stage in the perceptual process or cognitive series (cittavíthi). This moment again is subdivided into the genetic (uppáda), static (thiti) and dissolving (bhanga) moment. One such moment is said in the commentaries to be of inconceivably short duration and to last not longer than the billionth part of the time occupied by a flash of lightning. However that may be, we ourselves know from experience that it is possible within one single second to dream of innumerable things and events. In Anguttara Nikaya I, 10 it is said: "Nothing, o monks, do I know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing consciousness.". For a sutta source of the 3 stages, see Anguttara Nikaya III, 47-- "There are 3 characteristics of what is conditioned (sankhatassa lakkhaná): an arising (uppádo) is apparent, a passing away (vayo) is apparent, a change in the existing (thitassa aññathattam: Com. = ageing) is apparent" The same 3 phases are mentioned in Samyutta Nikaya XXII, 37, where they are applied to each of the 5 khandha. 9023 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Ken - Our back-and-forth post is getting lengthy - so I will snip away the parts I am not replying to. In a message dated 10/31/01 2:01:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Ahhh! Understood. No disagreement then on this. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Then I think you are back to the same question, do cittas cease? I > feel that the sutta defintion is not congruent with what you have agreed > with my point of view. What is your point of view on cittas cease? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: First of all, I'm not at all sure that I even accept the notion of cittas in the sense of instantaneous mind-moments! But for purposes of discussion, let me take 'citta' to mean "mind state", without an inference of that being instantaneous. In that case, I would say that in the same conventional sense that cittas arise and exist, they also cease. Whatever arises, ceases. However, in truth, and not just by convention, I don't believe that there ever arise separate cittas; I believe that *we* separate out cittas and dhammas from the general "flux" that is reality, and treat them as if they were substantial, individuated "things". --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > > > joy, also common to a lot of religion? > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > There are two exceptions, as I see it. Only through practicing > > the dhamma in its entirety, in my opinion, are the heights of insight > and unshakable calm attainable. Through sila and concentration alone, > which are the parts of the Buddha's path that appear elsewhere, only > *limited* calm and insight are attainable. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Only through anatta then we are different from the rest of the > religions bc most religions has a self attached view. Since all cittas > are anatta, it does not care whether we infer it as kusala or akusala, it > will still perform its role. By attached values on citta, is > discrimination a self on anatta. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Anatta is, indeed, the main doctrinal difference between the Dhamma and other religions, and satipatthana is the main difference in practice. But that does not imply that one can attend only to what is different and be a "complete Buddhist". The main difference between a good bakery cake and a mediocre one is butter (let us say), but that doesn't mean that a good cake consists only of butter! With regard to not distinguishing between kusala and akusala because both are sunya, by the same reasoning there is no need to distingish between a Buddha and a Hitler! Seeing clearly the nature of conventional things is important, even when realizing at the same time that there are, in reality, no such things. From the Mahayana perspective, which I understand is yours, consider the Diamond-Cutter Sutra. There, Bodhisattvas are encouraged to assist all beings towards liberation, while all the while realizing that, ultimately, there are no such beings. Don't forget the notion of "two truths". Until you and I are arahants, we ignore conventional truth at our peril (and the peril of others). -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Furthemore to explain why I say kusala depends on aksuala. Firstly, how > do we not know what is detachment if we do not realised what is > attachment. How do we know what is joy if we do not know what is sad? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't disagree with you on this. I said that before. The notions, the concepts, of kusala and akusala are mutually dependent, and the understanding of one depends on the understanding of the other. As I pointed out before, however, that conceptual interdependence is a different matter from the conditionality that may or may not hold between kusala and akusala mind states. ------------------------------------------------------------ > These discrimination arise bc of our condition thinking. Since cittas are > anatta, it is us who "fixed" such a meaning. Paradoxically we need such a > meaning to know what is good what is bad (it is like a reference book), > but the practise I more incline to interpret is Buddha urges us not to > attached to both sides. It is a practise of non fixations (sati) since > cittas or cetasikas have no fixations. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: If, by the foregoing, you mean that there is no difference between kusala and akusala states except as we arbitrarily impose, then I strongly disagree. The difference between conventional things is not arbitrary. Your c ertainty that poison is nectar will not protect you when you drink the poison! --------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Conventional right understanding is very important throughout, > > and when augmented by the other seven path practices, led by > mindfulness, > > there eventually arises supermundane right understanding (or wisdom), > which, in turn, leads to liberation. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > k: I agreed with you on right understanding which I will describe as the > steering wheel. Right Mindfullness is the engine. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I'm no more an expert on automobiles than I am on chariots! ;-)) But I think your metaphor sounds quite good! ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > > ============================== 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) 9024 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 11:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concepts Hi, Herman - In a message dated 10/31/01 4:55:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@d... writes: > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > ========================== Nagarjuna addressed this very point. If dukkha were truly "real", a true "thing", how could there be an escape from samsara? It is only because dukkha, itself, is empty that freedom is 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) 9025 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 5:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > First of all, I'm not at all sure that I even accept the notion > of cittas in the sense of instantaneous mind-moments! But for purposes of discussion, let me take 'citta' to mean "mind state", without an > inference of that being instantaneous. In that case, I would say that in the same conventional sense that cittas arise and exist, they also cease. Whatever arises, ceases. However, in truth, and not just by convention, I don't believe that there ever arise separate cittas; I believe that *we* separate out cittas and dhammas from the general "flux" that is reality, and treat them as if they were substantial, individuated "things". > --------------------------------------------------------- k: To me, I accepted that cittas are momentary. Because feeling, thoughts etc is also momentary hence to me cittas are also momentary. Furthermore there is logic to cittas as a seperate process bc in conventional sense our different part of our brain organ organise different sense faculty. They are also different sense organ doorways, hence there are different cittas or cetasikas involved. Actually I like to know what is the Pali actual words for the Anicca Sutta that you have provided. I like to study more on its Pali words rather than the translations. I wishfully hope that Gayan could translate it:). I like to know whether it was used conventionally or absolutely. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > If, by the foregoing, you mean that there is no difference > between kusala and akusala states except as we arbitrarily impose, then I strongly disagree. The difference between conventional things is not arbitrary. Your certainty that poison is nectar will not protect you when you drink the poison! > --------------------------------------------------------------- k: Conventional yes, we got to know these terms very well so that we do not do evil things and let the mind to become restless. But in absolute terms they are not impt if one is in sati. To further explain why it is not impt, cittas are like mechanical parts of an automobile, one does not know the presence of the other, they just work together. They do not know whether they are the gear or they are the wheel. It just worked together as they suppose to work. It does not care whether it is first or reverse gear. Imposition of good and bad to these cittas is mainly due to our conditioning habits since past countless lifes. In the Mahayana terms, Buddha's wisdom is the same essence as in defilements. There is no difference. Difference arise due to our conditioning of what is wrong or right, good or bad. What is neither right or wrong is beyond conditioning, what is beyond conditioning is inconceivable, what is inconceivable is the same realm as Buddha nature. It is the same as sati practise, neither right nor wrong. No discrimination. If you remember that I say abt feelings, it goes nowhere and it comes from nowhere. It is the same to the other four khandas. One that comes from nowhere and goes to nowhere has no fixation, one has no fixation has no dependency, one has no dependency has no grasping, hence no conditioning, hence the same nature as Buddha nature. Hence that I why I say the nature of citta is the same as Buddha nature in an earlier post. Kind regards Ken O 9026 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 6:12am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi Jon >Thus is Nibbána visible in this life, immediate, inviting, attractive, >and comprehensible to the wise" (A. III, 55). k: hmm attractive? Sounds like desiring to be in Nibbana? "Just as a rock of one solid mass remains unshaken by the wind, even so neither visible forms, nor sounds, nor odours, nor tastes, nor bodily impressions, neither the desired nor the undesired, can cause such a one to waver. Steadfast is his mind, gained is deliverance" (A, VI, 55). "Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be possible" (Ud. VIII, 3). k: I think when we are talk abt unborn we should not equate this with the born. Born should be equate with death and not unborn. Undeath is equate with unborn. It is like if there is no creation in the first place, where is there destruction. Furthermore when the commentary talk abt escape from the world of born, isn't it implying we are going from one "born" state to another state "where born does not exist". It sounds like saying that Nibbana is conditioned by the born, because without the born, where is there a state "where born does not exist". "One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only for the actual realization of the goal of Nibbána, but also for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anattá (q.v.), the egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive Nibbána - according to one's either materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an ego, or as an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or with which it merges. Hence it is said:" k: So what is the point of explaining Nibbana in the first place. That is why I think Buddha says very few points in describing Nibbana. A nature that are beyond words to described. >"Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; >The deed is, but no doer of the deed is there; k: Since there is no sufferer, where is there suffering in the first place? >Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; >The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." >(Vis.M. XVI) k: Since there is no traveler, where is there a need for a path to travel? Path is also anatta, same as the traveler, hence where is the path? Kind regards Ken O 9027 From: m. nease Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 7:31am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web Hi Sarah and Rob, Sorry to disappoint but I'm not up on abhidhamma on the web either (especially commentaries). The best I can offer are the files and links at http://abhidhamma.org/ and http://www.dhammastudy.com/ I agree with Sarah about Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations, some of which you can find on the web searching by his name, but unfortunately few. mike --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon > translated into English on the > > web? I > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can > only enjoy it for the pure > > poetry of the sound. > > I know the feeling:-) > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries > are not translated into > English at all. Out of those parts which have been > translated into English, I'm > always very out-of-date as to what is available on > the web exactly. Perhaps > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely > with links as I know they > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll > find links to the Access to > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in > English, but precious > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of > the translations which are > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all > the Access to Insight > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy > links, but generally I > prefer to read other translations, such as those by > B.Bodhi with Commentary > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book > form. None of the PTS > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), > but all of this is just a > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small > publishers who would like the > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue > to do their work without any > income. > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I > hope someone else will help > with better information. > > Sarah > > 9028 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 8:06am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding > of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that > Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that > isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. > Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. Hi Kenneth, Nibbana is a LABEL that is applied to the absence of the defilements of greed, hatred, and delusion. In this way it is a "nature" (absence of the defilements), but not a "nature" in the sense that if we just scratch the surface of ourselves, or if we just purify enough we'll find this mysterious entity underneath it all called "Buddha-nature" that's just been hidden away all this time, some hidden Self, for example. Buddha-nature correctly interpreted by Mahayana commentators refers to the POTENTIAL of all sentient beings to realize perfect enlightenment. It is not a thing-in-itself, a Universal Mind or somesuch, some permanent entity or substratum underlying all reality. Even the Zen patriarch Hui Neng, for example, when he uses the term "Self", simultaneously rejects independent existence. Anatta/emptiness refers to the fact that all things lack fixed or permanent nature (which would entail the consequence that they have existed for all time and will continue to exist for all time, unchanged, and unchanging, not to mention unchangeable). The "nature" part of anatta refers to the fact that all composed things are composed of other things, implying that nothing has any "core" or true "essence" or "entity" or "identity", that "realness" is a mere mental construct dependent on our own conditioning, which we impose onto a bunch of composed parts (in turn composed of yet more parts), in the same way we disignate a "chair" a chair in dependence on legs, a cushion, etc. There is no truly existent "chair" there, no "chairness" to be found among the legs, the cushion, the backrest. "Chair" is merely a concept, and thus unreal ultimately. Yet conventionally it performs the function of supporting your behind all the same! Anatta also says that that there is not truly any "oneness", nor is there truly "manyness"--meaning things are neither one nor many--this is the Middle Way betwen saying things exist as "things in themselves" and denying things exist at all. Furthermore, all composed things are impermanent, undergoing constant change, and as such this also implies they are devoid of any intrinsic or permanent "self". This is the atta (self) denied by the teaching of anatta, which is implied by anicca (impermanence), which in turn implies dukkha (suffering), since we tend to cling to these impermenent fabrications as "real", since we are under the spell that they truly exist. As a result, we experience pain as a result of this ignorance of their true nature, because we either attach to them if they appear pleasurable (and thus get upset when they change or disappear on us, which is inevitable following the law of impermanence), or feel aversion and disgust toward them if they appear unpleasant. The point is to come to see that there is nothing in the triple-realm that possesses intrinsic identity (self, atta), that even we sentient beings, as composed entities, also lack substantial entity. Once this undersatnding is permanently established (as it is for arahats) then all suffering ceases, because all the causes for suffering have been eradicated, starved of their fuel (the ignorance that conceives of an "I, me, mine"). This delusion is permanently abolished in those who have brought the Buddhist path to completion. 9029 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 9:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 HI Erik > > Hi Kenneth, > > Nibbana is a LABEL that is applied to the absence of the defilements > of greed, hatred, and delusion. In this way it is a "nature" (absence > of the defilements), but not a "nature" in the sense that if we just > scratch the surface of ourselves, or if we just purify enough we'll > find this mysterious entity underneath it all called "Buddha-nature" > that's just been hidden away all this time, some hidden Self, for > example. k: For the Thervadans, that is their definition but for Mahayana that is not the definitions. Because all defilements are empty by nature hence they have the same essence as Buddha's wisdoms. There is no discrimination bc if there is discrimination, it shows dependency. If there is dependecy, there is conditioning. > > Buddha-nature correctly interpreted by Mahayana commentators refers > to the POTENTIAL of all sentient beings to realize perfect > enlightenment. It is not a thing-in-itself, a Universal Mind or > somesuch, some permanent entity or substratum underlying all reality. > Even the Zen patriarch Hui Neng, for example, when he uses the > term "Self", simultaneously rejects independent existence. k: Buddha Nature can be interpreted in many ways in many context. It depends on the situation. On one hand it can be interpreted as the potential, while on the other, it can be interpreted as emptiness. because Buddha nature is empty by nature. > Anatta/emptiness refers to the fact that all things lack fixed or > permanent nature (which would entail the consequence that they have > existed for all time and will continue to exist for all time, > unchanged, and unchanging, not to mention unchangeable). The "nature" > part of anatta refers to the fact that all composed things are > composed of other things, implying that nothing has any "core" or > true "essence" or "entity" or "identity", that "realness" is a mere > mental construct dependent on our own conditioning, which we impose > onto a bunch of composed parts (in turn composed of yet more parts), > in the same way we disignate a "chair" a chair in dependence on legs, > a cushion, etc. > > There is no truly existent "chair" there, no "chairness" to be found > among the legs, the cushion, the backrest. "Chair" is merely a > concept, and thus unreal ultimately. Yet conventionally it performs > the function of supporting your behind all the same! Anatta also says > that that there is not truly any "oneness", nor is there > truly "manyness"--meaning things are neither one nor many--this is > the Middle Way betwen saying things exist as "things in themselves" > and denying things exist at all. k: Buddism is beyond dualism and oneness bc they are both end of the spectrum. When we talk abt the chair, it neither exist nor not exist. If it does not exist, why are you seeing it. If it exist, where is its nature. > > Furthermore, all composed things are impermanent, undergoing constant > change, and as such this also implies they are devoid of any > intrinsic or permanent "self". This is the atta (self) denied by the > teaching of anatta, which is implied by anicca (impermanence), which > in turn implies dukkha (suffering), since we tend to cling to these > impermenent fabrications as "real", since we are under the spell that > they truly exist. As a result, we experience pain as a result of this > ignorance of their true nature, because we either attach to them if > they appear pleasurable (and thus get upset when they change or > disappear on us, which is inevitable following the law of > impermanence), or feel aversion and disgust toward them if they > appear unpleasant. > k: I thought that is what I said on the other post I defined impermanent as "every changing", not creating or destroying. What we experience is also empty by nature. Because it goes nowhere and comes from nowhere. It only "appear" when there is the right of causes and conditions and "disappear" when the causes and contions are absent. Furthermore, where is there to experience if one is in sati. Where is aversion if one is in sati. Where is suffering is one is in sati. > The point is to come to see that there is nothing in the triple-realm > that possesses intrinsic identity (self, atta), that even we sentient > beings, as composed entities, also lack substantial entity. Once this > undersatnding is permanently established (as it is for arahats) then > all suffering ceases, because all the causes for suffering have been > eradicated, starved of their fuel (the ignorance that conceives of > an "I, me, mine"). This delusion is permanently abolished in those > who have brought the Buddhist path to completion. k: I agree with you wholeheartedly that we must understand anicca, anatta and dukkha in order to have right understanding and practise the eight noble path deligently and follow it every moment of our life. I believe in this path and I am convinced this path is the way. Such a conviction is develop not by blinding following what Buddha says in the suttas. It is the actual practise of what it is taught in the sutta and then investigate it whether it conforms to the wise. As a result, we are able to grow confidence in Buddhism and this is the kalama spirit, henceforth our understanding is further increase or reinforce, and not by studying or reading the numerous suttas. In fact if we look at the Pali Cannon closely, it drills on the same few concepts of anatta, anicca, dukkha and sati. It is just represented differently in different wordings. Now what I am saying is something I like to point out the differences in our understanding of certain concepts. What Buddha is teaching is "is not" to conteract our "is" conditioning for humans. But his method of practise is beyond "is not" and "is". All dhammas by nature is beyond "is not" and "is". This is the concept of Mahayana emptiness. The Thervada concept of emptiness is different from the Mahayana bc Thervada defintion is on "is not" spectrum while the Mahayana concept of emptiness is beyond "is not" and "is". There is always a substantiality reality issue in Buddhism because we are trying to define Nibbana as "is not" which in fact Nibbana is beyond "is not" and "is". We cannot define Nibbana as free of defilements bc it is "is not". Words is very inadequate to describe such a state. Its beyond words as it is beyond dualism and oneness. Kind regards Ken O 9030 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:58pm Subject: Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. Dear Robert, I am not sure if you have found the info. you're after - very busy at work this last week or two (Hospital being audited and accredited..... hopefully). So I have not caught up with the posts - and may never do so if all of you keep up the current pace! :-) These few links may be helpful: Access to Insight - Canon http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/index.html Sacred Texts of Buddhism http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/index.htm Tipitaka http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/index.htm Majjhima Nikaya at: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/index.htm Some sites are more comprehensive than others. But all have only a portion of the whole. I would really like to know more of the Commentaries, my interest has been piqued by members of this list. Could anyone assist by listing what would be good to buy, where to buy and what to start with? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the web? I > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure > poetry of the sound. > > Robert Ep. > 9031 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 1:17pm Subject: A thought about Pali Dear Rob E. and All, Would it be worthwhile learning Pali? I notice that there are a number of sites for groups and courses devoted to this. Then you CD copy would come in handy.:-) I guess it all comes down to Money vs limited Time and Effort, and choices on where to expend either one. metta, Christine 9032 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 2:22pm Subject: Re: Concepts Howard, Thank you for this and all your other responses. I may not always acknowledge each and everyone of them, but be assured I read, digest and appreciate them. There is tremendous profundity in your reply. Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 10/31/01 4:55:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, > hhofman@d... writes: > > > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > > > ========================== > Nagarjuna addressed this very point. If dukkha were truly "real", a > true "thing", how could there be an escape from samsara? It is only because > dukkha, itself, is empty that freedom is 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) 9033 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 6:04pm Subject: Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > . > I would really like to know more of the Commentaries, my interest has > been piqued by members of this list. > > Could anyone assist by listing what would be good to buy, where to > buy and what to start with? > > metta, > Christine > >___________ Dear Christine, I recommend : Net of views Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS The Root of existence Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS The Discourse on the fruits of recluseship Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS The Dispeller of Delusion (2volume set) Pali Text society The Expositor, Pali text society The Dhammapada (commentary) by John Ross Carter and Palihawadana Buddhist legends (3vol.set) Burlingame Jataka (3vol.set) Cowell PTS the udana commentary (masefield) PTS Vimana stories (masefield) PTS You could start at the top and work down. I also recommend ANY books by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk (she always quotes suttas and commentaries) robert 9034 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 7:17pm Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: Hello Kenneth, > > Nibbana is a LABEL that is applied to the absence of the defilements > > of greed, hatred, and delusion. > k: For the Thervadans, that is their definition but for Mahayana that is > not the definitions. It is the Mahayana definition--at least, it's the definition given me by my Tibetan teachers. I think they're what some would label Mahayana! (though of course those are mere labels for the same Buddhadharma) > Because all defilements are empty by nature hence > they have the same essence as Buddha's wisdoms. Indeed they do. > There is no discrimination > bc if there is discrimination, it shows dependency. There is no ULTIMATE discrimination, but here's where problems arise interpreting this. Some take it to mean that ultimate non-difference in emptiness means there is no conventional difference between composed entities, or any meaningful distinction between good and evil. While neither exist "truly", in the ultimate sense--from the perspective of ultimate truth (paramattha sacca)--there is one hell (or heaven) of a big difference in conventional terms! :) It is key, important to understand the difference between the two truths, and how they apply. To hold to the conventional at the expense of the ultimate is to fall into one extreme--the extreme of true existence; to hold to to ultimate is to fall into the other extreme, the extreme of non-existence. Je Tsongkhapa notes: "A person's entered the path that pleases the Buddhas When for all objects, in the cycle or beyond, He sees that cause and effect can never fail, And when for him they lose all solid appearance. "You've yet to realize the thought of the Able As long as two ideas seem to you disparate: The appearance of things-infallible interdependence; And emptiness-beyond taking any position. "At some point, they no longer alternate, come together; Just seeing that interdependence never fails Brings realization that destroys how you hold to objects, And then your analysis with view is complete. "In addition the appearance prevents the existence extreme; Emptiness that of non-existence, and if You see how emptiness shows in cause and effect You'll never be stolen off by extreme views." > If there is dependecy, there is conditioning. Indeed, and dependent origination is the flipside complement of anatta; without dependency, no anatta/emptiness. > > Buddha-nature correctly interpreted by Mahayana commentators refers > > to the POTENTIAL of all sentient beings to realize perfect > > enlightenment. > k: Buddha Nature can be interpreted in many ways in many context. It > depends on the situation. On one hand it can be interpreted as the > potential, while on the other, it can be interpreted as emptiness. > because Buddha nature is empty by nature. This emptiness implies the potential for Buddhahood, and what you just said is exactly what one of my teachers said as well, just FYI-- our Buddha-nature IS our emptiness. And if we were not conditioned, as Howard quoted from Nagarjuna (if memory serves), then we would never have a chance of getting out of samsara. So two ways of saying essentially the same thing. > Furthermore, where > is there to experience if one is in sati. Where is aversion if one is in > sati. Where is suffering is one is in sati. In sati, mindfulness, there can definitely be a "me" there experincing the arising and passing away of sensation, for example-- even at a very subtle level. That is not true in the direct perception of emptiness, however, where this "I, me, mine" is demolished at the root. > k: I agree with you wholeheartedly that we must understand anicca, > anatta and dukkha in order to have right understanding and practise the > eight noble path deligently and follow it every moment of our life. I > believe in this path and I am convinced this path is the way. Such a > conviction is develop not by blinding following what Buddha says in the > suttas. It is the actual practise of what it is taught in the sutta and > then investigate it whether it conforms to the wise. Indeed! All that theory has to be APLLIED, and TESTED in daily life, incessantly. Only then can the truth of the Buddha's teachings be verified. > Now what I am saying is something I like to point out the differences in > our understanding of certain concepts. > > What Buddha is teaching is "is not" to conteract our "is" conditioning > for humans. But his method of practise is beyond "is not" and "is". All > dhammas by nature is beyond "is not" and "is". This sounds to me like another way of saying that the Buddha teaches the Middle Way between the extreme of non-existence and true existence. I see differences in the way it is being phrased, but not it the general meaning. > This is the concept of Mahayana emptiness. The Thervada concept of emptiness is different from > the Mahayana bc Thervada defintion is on "is not" spectrum while the > Mahayana concept of emptiness is beyond "is not" and "is". Not the case at all. When the Theravada is understood properly there is no difference between anatta and emptiness. There CAN'T be, because both refer to the fact that lings lack "core" or true entitiness. Please forget for a moment these labels Theravada and Mahayana. They're of little use in discussing anatta/emptiness, which are, in fact, when investigated, referring to the very same thing. > There is always a substantiality reality issue in Buddhism because we > are trying to define Nibbana as "is not" which in fact Nibbana is beyond > "is not" and "is". I think it is important not to get hung up on the verbal descriptions of Nibbana here (or any verbal descriptions, for that matter, since they represent views, not realities). The negations applied to Nibbana in all systems are specifically to get past the "is" "is not" false dichotomy by helping us let go of our clinging to VIEWS of "is" or "is not". > We cannot define Nibbana as free of defilements bc it > is "is not". Words is very inadequate to describe such a state. Its > beyond words as it is beyond dualism and oneness. We have to define Nibbana verbally if only in a pedagogical sense. Of course Nibbana lies beyond all words and descriptions. Nevertheless, it can be very helpful to understand what it is NOT, because in this way, the views the block direct apprehension of Nibbana can be relinquished. 9035 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 AND 5 Dear Rob Ep, Sarah: >> From the commentaries: >>since it is possible to speak of the gloom and of a need for that >>gloom’s scattering to be maintained by a sun and a moon >>(only)........therefore there is therein, in that nibbana, neither, vz.sun nor >>moon; in this way he indicates the fact of nibbana having as its own >>nature solely of light.(aalokasabhaavata.m). and as > > the Dhamma-king was explaining to those monks lacking complete >>penetration the ultra-profound, extremely hard to see, abstruse and >>subtle, extremely choice, (yet) not formerly experienced (by them), even >>in a dream, within this sa.msaara that is without beginning, ....... .................... Rob Ep: > Two points: > 1/ Nibbana is here said to be 'solely of the nature of light'. I don't see > in > any way how this description can be reconciled with Nibbana being 'purely the > ending of defilements'. What in the ending of defilements gives Nibbana > 'solely > the nature of light'? .................... Sarah: I don't think I've described or quoted Nibbana as being 'purely the ending of defilements'. Defilements are finally eradicated at the final stage of enlightenment (arahatship). Nibbana is the object of the lokuttara cittas at each stage of enlightenment. I understand the 'nature of Light' to be metaphorical and opposed to the nature of darkness so often associated with the khandhas of grasping ('aloko' for light also came up in one of Gayan's translations to refer to nibbana and in contrast to the darkness seen for those of us with avijja or ignorance). For the arahat, there are no longer any conditions for the arising of defilements. Of course, there were never defilements or any darkness in Nibbana. ..................... Rob Ep: >I would say nothing, and that the 'light nature' of > Nibbana > must come from another source, the light of pure consciousness. What other > light > could give it this nature? I am open to another explanation of this > statement. .................... Sarah: I think all I can say without really speculating wildly, is that nama is a nama, and light as I've discussed. It is not citta (consciousness), but is experienced by cittas (lokuttara cittas).....and as arammana (object) is a condition for these cittas. May I just stress that cittas (or vi~n~naana) always refer to conditioned realities in the Pali Canon and not to nibbana. Let me quote this paragraph from the Vism, XV1, n.18: ********************************* '......So, because the kind of knowledge that has formed dhammas as its object and that which has conventional truth as its object are both incapable of abandoning defilements by cutting them off, there must (consequently) exist an object for the noble-path knowledge that effects their abandonment by cutting them off, (which object must be) of a kind opposite to both, and it is this that is the unformed element. 'Likewise, the words "Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unformed" and so on, which demonstrate the existingness of nibbana in the ultimate sense, are not misleading because they are spoken by the blessed One, like the words "All formations are impermanent, all formations are painful, all DHAMMAS (states) are not self" (DH. 277-79; A.i,286, etc)...' ******************************* I think my point was meant to be that it is the 'noble-path knowledge' rather than nibbana that 'effects their abandonment by cutting them off'. .................... Rob Ep: > 2/ The following passage in which Nibbana is described as 'abstruse and > subtle, > extremely choice, not formerly experienced even in a dream' seems to very > much > describe a definitive experience, not merely a negative experience of > defilements > ended. > Does it seem to you that this description of the most choice experience that > few > have experienced suggests a state of nullity? It suggests to me a state of > the > most refined, pure experience possible to experience, which is enabled by the > defilements having been put to rest. .................... Sarah: Btw, almost identical words are used to these ones I quoted from the Commentaryand the ones that followed in certain suttas such as in SN 370. Yes, I certainy don't have any idea of this as a 'negative experience' or a 'state of nullity' either. At the moments of the lokuttara cittas experiencing nibbana, there is no idea of defilements 'having been put to rest'. These realisations are in the reviewing processes following the experience of nibbana from what I understand. Again I would not refer to nibbana as experience, but certainly the lokuttara cittas which experience it must be very refined and pure as you suggest. .................... Rob Ep: > To me at least, it seems to be very much the case that the commentaries, > perhaps > even more than the Suttas themselves, suggest a state of prized experience in > which human awareness reaches its fruition. .................... Sarah: Yes. (Remember there are 4 stages of enlughtenment). Even now, as we take some baby steps, a moment of awareness is precious and prized, in that for this brief instant, there is no darkness or ignorance. We really cannot comprehend what highly developed 8fold path factors are like or what it is like to have no defilements. We can, however, begin to learn about the characteristics of sati (awareness) and panna(understanding) and begin to know more about what is appearing right now. .................... Rob Ep: >I can't go beyond that, but I > can't > see this as a description of merely seeing into the complete Anatta of > everything. > And this is not even suggested in these passages. .................... Sarah: Let's just say that the 3 characteristics of realities, anicca, dukkha and anatta have to be vey clearly understood at different stages prior to the arising of the lokuttara cittas. it will depend on conditions as to which characteristic is apparent just pior to the lokuttara cittas.....but really I'd need to read up further here as I'm again getting into deep water;-) .................... Rob Ep: > I do not exaggerate when I say that I am anxious to hear your response and to > engage with this question. ..................... Sarah: The main point I'd like to stress is the distinction between the conditioned, impermanent cittas which experience nibbana and the unconditioned reality which is experienced and which doesn't 'do' or 'experience' anything. Rob, I really am not exaggerating either when I say I really have never considered much about nibbana at all before. However, I think the more understanding and awareness there is of namas and rupas in daily life, the easier it is to understand whichever part of the Teachings it is we're reading and to have confidence in their truth and value. Even just a very little understanding is very, very helpful. Let me finish by quoting the final passage I’d like to raise from the commentary to the Sutta: You’ll remember that the last line of the Sutta was ‘This alone is the end of dukkha (es’ ev’ anto dukkhassa): ‘This alone is the end of dukkha: this- that is to say, nibbana with aforementioned characteristics that was praised, extolled, with the phrases “Without foundation” and so on - alone is the end, the culmination, of the entire dukkha belonging to the cycle, on account of the absence of all dukkha when there be attainment thereof; he therefore indicates the same, viz. “the end of dukkha”, to be its own nature.’ This has already got rather long, so I won't add more comments (I think I've already made too many in any case;-)) Sarah 9036 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Ken O, I have 4 posts from you waiting for replies...if you don't mind, I'm going to try and run through the main points briefly as Rob Ep just 'took' most my computer time;-) > > S: Hmmm....It’s true that mundane cittas acompanied by panna (more and > > more highly developed) and the other necessary wholesome cetasikas > eventually condition the lokuttara cittas. Conditions are very complex, so > I wouldn’t call these cittas ‘the resultant’, nor do I understand your > first sentence above. Nibbana is not conditioned by any cittas. It is > expereinced (the object of) the lokuttara cittas. Sorry if I sound very > ‘finicky’, but the dhamma is very precise, I think. > k: No I do not agreed. We cannot use this basis to divert the point. We > got to admit weakness if there are, as like when I point out there is > substantiality issues in Buddhism. Well I've shown you my pali canon sources (and you mentioned you don't agree with the Commentary). As we are discussing the pali canon Tipitaka here, perhaps you can show me your sources. I haven't found any 'weakness' or 'substantiality issues' and would need to see your texts before commenting further. > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful posts’ > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated in > my previous quote. > k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it difficult > to believe me. We read about the momentary death of all realities. There is death of citta now and now and now....I believe what I read in the Teachings as confirmed by a little understanding of realities which is being developed. > k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as > kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala cittas. > Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we have > kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. Because > kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to > replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and akusala > both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not permanent. > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more peaceful > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges goodness > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their practise. > In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention to > what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very difficult to > do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on > commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and > plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. As I stressed in my post yesterday to Rob Ep, sati (awareness) has the characteristic of being aware, of being 'watchful' of whatever reality is experienced now. It guards the citta from akusala for a moment only. As you rightly say, it is only 'concerned' to be aware of the reality. it doesn't care or 'discriminate' as to which reality it is aware of. It'll depend on all those complex conditions. There are different levels of sati and it is not 'owned' by Buddhists. However, it was only the Buddha who taught about the development of satipatthana, the awareness and understanding of realities as not self. At these moments, the reality is known just 'as it is'. There is no confusion of mixing up of kusala and akusala states for that moment. They are known for what they are, but I agree that at these moments there is detachment and not minding about what reality is experienced. I think we're partly in agreement here at least, Ken ;-) sarah 9037 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 Hi again, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > >S: I would just like to emphasise that the 'worlds' are referring to the > > worlds of khandhas which do not exist in nibbana. also this passage > stresses that nibbana is not and has never been experienced in samsara and > is only ever experienced by the highly developed wisdom, able to penetrate > or see the ‘ultra profound’. > k: Isn't this just describing there exist a nature without khandhas, > isn't that an outter ego also. It's true that we read nibbana has its own 'sabhava' or nature (ie it is not 'nothing'). I don't know what you mean by 'outer ego' here. >S: There is no hint that nibbana is ‘one’s true nature’ as I read it;-) > k: I know there is no hint of 'one' true nature, but is it still a nature > that is described. Nature or characteistic, but not self. just as if we talk about a nature or characteristic of seeing, it doesn't mean there is any self or 'one's true nature'. > >S: There are just one or two more passages I’d like to quote next time. > k: :) I would most happy to read it. Thanks for your keen interest and encouragement, Ken. Sarah 9038 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 & 2 Hi Ken, no.3;-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > k: Isn't commentary also basing on their own experience :). No offence > here, to me, we got to use the Kalama approach even to the commentary or > to the sutta. I agree that it's helpful to question and consider carefully. The commentary is not just 'basing on their own experience' as I understand. It's not a personal opinion, but the recorded joint wisdom of the Theras who recited the Buddha's Teachings with the added explanations as needed at the councils of arahats. I have had no experience of nibbana and can only discuss it conceptually, but I fully accept what this group of arahats (whose wisdom has been recognised since those times) were relaying the Buddha's wisdom. Furthermore, all the commentary notes I read accord with what is taught in the Suttas themselves. > k: Buddha has always limited in his description in Nibbana even less for > PariNibbana. How would a commentary explain what Buddha does not wish to > explain further in the sutta. If it is that impt, Buddha would have > explain again and again just like what he do to sati, anatta, anicca. In short, for those of us who can only discuss nibbana conceptually, i question how useful it is to talk more on Nibbana except, as Erik mentioned, to find out what 'it is not' and thus help to get rid of wrong views. The emphasis in the Buddha's Teachings, as I read them, is on helping and encouraging us to understand realities now. This is the only way the path can be developed. The rest, we may say is 'academic'. Only by undestanding these realities will there even be the correct idea conceptually about what nibbana or parinibbana are. > >S: No, I don't think so. When we refer to sabhava or nature in Theravada > > texts, there is no hint or inner or outer ego or substantiality. Where > does the Buddha refuse to answer here? Quite a lot has been written on the > ‘sabhava thread’ (another popular one for those from a mahayana > background). Please refer to ‘Useful Posts’ under ‘Sabhava’. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts> > k: Isn't Sabhava also a sustaintiality or nature issue. How do I explain > to you. No matter how we see Buddhism be it PariNibbana or Nibbana is > always this issue of a state or nature of PariNibbana or Nibbana. Isn't > this nature Nibbana or Parinibbana is also an substance in a sense. You're understanding 'sabhava' with a different meaning to that understood in the theravada texts. As we read and understand this term, I stress there is no self or substantiality involved. Each reality has a characteristic...Seeing has the characteristic of experiencing a rupa through the eye-sense. This characteristic is different from the characteristic of hearing or sound. We don't need to use the word sabhava at all. > Thervada use words like Sabhava to escape this fundamental questions, > Mahayana escape by using emptiness, unborn to explain this question. Even > anatta is itself is a substantiality issue if we look at the other way > round from non self. Isn't non self dependent on self to be non self? > Just a thinker :). I don't see this escape plot at all myself. Non-self is the nature of all realities. 'Self' is a concept which is not based on reality but which results from ignorance and wrong view. I think, Ken, it only seems that there are escape plots and a lack of answers when realities are not understood precisely enough by panna. > k: Sarah, I respect your upholding of the sutta. I value the tripakata > same as you. But to me, I do not think we should accept just as it is. > Understanding can be improve if we are willing to look at other school of > thoughts. From different school of thoughts and I realise that from each > school the weaknesses of one school could be explain in another school of > thought. We all come from different cultures, backgrounds and have read different texts and schools of thought. I would always encourage anyone to read whatever seems helpful to them and like you do so very well, to question and challenge and make sure one is really understanding what is said rather than just agreeing for that easy life:-) Having said that, I have to tell you that I don't share your perception of the 'weaknesses' in the Pali Canon and have always found (with some excellent guidance) that it has always provided all the answers for me. This may be unusual I realise;-) One short response to follow.... Sarah 9039 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 11:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 Hi again Ken, This will be even quicker as I have students coming very soon:-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding > of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that > Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that > isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. > Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. I > hope I am being clear abt what I think. Thanks for your kind comments too, Ken. It's always a pleasure to talk to you. (I won't comment on the mahayana ideas and understandings though.) I agree with you when you (I think) when you mention a 'nature' in its own right..... (hope this isn't a trap now, Ken;-) Back to 'seeing'....as I just said, it has the characteristic of experiencing visible object, it's a nama, distinct from a rupa, and so on. Furthermore, each moment of 'seeing' is different to another moment of 'seeing' and although it shares these characteristics, it has another characteristic or nature depending on all the conditions which 'produce' it at that moment and not at any other moment. And then, it falls away, instantly, never to return again. It's not 'my' seeing or 'me' who sees...just a reality with a 'sabhava' and characteristics. No self or thing in it. Anatta is one of the 3 lakhana (special characteristics) which are common to all conditioned realities and in the case of anatta to nibbana too. Hope this helps. i really think that we need to learn more about realities which can be understood and 'tested' at this moment. Look forward to hearing back.....(no hurry;-)) Sarah 9040 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Sarah > > There are different levels of sati and it is not 'owned' by Buddhists. k: No one owns anything. if you can own something, please give some to me :). cheers > However, it was only the Buddha who taught about the development of satipatthana, the awareness and understanding of realities as not self. At these moments, the reality is known just 'as it is'. There is no confusion of mixing up of kusala and akusala states for that moment. They are known for what they are, but I agree that at these moments there is detachment and not minding about what reality is experienced. > > I think we're partly in agreement here at least, Ken ;-) > > sarah k: Sarah its ok even if you disagree with me. Its all a mind game :). I think its time to let go of talking abt Nibbana bc in the end that is not the focus of our practise. Personnally I feel this will end up not going anywhere and I apologise for making you spending so much of your time responding to my post. I hope you are not offended if you kindly let me have the privilege to end this discussion on Nibbana. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9041 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 0:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 Hello Erik > > It is the Mahayana definition--at least, it's the definition given me > by my Tibetan teachers. I think they're what some would label > Mahayana! (though of course those are mere labels for the same > Buddhadharma) k: Yes all are just labels :). > > > There is no discrimination > > bc if there is discrimination, it shows dependency. > > There is no ULTIMATE discrimination, but here's where problems arise > interpreting this. Some take it to mean that ultimate non-difference > in emptiness means there is no conventional difference between > composed entities, or any meaningful distinction between good > and evil. > > While neither exist "truly", in the ultimate sense--from the > perspective of ultimate truth (paramattha sacca)--there is one hell > (or heaven) of a big difference in conventional terms! :) It is key, > important to understand the difference between the two truths, and > how they apply. To hold to the conventional at the expense of the > ultimate is to fall into one extreme--the extreme of true existence; > to hold to to ultimate is to fall into the other extreme, the extreme > of non-existence. Je Tsongkhapa notes: k: Sometimes that is the problem. When are we refering to conventional and when are we trying our best to talk abt absolute. It can be misread and misrepresentated at times. Yes I agree with you 100% that conventional truth is definitely impt bc we are conventional pple :). > "A person's entered the path that pleases the Buddhas > When for all objects, in the cycle or beyond, > He sees that cause and effect can never fail, > And when for him they lose all solid appearance. > > "You've yet to realize the thought of the Able > As long as two ideas seem to you disparate: > The appearance of things-infallible interdependence; > And emptiness-beyond taking any position. > > "At some point, they no longer alternate, come together; > Just seeing that interdependence never fails > Brings realization that destroys how you hold to objects, > And then your analysis with view is complete. > > "In addition the appearance prevents the existence extreme; > Emptiness that of non-existence, and if > You see how emptiness shows in cause and effect > You'll never be stolen off by extreme views." k; Yes dhamma always on the middle path, neither exist nor non exist. Sticking to one extreme, it will not help us at all. Emptiness is a concept not for conventional pple. It is for pple who have realise the relinquishment of self. > > This emptiness implies the potential for Buddhahood, and what you > just said is exactly what one of my teachers said as well, just FYI-- > our Buddha-nature IS our emptiness. And if we were not conditioned, > as Howard quoted from Nagarjuna (if memory serves), then we would > never have a chance of getting out of samsara. So two ways of saying > essentially the same thing. k: :). > > > Furthermore, where > > is there to experience if one is in sati. Where is aversion if one > is in > > sati. Where is suffering is one is in sati. > > In sati, mindfulness, there can definitely be a "me" there > experincing the arising and passing away of sensation, for example-- > even at a very subtle level. That is not true in the direct > perception of emptiness, however, where this "I, me, mine" is > demolished at the root. k: We must not be purposely be in sati. We let it sati comes naturally. No "self" effort in a sense involved. No matter what method we used there is still this presence of *me* involved, but a method is still needed which is non discrimination and of middle path. Even though we know that sticking to oneness is the way out of dualism, we still stick to it. > Not the case at all. When the Theravada is understood properly there > is no difference between anatta and emptiness. There CAN'T be, > because both refer to the fact that lings lack "core" or true > entitiness. Please forget for a moment these labels Theravada and > Mahayana. They're of little use in discussing anatta/emptiness, which > are, in fact, when investigated, referring to the very same thing. k: I do not agree. If you look at sunnata explaination and those presented by Mahayana, There is a difference. A subtle difference. What Thervada defintion of emptiness is base on deviod of *self*. It is still attached to *non self*. But in Mahayana it is beyond *self and non self*. Hence it is always say by Buddha in many times in Mahayana sutta, it is beyond human words but emptiness in Thervada is still can be described in words. > > We have to define Nibbana verbally if only in a pedagogical sense. Of > course Nibbana lies beyond all words and descriptions. Nevertheless, > it can be very helpful to understand what it is NOT, because in this > way, the views the block direct apprehension of Nibbana can be > relinquished. k: Nope we cannot do that bc it is attaching to one a *NOT* concept. It is just like pointing this NOT is condition by what it "IS NOT". We can never use *NOT* bc it is a conditionality by *IS*. I think further discussion of Nibbana will end up with no definite answer due to the diffculty in defining it in human words. I would like to seek your kind permission to allow me not to discuss this issue anymore similar to the request I have with Sarah. I apologise if I have cause much inconveniences to you in responding to my post. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9042 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 1:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello... Lisa Hi, and welcome to the list from me. Thanks for posting your question. --- lisa14850@y... wrote: > I'm Dan's wife, and he's been after me for a while to join this group > and introduce myself. Shortly after we were married, Dan dragged me > to a meditation retreat. Thereafter, I went willingly to another two > or three, but not since we had kids. Dan and I don't get much time > together these days, but when we do, he tries to explain Dhamma to me. > I always get bogged down in the Pali terminology. Last time we had > one of these conversations, I asked him a question that he told me to > post here: If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right > action? Yes, as your question implies, the quality of any action depends on the quality of the mind-state that accompanies the action, and not on some objective appraisal of the action as observed by another (or by oneself, for that matter). It is for this reason that, in the ultimate sense, intention *is* action. Any action that is accompanied by a wholesome (kusala) mind-state is ‘right’ action in one sense of the word. However, as your question also implies, action that is accompanied by wisdom (Pali: ‘panna’) is of a higher level of wholesomeness (‘rightness’) than action that is accompanied by wholesomeness of other levels. Wisdom (panna) itself is of different levels. However, the wisdom that is unique to the Buddha’s teaching is the wisdom that *understands the true nature of the reality that appears at the present moment*. This is sometimes lost sight of in the rush to reach enlightenment. We instinctively incline to the idea that factors such as less unwholesomeness (akusala) in our normal lives, a benign and serene manner, ‘worldly wisdom’ in making decisions, special experiences in our ‘practice’ or perhaps even the acquisition of certain powers are indicative of progress along the path and are desirable goals in themselves. However, none of these is a necessary outcome, to any marked degree, of the development of the understanding I have mentioned, which just sees the characteristic of a reality arising now as it truly is. Our task is really to begin to develop that understanding. Our actions can only ever be as ‘right’ as the level of understanding that accompanies them, and this is not something over which we have any control. So in a sense we don’t need to consider how to achieve ‘right’ action. But we do need to learn a lot more about how to develop right understanding (wisdom/panna). I hasten to add that nothing I have said is meant to imply that wholesomeness (kusala) of levels less than wisdom (panna) should not be of concern to us. The Buddha encouraged kusala of all kinds, and any moment of kusala is extremely valuable since it accumulates and is never ‘lost’. But only the development of panna can support the development of other kinds of kusala in the long run, since this will be a condition for us to ‘find’ the dhamma again and again in the future. Jon 9043 From: Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 2:06am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Sarah et al, > Well I've shown you my pali canon sources (and you mentioned you don't agree > with the Commentary). As we are discussing the pali canon Tipitaka here, > perhaps you can show me your sources. The Tipitaka , to me, is the three baskets, Vinaya, Suttas, Abhidhamma. Not the commentaries. Who knows, in a hundred years some of the posts on this site may be included in the commentaries of the future (heaven forbid :-) ) For clarification only, are we discussing the Tipitaka on this site, or the commentaries as well. And does the present moment play a part ? Did you know that rupas lasting 17 cittas or whatever is not mentioned in the Abhidhamma? Much like the Trinity not rating a mention in the Bible. Are commentators experiencers or theoreticians? If it turns out that we are studying books, we may as well subscribe to a morticians forum. (My opinion only) Regards Herman 9044 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Christine, > I recommend : > Net of views Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Root of existence Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Discourse on the fruits of recluseship Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Dispeller of Delusion (2volume set) Pali Text society > The Expositor, Pali text society > The Dhammapada (commentary) by John Ross Carter and Palihawadana > Buddhist legends (3vol.set) Burlingame > Jataka (3vol.set) Cowell PTS > the udana commentary (masefield) PTS > Vimana stories (masefield) PTS > > You could start at the top and work down. I also recommend ANY books > by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk > (she always quotes suttas and commentaries) > > > robert Dear Robert, Much appreciation. Thank you. metta, Christine 9045 From: Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 2:58am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: Hello Kenneth, > > Not the case at all. When the Theravada is understood properly there > > is no difference between anatta and emptiness. There CAN'T be, > > because both refer to the fact that lings lack "core" or true > > entitiness. Please forget for a moment these labels Theravada and > > Mahayana. They're of little use in discussing anatta/emptiness, which > > are, in fact, when investigated, referring to the very same thing. > > k: I do not agree. If you look at sunnata explaination and those > presented by Mahayana, There is a difference. A subtle difference. OK, and what difference is that, specifically? More specifically than the description below: > What > Thervada defintion of emptiness is base on deviod of *self*. It is still > attached to *non self*. "IT" is attached to non-self? Let me pose you a question. Is stating the fact that "there is presently no purple elephant presently occupying my room" identical to ATTACHMENT "to no purple elephant presently occupying my room"? What is important is know9ing that anatta refers to. There is much debate on what constitutes "self", and this is covered in depth in at least the study of "trangye" I underwent with my lama, where the various understandings of what constitute "self" are taken apart and analyzed. For example, som hold that thre is s difference between the "self of persons" and the "self of phenomena"; that no-self refers to a refutation of the self of the person, but that phenomena possess core, or instrinsic nature. This is one way somehave misinterpreted anatta, in specific, in the Sautrantika school. This distinction between the "gross self" vs. the "suibtle self" is even maintained by Mahayana Madhyamika (Svatantrika) commentators like Bhaviviveka, who asserted a difference bwtween the self of persons and the self of phenomena. This is thoroughly rejecetd by the correct school, the Madhyamika-Prasangika system (Middle Way Consequence School) of the Gelukpas, who deny that ANYTHING has core, or essence, not the person, not phenomena, that anatta (emptiness) refers to the absence of this substantial core. This is Right View, both in the Mahayana and in the Theravada. There is not a hair of difference between the two. > But in Mahayana it is beyond *self and non self*. Not "beyond". Neither. BIG difference. beyond implies something apart from, separate. Individuated. Essence. Think about it for a moment. It's beyond taking any positions (views), but NOT "beyond" in any metaphysical sense! > Hence it is always say by Buddha in many times in Mahayana sutta, it is > beyond human words but emptiness in Thervada is still can be described in > words. Let's continue this. I have a friend (Dhamma friend) knocking at my door now, so I have to run. More when I return from Cambodia! 9046 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 3:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 Hello Erik, > > > What Thervada defintion of emptiness is base on deviod of *self*. It is still attached to *non self*. k: Yes that is what I saying, "non self" is the antidote for the six realms but for the enlighted ones. Beyond "non self" and "self" is the realm of Buddhas. > > "IT" is attached to non-self? Let me pose you a question. Is stating > the fact that "there is presently no purple elephant presently > occupying my room" identical to ATTACHMENT "to no purple elephant > presently occupying my room"? k: Why not, bc of fixation of ideas :). It all depends what is our initial response or in fact our conditioning mind. When we say no or yes, there is already a response that this is right and this wrong. This is always our usual response due to conditioning. > > What is important is know9ing that anatta refers to. There is much > debate on what constitutes "self", and this is covered in depth in at > least the study of "trangye" I underwent with my lama, where the > various understandings of what constitute "self" are taken apart and > analyzed. > k: I got no problem with the meaning of anatta. I like anatta because it is the antidote for *self*. I am contesting the meaning of sunnatta by Thervada and the meaning of emptiness of Mahayana. I am saying there are not the same. > For example, som hold that thre is s difference between the "self of > persons" and the "self of phenomena"; that no-self refers to a > refutation of the self of the person, but that phenomena possess > core, or instrinsic nature. This is one way somehave misinterpreted > anatta, in specific, in the Sautrantika school. This distinction > between the "gross self" vs. the "suibtle self" is even maintained by > Mahayana Madhyamika (Svatantrika) commentators like Bhaviviveka, who > asserted a difference bwtween the self of persons and the self of > phenomena. This is thoroughly rejecetd by the correct school, the > Madhyamika-Prasangika system (Middle Way Consequence School) of the > Gelukpas, who deny that ANYTHING has core, or essence, not the > person, not phenomena, that anatta (emptiness) refers to the absence > of this substantial core. This is Right View, both in the Mahayana > and in the Theravada. There is not a hair of difference between the > two. > > But in Mahayana it is beyond *self and non self*. > > Not "beyond". Neither. BIG difference. beyond implies something apart > from, separate. Individuated. Essence. Think about it for a moment. k; I know what you are trying to say. But that is the fundamental problem when one try to describe something that is beyond words. This is emptiness, beyond words. If it can be describe, then it is not emptiness. Any word expressing it is wrong. Hence ZEN master when teach emptiness in a class, the master remain quiet bc any word by him is a form of substantiality. Sunatta sounds very similar to Mahayana emptines but it is not bc they can be describe and be understanded by ordinary pple like us. Emptiness of Mahayana is the play field of the enlighted and not us. Emptiness is just conveniently used by the Mahayana. We could use the word like Buddha Nature or Unborn. > Let's continue this. I have a friend (Dhamma friend) knocking at my > door now, so I have to run. More when I return from Cambodia! > k: Enjoy your trip :) It always a pleasure to talk to you. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9047 From: Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 4:11am Subject: Tipitaka and commentaries --- Dear Herman, This web site lists the Tipitaka and all commentaries and tikas that were recited at the last Buddhist council http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/archive.htm The commentaries are: ..>>>ATTHAKATHAS The Pali Tipitaka Atthakathas as approved by the Sixth Buddhist Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows, the size of each book is the same as that of the Pali Canon Books Commentaries (Atthakathas) (51 Volumes). 1. Digha Nikaya (Silakkhandha vagga) Atthakatha. (pp. 338). 2. Digha Nikaya Mahavagga Atthakatha (pp. 403). 3. Digha Nikaya Pathikavagga Atthakatha (pp. 251). 4. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. I (pp. 398) 5. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. II (pp. 320) 6. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. III (pp. 309). 6. Majjhimapannasa Atthakatha (pp. 309) 7. Upari-pannasa Atthakatha (pp. 254). 8. Sagathavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 325). 9. Nidanavagga and Khandha (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 324). 10. Salayatanavagga & Mahavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 341). 11. Anguttara AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 416). 12. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. II (pp. 397) 13. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. III (pp. pp. 357 14. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 346). 15. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 312). 16. Pacityadi Atthakatha (pp. 437). 17. Culavaggadi Atthakatha (pp. 265). 18. Kankhavitarani Atthakatha(pp. 357). 19. Vinaya Sangaha Atthakatha(pp. 468). 20. Atthasalini Atthakatha (pp. 454) 21. Sammoha Vinodani Atthakatha (pp. 508). 22. Panca pakarana Atthakatha (pp. 499). 23. Khuddakapatha Atthakatha (pp. 216). 24. Dhammapada AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 447). 25. Dhammapada Atthakatha. 26. Udana Atthakatha(pp. 393). 27. Itivuttaka Atthakatha (pp. 355) 28. Suttanipata Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 314) 29. Suttanipata AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 324) 30. Vimanavatthu Atthakatha (pp. 335) 31. Petavatthu (pp. 270) 32. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 345). 33. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 323). 34. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 370). 35. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 353). 36. Thera Gatha AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 485). 37. Thera Gatha Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 546). 38. Theri Gatha Atthakatha(pp. 305). 39. Apadana AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 403). 40. Apadana AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 303) 41. Jataka AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 538). 42. Jataka AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 408). 43. Jataka AtthakathaVol. III. (pp. 517). 44. Jataka AtthakathaVol. IV. (pp. 504) 45. Jataka AtthakathaVol. V. (pp. 553). 46. Jataka Atthakatha Vol. VI. (pp. 332). 47. Jataka Atthakatha Vol.VII. (pp. 387). 48. Cula Niddesa and Netti Atthakatha (pp. 276). 49. Maha Niddesa Atthakatha (pp. 419). 50. Buddhavamsa Atthakatha (pp. 354), 51. Cariya Pitaka Atthakatha (pp. 328) TIKAS The Pali Tipitaka Tikas as approved by the Sixth Buddhist Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows; the size of each book is the same as that of the Pali Canon Books:— Sub-Commentaries (Tikas)(26-Volumes). 1. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. I. (pp. 500). 2. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. II. (pp. 437). 3. Silakkhanahavagga Mula Tika (pp. 405). 4. Mahavagga Tika (pp. 358). 5. Pathikavagga Tika (pp. 292). 6. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. I. (pp. 394). 7. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. II. (pp. 324). 8. Majjhima & Uparipannasa Tika (pp. 442). 9.Samyutta Tika Vol. I (pp. 345) 10. Samyutta TikaVol. II. (pp. 551). 11. Anguttara TikaVol. I (pp. 288). 12. Anguttara Tika Vol. II. (pp. 396). 13. Anguttara Tika Vol. III.(pp. 371). 14. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol . I (pp. 460). 15. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. II. (pp. 448). 16. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. III. (pp. 496). 17. Vimativinodani TikaVol. I. (pp. 362). 18. Vimativinodani TikaVol. II. (pp. 322) 19.Vajirabuddhi Tika (pp. 585) 20. Dhammasangani Mula Tika (pp. 220) 21. Vibhanga Mula Tikaand (pp. 229) 22. Pancapakarana Mula Tika and Anutika(pp. 323). 23. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. I. (pp. 46l). 24. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. II. (pp. 533). 25. Netti Tika and Netti Vibhavini Tika (pp. 356). 26. Kankhavitarani Purana and Abhinava Tika Only a handful of these have been translated into English to my great regret. The guidelines to Dhammastudygroup says: Agreement By subscribing to DhammaStudyGroup, you agree to follow the guidelines prescribed here. Posts We welcome any questions, answers, or comments, however light- hearted, relating to the Buddha's teachings as found in the texts of the Theravada tradition (including the Suttanta, Abhidhamma, Vinaya and the ancient commentaries). Endquote http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guidelines This doesn't mean that there can be no disagreement with any points in the commentaries or even the Tipitaka. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi Sarah et al, > > > The Tipitaka , to me, is the three baskets, Vinaya, Suttas, > Abhidhamma. Not the commentaries. Who knows, in a hundred years some > of the posts on this site may be included in the commentaries of the > future (heaven forbid :-) ) > > For clarification only, are we discussing the Tipitaka on this site, > or the commentaries as well. And does the present moment play a part ? > Did you know that rupas lasting 17 cittas or whatever is not > mentioned in the Abhidhamma? Much like the Trinity not rating a > mention in the Bible. Are commentators experiencers or theoreticians? > > If it turns out that we are studying books, we may as well subscribe > to a morticians forum. (My opinion only) > > Regards > > > Herman 9048 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 5:50am Subject: Morticians forum- Herman Hi Herman, Interesting comments which I'm glad to hear;-)...I'll even let them jump the queue and do a quick reply... --- hhofman@d... wrote: > The Tipitaka , to me, is the three baskets, Vinaya, Suttas, > Abhidhamma. Not the commentaries. Who knows, in a hundred years some > of the posts on this site may be included in the commentaries of the > future (heaven forbid :-) ) Well at least you've included the Abhidhamma;-) I think the Abhidhamma commentaries have always been included and recited together with the Abhidhamma, which is not 'complete' without them. > For clarification only, are we discussing the Tipitaka on this site, > or the commentaries as well. Rob K has just given a detailed response to this..... As I understand it, generally accepted in the Theravada Tipitaka are the ancient commentaries only (down to the Abhidammattha Sangaha), so not any modern commentaries and certainly not anything any of us might write;-) (Heaven forbid as you say...) Like I mentioned when I started the Udana com notes (really only because lines from that particular sutta were often quoted and I thought it might add a little 'depth'), no one has to agree with them and Ken O made it clear that he doesn't. No one has to agree with the Suttas or anything else the Buddha said either, for that matter. >And does the present moment play a part ? In my own opinion, unless we read the texts to help us understand more about the present moment, it's really quite useless. If we read just to become 'abhidhamma experts' or to memorise the details, then there is no respect or appreciation being shown to these same Teachings. However, I really haven't seen any sign of this here and am particularly struck by how sincer everyone here is in terms or really wishing to understand and consider the Dhamma. One thing I've really come to see on dsg, however, is that we're all very different in terms of how much detail and what kind of detail we need to hear and consider in order for 'blocks' and 'wrong views' to be removed. Some people like Num and Kom really appreciate hearing and reading and retaining a lot of very precise detail and it helps them understand more about anatta. Others like Mike or myself tend to 'switch off' when there is too much detail and prefer to consider and reflect on a few lines of a sutta and this seems more helpful. So I don't think we can set any rules, but just see with interest the different accumulations and develop our 'own' understanding of realities appearing now. > Did you know that rupas lasting 17 cittas or whatever is not > mentioned in the Abhidhamma? Much like the Trinity not rating a > mention in the Bible. Are commentators experiencers or theoreticians? I'm pretty impressed that you know this kind of detail, Herman... I know it is mentioned (with some other abhidhamma details which can only be found in the commentaries) by B.Bodhi in his intro. to Abhidamattha Sangaha. Sounds like you must be doing some serious Abhidhamma commentary study to appreciate this, Herman;-) I have no doubt at all that these ancient commentators were 'experiencers' and the evidence suggests that they were all arahats I believe. > If it turns out that we are studying books, we may as well subscribe > to a morticians forum. (My opinion only) Well, I agree that some of my recent threads may have been too 'heavy' for some (many), and I'll happily chat about any daily life or lively topics you'd like to raise;-)) I think it's a good reminder that the aim of any 'study' is not for the sake of book study but for the 'practice' and development of wisdom and other wholesome states. Not quite a 'morticians forum' I hope;-( Thanks for your comments, Herman.. happy to chat to you anytime.... Sarah 9049 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 6:14am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Focus Hi Sarah > > However, it was only the Buddha who taught about the development of > satipatthana, the awareness and understanding of realities as not self. > At these moments, the reality is known just 'as it is'. There is no > confusion of mixing up of kusala and akusala states for that moment. They are known for what they are, but I agree that at these moments there is detachment and not minding about what reality is experienced. > > > > I think we're partly in agreement here at least, Ken ;-) > > > > sarah If the focal point of practise is not sati for the Abidhammaist (hope you do not mind I use this word), what is their focus. I think the problem lies on the fact that I am a Suttaist, hence sati is the focus. But I do not know abt Abidhammaist bc Abidhammaist classify sati as cetasika. What is the goal or focus? Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9050 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 8:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert] Robert and Dan, I have a different take on this. I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as really being a hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a discerning view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and attachment? Is the feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace really a clinging to quiet? I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life which appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that it is the accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not really that hard to identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their occurence -- to be the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary experiences. If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before Parinibbana to be one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt with without hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments like this, only they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and lessening of attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions seems to me to be almost Christian in its assertion that most of our lives are really 'sins' disguised as good qualities and that we are irrevocably 'bad' in a sense. I don't look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither good nor bad. Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither 'good' nor 'bad'. Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not experienced as suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they arise? Robert Ep. ================================= --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > > From right study and development we find that what we had once > > thought were our strenghts turn out to be faults:our confident > > nature is mostly mana(conceit). The calmness we cherish only > clinging > > to quiet; our directness mostly aversion. > > Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Rob has made > the Dhamma clear in many ways, holding up a lamp in the dark for > those with eyesight to see forms. > > Dan was satisfied and delighted in Rob's words. 9051 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 8:26pm Subject: subtle bad states Dear Rob.E, It wasn't very clear from my post ; but I wasn't suggesting trying to change ones personality. A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates ignorance. Thus vipassana bhavana is not so much trying to stop any defilements -including subtle clinging and mana - as of understanding them. Panna understands kilesa (as well as other dhammas) and this also leads to a turning away from akusala; but very gradually. By the development of understanding the causes for all types of akusala are better understood - and too, the nature of akusala. The final eradication of kilesa comes about once dhammas are fully understood. Iggleden writes (Intro. to Vibhanga PTS) p.xliv "what is the definition of a bad state? How can it be recognised, not just the obvious ones but those that are really subtle, deep, complicated and hidden from view? This is where adequate study as well as practice is absolutely essential"endquote. On plxvi he writes about greed, aversion and ignorance: "In their more gross forms they sometimes become obvious even to those experiencing thier own false view, speech, action and livelihood...Nevertheless , these 3 bad roots and associated mental factors..are customarily far less obvious in their more usual modes of manisfestation than in their grosser forms. In their even finer and more subtel forms they become so deep and hidden from view that in the great majority of cases they pass quite unnoticed, or indeed are even associted with thought speech and action which is thought to be wise and virtuos, and therefore much to be encouraged" endquote. On pLxvii he says " speech which he had once thought of as correct and pleasing he will find fundamentally to have been directed to his own selfish gain. his whole thought he will find to be a very nest and stronghold of 'evil, bad states'." About tanha he says plxvii "this most difficult to eradicate component of the system of Dependent origination manifests itself in almost every aspect of one's thinking, from the apparently simple consideration 'I am" up to complicated attitude of mind which thinks 'by means of this would that I may be otherwise'endquote robert .... Robert and Dan, I have a different take on this. I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as really being a hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a discerning view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and attachment? Is the feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace really a clinging to quiet? I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life which appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that it is the accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not really that hard to identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their occurence -- to be the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary experiences. If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before Parinibbana to be one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt with without hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments like this, only they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and lessening of attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions seems to me to be almost Christian in its assertion that most of our lives are really 'sins' disguised as good qualities and that we are irrevocably 'bad' in a sense. I don't look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither good nor bad. Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither 'good' nor 'bad'. Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not experienced as suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they arise? Robert Ep. -------- A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that samatha eliminates lobha while vipassana eliminates ignorance. Thus it is not so much trying to surpress any defilements -including subtle clinging and mana - as of understanding them. Panna understands and this seeing them also leads to a turning away but very gradually. We all of course know the obvious kilesa such as bordeom and strong conceiit and clinging. Everyone sees the dangers in thses whetehr buddhist or not children /other children. 9052 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] subtle bad states Dear Robert, I understand the need to be aware of subtle states that are other than they seem. I probably should have acknowledged your basic point there. What I was trying to emphasize is that I think we should also acknowledge the subtle and not-so-subtle *undefiled* states that also pop up along the path, as hints of what enlightenment is like. Robert Ep. ===================================== --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Rob.E, > > It wasn't very clear from my post ; but I wasn't suggesting > trying to change ones personality. > A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates > ignorance. > Thus vipassana bhavana is not so much trying to stop any > defilements -including subtle clinging and mana - as of > understanding them. Panna understands kilesa (as well as other > dhammas) and this also leads to a turning away from akusala; but > very gradually. By the development of understanding the causes > for all types of akusala are better understood - and too, the > nature of akusala. The final eradication of kilesa comes about > once dhammas are fully understood. > Iggleden writes (Intro. to Vibhanga PTS) > p.xliv "what is the definition of a bad state? How can it be > recognised, not just the obvious ones but those that are really > subtle, deep, complicated and hidden from view? This is where > adequate study as well as practice is absolutely > essential"endquote. > On plxvi he writes about greed, aversion and ignorance: "In > their more gross forms they sometimes become obvious even to > those experiencing thier own false view, speech, action and > livelihood...Nevertheless , these 3 bad roots and associated > mental factors..are customarily far less obvious in their more > usual modes of manisfestation than in their grosser forms. In > their even finer and more subtel forms they become so deep and > hidden from view that in the great majority of cases they pass > quite unnoticed, or indeed are even associted with thought > speech and action which is thought to be wise and virtuos, and > therefore much to be encouraged" endquote. > On pLxvii he says " speech which he had once thought of as > correct and pleasing he will find fundamentally to have been > directed to his own selfish gain. his whole thought he will find > to be a very nest and stronghold of 'evil, bad states'." > About tanha he says plxvii "this most difficult to eradicate > component of the system of Dependent origination manifests > itself in almost every aspect of one's thinking, from the > apparently simple consideration 'I am" up to complicated > attitude of mind which thinks 'by means of this would that I may > be otherwise'endquote > robert .... > > Robert and Dan, > I have a different take on this. > > I find the description of everything that seems positive in life > as really > being a > hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely > a discerning > view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and > attachment? Is > the > feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace > really a clinging > to quiet? I don't agree with this. I think the really free > moments in life > which > appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and > that it is the > accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not > really that hard > to > identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their > occurence -- to > be > the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of > momentary experiences. > > If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before > Parinibbana to be > one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt > with without > hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have > moments like this, > only > they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and > lessening of > attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. > > To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions > seems to me to be > almost Christian in its assertion that most of our lives are > really 'sins' > disguised as good qualities and that we are irrevocably 'bad' in > a sense. I > don't > look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but > neither good nor > bad. > Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither > 'good' nor > 'bad'. > > Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not > experienced as > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when > they arise? > > Robert Ep. > -------- > > > > > A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > samatha eliminates lobha while vipassana eliminates ignorance. > Thus it is not so much trying to surpress any defilements > -including subtle clinging and mana - as of understanding them. > Panna understands and this seeing them also leads to a turning > away but very gradually. We all of course know the obvious > kilesa such as bordeom and strong conceiit and clinging. > Everyone sees the dangers in thses whetehr buddhist or not > children /other children. > > > 9053 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Erik > > > > I could not agree with you more in this. Ridding the mind of > > unwholseome tendencies is but the first baby-step on the path to > > freedom. So long as there is sufficient craving or aversion present, > > forget getting to the deeper level, the root-controller of that: > > ignorance! And forget insight into the nature of things for that > > reason alone, since craving and aversion will hold so much sway > > ignorance will remain all but invisible, as it is hidden by the > > coarser faculties of craving and aversion. > > > > In other words, forget believing there will be enough of the right > > conditions for insight even into the unpleasant sensations to arise > > without this basic, basic foundation of sila. IT IS SO IMPORTANT to > > cultivate wholesome states of mind, all the time, day in, day out, > > all the time, without fail, to endeavor to see all things that arise > > as opportunities to be turned into skillful activities somehow, using > > the simply threefold formula laid out by Lord Buddha: morality, THEN > > concentration, THEN wisdom. > > > > May all beings gain the wisdom of seeing things-as-they-are, in this > > very lifetime! > > > As I said to Howard, I disagree. It is not cultivating a wholesome state > of mind bc it leads to an attachment to an wholesome state of mind. It is > a practise just being in the present, free of attaching views or fixations > of ideas. It is just there, seeing things as it is. No discriminations, > just in the presence. > > All religions exhorts its fellowers to cultivate wholesome state of mind > but most of them cannot reach Arahantship bc they are attached to one > sided of the practise similiarly to satanic cults, they are attached to > the other side of the practise. I agree Ken. I think the point you have been trying to make lately about attaching to views is very important, and very hard to get. Since every direction we think we are taking on the path is in a sense a view, expectation or anticipation of something not yet experienced, it is almost the same as asking people to give up 'the path', at least the path in their mind. Very hard. That is why the zen concept of beginner's mind is very helpful. To keep going back to understanding that one cannot actually know anything, even the path, except by direct experiencing of its principles in the moment. Robert Ep. 9054 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Sarah, Thanks for being so welcoming to my questions. I very much appreciate your thoughtful answers, and it is also a pleasure to converse on these questions, which as you said, are so 'directly related to....realities to be known now.' That is a very nice definition of the kind of contemplation that attempts to really see into the moment, and to me it is also a very good indicator of real meditation. More comments below: --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > I apprecdiated this post of yours, Rob, and the questions and comments raised. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for your help. I found it very clear. I do have a couple of > > questions: > > > > Is there any reason given why only one citta can arise at a time? Why must > > they > > be sequential? If there is no 'mind' in which they are to occur, why or how > > are > > they coordinated in a tight sequential string? > > I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it is...and > our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason why.....The > only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and cannot be > any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to be > like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya > which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially and > so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta > arising. I do think this is a good explanation of why each present moment is both unique and in a sense solitary, even though it is also completely connected to each other factor coming before and after, and all those which surround it in the present. A very clear paradox, but a reality. > So imagine a puppet on thousands of strings, each coordinated and having > effect. The way the puppet moves sequentially is a result of these complex > moves and adjustments (read conditions). > > Or to keep a lingering Indian thread alive, why does an Indian curry on any day > taste just the way it does? Isn’t it because of the particular ingredients, the > quantities of those ingredients on that day, the order and timing they are > added and of course the nature of the tasting, the taste buds, the temperature, > the previous experiences, the place and time of tasting and so on and so on. These are helpful examples. > Only the Buddha can really see and understand all the conditions for a reality > to arise at any time. However, by reading and considering a little more about > conditions (I’m resisting from reminding you of more homework), ha ha, thanks! I already feel guilty enough. it helps to see > there is no mind, form or body as we usually understand. > > > If sati is an 'accompaniment' of a citta when it does occur, rather than a > > citta > > itself, what is it? Where or how does sati arise? Does it 'piggyback' on > > its > > associated citta(s)? Does it also last for specific number of cittas as a > > rupa > > does? How would you define sati? I always thought of mindfulness as being > > 'an > > awareness of being aware'. In other words, for those moments, one is aware > > that > > there is a process of consciousness taking place, rather than merely > > participating > > in the consciousness without realizing it. Is this a definition you would > > accord > > with? > > Excellent questions and considerations, Rob, but I’m not sure my answer will do > them justice > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies citta > (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and is aware of > the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any reality, but is not > necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level of satipatthana which is > aware of a reality as not self. So for example, if there is generosity or > kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s teachings, at the moments these > mental states arise with the wholesome cittas, there is sati which is mindful > of what is skilful and prevents that which is unskilful, but not necessarily > accompanied by wisdom. Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral > states” (Atth.) > > Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). As we’ve > discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but of the > characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware of a > process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which thinks > about a process of consciousness. Very good. I am still trying to imagine in a sense what a 'citta' is 'formed like' and how the 'cetasikas' interact or support it, and how 'sati' sort of overlooks or opens insight into the whole thing, and how satipathana, like a mature sati, can see into the full nature of the momentary arising, whereas sati would only see its more obvious qualities...... I'd sort of like a kind of molecular chart of these relationships, however I'm sure in a way that would give the wrong impression that these events are like little 'things' that sit there for a second, when in truth they must be more in the nature of an open quality of mind and not really occupy any place or space but simply co-occur together in spaceless, formless function. Since they really have no entity, it is hard to imagine how they arise or function at all. Unlike the physical realities, which maintain physical forms that sort of 'house' them, the cittas and cetasikas and sati have no such place to dwell. So in a sense it is hard to see how or where they really occur at all. It is only in conjunction with physical sense organs and physical objects, I guess that they can find the conditions to cohere for a moment within the functioning of these mechanisms, and so they are associated with sense-door, mind-door and mind itself. But it would be nice to have alittle more conceptual clarity, which I guess will come in time....and then perhaps obscure their reality even more! thanks for the very useful quote from Nina's book, which I have snipped, but enjoyed. ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be aware > (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical phenomena) now, such > as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, this is the way > sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, and understanding the > difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the idea of > a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very specific > function and characteristic. Very good. Thanks for going from my abstract to the clarity of the concrete moment. > > Gee, I really have no hesitation to give you a hard time while your dear > > friends > > and associates are away. If I'm being overly inquisitive, just let me know. > > I > > know you have a schedule beyond our little 'chats'! > > I hope to hear more of these questions. You’re not giving me a hard time at all > and our little ‘chats’ are a joy, Thank you, that warms my heart..... even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, > can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). I wouldn't say so. I think you are sincere and very clear, and I appreciate your level-headedness, something that I've been missing most of my life. I’m particularly > interested in anything further you have to say on this thread which is so > directly related to the present moment and realities to be known now. Thanks, Sarah. I also find it very enjoyable to dig into the possibilities of this present reality. As I said before, I was surprised at my first exposure to the commentaries to find them very illuminating and to have a 'warmth' about them. They seem to understand the 'luminosity of mind' or at least to express it, even if we can't yet get a handle on it ourselves. These conversations with you are very special, a kind of Dhamma oasis for me, for which I give you much thanks. Robert 9055 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding > of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that > Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that > isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. > Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. I > hope I am being clear abt what I think. Kenneth, I think the real problem, the really deep problem, is not disagreement but the difficulty of what these suggestions of the Masters really refer to. Whether you say the 'true nature of Nibbana is anatta' or you say it is the 'unborn', you are really faced with the same terrible problem, that these suggestions of the ultimate reality do not refer to *anything*. There is no way that our minds can really comprehend that there is something that is not something, or that there is an experience that is no experience, or that there is a self that is really not-self through and through. All we can do is see these as hints to a reality that is much more profound than we can grasp, that as an *object for our path* can just lead us in the right direction. But we have to be satisifed with *not knowing*, radical not knowing, until the path is ended. Robert Ep. 9056 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Erik] --- Sarah wrote: > Erik, > > > > on Sunday I will be > > > officially married > > ============================= > > Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. > > > > May I also wish send my bery best wishes to you and Aert. I hope you both have > a very memorable and happy day on Sunday with plenty of wise reflection and > mindfulness. I'm sure we'll all be thinking of you then. Who knows, Aert may be > able and willing to join us on the list as well in time too;-)) > > Your wedding day almost falls on our anniversary (20th) a few days later, but > let me assure you that we're still learning;-) > > With metta and best wishes, > > Sarah congratulations to you, Erik, and to you too Sarah, on your and Jon's upcoming anniversary. That's a long time to not really be entities together! Best, Robert Ep. 9057 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- upasaka@a... wrote: > **************************************** > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading away, to > CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if all > that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are no > truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none to be > destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have expressed it. > If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand you. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Howard, I'm not absolutely sure, but I suspect that what Kenneth is trying to express is that not only are cittas not real *things* that can either be created or destroyed, but that they only arise momentarily and seemingly in response to arising conditions, and therefore there is no way for them to *permanently cease*. In other words, if you define Nibbana as that condition under which they do cease, you would have to say definitionally that they then cease. But as I read Kenneth, he is saying that this is only provisionally permanent, because if conditions were to arise again which would promote the arising of cittas, then the cittas would arise again. See what I mean? There is no *thing* called Nibbana which actually guarantees that no cittas will arise again. They will if and only if conditions do arise again which cause they to co-arise. Hope that's not too convoluted, but it leads away from seeing Nibbana as entity, but as merely a recognition of anatta in [your] field of possibilities...... Robert Ep. 9058 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi RobEp, > > I think you're right. And I also think that the > reason some of us have become such hammerheads on the > subject of satipatthaana is that all that other > kusala, no matter how kusala, just leads to more > sa.msaara--satipatthaana does not. That's how I > understand it, anyway... > > mike Interesting Mike. I'm quite up to understanding the fine differences between what arises with regard to plain old sati and satipatthana, but I find your point intriguing. Robert Ep. --------------------------- > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > > > > ...I always come back > > > to this point here, it seems. While we can talk > > about anatta until > > > the cows come home, even particle physicists know > > that nothing has > > > any intrinsic nature. And yet what does that do > > for them in terms of > > > eradicating the source of suffering? Seriously? > > There is much more to > > > the game than just the study of Right View, which, > > as forerunner, may > > > be key, yet it still plays a holistic role with > > all the other path- > > > factors like Right Speech, Right Resolve, Right > > Effort, etc., and > > > these operate at both the conventional and > > supramundane levels. > > > > Erik, > > I don't know if this applies to what you are saying, > > but I would say there's a big > > difference between understanding something as a > > concept and experiencing it. But > > they are related. > > > > I spent some time trying to directly contemplate > > anicca and anatta the other week > > and had a moment when I suddenly realized that what > > I considered 'Robert' was just > > a temporary collection of experiences. I had > > understood this concept for a long > > time, but the realization at that moment was that it > > was not just right but > > *actual*. It was quite a shock. Instead of having > > the reaction I thought I would > > have had, that I would be depressed at the sense of > > temporariness and mortality > > that this revealed, it was exciting and liberating. > > So this to me was a direct > > experience of anicca. Now I can't say what ultimate > > effect it had. But when I > > think back I now have this memory of a direct > > experience of 'anicca' as it > > pertains to my 'self' [just meaning the familiar > > body, thoughts, etc. that I > > associate with 'Robert']. These moments of direct > > insight, whether they are > > 'large' or 'small' have a very different flavour > > from studying and understanding a > > concept. And in that sense they seem to me to be > > akin to the real workings of the > > path. > > > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at > > concepts and had *no* insights of > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that > > there is any direct relation. > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative > > relation between Right View and > > the development of Insight. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > 9059 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Hi Rob E., > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* > insights of > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct > relation. > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between > Right View and > > the development of Insight. > > > > What do you think? > > Bingo. :] Robert Ep. 9060 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] Inspiring, Erik. Thanks for sharing your background and specific points. Robert Ep. ============= --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > > Hi Rob E., > > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had > *no* > > insights of > > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any > direct > > relation. > > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between > > Right View and > > > the development of Insight. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > Bingo. > > Indeed Dan, but with a little illustration from my own limited > experience as a middling practitioner of this path (who's trying hard > to improve) that may or may not be of some benefit. > > I found the most important aspect of study for me several years ago > was "trangye"--studying the Tibetan sage Je Tsongkhapa's various > refutations of the other tenet systems held by some proponents > of various schools over the millennia, such as the Vaibhasika, > Sautrantika, Yogacara, and "lower" Madhyamika. > > This was an in-depth of several flavors of wrong views that did more > for my understanding of what is measnt by Right View than any other > approach I'd come across in my study of thje Dharma. Of course, I > could have never been ready for this without FIRST having practiced > getting rid of my intense aversion to othjer sentient beings through > the practice of tonglen (giving and taking compassion using the > breath as object). All that study of Right View would have made no > difference to me at the point my mind was filled with ill-will toward > sentient beings, as it had been until I was set straight on the > practice of tonglen and had practiced that for many, many months, > until my heart turned from sour and cynical to being somewhat more > open and accommodating. > > When these preparations were there--in terms of having cultivatad a > somewhat kinder, gentler heart--not to mention the sila of having > abandoned driking to the point of heedlessness, THEN (just looking > back on my own mind-state) the study of Right View became the most > important factor in my practice of the Dharma. > > Right View as taught to me by my lama through his presentation of Je > Tsongkhapa's in his "Essence of Eloquence" showed me how to properly > analyze positions (views) like "Mind Only". These etachings showed me > where I'd been going wrong, and how to analyze and refute the view > that "mind" exists as an absolute entity (the view I had been > clinging to--nearly a solipisistic one). > > This study was still, of course, combined with ongoing tonglen > (Tibetann metta-bhavana) with at least one hour a day of anapanasati > meditation EVERY DAY WITHOUT FAIL, until mental and physical > lightness and pliancy and tranquility became well-established, until > even jhana while riding the subway was possible, and there was real > viriya combined with real passadhi and upekkha at most times, and > even greater piti in jhana meditation than normal throughout the day > (not to mention I dropped about two hours of sleep a night because a > few minutes in the rapture of jhana is like an hour or more of > sleep). Mind you thhis is not even any kind of mastery of jhana, > but "good enough" for a beginner, and good enough that within a few > moments of sitting down, bodily fabrications were calmed and > concentration firmly established, and within moments after that > the "circulating fountain of bliss" arose, and then shortly > thereafter, just calm, unshakeable concentration, taking emptiness of > the "I, me, mine" as the object of meditation stepping in & out of > the jhanas. In other words, a full combination of samatha and > vipashayana, as taught in my system (which is based on Master > Kamalasila's "Bhavana Krama" or the "Progressive Stages" [of > meditation]). > > This practice was ALSO combined also with serious confidence in my > ability to "get" Right View: strong faith (saddha) in the Buddha's > teachings, as well as in my lama's understanding and that he was > teaching Right View. My confidence grew after being shown, via > reasoning and logic, how nothing has independent existence, that > nothing exists absolutely (unestablished apart from conditions), that > all things are composed of other things and therefore subject to > cessation. Nagarjuna's "Verses from the Middle Way" were (and are) of > immense help in this, I must say. > > Every waking moment of my life was centered on the Dharma in some way > at this time, every contemplation a meditation on how things lack > self-nature yet still exist by way of convention, and NEVER the > discarding of conventions like accumulating wholsome kamma either-- > working diligently on practices like tonglen, since my lama taught us > that merit and wisdom are like "two wings on a bird" that work in > tandem to bring to fruition the realization that destroys how we > incorrectly hold to objects as being self-existent, and the direct > realization of emptiness or anatta is the ultimate (and only) > antidote to the sufferings of samsara. > > So not just the study of Right View, but many, many things that all > come together at the same time, which for thse khandas involved at > least two hours a day of the textual study of the Dhamma in addition > to every moment I could recall practices like tonglen and the > meditation on emptiness, along with jhana practice daily for at least > an hour (preceded by mantra recitations--an excellent form of samatha > meditation, BTW, not to mention great metta-bhavana cultivation > with "OM MANI PEMA HUNG" and the like), until the aforementioned > factors were all energized to the point they all came together in a > flash of a single moment that changed everything. > > So while I agree with you that Right View IS forerunner, and I'd > never deny that, and the study of Right View is key. AND YET, without > the more mundane practices it would have been for me a worthless > theoretical exercise by itself. That is a danger of clinging to > the view of anatta often spoken of (Nagarjuna called those who take > anatta/e,ptiness as a view as "incurable" for example)--that it > becomes a VIEW in itself, that it becomes so important it makes > things like cultivating a good heart seem like a pointless endeavor. > > The reason I spend so much time on this point here is that I really > believe that the Middle Way propounded by the Buddha means just that: > it's about finding the right balance, striking the "sweet spot"--like > the lute-string: not too tight, nor too loose. And it is very easy to > become too tight on the study of anatta to the exclusion of > accumulating merit (or too loose), or too tight on the practice of > accumulating merit to the exclusion of the study of Right View (or > too loose). > > The Path is the Middle Way between these extremes. When there is too > much emphasis on either Right View OR the accumulation of merit and > wholesome states of mind (which by themselves we all know don't lead > to anything other than pleasant results--they MUST be combined with > Right View to actualize the Buddha's path), then practice becomes > lopsided and yields no fruit, and one will never find the Middle Way > between the extremes of no-existence and true existence. > 9061 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question Dear Sarah, Thanks for your comments on this post. On re-reading it, it reveals a much firmer beginner's understanding of anatta and anicca than I ever had before joining this list. Thanks to all of you for your clarity. Robert Ep. ================================= --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Lisa, > > Rob Ep wrote this post (below) recently and I thought it was beautifully > written with a good explanation as to why some people like himself 'have been > attracted to this list'.... I might quibble over a few minor points, but I > thought the 'gist' was spot on and very sincere. > > Lisa, as I was clearing out old posts, I thought of your question and wondered > if you might find it helpful. I know Rob Ep will be delighted if you wish to > pursue any of his comments further..... > > Thanks Rob....;-) > > Sarah > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both > > beings > > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > > anatta as > > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > > anything > > to me. > > > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: > > > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > > nothing to > > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > > phenomena. > > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the > > factors > > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, > > and > > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing > > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > > co-arising > > conditions. > > > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no > > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > > impermanence > > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a > > real > > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting > > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more > > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not > > ordained > > by some other action. > > > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > > effort. > > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good > > medicine > > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in > > the > > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > > notion of > > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the > > rainbow > > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not > > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self > > or > > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is > > to > > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is > > just > > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, > > this is > > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted > > to > > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good > > dose of > > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > > substitute for > > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of > > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. > > > > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to > > be > > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > > > Regards, > > Robert > > > > =========================== 9062 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 10:02pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web thanks, Sarah. Hmn..... this is a good time to thank Sukin for sending me several nice books on Abhidhamma which I have just received in the mail! There's nothing like getting 'hard copy dhamma' from my friends here on the web! Thanks, Sukin! And thanks to Kom again who sent me two nice books on Abhidhamma previously. I can say with some pride that I have read a little and promise to keep reading. These are really lovely gifts! Sarah, I will go to the sites and see what I can find. If I get a bit more reading done in the next few months, maybe I will give myself permission to purchase some of Bikkhu Bodhi's translations. A gift to myself...but not until I'm a bit more deserving. As for the commentaries....hmnn.....that is really a shame that most are not even translated, now that I am finally curious about them. Um, Gayan.........If you're not busy........... Best, Robert Ep. =================================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the > > web? I > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure > > poetry of the sound. > > I know the feeling:-) > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries are not translated into > English at all. Out of those parts which have been translated into English, I'm > always very out-of-date as to what is available on the web exactly. Perhaps > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely with links as I know they > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll find links to the Access to > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in English, but precious > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of the translations which are > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all the Access to Insight > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy links, but generally I > prefer to read other translations, such as those by B.Bodhi with Commentary > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book form. None of the PTS > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), but all of this is just a > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small publishers who would like the > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue to do their work without any > income. > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I hope someone else will help > with better information. > > Sarah > > 9063 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 10:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > k: Sarah its ok even if you disagree with me. Its all a mind game :). > I think its time to let go of talking abt Nibbana bc in the end that is > not the focus of our practise. Personnally I feel this will end up not > going anywhere and I apologise for making you spending so much of your > time responding to my post. I hope you are not offended if you kindly let > me have the privilege to end this discussion on Nibbana. Nothing at all to apologise for and why would I feel offended at being given an unexpected holiday Ken;-) ?? Joking aside, thanks for the discussion and all your comments. Please feel free to discuss whatever you like (related to the Dhamma of course ;-) whenever you like.. Sarah 9064 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1- Manji Hi Manji, --- manji wrote: > Hi, > > I am deshi living in a dojo in Washington, DC. Sorry to show my ignorance, but would you tell me what deshi and a dojo are? Rob Ep also lives in Wash DC....thanks in advance. I am so happy to find a > dhamma discussion group, so I joined. Anyways, I learn from daily life and > meditation. I have been reading suttra, abhidhamma and vinaya for about 5 > years. This path was started along time ago, however I am thinking that > maybe the bell sounded greatest when a quote appeared on the back of a book > I walked by in the bookstore when i was very young. > > Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise, > seek what they sought. - Basho I like tthese lines too and you must have been a smart kid to appreciate them;-) > After some time being learning about cetasika in a quite direct fashion I am > right now understanding why aversion is akusala. It is akusala for what it > is, not for what it is about or around. I spent much time after the military > service "beating" myself up mentally over living the way I wanted to live, > in the military I thought of completing military service and becomming a > monk. I thought I had aversion to work and going to college and > universities, but really it was a conditioned aversion to living a monk's > life and attachment to living a monk's life. Doubt... maybe we all know > this... so using that opportunity to listen to the dhamma of doubt, the > dhamma of aversion... the dhamma of... the dhamma of... > > So now I am here, practicing and studying, after realizing that it is noble > to live this way. So maybe others realize this too. Experiencing > nama-rupa... I am very fortunate to experience and grow up these ways, and > realizing that living a human existence allows all the chimes of dhamma to > ring. > > We are very fortunate, so use every opportunity to listen to the dhamma. > Nice to meet you Sarah :) Manji, I found all of this to be interesting and intriguing....and am very glad you've found us...Like you say, we're fortunate to be able to listen to the dhamma in this life. Look forward to hearing plenty more from you and hope the 'chimes of dhamma' keep ringing;-) Sarah p.s. You asked this question: "Nibbana is a dhamma, what does it uphold?".....I'm not sure I can answer this or I could say it upholds anything...what do you think? 9065 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:26pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II & welcome Dear Yulia, --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thank you very much for your welcome letter! > This group was recommended to me by one of your members, Robert. And I am > very glad he did! All of us too... > I have to say I understand a little from postings here, because I am very > new to Buddhism. > I forgot to say, I've read a book on line by Nina Van Gorkom and was moved > by it. Was there anything in particular that 'moved' you or struck a chord? > I am a very first grader now and take off my hat for you, graduates :). I think we'd mostly rather put ourselves with the 1st graders than the graduates..:) > I live in Florida, originally from Russia. I have a language ability, that's > why I asked about Pali. I am little bit disagree with people here who said, > language doesn't matter. Actually I think this is a big advantage in that for many people, if they read or hear a few pali words it's a condition for dosa (aversion) and this can be an obstacle to considering more. >It's not what language matters, translator will > always brings his (her) feelings, vision to the subject. If you read > Shakspiere in old English and read it in Russian translation, it leaves you > wonder, if that was the same autor :). This is a good point and why some people prefer to only read Pali. > Thank you for all your postings here, I really enjoy atmosphere here (does > it sound like attachement to you :)?). Well, I think it's natural to have attachment (and fun) too ;) Hopefully in between the many moments of attachment there is a little sati (mindfulness) and some wise reflection too. Hope to hear more from you, Yulia and just 'shout' if you wish anyone to explain what they've written... Sarah 9066 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. Folks, By the way, ACCESS TO INSIGHT has a largish collection of transcribed lectures by B. Bodhi, A. Brahmavamso, and other notable teachers, available for reading or cutting and pasting. For instance, there is an eighty-page lecture by B.Bodhi on the Noble Eightfold Path. More homework for me. Here is the exact site: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html ================= --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" > wrote: > > > > . > > I would really like to know more of the Commentaries, my interest > has > > been piqued by members of this list. > > > > Could anyone assist by listing what would be good to buy, where to > > buy and what to start with? > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > >___________ > Dear Christine, > I recommend : > Net of views Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Root of existence Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Discourse on the fruits of recluseship Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Dispeller of Delusion (2volume set) Pali Text society > The Expositor, Pali text society > The Dhammapada (commentary) by John Ross Carter and Palihawadana > Buddhist legends (3vol.set) Burlingame > Jataka (3vol.set) Cowell PTS > the udana commentary (masefield) PTS > Vimana stories (masefield) PTS > > You could start at the top and work down. I also recommend ANY books > by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk > (she always quotes suttas and commentaries) > > > robert 9067 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:42pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web thanks, Mike. Where's a good place to order some of the commentaries in hard cover. Perhaps used?? Robert Ep. ============== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah and Rob, > > Sorry to disappoint but I'm not up on abhidhamma on > the web either (especially commentaries). The best I > can offer are the files and links at > http://abhidhamma.org/ > and http://www.dhammastudy.com/ > > I agree with Sarah about Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations, > some of which you can find on the web searching by his > name, but unfortunately few. > > mike > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon > > translated into English on the > > > web? I > > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can > > only enjoy it for the pure > > > poetry of the sound. > > > > I know the feeling:-) > > > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries > > are not translated into > > English at all. Out of those parts which have been > > translated into English, I'm > > always very out-of-date as to what is available on > > the web exactly. Perhaps > > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely > > with links as I know they > > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll > > find links to the Access to > > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in > > English, but precious > > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of > > the translations which are > > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all > > the Access to Insight > > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy > > links, but generally I > > prefer to read other translations, such as those by > > B.Bodhi with Commentary > > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book > > form. None of the PTS > > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), > > but all of this is just a > > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small > > publishers who would like the > > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue > > to do their work without any > > income. > > > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I > > hope someone else will help > > with better information. > > > > Sarah > > > > 9068 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:49pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web Here's another good section of the Access to Insight site, with large portions of the Pali Canon and essays by important teachers available for direct downloading. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/index.html Robert Ep. ================= > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Rob, > > > > Sorry to disappoint but I'm not up on abhidhamma on > > the web either (especially commentaries). The best I > > can offer are the files and links at > > http://abhidhamma.org/ > > and http://www.dhammastudy.com/ > > > > I agree with Sarah about Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations, > > some of which you can find on the web searching by his > > name, but unfortunately few. > > > > mike > > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > Dear Rob Ep, > > > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah, > > > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon > > > translated into English on the > > > > web? I > > > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can > > > only enjoy it for the pure > > > > poetry of the sound. > > > > > > I know the feeling:-) > > > > > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries > > > are not translated into > > > English at all. Out of those parts which have been > > > translated into English, I'm > > > always very out-of-date as to what is available on > > > the web exactly. Perhaps > > > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely > > > with links as I know they > > > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > > > > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll > > > find links to the Access to > > > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in > > > English, but precious > > > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > > > > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of > > > the translations which are > > > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all > > > the Access to Insight > > > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy > > > links, but generally I > > > prefer to read other translations, such as those by > > > B.Bodhi with Commentary > > > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book > > > form. None of the PTS > > > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), > > > but all of this is just a > > > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small > > > publishers who would like the > > > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue > > > to do their work without any > > > income. > > > > > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I > > > hope someone else will help > > > with better information. > > > > > > Sarah > > > 9069 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi Howard, sorry for the delay... --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > posts’ > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated > in > > my previous quote. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if it is > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things > really are when seen truly? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. I thought these passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or arammana for the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition in this way. I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate dhamma'....No? I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of realities, 'things' are 'seen truly'. So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) truly, BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the final remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue to be plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities as they are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is that even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or these ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use whatever assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. Without a little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're bound to read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with another interpretation. I think all your other points were addressed to Ken O (and I'm not looking for extra trouble today;-) Howard, I have a (strong) feeling that my answer just given is not going to pass your rigorous test....so I look forward to hearing back from you. 2 qus from other posts of yours: 1) what is a 'modicom of sila'?? 2) What happens when those bicycle pedals stop going round.....(by conditions they will stop in time, no?) Sarah p.s I've appreciate a couple of your replies to Herman's questions btw..... 9070 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India - Nimitta & anubyanjana Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > > This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another > > world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours > ago, > > but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different > > only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and > anupayancanna > > -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') > appearing > > through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through > the > > various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, > and > > it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding > that > > we are urged to develop. > > Would you kindly elaborate on the nimitta and anupayancanna as mentioned > above > and the distinction between them in this context. I would be very happy to, but I’m afraid I don’t know much about this area, except that it’s an important aspect of both sila and satipatthana. As I understand it, when impressions are received through the sense-doors there will inevitably be paying attention with kilesa to the ‘sign’ (shape-and-form/nimitta) and ‘particulars’ (details/anubya~njana) of those sense-impressions. It seems to mean the absence of the guarding of the sense-doors. I don’t know any more than this. Further study required, for sure. I am hoping Nina will have something to say about it in her writings on the trip, since it came up for discussion and Nalanda and again at Patna. In the meantime, here are some references to get started with— Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’: ‘Nimitta’ is defined as ‘mark, sign; image; target, object; cause, condition’, with the comment that ‘These meanings are used in, and adapted to, many contexts’. Several doctrinal usages are discussed, of which #3 is— <<'Outward appearance': of one who has sense-control it is said- that "he does not seize upon the general appearance” of an object (na nimittaggáhí; M. 38, D. 2; …).>> There is further discussion under the 4 kinds of morality consisting of purification (catupárisuddhi-síla), as follows: <<(2) Restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara-síla). "Whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, an object with the mind, *he neither adheres to the appearance [J: nimitta?] as a whole, nor to its parts [J: anubyancana?]*. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses" (M 38).>> Visudhimagga I, 42, 54 At I, 42, a discussion of ‘Virtue as restraint of sense faculties’: <<‘On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends *neither the signs nor the particulars* through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, he undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. … [and so on for the other sense doors] …’ (M.i, 180) [This] is virtue of restraint of the sense faculties.>> At I, 54, an explanation of the 2 terms: <<”Apprehends neither the signs”: he does not apprehend the sign of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. “Nor the particulars”: he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot , smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name ‘particular (anubya~njana)’ because of its particularising ( anu anu bya~njanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there.>> Hope this is helpful. Jon 9071 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 3:01am Subject: Seeing Realities - beginners class Dear All, I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to ask it here as well. I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any group, there will people who have at least an elementary understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are defined immediately I am aware of them. Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is possible). metta, Christine 9072 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 4:13am Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert E] Hi Robert E., It's tough to argue with most of your comments, but I don't think that Robert K is espousing the view that you are attributing to him. Comments interspersed... Rob E: > I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as really being a > hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a discerning > view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and attachment? Is the > feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace really a clinging > to quiet? Moments of real love (metta? karuna? mudita? adosa?) must be free of conceit and attachment. But are moments that we might feel joy at what we term "love" really free of conceit and attachment? Or is there attachment, lust, craving, pity? Discernment of the difference between attachment and non-attachment is critical, and in this ignorant confluence of 5 aggregates, attachment is much, MUCH more common. >I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life which > appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that it is the > accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not really that hard to > identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their occurence -- to be > the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary experiences. It is true that dosa is associated with nasty feeling somewhere, but consciousness rooted in lobha (craving) can be pleasant or neutral. Dosa is easier to recognize, it is unpleasant, and it can have such sharp negative external consequences that are obvious; but lobha (craving, clinging, lust, attachment) is more difficult to recognize, may be pleasant, may not always have sharp external consequences. Development is much more difficult than trying to avoid the things with nasty feeling evident (dosa) and pursuing the things without nasty feeling evident (both lobha and kusala). This may be why Buddha said "Greed is a lesser fault and fades away slowly; hatred is a great fault and fades away quickly..." (AN 3:68) > If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before Parinibbana to be > one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt with without > hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments like this, only > they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and lessening of > attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. Right. > To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions All? To see all 'good' (pleasant?) feelings as attachment and delusion would indeed be a grave mistake. But to fail to realize how frequently what we think is 'good' (pleasant) is really 'bad' (attachment, delusion) is also a grave mistake. > sense. I don't > look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither good nor bad. > Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither 'good' nor 'bad'. Attachment and clinging cause suffering and are called 'akusala'. Non- attachment (with wisdom) leads away from suffering and so is called 'kusala'. > Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not experienced as > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they arise? I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha as lobha. 9073 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 4:24am Subject: Re: Tipitaka and commentaries Dear Robert, As per usual there is rigour and thoroughness in your posts. I feel uneasy about the next question, but I do not think that not asking it will be a better option. What then, in the scheme of things, is the place of the writings of Khun Sujin ( I have no idea what Khun means, by the way, I am merely repeating what I have seen ) and Nina van Gorkom (Gorinchem is a beautiful walled town in Gelderland, just up the dike from where I spent my childhood). Thank you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Herman, > This web site lists the Tipitaka and all commentaries and tikas that > were recited at the last Buddhist council > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/archive.htm > The commentaries are: > ..>>>ATTHAKATHAS > The Pali Tipitaka Atthakathas as approved by the Sixth > Buddhist Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows, the size of each > book is the same as that of the Pali Canon Books > > Commentaries (Atthakathas) (51 Volumes). > 1. Digha Nikaya (Silakkhandha vagga) Atthakatha. (pp. 338). > 2. Digha Nikaya Mahavagga Atthakatha (pp. 403). > 3. Digha Nikaya Pathikavagga Atthakatha (pp. 251). > 4. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. I (pp. 398) > 5. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. II (pp. 320) > 6. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. III (pp. 309). > 6. Majjhimapannasa Atthakatha (pp. 309) > 7. Upari-pannasa Atthakatha (pp. 254). > 8. Sagathavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 325). > 9. Nidanavagga and Khandha (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 324). > 10. Salayatanavagga & Mahavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 341). > 11. Anguttara AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 416). > 12. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. II (pp. 397) > 13. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. III (pp. pp. 357 > 14. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 346). > 15. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 312). > 16. Pacityadi Atthakatha (pp. 437). > 17. Culavaggadi Atthakatha (pp. 265). > 18. Kankhavitarani Atthakatha(pp. 357). > 19. Vinaya Sangaha Atthakatha(pp. 468). > 20. Atthasalini Atthakatha (pp. 454) > 21. Sammoha Vinodani Atthakatha (pp. 508). > 22. Panca pakarana Atthakatha (pp. 499). > 23. Khuddakapatha Atthakatha (pp. 216). > 24. Dhammapada AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 447). > 25. Dhammapada Atthakatha. > 26. Udana Atthakatha(pp. 393). > 27. Itivuttaka Atthakatha (pp. 355) > 28. Suttanipata Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 314) > 29. Suttanipata AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 324) > 30. Vimanavatthu Atthakatha (pp. 335) > 31. Petavatthu (pp. 270) > 32. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 345). > 33. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 323). > 34. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 370). > 35. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 353). > 36. Thera Gatha AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 485). > 37. Thera Gatha Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 546). > 38. Theri Gatha Atthakatha(pp. 305). > 39. Apadana AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 403). > 40. Apadana AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 303) > 41. Jataka AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 538). > 42. Jataka AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 408). > 43. Jataka AtthakathaVol. III. (pp. 517). > 44. Jataka AtthakathaVol. IV. (pp. 504) > 45. Jataka AtthakathaVol. V. (pp. 553). > 46. Jataka Atthakatha Vol. VI. (pp. 332). > 47. Jataka Atthakatha Vol.VII. (pp. 387). > 48. Cula Niddesa and Netti Atthakatha (pp. 276). > 49. Maha Niddesa Atthakatha (pp. 419). > 50. Buddhavamsa Atthakatha (pp. 354), > 51. Cariya Pitaka Atthakatha (pp. 328) > TIKAS > The Pali Tipitaka Tikas as approved by the Sixth Buddhist > Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows; the size of each book is > the same as that of the Pali Canon Books:— > > Sub-Commentaries (Tikas)(26-Volumes). > 1. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. I. (pp. 500). > 2. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. II. (pp. 437). > 3. Silakkhanahavagga Mula Tika (pp. 405). > 4. Mahavagga Tika (pp. 358). > 5. Pathikavagga Tika (pp. 292). > 6. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. I. (pp. 394). > 7. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. II. (pp. 324). > 8. Majjhima & Uparipannasa Tika (pp. 442). > 9.Samyutta Tika Vol. I (pp. 345) > 10. Samyutta TikaVol. II. (pp. 551). > 11. Anguttara TikaVol. I (pp. 288). > 12. Anguttara Tika Vol. II. (pp. 396). > 13. Anguttara Tika Vol. III.(pp. 371). > 14. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol . I (pp. 460). > 15. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. II. (pp. 448). > 16. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. III. (pp. 496). > 17. Vimativinodani TikaVol. I. (pp. 362). > 18. Vimativinodani TikaVol. II. (pp. 322) > 19.Vajirabuddhi Tika (pp. 585) > 20. Dhammasangani Mula Tika (pp. 220) > 21. Vibhanga Mula Tikaand (pp. 229) > 22. Pancapakarana Mula Tika and Anutika(pp. 323). > 23. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. I. (pp. 46l). > 24. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. II. (pp. 533). > 25. Netti Tika and Netti Vibhavini Tika (pp. 356). > 26. Kankhavitarani Purana and Abhinava Tika > > Only a handful of these have been translated into English to my great > regret. > The guidelines to Dhammastudygroup says: > Agreement > > By subscribing to DhammaStudyGroup, you agree to follow the > guidelines prescribed here. > > Posts > We welcome any questions, answers, or comments, however light- > hearted, relating to the Buddha's teachings as found in the texts of > the Theravada tradition (including the Suttanta, Abhidhamma, Vinaya > and the ancient commentaries). Endquote > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guidelines > > This doesn't mean that there can be no disagreement with any points > in the commentaries or even the Tipitaka. > best wishes > robert > 9074 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Christine, I just read a great sutta in SN the other day. The Buddha talks about the importance of developing concentration. The deepening of concentration allows us to get a more direct perception of impermanence. When we get a deeper perception of impermanence, then we are seeing deeper into reality. How do we deepen concentration? I think the answer will differ for everyone. The obvious answer is to meditate, but if meditation seems to yield little progress, then the 5 hindrances are acting up and we have to deal with those that are particularly troublesome for me. -fk p.s. the more I see how much the Buddha in the early suttas emphasizes the practical matters of cultivation and "seeing reality", i.e. seeing impermanence of the world, the 3 marks applied to the six sense bases, the 5 aggregates of clinging, the more I doubt the later buddhist scriptures have any validity whatsoever as the authentic word of the Buddha. The styles and material are just SO INCONGRUOUS. Here's a worldly poem on impermanence I ran into recently. Death of the Day (1858) by Walter Savage Landor My pictures blacken in their frames As night comes on, And youthful maids and wrinkled dames Are now all one. Death of the day! a sterner Death Did worse before; The fairest form, the sweetest breath, Away he bore. 9075 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:12am Subject: Re: Tipitaka and commentaries Dear Herman, Always a pleasure to talk, and I think this is a question that a few members would be interested in. Nothing anyone at this time, no matter who they are, can ever be considered as atthakatha (commentary). This only applies to the works that Buddhaghosa and Dhammapala did (maybe one other too but I'm not sure). They edited and translated the ancient commentaries that mahinda had brought from India in 2200BC.(Plus added some additional material collected up until their time). The tikas (subcommentaries ) have a tiered system where some are considered better than others. And then there are the even later tikas on the tikas...which are accordingly respected based on their worth. In Thailand Sujin is well-respected among people who like Abhidhamma (a relatively small minority of Buddhists). However, if you meet Sujin you'll probably find she doesn't so often refer to the texts and is most interested in helping people understand the present moment and how to really see that all dhammas are conditioned. In short, to answer your question - some people greatly respect Sujin and Nina now; and the way things work they will probably be more respected and studied after they die, but their words cannot surpass or supercede the ancients. At best it can only support them. best wishes robert p.s khun just means sir or madame in thai. p.s. I know longtime students of Sujin's who don't especially like Abhidhamma, or at least not in large doses, and who would (and have) find this list a little arcane sometimes. They still get the gist of the Buddha's teaching through listening and learning to study the moment and have deeper understanding than some Abhidhamma theorists. (but I think they would go even faster if they studied more details) In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > As per usual there is rigour and thoroughness in your posts. > > I feel uneasy about the next question, but I do not think that not > asking it will be a better option. > > What then, in the scheme of things, is the place of the writings of > Khun Sujin ( I have no idea what Khun means, by the way, I am merely > repeating what I have seen ) and Nina van Gorkom (Gorinchem is a > beautiful walled town in Gelderland, just up the dike from where I > spent my childhood). > > Thank you > > Herman gg 9076 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:12am Subject: Rid of impurities... Make an island unto yourself! Strive hard and become wise! Rid of impurities and cleansed of stain, you shall not come again to birth and decay. Dhammapada 238 Dear friends, The above verses seem the Buddha suggests a lot of controlling. I don't know if they are translated incorrectly from Pali. Please help. Thank you. With Appreciation, Alex Tran 9077 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 2:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Robert (and Kenneth) - In a message dated 11/2/01 12:39:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Hi Howard, > I'm not absolutely sure, but I suspect that what Kenneth is trying to > express is > that not only are cittas not real *things* that can either be created or > destroyed, but that they only arise momentarily and seemingly in response > to > arising conditions, and therefore there is no way for them to *permanently > cease*. > In other words, if you define Nibbana as that condition under which they do > cease, you would have to say definitionally that they then cease. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: As I understand it, any dhamma arising is a conventional arising, with no real and separate "thing" truly arising at all. But, this side of nibbana, that is not how you or I or Ken or any of us (I believe) see it. Every apparent dhamma which arises subsequently ceases, and it then no longer "exists". For sure the (final) cessation is instantaneous and not a permanent or ongoing event, but, then that dhamma is gone for good. The advent of full enlightenment, however, marks the cessation of all conditions, not in the sense that any real, self-existent and separate things ever cease, but, rather, in the sense that the illusion of there ever *being* such things has been uprooted. The advent of nibbana is a phenimenological and psychological event, not the transformation of some self-existing external world. ------------------------------------------------------- But as I read> > Kenneth, he is saying that this is only provisionally permanent, because if > conditions were to arise again which would promote the arising of cittas, > then the > cittas would arise again. See what I mean? > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know. In this triple world of conventional things, when a mind state ceases, though others, conditioned by the first, will subsequently arise, the first one is *gone*. Any sense that the first one, though gone, still somehow continues, is to read into things one of the very kinds of eternalism and essentialism that Nagarjuna, and well before him the Buddha, criticized. The problem with language, of course, is an essential one. When one says that dhammas cease entirely, that is taken to be a form of anniilationism. But that is only due to our misbelieving in the existence, at any time, of separate, self-sufficient dhammas. -------------------------------------------------------- There is no *thing* called Nibbana > which actually guarantees that no > cittas will arise again. They will if and only > if conditions do arise again which cause they to co-arise. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This I do not get. Nibbana has nothing to do with the ordinary cessation of "things". Nibbana is the state of cessation in the sense "in nibbana" no separate things are ever seen to actually arise at all, ever. But even in the realm of apparently separate conditions, the samsaric realm of resticted and defiled vision in which we all "live", conditions don't re-arise and don't cause other conditions to re-arise, except when really misperceived. The pain I have in my knee today has many charateristics in common with the pain I had there yesterday, but it is not "the same pain", and the aversive reaction that arises in response today is not the aversive reaction which arose yesterday. Sure we conventionally say "Hey, my knee pain is back", but that is just a manner of speaking, and a manner of speaking shouldn't serve as the basis for some sort of eternalist, essentialist philosophical enterprise. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hope that's not too convoluted, but it leads away from seeing Nibbana as > entity, > but as merely a recognition of anatta in [your] field of > possibilities...... > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I'll say that this characterization of nibbana certainly has an appealing ring to my ears! ;-)) -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert Ep. > > ============================= 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) 9078 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:07am Subject: Re: Rid of impurities... --- Dear Alex, Nice to hear from you! Remember the Buddha used at times vohara vaca (conventional speech). Sometimes we urge each other to do good deeds , to study , to listen, to consider , to have sati. These words can be a condition and a reminder for awareness. For one person it can be a condition (but never the only condition) for them to be more generous, for another to respect their parents, and for another to understand this moment. ..And yet for another it could be a condition for wrong effort with wrong view... What is the deepest way of making an "Island of oneself'? Well in the Satipatthanasamyutta sutta (p1637-connected discourses) it says : "And how Ananda does a bhikkhu dwell with himself as an island..with no other refuge, dwell with the Dhamma as an island, with the Dhamma as a refuge, with no other refuge. Here Ananda a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body..feelings in feelings..mind in mind...phenomena in phenomena"enquote. Thus a summary of satipatthana. And what is satipatthana?`Iggleden pxliii (vibhanga intro.) "These states are not me, these are not mine, herein there is no soul, this is transient, clinging to these states is of the nature of suffering'. This as a broad statement is what is meant by the Four Foundations of Mindfulness" endquote. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., axtran@h... wrote: > Make an island unto yourself! > Strive hard and become wise! > Rid of impurities and cleansed of stain, > you shall not come again to birth and decay. > > Dhammapada 238 > > Dear friends, > > The above verses seem the Buddha suggests a lot of controlling. I > don't know if they are translated incorrectly from Pali. Please help. > > Thank you. > > With Appreciation, > Alex Tran 9079 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:42am Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert E] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > > > >Robert E: Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not > experienced as > > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they > arise? > _________ >DAN: I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments > that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha > as lobha. ____________ Yes, that's right Dan. Possibly I do sound a bit 'protestant' in some posts - and give the wrong impression. I heard a tape where Alan Weller asked T.A. Sujin about enjoyments etc. in life. She replied that she thought one should follow what one enjoys, but with wisdom. I think Robert E. was getting at this in his post. So what we don't want to do is become serious, uptight, anal retentive prudes; plenty of these around already.;) robert 9080 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concepts Herman, Let me give you my initial answers to some very interesting questions. The last, first: The idea that suffering occurs to a non-existent being and thus is non-existent itself is an easy conclusion to draw, but in my opinion does not note the reality correctly. Suffering does not occur to the 'concept' 'self' because a concept cannot experience anything. It is rather an object of consciousness. So where is suffering experienced? It is experienced by a citta, by consciousness. Since consciousness actually experiences suffering, suffering is actual. The being that we *think* is suffering is not real, but the suffering and the consciousness that experiences it, are. I hope that distinction makes some sense of what is a very perplexing seeming paradox. My conclusion is that compassion arises from this understanding and that the expression of ultimate compassion is to help the 'cittas' in question to release the causes of suffering. The path leads to release of clinging and aversion which cause suffering, and thus the suffering cittas gradually will cease to arise in more advanced stages. One can also try to help relieve physical suffering in the physical world at the same time without undermining this deeper intention. As for anicca, it is again a citta, or consciousness, that is aware of both the illusion of permanence and the reality of transcence. Without the ability to remember and compare moments in a single citta, which takes as its content the reality of the previous moment, I believe there would be no suffering and be no path. Neither would be possible. It is part of the process of this life, both delusion and awakening, that this is possible. I don't know what life would be or what kind of mindfulness we would be capable of if we could absolutely only be cognisant of the contents of this moment only, without comparing it to another. It is also clear that the ability to see what is in this moment and what is not is part of liberation. Best, Robert Ep. ================== --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi all, > > > Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of > existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to be > directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment include > awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? How > can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is changing? > There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality for > the deduction of change to be made. > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > Regards > > > Herman 9081 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/2/01 3:12:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > sorry for the delay... > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > > posts’ > > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the > conditioned > > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as > indicated > > in > > > my previous quote. > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > it is > > > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a > > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of > > > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things > > really are when seen truly? > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes > accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the > conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't recall anything there about nibbana being experienced by conditioned mind states. Also, when it is said that there is that realm where there is neither earth nor fire etc, that simply describes the functioning of mind freed of defilements, and not an object to be observed. ---------------------------------------------------------------- I thought these> > passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or arammana > for > the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition in > this > way. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not at all clear to me. Sorry. -------------------------------------------------------------- I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate> > dhamma'....No? > > I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of > realities, > 'things' are 'seen truly'. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, there are moments of relative clarity, even in the midst of samsara. ----------------------------------------------------------------- So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and> > to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) truly, > BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the > final > remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue to > be > plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities as > they > are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: To me, cittas are conventional existents, though, since I am mired with defilement, they don't seem merely conventional - very little of anything does. Nibbana, the state undefiled by the three poisons, is a state to be realized, not to be observed as an object. Who stands where to view such an object?! ---------------------------------------------------------- > > In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing and > other > vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is > that > even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which the Buddha was without wisdom? ---------------------------------------------------------- > > I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or > these > ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use whatever > assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. Without a > little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're bound > to > read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with another > interpretation. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, we differ on this. I consider the suttas as primary. I consider the rest as helpful resources (as I do the Mahayana sutras and commentaries). ------------------------------------------------------ > > I think all your other points were addressed to Ken O (and I'm not looking > for > extra trouble today;-) > > Howard, I have a (strong) feeling that my answer just given is not going to > pass your rigorous test....so I look forward to hearing back from you. > > 2 qus from other posts of yours: > > 1) what is a 'modicom of sila'?? > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: A minimally adequate amount for getting beyond step zero! How that is to be precisely measured I can't say. ------------------------------------------------------ > 2) What happens when those bicycle pedals stop going round.....(by > conditions > they will stop in time, no?) > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't know, and it doesn't much matter. Once the gears are released, once there is no longer any grasping, any pushing, any pulling, once there are no longer seen any substantial dhammas to crave or cling to or escape from, and no self to be caught in attachment, nothing more is required, one way or the other. ------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah > > p.s I've appreciate a couple of your replies to Herman's questions btw..... ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks, Sarah. I'm pleased, particularly because I have no doubt you won't be so much in love with this current post of mine! ;-)) ========================= 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) 9082 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 10:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question Hi Robert Ep and all, Even though we have differences I wholeheartedly agree with Robert Ep that studying Abidhamma, the concept of anatta and anicca is very beautifully explain. Without knowing anatta and anicca, it is difficult to go on the path of cessation of suffering. Without knowing them, it is difficult to learn satipatthana. Without knowing them, it is difficult to understand the meaning of Nibbana (as explain in the Pali Cannon). Without knowing them, it is diffcult to understand there is anatta in anatta. It is through such discussions of Abidhamma, I have benefited greatly. It is also true that without the commentaries of Abidhamma, it is quite difficult to learn Abidhamma. I have a book of Abidhamma by Bikkhu Bodhi, it is diffult to understand unless the commentaries of Abidhamma is there. I hope one day, someone will do the whole translation. I like the way Gayan did it. His translation has an effect like Buddha talking to me directly. Kind regards kenneth Ong --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for your comments on this post. On re-reading it, it reveals a > much firmer > beginner's understanding of anatta and anicca than I ever had before > joining this > list. > > Thanks to all of you for your clarity. > > Robert Ep. > > ================================= 9083 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 6:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert E] Hi Lisa and Dan, Dan, I really enjoy reading your mail. Thanks for sharing your insight with us. Lisa, welcome to dsg. My name is Num, I am more a lurker or a reader in dsg. Your question looks simple, but to me it's a very deep and hard question. Esp. what is right and what is wrong? I personally prefer to use wholesome (kusala) or unwholesome (akulasa) to right/wrong. For me to do good deed at times definitely without any wisdom or understanding. I did a lot of thing by my second nature b/c I am used to do it. In Thailand, my parents made me give food to monks on every of my birthday. I think I have done it since my first birthday. I think it's a good thing, but I did it mainly b/c it's sth we always do it. Again on my birthday, I had to serve everybody first, no matter who they were or how old they were. I did not agree with the idea but I always did it. I remember I felt like I just wanted my piece of cake, hey I was the most important person on my birthday. By now, I think I have somewhat more understanding and can see the good reason from my parents points' of view. Without wisdom, we can do a lot of thing, good or bad, on a ritualistic manner. But to me, with wisdom, things become spontaneous and more intuitional base. > > Moments of real love (metta? karuna? mudita? adosa?) must be free of > conceit and attachment. But are moments that we might feel joy at > what we term "love" really free of conceit and attachment? Or is > there attachment, lust, craving, pity? Discernment of the difference > between attachment and non-attachment is critical, and in this > ignorant confluence of 5 aggregates, attachment is much, MUCH more > common. > I remember a debate from my philosophy class in college about how many kinds of love: state, fraternal, erotic, friendship.. At this point I think that actually there is only one kind of love, metta (loving-kindness). Clinging, attachment and anger are not part of love or metta but joy can be both in attachment and metta. The difference between to two is difficult as you said. Things are easily mixing up, kusala moment can cause akusala moment, and rapidly alternating between the two. > It is true that dosa is associated with nasty feeling somewhere, but > consciousness rooted in lobha (craving) can be pleasant or neutral. > Dosa is easier to recognize, it is unpleasant, and it can have such > sharp negative external consequences that are obvious; but lobha > (craving, clinging, lust, attachment) is more difficult to recognize, > may be pleasant, may not always have sharp external consequences. > Development is much more difficult than trying to avoid the things > with nasty feeling evident (dosa) and pursuing the things without > nasty feeling evident (both lobha and kusala). This may be why Buddha > said "Greed is a lesser fault and fades away slowly; hatred is a > great fault and fades away quickly..." (AN 3:68) > > To me both are difficult to recognize esp. the fine one. Again come back to wisdom, lobha as you said can be accompanied by pleasant and neutral feeling. No matter how little the pleasant feeling, lobha can always clings to it. Is it wrong to play tennis?. I don't think so, according to my level of wisdom :) It's fun, good for health but it can be a source of clinging and attachment, pleasant feeling, joy, friendship, feeling good about oneself or even anger when I cannot play the way I want. Usually there are akusala than kusala but kusala moment can occur anytime and anywhere if there are right conditions. > To see all 'good' (pleasant?) feelings as attachment and delusion > would indeed be a grave mistake. But to fail to realize how > frequently what we think is 'good' (pleasant) is really 'bad' > (attachment, delusion) is also a grave mistake. > > Attachment and clinging cause suffering and are called 'akusala'. Non- > attachment (with wisdom) leads away from suffering and so is > called 'kusala'. > > I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments > that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha > as lobha. > I completely agree. As Robert K's quoted, one can follow what one enjoys, but it's better with wisdom. Akusala can condition later kusala and vice versa. Wisdom does it's own function not us or ourselves. Appreciate Num 9084 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:02pm Subject: Re: Rid of impurities... Dear Robert, It's nice to hear from you, too. Thank you for helping me out. With Respect and Appreciation, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > Dear Alex, > Nice to hear from you! > Remember the Buddha used at times vohara vaca (conventional speech). > Sometimes we urge each other to do good deeds , to study , to listen, > to consider , to have sati. These words can be a condition and a > reminder for awareness. > For one person it can be a condition (but never the only condition) > for them to be more generous, for another to respect their parents, > and for another to understand this moment. ..And yet for another it > could be a condition for wrong effort with wrong view... > > What is the deepest way of making an "Island of oneself'? > Well in the > Satipatthanasamyutta sutta (p1637-connected discourses) > it says : "And how Ananda does a bhikkhu dwell with himself > as an island..with no other refuge, dwell with the Dhamma as an > island, with the Dhamma as a refuge, with no other refuge. Here > Ananda a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the > body..feelings in feelings..mind in mind...phenomena in > phenomena"enquote. Thus a summary of satipatthana. > > And what is satipatthana?`Iggleden pxliii (vibhanga intro.) "These > states are not me, these are not mine, herein there is no soul, this > is transient, clinging to these states is of the nature of > suffering'. This as a broad statement is what is meant by the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness" endquote. > best wishes > robert 9085 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Good material, Jon. Thanks. And this description of the arising, duration and ending of a citta is not so complicated really. Like everything else within the space-time continuum, it has a beginning, a middle and an end, which take place seemingly in time and in the physical world. This makes the citta somewhat accessible as an event, even if it happens too fast and subtly for us to normally be aware of it. Robert Ep. ===================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard & others > > I have pasted below the entry from Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' on > the subject of the stages in the life-span of a citta. Hope you find it > of interest. > > Jon > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > Dear Howard and sarah, > > In "A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhip156 Guide to > > #6 'The life span of a citta is termed , in the Abhidhamma a > > mindmoment(cittakhana). ..in a flash of lightning billions of mind- > > moments can elasp. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinetesimal each > > mind moment in turn consists of three sub-moments: arising(uppada) > > presence(thithi) and dissolution(bhavanga). Within the breath of a > > mindmoment a citta arises , performs its momentary function, and then > > dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succesion"Endquote > > robert > > Citta-kkhana: 'consciousness-moment', is the time occupied by one single > stage in the perceptual process or cognitive series (cittavíthi). > This moment again is subdivided into the genetic (uppáda), static (thiti) > and dissolving (bhanga) moment. > One such moment is said in the commentaries to be of inconceivably short > duration and to last not longer than the billionth part of the time > occupied by a flash of lightning. > However that may be, we ourselves know from experience that it is possible > within one single second to dream of innumerable things and events. > In Anguttara Nikaya I, 10 it is said: "Nothing, o monks, do I know that > changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may be found that > could be compared with this so rapidly changing consciousness.". > > For a sutta source of the 3 stages, see Anguttara Nikaya III, 47-- > "There are 3 characteristics of what is conditioned (sankhatassa > lakkhaná): an arising (uppádo) is apparent, a passing away (vayo) is > apparent, a change in the existing (thitassa aññathattam: Com. = ageing) > is apparent" > > The same 3 phases are mentioned in Samyutta Nikaya XXII, 37, where they > are applied to each of the 5 khandha. > 9086 From: manji Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 - probably new now. Below... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Epstein" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:01 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 > I agree Ken. I think the point you have been trying to make lately about > attaching to views is very important, and very hard to get. Since every direction > we think we are taking on the path is in a sense a view, expectation or > anticipation of something not yet experienced, it is almost the same as asking Hmm, "every direction we think..." this right here is part of abhidhamma, the very thing being discussed. Of course it is view, but how about this... The truth is... There is direction. There is path. There is rupa. There is nama. There is suffering. This is different than... My direction, My rupa, My nama, My Suffering... Some say "Life is suffering" but this is not the case, this is not knowing dhamma now. There is suffering, just as there is direction. And in essence... not self, empty. > people to give up 'the path', at least the path in their mind. Very hard. That > is why the zen concept of beginner's mind is very helpful. To keep going back to > understanding that one cannot actually know anything, even the path, except by > direct experiencing of its principles in the moment. > > Robert Ep. The beginner's mind has no concept. No kamma making. It may be just after ;) About knowing... there is knowing, there is wisdom, there is mind. There is sanna. Someone mentioned earlier about importance. This is abhidhamma - right now nama. Right now cetasika... conditioning the sense of "importance". Conditioning a sense of urgency. And what sense is this? It is cetasika. So right now understanding conditioning, and understanding "conditioning of path". It was taught somewhere that "it is like taking a path to get to someplace, you travel toward that place... conditioned. And once you are there there is no travelling, no need for the direction, no more need for the way." It is then you stand in what is unconditioned. Of course, there cannot be this when there is always reaching mind, identifying and reaching. walk softly, manji 9087 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 2:12pm Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class/Frank Hi Frank, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., frank kuan wrote: > Hi Christine, > I just read a great sutta in SN the other day. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Can you quote the name and number, or better still, a link? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The > Buddha talks about the importance of developing > concentration. The deepening of concentration allows > us to get a more direct perception of impermanence. > When we get a deeper perception of impermanence, then > we are seeing deeper into reality. > How do we deepen concentration? I think the answer > will differ for everyone. The obvious answer is to > meditate, but if meditation seems to yield little > progress, then the 5 hindrances are acting up and we > have to deal with those that are particularly > troublesome for me. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I guess that is where I am at the moment. I seem to have lost the 'desire' to meditate formally i.e.(sitting/walking). I am not sure whether this is a 'hindrance' like 'sloth and torpor' that I should do battle with, or whether I am leaning towards another way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -fk > > p.s. the more I see how much the Buddha in the early > suttas emphasizes the practical matters of cultivation > and "seeing reality", i.e. seeing impermanence of the > world, the 3 marks applied to the six sense bases, the > 5 aggregates of clinging, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: This is the point of my question....Do we have to 'only formally meditate'....if not, are there simple, for me - very simple, instructions on learning the skill of 'seeing reality'? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- the more I doubt the later > buddhist scriptures have any validity whatsoever as > the authentic word of the Buddha. The styles and > material are just SO INCONGRUOUS. > > Here's a worldly poem on impermanence I ran into > recently. > > Death of the Day (1858) by Walter Savage Landor > > My pictures blacken in their frames > As night comes on, > And youthful maids and wrinkled dames > Are now all one. > > Death of the day! a sterner Death > Did worse before; > The fairest form, the sweetest breath, > Away he bore. > So - 'the down to earth, call a spade a spade' Frank that we all know and love, also quotes poetry. What an unexpected delight! :-) Also by Walter Savage Landor: from "Why, why repine.." Why, why repine, my pensive friend, At pleasures slipp'd away? Some the stern Fates will never lend, And all refuse to stay. I see the rainbow in the sky, The dew upon the grass, I see them, and I ask not why They glimmer or they pass. from "to Age" Thanks for expelling Fear and Hope, One vile, the other vain; One's scourge, the other's telescope, I shall not see again. Rather what lies before my feet My notice shall engage-- He who hath braved Youth's dizzy heat Dreads not the frost of Age. The two quotes below are what I remind myself of when trying to overcome the difficulties I have understanding Dhamma. A quote by Thomas Paine The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value. I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. A quote by Bertolt Brecht 'Don't be afraid of death so much as an inadequate life. ' metta, Christine 9088 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 10:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class/Frank Hi, Christine - In a message dated 11/2/01 5:14:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Christine: I guess that is where I am at the moment. I seem to have > lost the 'desire' to meditate formally i.e.(sitting/walking). I am > not sure whether this is a 'hindrance' like 'sloth and torpor' that I > should do battle with, or whether I am leaning towards another way. > ========================= I have found that centering mindfulness on the body (on breath, bodily position, sensation, movement, solidity etc) during ordinary non-meditative states, whenever not having to attend completely to some specific complex task, is a wonderful practice, which also leads, almost automatically, to mindfulness of volition, thoughts etc, and is especially useful when done with an "eye" to observing the impermanence and conditioned status of all aspects of experience. Moreover, this practice tends to make the more focussed formal sitting and walking meditation easier, and, that formal meditation will, in turn help support the first. 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) 9089 From: manji Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Christine, When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new dhamma. Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is a cetasika. After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just like abhidhamma expresses. Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can there can be experience of all dhammas. This same thing is taught many times. When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is happening right now? Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... anatta... anatta... not self. So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, right now dhamma falling. Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and deeper seeing. Prajna Paramita... musha shugyo, manji ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christine Forsyth" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > Dear All, > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > ask it here as well. > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > defined immediately I am aware of them. > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > possible). > > metta, > Christine > 9090 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Christine --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > ask it here as well. > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > defined immediately I am aware of them. > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > possible). > > metta, > Christine Thanks very much for asking this question, and I’m glad Robert suggested that you post it here. Your question brings us to the very crux of the Buddha’s teaching, and helps us to focus on how all that theory has application in practice, right now. I recently spent 2 weeks in India with a group from Thailand visiting the Buddhist holy places. During this period we had frequent discussions about this very subject. There were relatively few questions about the more abstruse points of the teachings, as most people on the trip appreciated the significance of hearing again and again about the understanding of the realities appearing at the present moment. And it is not an easy thing to grasp, although it seems so simple on a first hearing. As you have correctly observed, the world as we experience it (ie. a world of people and things) is different from the world as we understand it to be from our studies of the teachings (ie. experiences through the different senses-doors, and a lot of thinking about those experiences). You say— > I look at a person, a car or > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > defined immediately I am aware of them. Yes, this is how it is for all of us (and even, I believe, for the person with highly developed understanding). And what I think you are implying here is that you understand, in theory at least, that in order for the world to appear to us like this, there must also be different and discrete experiences through the sense- and mind-doors, preceding the labelling as people and things, which are not apparent to us and which happen so rapidly as to give the illusion of people, objects and things. So the starting point is that there are realities arising/appearing now that are not apparent to us in their true nature. [Other terms for realities are ‘dhammas’ or ‘absolute/ultimate realties (paramattha dhammas)’. The labels by which we know and appear to experience the world, on the other hand, are not realities but are a concepts (pannati).] Realities are of 2 basic kinds, and understanding the distinction between the 2 is absolutely crucial. One kind of reality experiences an object. For example, at the moment of reading this message, the consciousness that sees is experiencing visible datum through the eye-door, and the consciousness that thinks is thinking about that datum and finding meaning in it. Every kind of consciousness, whether through one of the sense-doors or the mind-door, is a reality that has the nature of experiencing an object. This kind of reality is termed a ‘naama’ (sometimes translated as ‘mentality’). The other kind of reality does not experience an object. To take the present moment of seeing again, the visible datum that is being experienced by the seeing consciousness cannot itself experience an object. Nor, for example, can the sound that is experienced by hearing consciousness, or the objects of the experiences through the other sense-doors. These kinds of realities are termed ‘ruupa’ (materiality). The beginning of ‘seeing realities’ is the understanding that at this very moment both kinds of realities are appearing but are not known as they truly are. The reason that they are not known for what they are is our accumulate ignorance and lack of awareness, nothing more and nothing less. To overcome this, it is not necessary (or appropriate) to go anywhere or do anything. What is needed is an understanding of what the Buddha said about the reality of present moment, considering the meaning of that and relating that theoretical understanding to the present moment of experience. In this way the veil of ignorance can gradually be lifted. This may all sound absolutely basic, even simplistic (or ‘Dhamma 101’, as some would no doubt characterise it), but the importance of understanding the significance of just this much cannot be overestimated. It is easy to think that there must be something more, something to be done, some technique to be taken up or applied; but that, I believe, would be to fall into the trap of wrong view. The task is a long term one and progress can only ever be exceedingly slow. We cannot hope within a single lifetime to advance our understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction. But it is important to understand that we all have a level of such accumulated understanding, and this can be the basis for further development at this very moment, since we all appreciate the significance (urgency) of developing understanding and we all have the capacity to understand at an intellectual level and reflect usefully on what we have heard. Indeed, we have all already done so to varying degrees in this lifetime – what is perhaps lacking, because of other views we also hold, is the relating of that intellectual understanding to the realities of the present moment as they appear right now, rather than at some other time or in some other circumstances. Christine, are you with me so far? Please come back with any questions or comments. I very much welcome the chance to discuss this. Jon dhamma -- reality pannati -- concept nama/nama dhamma -- reality that experiences an object rupa/rupa dhamma -- reality that cannot experience and object 9091 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:52pm Subject: Re: Lisa's question [Sarah and Robert Ep.] Sarah and Robert Ep, Thank you both. This IS helpful--clear, pertinent, and not too many Pali words! Robert, you wrote recently (message 8990) "...I would say there's a big difference between understanding something as a concept and experiencing it." This distinction keeps coming up for me too. Do you think understanding the concept is a necessary precursor to the experience? It seems like conceptual understanding can be an aid to experiential understanding, or it can be a hinderance. Lisa --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Lisa, > > Rob Ep wrote this post (below) recently and I thought it was beautifully > written with a good explanation as to why some people like himself 'have been > attracted to this list'.... I might quibble over a few minor points, but I > thought the 'gist' was spot on and very sincere. > > Lisa, as I was clearing out old posts, I thought of your question and wondered > if you might find it helpful. I know Rob Ep will be delighted if you wish to > pursue any of his comments further..... > > Thanks Rob....;-) > > Sarah > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both > > beings > > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > > anatta as > > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > > anything > > to me. > > > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: > > > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > > nothing to > > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > > phenomena. > > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the > > factors > > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, > > and > > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing > > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > > co-arising > > conditions. > > > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no > > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > > impermanence > > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a > > real > > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting > > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more > > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not > > ordained > > by some other action. > > > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > > effort. > > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good > > medicine > > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in > > the > > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > > notion of > > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the > > rainbow > > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not > > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self > > or > > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is > > to > > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is > > just > > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, > > this is > > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted > > to > > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good > > dose of > > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > > substitute for > > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of > > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. > > > > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to > > be > > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > > > Regards, > > Robert > > > > =========================== > 9092 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Jon, Robert] Thank you both for your thoughtful answers to my question. Dan kindly printed them out so I can easily read them several times. Below is an attempt at expressing the state of my understanding of the answer. I'd appreciate corrections or comments. > If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right action? First, "right action" is a technical term. It has a different meaning here than it would in other company. I'm not sure exactly what it means, but it does not mean "moral action," though "right action" would be moral by virtue of the mental state from which it sprang. Second, it is impossible to choose the right action. If one doesn't have enough wisdom, one can't tell whether an action is right or not. If one does have enough wisdom, there is no choice involved. If one wonders if one has enough wisdom to discern right action, the answer is "no," but if one does not wonder, the answer is still probably "no." So the thing to do is to acquire wisdom. But maybe "acquire" is the wrong verb, because it seems like I can't just learn something, pack it away, and go on. I have to keep going back to reconsider, because it's likely that I've fallen into a trap, as Robert alluded to ("...our strengths turn out to be faults..."). So acquiring wisdom is more like losing delusion. Lisa 9093 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 9:56pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Jon, Robert] --- Your thinking looks very sound to me, Lisa. Especially the fact that you rasp the subtlety of right action. I also see wisdom as akin to losing delusion. There are different levels of right action and some right actions can be done without wisdom. Some people , for example, are very generous simply because of past habit. Or Num spoke of his childhood where he did good actions without really knowing why. Of course, as you said, it depends on the underlying mental state as to whether these actions were genuinely good: probably there were moments of 'good' alternating with those rooted in bad states. We have a lot of discussion about choice on this list. When we 'choose' to do something it is really because of complex factors arising that coincide for such a thought to arise. Nothing wrong with that and so it is perfectly natural that we make so many 'choices'each day. Wisdom, though, uncovers the conditioned nature of choice and so it can be seen that, at the deepest level, control is an illusion. Paradoxically knowing that there is no true control "one" is more "in control" than ever before. This is because there is wisdom that performs its function of discerning and knowing what is right and wrong: no 'one' getting in the way to complicate and confuse things. A very long path to get to the stage where that 'one' is gone for good. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., lisa14850@y... wrote: > Thank you both for your thoughtful answers to my question. Dan kindly > printed them out so I can easily read them several times. Below is > an attempt at expressing the state of my understanding of the answer. > I'd appreciate corrections or comments. > > > If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right action? > > First, "right action" is a technical term. It has a different meaning > here than it would in other company. I'm not sure exactly what it > means, but it does not mean "moral action," though "right action" > would be moral by virtue of the mental state from which it sprang. > > Second, it is impossible to choose the right action. If one doesn't > have enough wisdom, one can't tell whether an action is right or not. > If one does have enough wisdom, there is no choice involved. If one > wonders if one has enough wisdom to discern right action, the answer > is "no," but if one does not wonder, the answer is still probably > "no." So the thing to do is to acquire wisdom. > > But maybe "acquire" is the wrong verb, because it seems like I can't > just learn something, pack it away, and go on. I have to keep going > back to reconsider, because it's likely that I've fallen into a trap, > as Robert alluded to ("...our strengths turn out to be faults..."). > So acquiring wisdom is more like losing delusion. > > Lisa 9094 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 11:54pm Subject: Re: Focus > > > If the focal point of practise is not sati for the Abidhammaist (hope you > do not mind I use this word), what is their focus. I think the problem > lies on the fact that I am a Suttaist, hence sati is the focus. But I do > not know abt Abidhammaist bc Abidhammaist classify sati as cetasika. What > is the goal or focus? > > >____________ Dear Ken, Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine satipatthana. Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, anatta. This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. I appreciate your input here and on d-l. robert 9095 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Rid of impurities... Alex It’s nice to hear from you again! --- axtran@h... wrote: > Make an island unto yourself! > Strive hard and become wise! > Rid of impurities and cleansed of stain, > you shall not come again to birth and decay. > > Dhammapada 238 > > Dear friends, > > The above verses seem the Buddha suggests a lot of controlling. I > don't know if they are translated incorrectly from Pali. Please help. > > Thank you. > > With Appreciation, > Alex Tran There are many instances, especially in the Dhammapada, when the Buddha seems (on a superficial reading) to have spoken in terms that suggest a self or control. Yet we know that the themes of non-self and lack of any control are central to his teaching. The explanation lies, I think, in the fact that sometimes the Buddha’s audience was capable of understanding the deeper meaning of his teaching without the need for the fine detail or extended explanation. To these listeners the Buddha could speak in normal conventional language yet still convey his unique message. In cases like this we can see how necessary it is to have a good general knowledge of the teachings, or access to the commentaries, in order to avoid getting the wrong idea. Then there is, as you also mention, the problem of translations. Alex, it is my understanding that no amount of ‘striving hard’ of the conventional kind can lead to wisdom. The conditions that lead to wisdom that understands the true nature of the reality appearing at the present moment are far more subtle and deep than that. So I think the striving being referred to here is the kind that comes from a proper appreciation of the urgency and immensity of the task that results eventually in escape from samsara. The more wisdom has been developed, the more this can be appreciated and the more there can be 'striving hard' of the appropriate kind. I would be interested in hearing your own thoughts on any aspect of this verse, Alex. Thanks again for your post. Jon 9096 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 1:13am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali in Singapore (was, dhammavicaya II) Ken O --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Gayan > > Suddenly I become very interested in Pali because of you :). Do you > know > any good Pali Language centre in Singapore. > > Thanks and keep posting and I enjoy them very much > > Kinde regards > Kenneth Ong I don't know if you've found anywhere yet, but one of our (lurking) list members in Singapore would probably know if there is a good place to learn Pali. Her name is Pinna Indorf, and she can be reached at akiindof@n.... Good luck! Jon 9097 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 1:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Focus Robert K Many thanks for the information. I did not realise that there is a section of Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma) on Satipatthana. By the way where can I get this book in English hopefully with commentaries or link. I find it difficult to understand Abidhamma without commentary. I agree with Frank, the suttas are linked with the Abidhamma, hence there is a need to understand the Abidhamma. I say in D-L list, without understanding anatta and anicca it is difficult to understand satipatthana. Kind regards Kenneth Ong > > > >____________ > > Dear Ken, > Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference > in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is > given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). > The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that > sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine > satipatthana. > Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have > to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, > anatta. > This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank > said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas > (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. > I appreciate your input here and on d-l. > robert 9098 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 1:58am Subject: Re: Focus --- Dear Ken, Actually I was a little unclear: Frank referred to the suttas about the khandas and ayatanas - and I just added in that it was similar to Abhidhamma. The Vibhanga is translated as The Book of Analysis and the commentary is a 2 volume set; The Dispeller of Delusion . Both are available from the Pali text society and both are very good translations. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Robert K > > Many thanks for the information. I did not realise that there is a > section of Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma) on Satipatthana. By the way where > can I get this book in English hopefully with commentaries or link. I > find it difficult to understand Abidhamma without commentary. I agree > with Frank, the suttas are linked with the Abidhamma, hence there is a > need to understand the Abidhamma. I say in D-L list, without > understanding anatta and anicca it is difficult to understand > satipatthana. > > > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > > > > > > > > > >____________ > > > > Dear Ken, > > Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference > > in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is > > given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). > > The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that > > sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine > > satipatthana. > > Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have > > to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, > > anatta. > > This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank > > said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas > > (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. > > I appreciate your input here and on d-l. > > robert 9099 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 3:47am Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Manji, Thank you for your kind reply. I feel a sense of encouragement from your post to persevere with formal meditation - I did find that I developed strong concentration on a 10 day Vipassana retreat, though I developed an almost unbearable awareness of the suffering of all beings and I am not sure I would have the courage to repeat that experience. But to combine daily meditation with periods of strengthening of general mindfulness and study of the Realities seems attractive to me. Yes, it is true that being born human is 'a most fortunate vehicle of liberation.' To be always happy - why would you want to escape? To be always suffering - where would you get the energy to think about more than surviving the moment and enduring? I find your mention of the 'mental-physical object shift' intriguing and worthy of further investigation. Do you have any links to readings or articles on this? You say,'maybe putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and deeper seeing' - I really do believe some understanding is growing. Recently (on another list) some explanations began to seem easily understandable, whereas previously,they had just gone over my head. So whatever I don't understand in a post (even enough to ask questions), I let go and now know that eventually (with diligence) the understanding will come. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta > that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is > reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new > dhamma. > > Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea > that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when > there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of > "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" > there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is > a cetasika. > > After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for > a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just > like abhidhamma expresses. > > Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma > rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are > seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. > > Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a > magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising > and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning > process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe > its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there > is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons > that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can > there can be experience of all dhammas. > > This same thing is taught many times. > > When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those > moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. > > For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the > concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental > object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the > shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe > for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object > reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration > is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its > been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is > happening right now? > > Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... > concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) > > So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? > Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... > anatta... anatta... not self. > > So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, > right now dhamma falling. > > Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe > putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and > deeper seeing. > > Prajna Paramita... > > musha shugyo, > manji > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christine Forsyth" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > > > > Dear All, > > > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > > ask it here as well. > > > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > > possible). > > > > metta, > > Christine 9100 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 3:56am Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Howard, Your post is very clear, encouraging and understandable - thank-you. I see it was not the case of needing to choose either formal meditation or mindulness or study.....nothing need be excluded. I'll see how it goes, metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Christine - > I have found that centering mindfulness on the body (on breath, bodily > position, sensation, movement, solidity etc) during ordinary non- meditative > states, whenever not having to attend completely to some specific complex > task, is a wonderful practice, which also leads, almost automatically, to > mindfulness of volition, thoughts etc, and is especially useful when done > with an "eye" to observing the impermanence and conditioned status of all > aspects of experience. Moreover, this practice tends to make the more > focussed formal sitting and walking meditation easier, and, that formal > meditation will, in turn help support the first. > > 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) 9101 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 5:13am Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Jon, I am really glad I asked the questions on this list - I have received encouragement and learned a great deal from the replies here and from Amara, Kenneth O. and Robert K. on DL. Your explanation of the realities 'naama' and 'ruupa' and the distinction between them is quite clear and I understand it. At least while I read your words. :-) Once again the term 'accumulate' or 'accumulations' comes up. Amara also mentioned this. I understand you to say that one's accumulations are not an impenetrable barrier, that they can be overcome, and the way to do this is to know and contemplate (?) the Buddha's teachings on 'the reality of the present moment' and integrate theory with experience. You say. 'The task is a long term one, and can only ever be exceedingly slow. We cannot hope within a lifetime to advance our understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction.' This is logical, this is believable; but this is very difficult for me to hear. I came to the Teachings via the tradition of Mahasi Sayadaw. My first Dhamma and meditation teacher, Patrick Kearney, was of this tradition, and had for some years worn the robes. He, for whom I have the deepest respect and gratitude, plus a book by U Pandita called "In This Very Life", have been pivotal in my staying within Buddhism for more than a quick sampling of whatever flavour was on offer. Patrick lives and works in another State now, and there is little chance of contact, but finding my own way is an adventure, and I have found new teachers on the Net as well. However - I want to find the foundation of truth, 'what is', whether it fits with what I have been previously taught, or what I hope for, or not. I would appreciate hearing more. Metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Christine > > Thanks very much for asking this question, and I'm glad Robert suggested > that you post it here. Your question brings us to the very crux of the > Buddha's teaching, and helps us to focus on how all that theory has > application in practice, right now. > > I recently spent 2 weeks in India with a group from Thailand visiting the > Buddhist holy places. During this period we had frequent discussions > about this very subject. There were relatively few questions about the > more abstruse points of the teachings, as most people on the trip > appreciated the significance of hearing again and again about the > understanding of the realities appearing at the present moment. And it is > not an easy thing to grasp, although it seems so simple on a first > hearing. > > As you have correctly observed, the world as we experience it (ie. a world > of people and things) is different from the world as we understand it to > be from our studies of the teachings (ie. experiences through the > different senses-doors, and a lot of thinking about those experiences). > You say— > > > I look at a person, a car or > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > Yes, this is how it is for all of us (and even, I believe, for the person > with highly developed understanding). And what I think you are implying > here is that you understand, in theory at least, that in order for the > world to appear to us like this, there must also be different and discrete > experiences through the sense- and mind-doors, preceding the labelling as > people and things, which are not apparent to us and which happen so > rapidly as to give the illusion of people, objects and things. > > So the starting point is that there are realities arising/appearing now > that are not apparent to us in their true nature. [Other terms for > realities are `dhammas' or `absolute/ultimate realties (paramattha > dhammas)'. The labels by which we know and appear to experience the > world, on the other hand, are not realities but are a concepts (pannati).] > > Realities are of 2 basic kinds, and understanding the distinction between > the 2 is absolutely crucial. One kind of reality experiences an object. > For example, at the moment of reading this message, the consciousness that > sees is experiencing visible datum through the eye-door, and the > consciousness that thinks is thinking about that datum and finding meaning > in it. Every kind of consciousness, whether through one of the > sense-doors or the mind-door, is a reality that has the nature of > experiencing an object. This kind of reality is termed a `naama' > (sometimes translated as `mentality'). > > The other kind of reality does not experience an object. To take the > present moment of seeing again, the visible datum that is being > experienced by the seeing consciousness cannot itself experience an > object. Nor, for example, can the sound that is experienced by hearing > consciousness, or the objects of the experiences through the other > sense-doors. These kinds of realities are termed `ruupa' (materiality). > > The beginning of `seeing realities' is the understanding that at this very > moment both kinds of realities are appearing but are not known as they > truly are. The reason that they are not known for what they are is our > accumulate ignorance and lack of awareness, nothing more and nothing less. > To overcome this, it is not necessary (or appropriate) to go anywhere or > do anything. What is needed is an understanding of what the Buddha said > about the reality of present moment, considering the meaning of that and > relating that theoretical understanding to the present moment of > experience. In this way the veil of ignorance can gradually be lifted. > > This may all sound absolutely basic, even simplistic (or `Dhamma 101', as > some would no doubt characterise it), but the importance of understanding > the significance of just this much cannot be overestimated. It is easy to > think that there must be something more, something to be done, some > technique to be taken up or applied; but that, I believe, would be to > fall into the trap of wrong view. > > The task is a long term one and progress can only ever be exceedingly > slow. We cannot hope within a single lifetime to advance our > understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction. But > it is important to understand that we all have a level of such accumulated > understanding, and this can be the basis for further development at this > very moment, since we all appreciate the significance (urgency) of > developing understanding and we all have the capacity to understand at an > intellectual level and reflect usefully on what we have heard. Indeed, we > have all already done so to varying degrees in this lifetime – what is > perhaps lacking, because of other views we also hold, is the relating of > that intellectual understanding to the realities of the present moment as > they appear right now, rather than at some other time or in some other > circumstances. > > Christine, are you with me so far? Please come back with any questions or > comments. I very much welcome the chance to discuss this. > > Jon > > dhamma -- reality > pannati -- concept > nama/nama dhamma -- reality that experiences an object > rupa/rupa dhamma -- reality that cannot experience and object > 9102 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 4:16pm Subject: Re: Concepts Dear Robert, Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to reflect on the Dhamma. When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't to do with vedana? If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of whether it feels good or bad. When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why it just goes on and on. I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And in a moment of awareness it is not there. Happy to hear any dissenting view of course All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Herman, > Let me give you my initial answers to some very interesting questions. > > The last, first: > > The idea that suffering occurs to a non-existent being and thus is non-existent > itself is an easy conclusion to draw, but in my opinion does not note the reality > correctly. > > Suffering does not occur to the 'concept' 'self' because a concept cannot > experience anything. It is rather an object of consciousness. So where is > suffering experienced? It is experienced by a citta, by consciousness. Since > consciousness actually experiences suffering, suffering is actual. The being that > we *think* is suffering is not real, but the suffering and the consciousness that > experiences it, are. I hope that distinction makes some sense of what is a very > perplexing seeming paradox. > > My conclusion is that compassion arises from this understanding and that the > expression of ultimate compassion is to help the 'cittas' in question to release > the causes of suffering. The path leads to release of clinging and aversion which > cause suffering, and thus the suffering cittas gradually will cease to arise in > more advanced stages. > > One can also try to help relieve physical suffering in the physical world at the > same time without undermining this deeper intention. > > As for anicca, it is again a citta, or consciousness, that is aware of both the > illusion of permanence and the reality of transcence. Without the ability to > remember and compare moments in a single citta, which takes as its content the > reality of the previous moment, I believe there would be no suffering and be no > path. Neither would be possible. It is part of the process of this life, both > delusion and awakening, that this is possible. I don't know what life would be or > what kind of mindfulness we would be capable of if we could absolutely only be > cognisant of the contents of this moment only, without comparing it to another. > It is also clear that the ability to see what is in this moment and what is not is > part of liberation. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ================== > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > > > Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of > > existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to be > > directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment include > > awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? How > > can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is changing? > > There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality for > > the deduction of change to be made. > > > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Herman > > 9103 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert E] Dear Dan, I can't argue with anything you say here either. I think I may have been a little too 'reactive' myself to Robert K's post. Probably because I don't want anyone to challenge my pleasant states! They're hard enough to come by! I think it is good to be on the lookout for all the subtle elements that attend each state of consciousness that arises. That is part of mindfulness. I also think that if one feels 'confidence', 'joy', and other positive-seeming states, it is good to inquire into their true content, but a mistake to crush the experience by being too suspicious of our happier moments. It's probably a question of balance like everything else. Robert Ep. ================ --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Robert E., > It's tough to argue with most of your comments, but I don't think > that Robert K is espousing the view that you are attributing to him. > > Comments interspersed... > > Rob E: > > I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as > really being a > > hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a > discerning > > view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and > attachment? Is the > > feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace > really a clinging > > to quiet? > > Moments of real love (metta? karuna? mudita? adosa?) must be free of > conceit and attachment. But are moments that we might feel joy at > what we term "love" really free of conceit and attachment? Or is > there attachment, lust, craving, pity? Discernment of the difference > between attachment and non-attachment is critical, and in this > ignorant confluence of 5 aggregates, attachment is much, MUCH more > common. > > >I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life > which > > appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that > it is the > > accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not > really that hard to > > identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their > occurence -- to be > > the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary > experiences. > > It is true that dosa is associated with nasty feeling somewhere, but > consciousness rooted in lobha (craving) can be pleasant or neutral. > Dosa is easier to recognize, it is unpleasant, and it can have such > sharp negative external consequences that are obvious; but lobha > (craving, clinging, lust, attachment) is more difficult to recognize, > may be pleasant, may not always have sharp external consequences. > Development is much more difficult than trying to avoid the things > with nasty feeling evident (dosa) and pursuing the things without > nasty feeling evident (both lobha and kusala). This may be why Buddha > said "Greed is a lesser fault and fades away slowly; hatred is a > great fault and fades away quickly..." (AN 3:68) > > > If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before > Parinibbana to be > > one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt > with without > > hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments > like this, only > > they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and > lessening of > > attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. > > Right. > > > To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions > > All? > > To see all 'good' (pleasant?) feelings as attachment and delusion > would indeed be a grave mistake. But to fail to realize how > frequently what we think is 'good' (pleasant) is really 'bad' > (attachment, delusion) is also a grave mistake. > > > > > sense. I don't > > look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither > good nor bad. > > Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also > neither 'good' nor 'bad'. > > Attachment and clinging cause suffering and are called 'akusala'. Non- > attachment (with wisdom) leads away from suffering and so is > called 'kusala'. > > > Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not > experienced as > > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they > arise? > > I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments > that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha > as lobha. 9104 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- upasaka@a... wrote: .....The pain I have in my knee today has many charateristics in > common with the pain I had there yesterday, but it is not "the same pain"... I may be blowing smoke at myself, but the idea that I am fooling around with here seems very important...If I can express it properly and get you to see what I'm driving at, I would be interested in whether it seems equally significant to you. Here it is: The knee in your pain today is 'not the same pain' as the pain you had yesterday. But, and here's the but.....: Since the pain you had yesterday was not really an entity called 'pain', the pain you have today is also not 'different' from that other pain. You can't have something that's different from something that doesn't exist, any more than you can have something the same as something that doesn't exist. So the proper definition would be that the pain you have today is neither the same nor different than the pain you had yesterday. And that is the kind of thing that the Buddha often said. On a second point, I don't think that Ken, or myself for that matter, were particularly concerned about whether the cittas that might arise again would be the same ones or not, but rather whether the arising of cittas as a phenomenon had actually been annihilated, or had just 'ceased', meaning the productions of cittas could potentially arise again, rather than being permanently eradicated. That is the reference in which I said that if conditions were to arise again......then cittas might arise again. Not the same ones, but the mechanism of their occurence. however, your answer, that Nibbana is that state of realization in which there are no separate arisings perceived because that mechanism has been seen to be illusory, sort of pre-empts the whole question. When it's put that way, i don't any longer have a 'citta' problem, or even an experience problem, because: nothing has been annihilated, the cessation has happened as a transformation from within, not a change in the status of cittas. This seems appropriate to me, it is you not the objects that have changed,and I doubt Kenneth will have a problem with this either. So much for speaking for Kenneth without permission!! Anyway, your whole post was very worthwhile and illuminating. Robert Ep. ================ 9105 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert E] --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: I heard a tape where Alan Weller asked T.A. Sujin > about enjoyments etc. in life. She replied that she thought one > should follow what one enjoys, but with wisdom. I think Robert E. was > getting at this in his post. > So what we don't want to do is become serious, uptight, anal > retentive prudes; plenty of these around already.;) > robert Thank you, Robert! Yes, I think you understood where my discomfort was here. I wasn't thinking exactly your words above, but I think if we get too serious in a certain way, it gets a little frightening. The path is hard enough without pulling so hard on the reins that we feel choked. I appreciate the comments. Robert Ep. 9106 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Goodness no, Robert E! As always, I am enjoying your comments. The following in particular struck me: > I think it is good to be on the lookout for all the subtle elements that attend > each state of consciousness that arises. That is part of mindfulness. I also > think that if one feels 'confidence', 'joy', and other positive- seeming states, it > is good to inquire into their true content, but a mistake to crush the experience > by being too suspicious of our happier moments. > > It's probably a question of balance like everything else. Of course we should not crush happier moments by being suspicious of them. That would be horrific! However, when awareness arises, it becomes clearer just how often akusala cittas arise, how addicted we are to reacting with aversion to the unpleasant and craving for the pleasant. There is no question about "crushing" anything. On the contrary, such an awareness is liberating (to a degree). Taking the suspicion approach would too easily lead to crushing! Instead, let's just work on development of discernment and understanding. In appreciation, Dan 9107 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 - probably new now. --- manji wrote: > Below... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Epstein" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:01 AM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 > > > > > I agree Ken. I think the point you have been trying to make lately about > > attaching to views is very important, and very hard to get. Since every > direction > > we think we are taking on the path is in a sense a view, expectation or > > anticipation of something not yet experienced, it is almost the same as > asking > > Hmm, "every direction we think..." this right here is part of abhidhamma, > the > very thing being discussed. Of course it is view, but how about this... The > truth is... > > There is direction. There is path. There is rupa. There is nama. There is > suffering. > > This is different than... My direction, My rupa, My nama, My Suffering... > Some > say "Life is suffering" but this is not the case, this is not knowing dhamma > now. > > There is suffering, just as there is direction. And in essence... not self, > empty. > > > people to give up 'the path', at least the path in their mind. Very hard. > That > > is why the zen concept of beginner's mind is very helpful. To keep going > back to > > understanding that one cannot actually know anything, even the path, > except by > > direct experiencing of its principles in the moment. > > > > Robert Ep. > > The beginner's mind has no concept. No kamma making. It may be just after ;) > About knowing... there is knowing, there is wisdom, there is mind. There is > sanna. > > Someone mentioned earlier about importance. This is abhidhamma - right now > nama. > Right now cetasika... conditioning the sense of "importance". Conditioning a > sense of > urgency. And what sense is this? It is cetasika. > > So right now understanding conditioning, and understanding "conditioning of > path". > > It was taught somewhere that "it is like taking a path to get to someplace, > you travel > toward that place... conditioned. And once you are there there is no > travelling, no need > for the direction, no more need for the way." It is then you stand in what > is unconditioned. > Of course, there cannot be this when there is always reaching mind, > identifying > and reaching. > > walk softly, > manji =================== Thanks manji, Your emphasis on the reality of the present condition is very refreshing. thanks for relieving me of a few concepts I didn't really need to have. Robert Ep. 9108 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Wow, Manji, Thanks for the very nice talk. Once again, I appreciate your pulling the understanding of cittas and cetasikas into the context of the present moment, something that Sarah has also urged. Your explanation of cittas and cetisikas was very helpful. I hadn't quite understood cetasikas the way you explained it. It seems you are making clear that it is really the quality of the cetasikas that determines the progress of understanding. This is very interesting, as my emphasis was always on the consciousness, citta, and was thinking of the cetasikas as mainly mechanical functions. My education is slow, but it is gradually progressing. Very nice! Thanks again, Robert Ep. ================== --- manji wrote: > Hi Christine, > > When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta > that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is > reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new > dhamma. > > Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea > that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when > there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of > "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" > there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is > a cetasika. > > After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for > a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just > like abhidhamma expresses. > > Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma > rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are > seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. > > Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a > magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising > and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning > process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe > its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there > is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons > that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can > there can be experience of all dhammas. > > This same thing is taught many times. > > When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those > moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. > > For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the > concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental > object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the > shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe > for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object > reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration > is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its > been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is > happening right now? > > Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... > concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) > > So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? > Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... > anatta... anatta... not self. > > So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, > right now dhamma falling. > > Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe > putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and > deeper seeing. > > Prajna Paramita... > > musha shugyo, > manji > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christine Forsyth" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > > > > Dear All, > > > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > > ask it here as well. > > > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > > possible). > > > > metta, > > Christine 9109 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question [Sarah and Robert Ep.] --- lisa14850@y... wrote: > Sarah and Robert Ep, > > Thank you both. This IS helpful--clear, pertinent, and not too many > Pali words! I know what you mean! I'm just getting familiar with a few of them, after being here a few months. > Robert, you wrote recently (message 8990) > > "...I would say there's a big difference between understanding > something as a concept and experiencing it." > > This distinction keeps coming up for me too. Do you think > understanding the concept is a necessary precursor to the experience? > It seems like conceptual understanding can be an aid to experiential > understanding, or it can be a hinderance. Boy, that's an interesting question. I think that conceptual understanding is often the seed-bed from which more direct insight comes. I think it's a balance. Concepts are like tools, they make distinctions that can help you look at things differently. But they also have to be applied in some way. I think that when i practiced yoga and meditation without a really clear theoretical framework, I had more direct experiences but didn't have anywhere to put them in a sense. Looking at the concepts about enlightenment, eightfold path, and anicaa and anatta in a way give my experiences and my thoughts a structure to work with. If you get lost in the structure, then your concepts are working against you. If they give you a basis for understanding that you then compare and apply to your experiences, I think it is very valuable to have an ongoing study that deepens your knowledge. Personally, I find meditation to be the best place to put concepts and experiential practice together, although I sometimes find it hard to take the time to sit. Others are more analytic or contemplative in the way they approach understanding. But that combination of understanding and experience I think is essential. Robert Ep. 9110 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to > reflect on the Dhamma. > > When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type > suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. > > Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't > to do with vedana? > > If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree > with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be > experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. > > But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. > I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly > grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, > then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. > And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a > split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of > whether it feels good or bad. > > When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A > concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these > objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is > entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, > millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is > suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why > it just goes on and on. > > I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And > in a moment of awareness it is not there. Dear Herman, Well, I don't want to be too surprising, but I like this view very much, and appreciate your very wise description of the connection of suffering and delusion. I have been lucky in my life to have a few moments here and there where it seemed that the world was laid out as it is and there was no sense of having a concept. Just direct perception. These moments never lasted very long, but I would have to call them 'bliss', not because there was any intense sensation of pleasure or anything like that, but because everything was simply itself. So I agree that a single moment of awareness dispels concept and delusion. I once complained to my teacher at the time that these experiences seemed very profound but always went away. He said they were good signs, but shouldn't be held onto. Obviously, there were plenty of tendencies at play that would remove this perspective and throw me back into a deluded state, even while I watched. Well the sense of the I-watching was not ready to get put away. The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for me. What makes it suffering then? i would say delusion can feel great but really be not so great, and I would understand if you said this would lead to more suffering, but if there is no suffering experienced, where is the suffering at that moment? Other than this question, I greatly appreciate your wise comments. Robert Ep. =========================================== > Happy to hear any dissenting view of course > > All the best > > Herman > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Herman, > > Let me give you my initial answers to some very interesting > questions. > > > > The last, first: > > > > The idea that suffering occurs to a non-existent being and thus is > non-existent > > itself is an easy conclusion to draw, but in my opinion does not > note the reality > > correctly. > > > > Suffering does not occur to the 'concept' 'self' because a concept > cannot > > experience anything. It is rather an object of consciousness. So > where is > > suffering experienced? It is experienced by a citta, by > consciousness. Since > > consciousness actually experiences suffering, suffering is actual. > The being that > > we *think* is suffering is not real, but the suffering and the > consciousness that > > experiences it, are. I hope that distinction makes some sense of > what is a very > > perplexing seeming paradox. > > > > My conclusion is that compassion arises from this understanding and > that the > > expression of ultimate compassion is to help the 'cittas' in > question to release > > the causes of suffering. The path leads to release of clinging and > aversion which > > cause suffering, and thus the suffering cittas gradually will cease > to arise in > > more advanced stages. > > > > One can also try to help relieve physical suffering in the physical > world at the > > same time without undermining this deeper intention. > > > > As for anicca, it is again a citta, or consciousness, that is aware > of both the > > illusion of permanence and the reality of transcence. Without the > ability to > > remember and compare moments in a single citta, which takes as its > content the > > reality of the previous moment, I believe there would be no > suffering and be no > > path. Neither would be possible. It is part of the process of > this life, both > > delusion and awakening, that this is possible. I don't know what > life would be or > > what kind of mindfulness we would be capable of if we could > absolutely only be > > cognisant of the contents of this moment only, without comparing it > to another. > > It is also clear that the ability to see what is in this moment and > what is not is > > part of liberation. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ================== > > > > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of > > > existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to > be > > > directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment > include > > > awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? > How > > > can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is > changing? > > > There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality > for > > > the deduction of change to be made. > > > > > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > > > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change > all > > > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all > the > > > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > > > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is > nothing to > > > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > > > > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? > The > > > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > Herman 9111 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Goodness no, Robert E! --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > As always, I am enjoying your comments. The following in particular > struck me: > > > I think it is good to be on the lookout for all the subtle elements > that attend > > each state of consciousness that arises. That is part of > mindfulness. I also > > think that if one feels 'confidence', 'joy', and other positive- > seeming states, it > > is good to inquire into their true content, but a mistake to crush > the experience > > by being too suspicious of our happier moments. > > > > It's probably a question of balance like everything else. > > Of course we should not crush happier moments by being suspicious of > them. That would be horrific! However, when awareness arises, it > becomes clearer just how often akusala cittas arise, how addicted we > are to reacting with aversion to the unpleasant and craving for the > pleasant. There is no question about "crushing" anything. On the > contrary, such an awareness is liberating (to a degree). Taking the > suspicion approach would too easily lead to crushing! Instead, let's > just work on development of discernment and understanding. That is a good idea. And a lot of work. Best, Robert 9112 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Christine Many thanks for your reply and well-considered comments. I know you have been putting a lot of thought into these areas for some time. --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I am really glad I asked the questions on this list - I have received > encouragement and learned a great deal from the replies here and from > Amara, Kenneth O. and Robert K. on DL. > > Your explanation of the realities 'naama' and 'ruupa' and the > distinction between them is quite clear and I understand it. At least > while I read your words. :-) > > Once again the term 'accumulate' or 'accumulations' comes up. Amara > also mentioned this. I understand you to say that one's > accumulations are not an impenetrable barrier, that they can be > overcome, and the way to do this is to know and contemplate (?) the > Buddha's teachings on 'the reality of the present moment' and > integrate theory with experience. It is I think important to realise that both our virtues (including panna) and our vices (including wrong view) are what they are and how they are because of previous moments of development/accumulation of the same qualities, and that each further moment of these same realities is likewise accumulated ie. passed on. These lie latent and unknown to us unless for whatever reason they manifest at any time, but such manifestation is only ever a partial one. Understanding this helps us to realise how vast the store of accumulated attachment, aversion and wrong view must be that will have to eventually be eradicated if enlightenment is to be attained, and how relatively minute the increment of any wholesomeness (particularly understanding) that may be developed at any one time. While this may only add to your concern about the long-term nature of the task (sorry about that!), I think one only has to contemplate the alternative (ie. no end whatsoever to ignorance and suffering) to see that it is by far the lesser of 2 evils. As far as overcoming these accumulations is concerned, only panna (understanding) can finally eradicate ignorance and with it all other defilements. So as long as our focus continues to be on the development of the understanding that knows the reality appearing at the present moment, this will lead to the necessary 'overcoming' of accumulations. > You say. 'The task is a long term one, and can only ever be > exceedingly slow. We cannot hope within a lifetime to advance our > understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction.' > > This is logical, this is believable; but this is very difficult for > me to hear. > I came to the Teachings via the tradition of Mahasi Sayadaw. My > first Dhamma and meditation teacher, Patrick Kearney, was of this > tradition, and had for some years worn the robes. He, for whom I > have the deepest respect and gratitude, plus a book by U Pandita > called "In This Very Life", have been pivotal in my staying within > Buddhism for more than a quick sampling of whatever flavour was on > offer. Patrick lives and works in another State now, and there is > little chance of contact, but finding my own way is an adventure, and > I have found new teachers on the Net as well. > > However - I want to find the foundation of truth, 'what is', whether > it fits with what I have been previously taught, or what I hope for, > or not. I very much appreciate your sincerity and determination. I think that if one keeps this goal (the truth of 'what is') in mind at all times, it makes the task of understanding the teachings and sorting out the true path much easier. It is easy to become distracted with thoughts of 'what should be', but this would be an obstacle to development of the path. Jon 9113 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 0:15am Subject: Consciousness Dear All, While looking for information on how consciousness operates (with respect to the idea of not-self),I came across this article on "The Quantum Mechanical Model of Brain and Consciousness" by Dr. Granville Dharmawardena. http://www.lanka.com/dhamma/misc/science4.htm Has anyone seen it before? Not being of a Science background, I find it hard to assess. EXCERPT: "However computer models are many orders of magnitude slower than needed to account for the speed of human beings. A Neurologist has calculated that if the brain was a standard serial or a parallel computer it would take more time than the age of the universe to perform all the necessary calculations associated with just one perceptual event. But if the brain were a quantum computer, it would try out all the various possible combinations of data arrangement at once and thus unify its experience. Many who research on the brain-mind problem proceed with the a priori assumption that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. They consider consciousness as another property, emerging as a result of P from trillions of electrical pulses shuttling across the brain. According to this assumption consciousness is only a property and not an entity. John Searle introduces consciousness as a natural biological phenomenon that does not fit comfortably into either of the traditional categories of mental and physical, caused by lower level micro processors in the brain. However on the basis of practical observations made by us and many others we have to reject these assumptions and regard consciousness as a non-material entity capable of independent existence. Observations on OBE (Out of Body Experience ) and NDE (Near Death Experience ) show that while the body is in an anaesthetized or inactive state consciousness can remain disembodied, observe events from outside the body and later relocalize in the brain. After the body renormalizes the person can relate what his consciousness observed and heard from an out of body location while the body was inactive. Other experiments have shown that consciousness can leave a dying person, float around observing things and events and later, as Eccles had pointed out, attach itself to an unborn foetus to start a new existence as another individual." If this has been posted before - my apologies to any to whom it is 'old news'. But, if the article is "true", how will it impact/if at all on the Teachings? (Given the urging of the Kalamma Sutta not to just believe but to investigate everything.) metta, Christine 9114 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 0:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > > Howard: > > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > > it is > > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a > > > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > > > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of > > > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things > > > really are when seen truly? ------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: > > Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes > > accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the > > conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't recall anything there about nibbana being experienced by > conditioned mind states. Also, when it is said that there is that realm where > > there is neither earth nor fire etc, that simply describes the functioning of > > mind freed of defilements, and not an object to be observed. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: > I thought these> > > passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or arammana > > > for > > the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition in > > this > > way. --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not at all clear to me. Sorry. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I don’t wish to requote the notes which I’m sure your read carefully anyway. So I’ll just try to add my own ‘point’ notes and reasonings from the passages quoted: 1. Nibbana was spoken of as a ‘base’, as object condition for the ‘knowledges associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on’, just as visible objects are the object conditions for eye-consciousness. 2. Nibbana is discussed as the ‘unconditioned element’ in contrast to all other conditioned elements. 3. Paths and their fruitions (magga and phala cittas) are conditioned elements which take nibbana, the unconditioned element as object. 4. Nibbana has ‘its own nature’ which is ‘antithetical to all formations (sankhara). and there is nothing conditioned to be found within it. 5. When describing the nature of nibbana, it is made clear that it does not contain the 4 great elements, derived materiality (rupas), the conditioned namas (and not even those experienced in the arupa planes which are not dependent on rupas). ******************** We may just have to agree to differ and move on, although I’m very happy to keep discussing (and re-quoting any of the notes if need be). .................... Sarah: > I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate> > > dhamma'....No? > > I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of > > realities, > > 'things' are 'seen truly'. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, there are moments of relative clarity, even in the midst of > samsara. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: > So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and> > > to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) truly, > > BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the > > final > > remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue to > > be > > plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities as > > they > > are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > To me, cittas are conventional existents, though, since I am mired > with defilement, they don't seem merely conventional - very little of > anything does. Nibbana, the state undefiled by the three poisons, is a state > to be realized, not to be observed as an object. Who stands where to view > such an object?! ---------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: We can talk about a concept of seeing or hearing or any other citta. Still, they can be proved to be real and not mere labels whenever there is a moment of sati and panna, even now. We open our eyes and there is the ‘reality’ of seeing immediately and so on. According to the Abhidhamma, It is the magga citta (path consciousness) which we read eradicates defilements according to the stage of enlightenment reached. This citta is said to ‘transcend’ the state of the ordinary person, bcoming the state of a noble person. The magga citta conditions the following phala citta (fruition consciousness) which is lokuttara vipaka citta (supramundane result consciousness). All these cittas (along with a ‘change-of-lineage’ one arising before them) have nibbana as object. I wouldn’t say it is observed, it is experienced or realized as you say. There is of course no ‘who’ but merely moments of consciousness falling away in fast succession as always. Following these cittas there are bhavanga cittas (as usual) and then mind door process cittas which review the enlightenment, the magga and phala cittas and the defilements which have been eradicated (and those still remaining if arahatship has not been ‘attained’ yet). Nibbana is also reviewed. I can try to add more details if it helps. .................... Sarah: > > In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing and > > other > > vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is > > that > > even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which the > Buddha was without wisdom? > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sarah; Yes. For example whenever vipaka cittas (such as seeing, hearing and so on arise). These are never accompanied by wisdom or awareness. Only the 7 universal cetasikas arise with all cittas. .................... Sarah: > I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or > > these > > ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use whatever > > assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. Without a > > little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're bound > > > to > > read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with another > > interpretation. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, we differ on this. I consider the suttas as primary. I consider > the rest as helpful resources (as I do the Mahayana sutras and commentaries). ------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: Understood and respected, Howard. However, the Tipitaka which was recited from memory as heard by the Buddha’s disciples (all arahats) at the 1st council, held shortly after the Buddha’s parinibbana in Rajgir (Rajagaha), consisted of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and Vinaya Pitaka as well as the Sutas. These were all considered ‘primary’ and continued to be recited until written down in the 1st century B.C. They’ve continued to be considered as primary at all councils since (along with the Commentaries mentioned by Rob K). I amy be wrong here, but it seems the commentaries are only separated - or non-existent - from the other texts in the English translations. I know that in the Thai Tipitaka, for example, the commentaries are considered as an integral part of the Tipitaka which is incomplete without them. (Suan, Gayan or Jim would know more about these details and may like to add any comments.) ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Thanks, Sarah. I'm pleased, particularly because I have no doubt you > won't be so much in love with this current post of mine! ;-)) ========================= Sarah: Let me just say, I’m always glad to hear from you, Howard. You consider very carefully and I’d much rather you write and comment where you have a different understanding. It could get boring if we all agreed too;-) This is a lot more challenging. Best wishes as always, Sarah 9115 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 1:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Focus Dear KenO, > > If the focal point of practise is not sati for the Abidhammaist > (hope you > > do not mind I use this word), what is their focus. I think the > problem > > lies on the fact that I am a Suttaist, hence sati is the focus. > But I do > > not know abt Abidhammaist bc Abidhammaist classify sati as > cetasika. What > > is the goal or focus? Well, I think Rob K has answered this (below). I prefer not to call myself (or even think of myself) as an 'anything-ist'. Whichever part of the Tipitaka I'm reading and considering, I understand it to be about the development of sati and panna and in particular the knowing of realities as anatta. As Rob suggests, we read about the same realities in the Suttas as in the Abhidhamma. In the Sabba Sutta, the Budha says that the 6 pairs of bases are the 'All' and in the Vibhanga a lot more detail is given on what the mind base includes. In the Samyutta Nikaya, Sayayatanavagga (6 Sense Bases) we are constantly reminded of the value of sense restraint, the dangers of unwholesome states and the value of mindfulness and wisdom. As Jon reminded us, the defilements arise because the cittas attach to the nimitta (signs) and anubyanjana (features) of sense objects (sound, taste and so on), forming up the proliferations (papanca). So we are reminded that in seeing, there is only seeing, in visible object, there is only visible object. The sense faculties are like an ocean, the sense objects like a current and we travel along, facing hazards and dangers that need sense restraint (ie sati) to overcome them. In the Abhidhamma we learn more precise details about the objects, the processes and the consciousness. There is only one goal and one 'focus' ,as I understand, in the Teachings and I don't distinguish between different parts of the Tipitaka in this regard. I very much doubt, however, whether it is possible without some considerable detail gleaned from the Abhidhamma, to really understand the depth of the Suttas. I'm not sure I've contributed further, but I've tried;-) Sarah p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk for the New Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would be great if you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > > Dear Ken, > Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference > in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is > given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). > The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that > sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine > satipatthana. > Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have > to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, > anatta. > This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank > said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas > (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. > I appreciate your input here and on d-l. > robert > 9116 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 1:44am Subject: Bankok new year --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk for the New > Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would be great if > you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > >_______________ Dear Sarah, Any chance of making it the 12th- 14th of January?. I booked a ticket last week , to Bangkok, for the above weekend. best wishes robert 9117 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Robert (and Kenneth) - In a message dated 11/3/01 10:43:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > .....The pain I have in my knee today has many charateristics in > > common with the pain I had there yesterday, but it is not "the same > pain"... > > I may be blowing smoke at myself, but the idea that I am fooling around > with here > seems very important...If I can express it properly and get you to see what > I'm > driving at, I would be interested in whether it seems equally significant > to you. > > Here it is: > > The knee in your pain today is 'not the same pain' as the pain you had > yesterday. > > But, and here's the but.....: Since the pain you had yesterday was not > really an > entity called 'pain', the pain you have today is also not 'different' from > that > other pain. > > You can't have something that's different from something that doesn't > exist, any > more than you can have something the same as something that doesn't exist. > So the > proper definition would be that the pain you have today is neither the same > nor > different than the pain you had yesterday. And that is the kind of thing > that the > Buddha often said. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't disagree with this. They are "the same" certainly in the sense that all things are "the same" - in being empty of separate, independent existance. However, the two instances of conventional pain differ in context (the other events occurring around the same time), and possibly in terms of certain characteristics, and even possibly in terms of the conditions which led to their arising - it is also quite possible that the current pain is not a continuation of the first, but, rather, a "new" pain arising from the continuation of the conditions which led to the arising of the original pain. The matter is complex, actually much moreso than I am indicating. Should the current pain be a continuation of the first, I think that would match up with the Buddha's idea of neither the same nor different (nor both nor neither!). -------------------------------------------------------------- > > On a second point, I don't think that Ken, or myself for that matter, were > particularly concerned about whether the cittas that might arise again > would be > the same ones or not, but rather whether the arising of cittas as a > phenomenon had > actually been annihilated, or had just 'ceased', meaning the productions of > cittas > could potentially arise again, rather than being permanently eradicated. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahhh! That's a different story! The question, then, is whether the process of mental states arising ever stops, not whether specific mind states cease. Okay, that is, indeed, a different issue! ----------------------------------------------------------------- That is> > the reference in which I said that if conditions were to arise > again......then > cittas might arise again. Not the same ones, but the mechanism of their > occurence. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I would say that, certainly, at *least* for the non-arahant, "when" not immersed in some timeless state, the flow of experience continues, and when conditions of the same sort which occurred previously do arise, consequences of the same sort will result. Conditionality is lawful, objective, and dependable. As far as the arahant is concerned, and now I have to speak speculatively, I think that though experience in its most general sense continues, there is a genuine sense in which the discernment/consciousness of the worldling has ceased, that sense being that there no longer is the seeming of a self/subject apprehending separate, self-existing objects. There is just that nondual experiential reality which is sometimes called "suchness", a description of which is beyond the understanding of us worldlings and beyond the realm of language. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > however, your answer, that Nibbana is that state of realization in which > there are > no separate arisings perceived because that mechanism has been seen to be > illusory, sort of pre-empts the whole question. When it's put that way, i > don't > any longer have a 'citta' problem, or even an experience problem, because: > nothing has been annihilated, the cessation has happened as a > transformation from > within, not a change in the status of cittas. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, exactly! The cessation is the cessation of the three poisons. From my perspective, which I believe is the perspective of many, but certainly not all Theravadins, the notion that nibbana is, in fact, the cessation of experience in every possible sense, a permanent "turning-off-of-the-light" as it were, would be an annihilationist view, and a view at odds with understanding 'bodhi' to mean "awakening" or "enlightenment". ---------------------------------------------------------------- This seems appropriate to me, it is> > you not the objects that have changed,and I doubt Kenneth will have a > problem with > this either. > > So much for speaking for Kenneth without permission!! > > Anyway, your whole post was very worthwhile and illuminating. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I find this whole discussion worthwhile. You are very clear thinking, and you express your thoughts clearly, so that even when I disagree with you (very rarely), I am clear in my own mind as to exactly what it is that I am disagreeing about! ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert Ep. > ============================ 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) 9118 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi, Sarah - I respond below to a few parts of your post. In a message dated 11/4/01 3:51:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > > > Howard: > > > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And > if > > > it is > > > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be > a > > > > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > > > > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a > glimpse of > > > > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way > things > > > > really are when seen truly? > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Sarah: > > > Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes > > > accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the > > > conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I don't recall anything there about nibbana being experienced by > > conditioned mind states. Also, when it is said that there is that realm > where > > > > there is neither earth nor fire etc, that simply describes the > functioning of > > > > mind freed of defilements, and not an object to be observed. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > I thought these> > > > passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or > arammana > > > > for > > > the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition > in > > > this > > > way. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Not at all clear to me. Sorry. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah: > I don’t wish to requote the notes which I’m sure your read carefully > anyway. > So I’ll just try to add my own ‘point’ notes and reasonings from the > passages > quoted: > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: My main question on the following, Sarah, is whether it is based directly on the suttas involved or on commentaries about those suttas. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 1. Nibbana was spoken of as a ‘base’, as object condition for the ‘ > knowledges > associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on’, just as visible > objects are the object conditions for eye-consciousness. > > 2. Nibbana is discussed as the ‘unconditioned element’ in contrast to all > other > conditioned elements. > > 3. Paths and their fruitions (magga and phala cittas) are conditioned > elements > which take nibbana, the unconditioned element as object. > > 4. Nibbana has ‘its own nature’ which is ‘antithetical to all formations > (sankhara). and there is nothing conditioned to be found within it. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly, when 'nibbana' refers to the state free of the three poisons, there is nothing conditioned to be found. --------------------------------------------------------- > > 5. When describing the nature of nibbana, it is made clear that it does not > contain the 4 great elements, derived materiality (rupas), the conditioned > namas (and not even those experienced in the arupa planes which are not > dependent on rupas). --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Understood, and not questioned. We talk here of the "realm" of no separate conditions at all. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > ******************** > > We may just have to agree to differ and move on, although I’m very happy to > keep discussing (and re-quoting any of the notes if need be). > > .................... > > Sarah: > > I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate> > > > dhamma'....No? > > > I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of > > > realities, > > > 'things' are 'seen truly'. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes, there are moments of relative clarity, even in the midst of > > samsara. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and> > > > to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) > truly, > > > BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the > > > final > > > remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue > to > > > be > > > plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities > as > > > they > > > are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > To me, cittas are conventional existents, though, since I am mired > > > with defilement, they don't seem merely conventional - very little of > > anything does. Nibbana, the state undefiled by the three poisons, is a > state > > to be realized, not to be observed as an object. Who stands where to view > > > such an object?! > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > We can talk about a concept of seeing or hearing or any other citta. Still, > they can be proved to be real and not mere labels whenever there is a > moment of > sati and panna, even now. We open our eyes and there is the ‘reality’ of > seeing > immediately and so on. > > According to the Abhidhamma, It is the magga citta (path consciousness) > which > we read eradicates defilements according to the stage of enlightenment > reached. > This citta is said to ‘transcend’ the state of the ordinary person, > bcoming the > state of a noble person. The magga citta conditions the following phala > citta > (fruition consciousness) which is lokuttara vipaka citta (supramundane > result > consciousness). All these cittas (along with a ‘change-of-lineage’ one > arising > before them) have nibbana as object. I wouldn’t say it is observed, it is > experienced or realized as you say. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Hmm. Careful, Sarah! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------------------------- There is of course no ‘who’ but merely> > moments of consciousness falling away in fast succession as always. > > Following these cittas there are bhavanga cittas (as usual) and then mind > door > process cittas which review the enlightenment, the magga and phala cittas > and > the defilements which have been eradicated (and those still remaining if > arahatship has not been ‘attained’ yet). Nibbana is also reviewed. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Surely as a memory, a conditioned, limited "summing up" (by the conventional mind) of a glimpse of the undefiled state . ---------------------------------------------------------- > > I can try to add more details if it helps. > > .................... > > Sarah: > > > In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing > and > > > other > > > vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is > > > > that > > > even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which > the > > Buddha was without wisdom? > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah; > Yes. For example whenever vipaka cittas (such as seeing, hearing and so on > arise). These are never accompanied by wisdom or awareness. Only the 7 > universal cetasikas arise with all cittas. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, this I find very interesting. So we have Abhidhamma seeming to imply that there were times at which the Buddha was without wisdom. I think this is likely to come as a surprise to *many* Buddhists, including many Theravadins! ------------------------------------------------------------- > > .................... > > Sarah: > > I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or > > > these > > > ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use > whatever > > > assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. > Without a > > > little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're > bound > > > > to > > > read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with > another > > > interpretation. > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Well, we differ on this. I consider the suttas as primary. I > consider > > the rest as helpful resources (as I do the Mahayana sutras and > commentaries). > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Sarah: > Understood and respected, Howard. > > However, the Tipitaka which was recited from memory as heard by the Buddha’ > s > disciples (all arahats) at the 1st council, held shortly after the Buddha’s > parinibbana in Rajgir (Rajagaha), consisted of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and > Vinaya > Pitaka as well as the Sutas. These were all considered ‘primary’ and > continued > to be recited until written down in the 1st century B.C. They’ve continued > to > be considered as primary at all councils since (along with the Commentaries > mentioned by Rob K). I amy be wrong here, but it seems the commentaries are > only separated - or non-existent - from the other texts in the English > translations. I know that in the Thai Tipitaka, for example, the > commentaries > are considered as an integral part of the Tipitaka which is incomplete > without > them. (Suan, Gayan or Jim would know more about these details and may like > to > add any comments.) > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > Howard: > > Thanks, Sarah. I'm pleased, particularly because I have no doubt > you > > won't be so much in love with this current post of mine! ;-)) > ========================= > > Sarah: > Let me just say, I’m always glad to hear from you, Howard. You consider > very > carefully and I’d much rather you write and comment where you have a > different > understanding. It could get boring if we all agreed too;-) This is a lot > more > challenging. > > Best wishes as always, > > Sarah > ============================== Thanks much for writing, Sarah. It's always a pleasure! 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) 9119 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 6:13pm Subject: Bangkok (after) new year G'day Bangkokians, I also will be in Bkk from 5 Jan to 15 Jan 2002. However, I plan to spend most of the time visiting monasteries in the North-East (except perhaps one or 2 days in Bkk). Not sure if I could have time to meet you. Metta, Binh --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > > > p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk > for the New > > Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would > be great if > > you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > > > >_______________ > Dear Sarah, > Any chance of making it the 12th- 14th of January?. > I booked a ticket last week , to Bangkok, for the above weekend. > best wishes > robert 9120 From: manji Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 7:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class your welcome! :) -manji- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Epstein" To: Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 11:06 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > Wow, Manji, > Thanks for the very nice talk. > > Once again, I appreciate your pulling the understanding of cittas and cetasikas > into the context of the present moment, something that Sarah has also urged. > > Your explanation of cittas and cetisikas was very helpful. I hadn't quite > understood cetasikas the way you explained it. It seems you are making clear that > it is really the quality of the cetasikas that determines the progress of > understanding. This is very interesting, as my emphasis was always on the > consciousness, citta, and was thinking of the cetasikas as mainly mechanical > functions. > > My education is slow, but it is gradually progressing. > > Very nice! > > Thanks again, > Robert Ep. > > ================== > > > > --- manji wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > > > When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta > > that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is > > reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new > > dhamma. > > > > Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea > > that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when > > there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of > > "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" > > there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is > > a cetasika. > > > > After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for > > a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just > > like abhidhamma expresses. > > > > Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma > > rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are > > seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. > > > > Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a > > magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising > > and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning > > process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe > > its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there > > is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons > > that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can > > there can be experience of all dhammas. > > > > This same thing is taught many times. > > > > When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those > > moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. > > > > For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the > > concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental > > object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the > > shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe > > for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object > > reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration > > is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its > > been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is > > happening right now? > > > > Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... > > concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) > > > > So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? > > Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... > > anatta... anatta... not self. > > > > So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, > > right now dhamma falling. > > > > Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe > > putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and > > deeper seeing. > > > > Prajna Paramita... > > > > musha shugyo, > > manji > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christine Forsyth" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > > > ask it here as well. > > > > > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > > > > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > > > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > > > > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > > > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > > > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > > > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > > > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > > > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > > > > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > > > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > > > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > > > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > > > > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > > > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > > > > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > > > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > > > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > > > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > > > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > > > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > > > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > > > > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > > > possible). > > > > > > metta, > > > Christine 9121 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Bangkok (after) new year G'day Binh, Must be getting pretty hot Down Under in Perth.... Unfortunately, my dates are always fixed pretty well by school terms, so we're planning to go 28th Dec-1st or 2nd Jan (to be finalised). You may get to meet Rob K in Bkk and in anycase k.Sujin and other friends at the Foundation will be delighted to meet you. If you care to contact any of us off-list, we'd be happy to help with any arrangements. I was asking Gayan and Suan yesterday about the Sinhalese and Burmese Tipitakas... You may know about the Cambodian Tipitaka and of course about the Vietnamese one (but i wonder if this is as 'complete'). Sorry, I'm rather ignorant of these details, but would be interested to know which 'versions', like the pali contain all the ancient commentaries as part of the 'whole'. I'm quite sure you'll be a lot more knowledgable on this than I am. Thanks, Sarah p.s. We have a very good Amer. friend who lives in Nakom Phanom (sp?) with her Thai husband. She's v.interested in dhamma and I'm sure would be v.interested to meet you. Pls let me know (off-list) if you'd like her contact details. --- binh_anson@y... wrote: > > G'day Bangkokians, > > I also will be in Bkk from 5 Jan to 15 Jan 2002. However, I plan to > spend most of the time visiting monasteries in the North-East (except > perhaps one or 2 days in Bkk). Not sure if I could have time to meet > you. > > Metta, > Binh > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > > > > > p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to > Bkk > > for the New > > > Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but > would > > be great if > > > you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > > > > > >_______________ > > Dear Sarah, > > Any chance of making it the 12th- 14th of January?. > > I booked a ticket last week , to Bangkok, for the above weekend. > > best wishes > > robert 9122 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 10:01pm Subject: (2) Bangkok (after) new year G'day Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Must be getting pretty hot Down Under in Perth.... BA: Not too bad. The weather has been quite mild lately. However, we have had a squence of low rainfalls in the past few years, and thus, we are facing water restriction this summer and our gardens are not green as they used to be... ---------------------- > You may get to meet > Rob K in Bkk and in anycase k.Sujin and other friends at the Foundation will be > delighted to meet you. If you care to contact any of us off-list, we'd be > happy to help with any arrangements. BA: I would like to meet all dhamma friends. However, to be realistic, I'm not sure if I could, given the time constraint of my staying in Bangkok (as I also plan to see some old friends and in- laws there...). ---------------------------- > > I was asking Gayan and Suan yesterday about the Sinhalese and Burmese > Tipitakas... You may know about the Cambodian Tipitaka and of course about the > Vietnamese one (but i wonder if this is as 'complete'). Sorry, I'm rather > ignorant of these details, but would be interested to know which 'versions', > like the pali contain all the ancient commentaries as part of the 'whole'. I'm > quite sure you'll be a lot more knowledgable on this than I am. BA: Beside visiting Thailand, I will also be visiting Vietnam and will collect information on the Vietnamese translation. However, I will post separately of what I know on the current situation (and I don't have any information on Cambodian Tipitaka). ------------------------- > p.s. We have a very good Amer. friend who lives in Nakom Phanom (sp?) with her > Thai husband. She's v.interested in dhamma and I'm sure would be v.interested > to meet you. BA: Ah... That brings back some good old memories ... :-) I haven't been back to Nakhon Phanom since 1973! Not sure if I will go there this time. I only plan to visits monasteries in Udon, Ubon and Mahasarakham provinces. Metta, Binh 9123 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 10:27pm Subject: The Vietnamese Tipitaka G'day, As requested by Sarah, below is a brief overview of the Vietnamese Tipitaka. (This information will be updated after January 2002). Binh ------------------------------------------------------------------ A brief overview of the Vietnamese Tipitaka. ============================================ The following books have been translated into Vietnamese language: A. Sutta Pitaka: 1) Digha Nikaya (*) 2) Majjhima Nikaya (*) 3) Samyutta Nikaya (*) 4) Anguttara Nikaya (*) 5) Khuddaka Nikaya (incomplete): 5.1 Khuddaka Patha (*) 5.2 Dhammapada (*) 5.3 Udana (*) 5.4 Itivuttaka (*) 5.5 Sutta Nipata (*) 5.6 Vimana Vatthu (*) 5.7 Peta Vatthu (*) 5.8 Theragatha (*) 5.9 Therigatha (*) 5.10 Jataka (Birth Stories of the Bodhisatta) B. Abhidhamma Pitaka: All 7 books, in hard copy format. C. Vinaya Pitaka: Only the summaries. D. Other works: - Milinda-panha (*) - Mahavamsa (*) - Abhidhammathasanghaha (in hard copy) - Visuddhimagga (*) In addition, texts from the Chinese-Sanskrit source were also translated: A. The 4 Agamas: 1. Dhirga-Agama (*) 2. Madhyama-Agama (*) 3. Ekottara-Agama (*) 4. Samyukta-Agama (*) B. Vinaya books from the Dharmaguptaka and Mahasanghika (*) schools. Those with an asterisk (*) are those with digital files which are available (or will be available in the near future) at my websites: http://www.budsas.org and http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom -ooOoo- Metta, Binh Anson 9124 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 11:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] samatha Hi Robert K >A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates > ignorance I find this subject interesting. You got any commentary or notes that suggest that samattha (like breathing meditation) suppresses lobha. Kind regards Ken O 9125 From: jesse- Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 0:09am Subject: By request of Sarah :) Sarah was kind enough to welcome me to the group and ask a few questions about me, and I have shared with the level of apprehension I have of the dharma. I have very little formal instruction in buddhism, in the way of reading the texts of the tipitaka. My real learning comes from some readings and more so their applications in life. I find that these teachings are like a jewel, and thus the texts that cause one to bring out these observations are like a diamond in the rough. She has requested that I share with you a little something I wrote, so here you are, verbatim. In this message I am talking about a statement I made prior about how the quote I have in my signature is very beautiful and has "many meanings and no meanings" all at once: Sarah, Actually, I sent this thread to you personally. I didn't know if I should talk about IRC with everyone. :) What I mean by 'many meanings and no meanings' is this: Consider a man who is walking, but has no destination. A person who is in motion, but not going anywhere, equivalent to standing still. Because he is not going anywhere, but still moving, he can be at all places. He is untangled by so many things; he is just walking. Just walking. This is the meaning of 'many meanings and no meanings'. That the quote, and really the dharma, which is what the Buddha is all about, is like this person walking. When you understand it, it has innumerable applications; you can find it in every possible situation. But when you understand it even further, you discover that it is the only thing which actually has any meaning. Therefore to say that it has meaning or does not have meaning is useless; there is nothing else that has meaning. I'm not very good with words, but this is my understanding of the dharma, and these are the thoughts which bring beauty out of the dharma, for me. Hope that was helpful. :) I'm sure you understand in what ways the Buddha's teachings are beautiful, and how it's difficult to share that beauty with other people using just words. The good thing with this study group is that so many people bring their viewpoints together, that together their posts form a somewhat comprehensive view of buddhism. I hope you all have something to say, or that it helps you guys in some way. This, to me, is the meaning of life, to help. Jesse Dhillon. "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out your own salvation." 9127 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 0:11am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Hi Sarah You post to Robert Ep, >I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it is...and our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason why.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and falling of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is maybe of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel rather than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes or links that help us understand more on this sequential process. > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for example, if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting idea that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the kusala citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for eg metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the falling of kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. > ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical phenomena) > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why do we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. Also does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. Is memory a universal cetasikas. Kind regards Ken O 9128 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 1:57am Subject: Re: samatha --- Dear Ken, Nice you want to know more details. There are a few times where I have seen the commentaries say something to this effect, but I can't put my finger on a quote at the moment. Will look out for it and post it when I see it. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K > > >A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > > samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates > > ignorance > > I find this subject interesting. You got any commentary or notes that > suggest that samattha (like breathing meditation) suppresses lobha. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > 9129 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 4:00am Subject: Re: Concepts Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for me. What > makes it suffering then? As long as there is no craving, aversion and ignorance in whatever state one is in, then I guess that is a state free of suffering. Smoking used to feel really good, being in love with my first wife and being a loving and caring father was all very rewarding and satisfactory. Then you start coughing your lungs up, it turns out your wife has a few extra-curricular activities, and your baby dies. Awareness of suffering does not necessarily arise immediately with craving, aversion or ignorance. This is why I think of the three marks of existence as meta- qualities, because without insight these are not realities to be known. All the best Herman 9130 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 4:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Frank --- frank kuan wrote: > > p.s. the more I see how much the Buddha in the early > suttas emphasizes the practical matters of cultivation > and "seeing reality", i.e. seeing impermanence of the > world, the 3 marks applied to the six sense bases, the > 5 aggregates of clinging, the more I doubt the later > buddhist scriptures have any validity whatsoever as > the authentic word of the Buddha. The styles and > material are just SO INCONGRUOUS. An interesting observation, Frank. I have heard people talk of differences between the early and later texts, but was not sure if these differences extend to content, in the sense of doctrine, or are limited to matters of style. Jon 9131 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts Hi Herman and Robert Ep, Is suffering real? Does vedana related type of suffering also real? Since they are also anatta, where is there a self to experience in a sense? To me, it is real because of our attachment to the illusory self, that is why it is real. My understanding is that suffering is not real, it is real bc the illusory self thought it is real due to our conditioning of this illusory self. But still we have to treat it *real* for now :). Kind regards Ken Ong --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to > > reflect on the Dhamma. > > > > When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type > > suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. > > > > Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't > > to do with vedana? > > > > If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree > > with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be > > experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. > > > > But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. > > I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly > > grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, > > then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. > > And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a > > split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of > > whether it feels good or bad. > > > > When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A > > concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these > > objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is > > entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, > > millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is > > suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why > > it just goes on and on. > > > > I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And > > in a moment of awareness it is not there. > > Dear Herman, > Well, I don't want to be too surprising, but I like this view very much, > and > appreciate your very wise description of the connection of suffering and > delusion. > I have been lucky in my life to have a few moments here and there where > it seemed > that the world was laid out as it is and there was no sense of having a > concept. > Just direct perception. These moments never lasted very long, but I > would have to > call them 'bliss', not because there was any intense sensation of > pleasure or > anything like that, but because everything was simply itself. So I > agree that a > single moment of awareness dispels concept and delusion. > > I once complained to my teacher at the time that these experiences > seemed very > profound but always went away. He said they were good signs, but > shouldn't be > held onto. Obviously, there were plenty of tendencies at play that > would remove > this perspective and throw me back into a deluded state, even while I > watched. > Well the sense of the I-watching was not ready to get put away. > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for > me. What > makes it suffering then? i would say delusion can feel great but really > be not so > great, and I would understand if you said this would lead to more > suffering, but > if there is no suffering experienced, where is the suffering at that > moment? > > Other than this question, I greatly appreciate your wise comments. > > Robert Ep. > > =========================================== > > 9132 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Focus - Invitations Hi Sarah Thanks for the invitation. I think the major problem is whether my boss is willing to let me go. He seems to be frowning whenever I asked for overseas leaves. I think a few short days (less than 7 days, 5 days will be just right) could be good. But all dpds on his schedule next month which presently I have no idea. If he is on overseas leave, i definitely cannot be on leave. Bkk is good bc I never been there before :). Kind regards Ken O "p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk for the New Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would be great if you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... " 9133 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Ken O My apologies for taking so long to get back to you on this post. (Ken and all: If there are other posts or issues from before or during the India trip that I have not replied to, please feel free to send a reminder -- on or off-list -- as I have lost track of where I got to.) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > This reference that you have quoted, > VII, 38 > "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths. > It should be noted that while in the section on the requisites of > enlightenment, the eight path factors may be either mundane or > supramundane, in the teaching of the Four Noble Truths they are > exclusively supramundane." > > Could you kindly comment why is the Four Noble Truths are exclusively > supramundane. My confusion is that the Four Noble Truths is exclusively > supramundane, how is it going to be supramundane if the eight path > factors which is part of the Four Noble Truth could be mundane. > Furthermore if it is supramundane, how are we going to learn or practise > using mundane effort or understanding. This is a somewhat technical area, and I apologise in advance for the technical nature of the answer. I will try to keep it as brief as possible. What the passage is saying, I think, is that references in the suttas to the Noble Eightfold Path will have slightly different meanings depending on the context-- -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as the 4th of the Four Noble Truths, it always refers to the supramundane path, ie. a moment of path consciousness (magga citta). This is because, as I understand it, only at a moment of path consciousness are the Four Noble Truths fully realised. The 3rd and 4th Noble Truths in particular (nibbana and the path leading to it) are truths about the supramundane and are incapable of realisation at any other level. At such path moments, all 8 factors of the Noble Eightfold Path co-arise. -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as 8 factors among the 37 factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) it will be referring to the mundane path or to both the mundane path and the supramundane path. The mundane path is a moment of satipatthana arising with panna which understands the characteristic of the reality that is the object of awareness at that moment. At such moments, 5 of the 8 path factors arise and accompany the moment of consciousness. These 5 factors are -- samma ditthi (right view), ie. the mental factor that is panna cetasika samma sankappa (right thought), ie. the mental factor that is vitakka cetasika samma vayama (right effort), ie. the mental factor that is viriya cetasika samma sati (right mindfulness), ie. the mental factor that is sati cetasika samma samadhi (right samadhi), ie. the mental factor that is ekaggata cetasika In brief, any reference to the realisation of the 4 Noble Truths is a reference to a moment of path consciousness (the supramundane), while a reference to the factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) includes a reference to those who are developing the path but have not yet attained enlightenment. I hope this helps clarify your question. Jon 9134 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Awareness of suffering does not necessarily arise > immediately with > craving, aversion or ignorance. > > This is why I think of the three marks of existence > as meta- > qualities, because without insight these are not > realities to be > known. There's a great quote from Warren Buffett, something to the effect of, "all these years, I had been seeing the truth of this with my own eyes but did not capitalize on it, but one day the eyes finally made the connnection with my brain and I understood." The actual quote is much more eloquent, my memory does not do it justice, but it's a great analogy that really points out the huge gap between having a vague awareness of truth and having complete access to the truth and utilizing it in your moment to moment awareness to your benefit and well-being. -fk 9135 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Num In a recent post you made these comments on the subject of sati being aware of the rupa that was experienced in the previous sense-door process-- --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Object of mano-dvara vithi is, as Sarah mention, characteristic > of object of sense-door(panca-dvara) vithi which > just has fallen away. (we still call it > present b/c it just fallen away,( paccupan-santati)) At that point > object of mano-dvara vithi is still a paramutta object. There was some discussion on this point during the India trip. The explanation given was just as you have said, namely, that although the object has (just) fallen away, its characteristic can still be experienced by the succeeding citta, and thus it is not to be regarded as a mere memory or concept of the object that has just fallen away. The analogy given was that of a drop of water falling on a double layer of thin paper. The underneath sheet of paper experiences the quality of the water in the same way as the top sheet does. If you have any references from the texts on this point, I would be interested to see them. Thanks in advance. Jon 9136 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 8:09am Subject: Friendly Greetings Dear dhamma comrades, I've just joined the dhammastudygroup and would like to send a greeting to all of you. Namaste, Norman :-) 9137 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 11:05am Subject: Re: Rid of impurities... Dear Jonothan, It's good to read everyone's posts, here. As always, yours are thoughtful and full of wisdom. I feel very fortunate that I found this group. It's a treat to read your answers to my confusing questions. Thank you, Alex 9138 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 3:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts Thanks for the clarification, Herman. This certainly makes sense to me. I would not say that the state in which one is happy but ignorant is necessarily a state of suffering in itself. I would say it leads to a future state of suffering. I also think it is possible to be suffering but not be fully aware of it, or to interpret it as non-suffering in order to justify one's attachment, as in heroin addiction. As your teeth are falling out and you're losing your job and someone beats you up on the street, you think: 'Man isn't it great to get high?' [This one's not from my own experience, but I was a cigarette smoker and I felt unhappier when I quit than when I smoked, because the pain of attachment was 'revealed' by not satisfying the desire. Yet not smoking, I assume, is the more wholesome state, although I suppose 'not necessarily'.] If these are the kinds of sufferings you are talking about which may be caused, contained in or concurrent with states of pseudo-happiness, then I certainly understand and agree. For the personal circumstances that you described, I cannot help but express sympathy, Herman. Thanks for your message. Best, Robert Ep. ========================== --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little > tough for me. What > > makes it suffering then? > > As long as there is no craving, aversion and ignorance in whatever > state one is in, then I guess that is a state free of suffering. > Smoking used to feel really good, being in love with my first wife > and being a loving and caring father was all very rewarding and > satisfactory. > > Then you start coughing your lungs up, it turns out your wife has a > few extra-curricular activities, and your baby dies. > > Awareness of suffering does not necessarily arise immediately with > craving, aversion or ignorance. > > This is why I think of the three marks of existence as meta- > qualities, because without insight these are not realities to be > known. > > All the best > > > Herman ======================= 9139 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts Kenneth, Since suffering is a 'state', ie, an 'experience', it is only real to the extent it is experienced as real. It is a subjective sort of category. If a wooden statue gets its leg chopped off, we cannot say that it is suffering. But a person who gets his leg chopped off is suffering. If he is anaesthetized, he may not experience suffering. But when he finds out his leg is gone, he may experience psychological suffering, even though he is still physically anaesthetized. So suffering is a quality of mind, it is an experience. Thus it only exists or doesn't exist depending on whether citta [consciousness] contains it or not. In terms of being permanent or being an object of some kind, you could say it is not 'real'. But in terms of being something that takes place in consciousness, I would say it is 'real' at the time it arises, and non-existent at the time it is not being experienced. I have been thinking lately of what Hui Neng said and how brilliant it is, whether or not one agrees with it, I hasten to add: paraphrase: "One enlightened thought is enough to make one the equal of a Buddha. One deluded thought plummets us down into the depths of hell." There is a lot to contemplate there, within the transitory nature of experience. Robert Ep. ===================================== --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Herman and Robert Ep, > > Is suffering real? Does vedana related type of suffering also real? > Since they are also anatta, where is there a self to experience in a > sense? To me, it is real because of our attachment to the illusory self, > that is why it is real. My understanding is that suffering is not real, > it is real bc the illusory self thought it is real due to our conditioning > of this illusory self. But still we have to treat it *real* for now :). > > > > > > Kind regards > Ken Ong > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > > Dear Robert, > > > > > > Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to > > > reflect on the Dhamma. > > > > > > When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type > > > suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. > > > > > > Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't > > > to do with vedana? > > > > > > If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree > > > with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be > > > experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. > > > > > > But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. > > > I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly > > > grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, > > > then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. > > > And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a > > > split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of > > > whether it feels good or bad. > > > > > > When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A > > > concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these > > > objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is > > > entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, > > > millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is > > > suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why > > > it just goes on and on. > > > > > > I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And > > > in a moment of awareness it is not there. > > > > Dear Herman, > > Well, I don't want to be too surprising, but I like this view very much, > > and > > appreciate your very wise description of the connection of suffering and > > delusion. > > I have been lucky in my life to have a few moments here and there where > > it seemed > > that the world was laid out as it is and there was no sense of having a > > concept. > > Just direct perception. These moments never lasted very long, but I > > would have to > > call them 'bliss', not because there was any intense sensation of > > pleasure or > > anything like that, but because everything was simply itself. So I > > agree that a > > single moment of awareness dispels concept and delusion. > > > > I once complained to my teacher at the time that these experiences > > seemed very > > profound but always went away. He said they were good signs, but > > shouldn't be > > held onto. Obviously, there were plenty of tendencies at play that > > would remove > > this perspective and throw me back into a deluded state, even while I > > watched. > > Well the sense of the I-watching was not ready to get put away. > > > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for > > me. What > > makes it suffering then? i would say delusion can feel great but really > > be not so > > great, and I would understand if you said this would lead to more > > suffering, but > > if there is no suffering experienced, where is the suffering at that > > moment? > > > > Other than this question, I greatly appreciate your wise comments. > > > > Robert Ep. 9140 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 3:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Dear Jon, Is there a particular area in the commentaries that is translated, that shows how the scheme you have explained below is derived from the Suttas on the 4 Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path? I would like to see how this interpretation of the Path was conceived. Also, is there a part of the commentaries that explains the discovery of one citta arising at a time and passing on its attributes to the next citta, based on a particular aspect of parts of the Suttas? I would like to understand from where this was derived as well by the Arahats that composed the commentaries. Thanks, Robert Ep. ======================= --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > My apologies for taking so long to get back to you on this post. > > (Ken and all: If there are other posts or issues from before or during > the India trip that I have not replied to, please feel free to send a > reminder -- on or off-list -- as I have lost track of where I got to.) > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > This reference that you have quoted, > > VII, 38 > > "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths. > > It should be noted that while in the section on the requisites of > > enlightenment, the eight path factors may be either mundane or > > supramundane, in the teaching of the Four Noble Truths they are > > exclusively supramundane." > > > > Could you kindly comment why is the Four Noble Truths are exclusively > > supramundane. My confusion is that the Four Noble Truths is exclusively > > supramundane, how is it going to be supramundane if the eight path > > factors which is part of the Four Noble Truth could be mundane. > > Furthermore if it is supramundane, how are we going to learn or practise > > using mundane effort or understanding. > > This is a somewhat technical area, and I apologise in advance for the > technical nature of the answer. I will try to keep it as brief as > possible. > > What the passage is saying, I think, is that references in the suttas to > the Noble Eightfold Path will have slightly different meanings depending > on the context-- > > -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as the 4th of the Four Noble > Truths, it always refers to the supramundane path, ie. a moment of path > consciousness (magga citta). This is because, as I understand it, only at > a moment of path consciousness are the Four Noble Truths fully realised. > The 3rd and 4th Noble Truths in particular (nibbana and the path leading > to it) are truths about the supramundane and are incapable of realisation > at any other level. At such path moments, all 8 factors of the Noble > Eightfold Path co-arise. > > -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as 8 factors among the 37 > factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) it will be referring to the > mundane path or to both the mundane path and the supramundane path. The > mundane path is a moment of satipatthana arising with panna which > understands the characteristic of the reality that is the object of > awareness at that moment. At such moments, 5 of the 8 path factors arise > and accompany the moment of consciousness. These 5 factors are -- > > samma ditthi (right view), ie. the mental factor that is panna cetasika > samma sankappa (right thought), ie. the mental factor that is vitakka > cetasika > samma vayama (right effort), ie. the mental factor that is viriya cetasika > samma sati (right mindfulness), ie. the mental factor that is sati > cetasika > samma samadhi (right samadhi), ie. the mental factor that is ekaggata > cetasika > > In brief, any reference to the realisation of the 4 Noble Truths is a > reference to a moment of path consciousness (the supramundane), while a > reference to the factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) includes a > reference to those who are developing the path but have not yet attained > enlightenment. > > I hope this helps clarify your question. > > Jon > 9141 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 3:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Dear Ken O, Sarah: >.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this > way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions > (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises sequentially > because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the > preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other conditions > to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. .................... > k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and falling > of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is maybe > of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel rather > than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes or > links that help us understand more on this sequential process. .................... Sarah: I’d like to give some links, but most of the detail in this area that I have is in texts that are not on-line as yet, so I’ll try to quote selectively (i.e choose the shorter ones;-) Why can’t there be seeing and hearing at the same time? Why do cittas (consciusness) arise as they do? I think these questions are the imponderables and that it is better to understand that this is the way it is (because of all those conditions). One of the most useful commentaries is the Atthasalini (The Expositor), available from PTS. It’s not a big book and much easier to read, I think, than the English translation of Dhammasangani (1st book of the Abhidhamma)which it accompanies. The following quote is from Atth (63): ‘....... is termed ‘consciousness’ , because it arranges itself in a series (‘cintoti’, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed ‘consciousness’ because it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and corruptions. Moreover, all (four classes) are termed ‘consciousness’ because they are variegated (citra) acording to circumstance. The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of producing a variety of diversity of effects. Herein consciousness with lust is one thing, that with hate is another..........’ This one comes a little later from the same text at (112). Again citta is being described: ‘.....As to its characteristic, etc., cognizing object is its characteristic, forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental and material organism is its proximate cause. There is no such thing as consciousness in the four planes of existence without the characteristic of cognizing. All consciousness has it. But when a ‘door’ is reached at the place where the ‘object’ is evolved, consciousness is the forerunner, the precursor. A visible object seen by the eye is cognized by consciousness etc...an idea known by the mind is cognized by consciousness.............. The consciousness which arises next does so immediately after the preceding consciousness, forming a connected series. Thus it has connection as manifestation...’ ******************** Finally on this question of cittas, let me just refer you also to the Visuddhimagga, which many people have already. At XX30, it describes in detail the 89 kinds of consciousness. At 1V n13, there is a lengthy discussion on bhavanga and other cittas and also a discussion of the treatment of these in the Suttas, Abhidhamma and Commentaries and the ‘inter-connection’. A shorter passage which I’ll quote comes from V11139 addressing the question you’ve raised before about the cessation of cittas: ‘...As to the shortness of the moment; in the ultimate sense the life-moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the occurrence of a single conscious moment. Just as the chariot wheel, when it is rolling, rolls (that is, touches the ground) only on one point of (the circumference of) its tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life of living beings lasts only for a single conscius moment. When that consciusness has ceased, the being is said to have ceased, according it is said: ‘In a past conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a future conscious moment not he did live. not he does live, he will live. In the present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will live. ‘ “Life, person, pleasure, pain-just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return. No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow’ ‘(Nd.1.42). This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the moment.’ ******************** Thanks Ken, for giving me an opportunity to reflect on these quotes, especially the last one which is always a condition for ‘wise attention’ for me.> .................... Sarah: > > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies > > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and > is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any > reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level > of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for example, > if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s > teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome > cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents > that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. > Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) .................. > k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting idea > that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the kusala > citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for eg > metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the falling of > kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. .................... Sarah: There are many excellent details about the characteristic of sati (mindfulness) in Atthasalini again (121f): ‘....As the young treasurer of the king, in charge of the tenfold treasure, both early and late causes the king to take note of and remember the royal possession, so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act. Hence the Elder said: ‘As, your majesty, the king’s confidential adviser early and late makes the universal monarch remember: so many, lord, are your elephants, so many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so much bullion, so much gold, so much property; let your majesty remember it- even so, your majesty, mindfulness does not allow the floating away of moral states, such as the four applications of mindfulness, the four supreme efforts........... And as that jewel, the confidential adviser of the universal monarch, knowing what is diadvantageous and what is advantageous, removes the disadvantageous and promotes the advantageous, so mindfulness, searching well the courses of advantageous and disadvantageous states;- ‘these are disadvantageous states, misconduct in body’, etc, removes the disadvantageous states, misconduct in body.............It should be regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the object, and as a door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses.’ Ken, I think I’ve got a bit carried away with the typing of quotes, so I’ll just address the other points in brief with no more quotes;-) To be accurate, sati accompanies all the sobhana cittas which include the kusala cittas, vipaka cittas and kiriya cittas (of the arahat). You can find full details of these in Nina’s books on the websites linked here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links We’re not aware of anything (as you know) but sati is aware of any reality presenting itself, regardless of whether it is metta, unkindness, wise consideration, aversion, seeing or visible object. Any selection or choice shows there is no sati at that moment. The reason sati (of satipatthana) needs to develop is in order to be mindful of what really is appearing now, not what we’ve always taken to be appearing now. By being aware (with understading) of these realities, it becomes more and more apparent what their characteristics are and what the meaning of anatta is. However, if we don’t hear and consider a lot of details about metta and compassion for example, we’ll think there is awareness of them when really it is attachment or sorrow that is the reality. I’d just like to stress that ‘we’ don’t need to practise anything. Understanding is the key, rather than a wrong idea of ‘self that can do or prctise’. .................... Sarah: > > ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be > > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical > phenomena) > > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, > this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, > and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to develop > detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is > very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. .................... > k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why do > we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. Also > does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. Is > memory a universal cetasikas. .................... Sarah: Panna (rt understanding) and sati need to know and be aware of many, many different realities without any selection. They can then ‘see’ the advantageous and disadvantageous as discussed in the quote I gave. The lack of sati and panna is due to ignorance and wrong view and the lack of ‘guarding’ the sense doors. Sanna, (perception or memory) is one key universal cetasika but I think this post has already become too long ;-) Thanks for your patience and that of others who’ve read through all the quotes. Hope this helps;-) Sarah 9142 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 3:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friendly Greetings Hi Norman, --- nymchan0@n... wrote: > Dear dhamma comrades, > > I've just joined the dhammastudygroup and would like to send a > greeting to all of you. > > Namaste, > Norman :-) Glad to see you've 'broken the ice' and hope to hear more from you;-) To others; Norman also lives in Hong Kong and we had a pleasant breakfast and chat on the Peak a week or so ago. I'll let him add any other personal or background details as and if he wishes (or can be encouraged to do so). Norman, how do you find the 'list' here and do you have any comments or questions from 'Buddhism in Daily Life'? This book is also on line at: at: http://www.dhammastudy.com/ but under a different title 'Buddhist Outlook in Daily Life'. Norman, you asked about searching for a particular topic in the archives. Please go to: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ password:metta or selected posts have been saved under topics at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts I look forward to continuing our discussions here, so others can join and contribute too;-) See you soon, Sarah 9143 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 5:54am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Robert Ep This is another one out of the 'oldies' bin. --- Robert Epstein > > > Howard: > > > Nor for me. If "all that there is" is the five khandas, and > > if > > > parinibbana is a final end to these, then parinibbana is an > > annihilation as > > > far as I am concerned, one which would differ not at all from the > > > annihilation of death for a materialist. To me, desire for such a > > nibbana is > > > an instance of craving for annihilation, the mirror image of > > craving for > > > being. > > > -------------------------------------- > > Jon: > > I'm not familiar with the language of the 'isms', but I do wonder if > > you're not confusing a *belief or view* that is not in accordance > > with reality (in this case, that on death at the end of this very > > life there is nothing more, or that there is no result of deeds, > > whatever 'annihilationalism means) with a statement to the effect > > that at nibbana the khandas cease completely. There can be no > > question of any similarity or overlap between the 2, surely >> ----------------------------------- > Rob E: > Dear Jon, > I think what Howard was suggesting was that having a Nibbana that is a > complete > cessation of consciousness [including primary awareness or awakeness] as > a goal > would be a clinging to annihilation, ie, having the kandhas and > associated > experience destroyed. I think he is saying that if that is the actual > description > of Nibbana, then having such a goal represents a craving for non-being, > just as > clinging to samsara represents a craving for existence, or being. Jon: I think we may be on slightly different wave-lengths here, Robert. I understood the discussion to be about the scriptural description of nibbana/parinibbana, rather than a view held about nibbana as 'a goal'. As I understand it, any view of nibbana in the sense of a goal or something one aspires to is bound to be off-track, because we have nothing on which to base an accurate conception of nibbana. However, discussing whether, according to the scriptures, it can be said that the khandas cease on attaining parinibbana does not involve any held view or belief about nibbana; it is an exercise based on one's reading of the texts, with whatever knowledge of the teachings one can bring to bear on the matter. So an understanding, in this sense, that the Buddha was talking about complete cessation of the khandas would in no way run counter to the view of annihilationism (a view that contradicts the law of kamma and vipaka). At least, that's the way I see it… > I have to agree with this. I do not understand total cessation as the > final goal > of the spiritual path. Suffering comes from attachment and desire, not > from > awareness. It is possible to have nothing but kusala cittas if one is a > Buddha. > There is no reason to annihilate awareness in order to be free of > suffering. > Therefore I do not see annihilation of consciousness as a desirable > goal, only > cessation of suffering and attachment. I suppose there are many reasons for having an interest in developing the path. But a view as to a specific final goal of the spiritual path is not essential to seeing the disadvantage in living forever in ignorance and suffering. Indeed, if our interest in the dhamma is based on, for example, a desire for a happy rebirth, or a goal of attaining nibbana as we conceive it to be, then I am inclined to think that understanding the right path could be a very difficult task. Jon 9144 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 5:57am Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had to say on the > subject, > > ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana? > > > > Jon > > > ================================== > With regard to "And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had > to > say on the subject, ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana?", I would > be > very interested in some references to where the Buddha said that. > > With metta, > Howard I would have to start looking. But I sense from your response, Howard, that you are confident I won't find what I'm looking for (knowing how meticulous you are, and rightly so, about sources)!. So perhaps I should save myself the trouble, and just ask you what your understanding is, from your studies, as to the khandas and parinibbana? Thanks. I will do some research anyway, because I am interested to see what it turns up. Jon 9145 From: Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/6/01 8:57:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had to say on the > > subject, > > > ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana? > > > > > > Jon > > > > > ================================== > > With regard to "And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had > > to > > say on the subject, ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana?", I would > > be > > very interested in some references to where the Buddha said that. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > I would have to start looking. But I sense from your response, Howard, > that you are confident I won't find what I'm looking for (knowing how > meticulous you are, and rightly so, about sources)!. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: First of all, I'm really not at all meticulous in this. I am the quintessential non-expert! While I would not be surprised to find that a characterization of parinibbana as a final and complete ending of the khandas in every sense does not occur except in the commentaries, I would hope that some discussion of parinibbana can be found in the suttas. I would *like* to read what the Buddha directly said about it in order to better understand his meaning on that subject. I honestly do not know. As I understand it, for an arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" in the sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any longer to be observed. Whether or not, or how, this might change with the death of an arahant I just don't know. I see it as certainly possible that if no association is maintained at that point with any realm of experience, then the death of an arahant does, indeed, result in a radical change; but it would be a change that the arahant would be indifferent to in any case, inasmuch as once full liberation is attained, there is no longer any sense of self or independent dhammas anyway,and there no longer is any grasping at anything, including being and nonbeing. I can *imagine*, however, an arahant *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some realm or realms of experience. --------------------------------------------------------------- So perhaps I should> > save myself the trouble, and just ask you what your understanding is, from > your studies, as to the khandas and parinibbana? > > Thanks. I will do some research anyway, because I am interested to see > what it turns up. > > 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) 9146 From: Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 6:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas-(Jon) Hi Jon and everyone, Sorry this mail is not a Pali friendly one. The vithi of manodvara is mentioned in Abhidhammattha-sangaha, in the forth paricheta. Kom just mailed me a Thai version by Aj.Somporn. I checked out online from the main campus library at my univ., there is an English version by Narada Mahathera, Buddhist Publication Society, 1968. I do not know much about history and background of Abhidhammattha-sangaha, beside it's a commentary written about 1500 yrs ago by Ven.Anuruddha. The book has already mentioned some controversies during that time. From my understanding, we can track back the original writing in abhidhamma-pitaka from this book. If someone can tell me more about this commentary and it's origin and background, I would be appreciated. Jon, this is brief summary from the book. I do not even want to say I am parroting, b/c the parrot still has a brain. In Thai we have an idiom, the serving spoon never tastes the flavor of a curry. I, feel like I am a spoon, cannot absorb a flavor from this book. It's pretty complicated. Manodvara-vithi which continues the object (aramana) from 5-sense-door process (panca-dvara-vithi) 1.Atitak-kahana-vithi (atita = past, kahana = grasping or forming) 2.Smuhak-kahana-vithi (smuha = group, mass) 3.Atthak-kahana-vithi (attha = meaning) 4.Namak-kahana-vithi (nama = name) In Eye-door-process, after eye-door-process, (1)Atitak-kahana-vithi occurs alternatively and repeatedly with eye-door-process for numerous times. Then follows by (2)Smuhak-kahana-vithi. It's function is to gather colors together, again occurs repeatedly many times. Then follows by (3)Attak-kahana-vithi, knows the meaning of what has just been seen and finally (4)Namak-kahana-vithi functions as recognition of the name of the objects. (3) & (4) also occur repeatedly many times. To sum. up (1) and (2) have paramattha as aramana, (3) & (4) have pannatti as aramana. There is also another type of manodvara-vithi which does not occur after sense-door-process as well. Well, that's my own rough translation from Thai and my poor Pali. Please check with other sources. Num 9147 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 5:13pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abidhamma books Hi Sarah, Thanks for the explanation and could you kindly provide the English name for the first book of Abidhamma and its commentary. Udana commentary accompanies which book of Abidhamma. I think a list of the seven books and its English translated titles and their commentaries will be very helpful. Visuddhimagga, is the English title known as Path of Liberation or Path of Purity. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9148 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 10:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha (was, Concepts) Robert Ep On the subject of dukkha (‘suffering’), you commented in a post to Herman-- ------------------------------------------ I would not say that the state in which one is happy but ignorant is necessarily a state of suffering in itself. I would say it leads to a future state of suffering. I also think it is possible to be suffering but not be fully aware of it, or to interpret it as non-suffering in order to justify one's attachment, as in heroin addiction. ------------------------------------------ and to Kenneth— ------------------------------------------ Since suffering is a 'state', ie, an 'experience', it is only real to the extent it is experienced as real. It is a subjective sort of category. … In terms of being permanent or being an object of some kind, you could say it is not 'real'. But in terms of being something that takes place in consciousness, I would say it is 'real' at the time it arises, and non-existent at the time it is not being experienced. ------------------------------------------ This subject of dukkha is a vast and detailed one, and it will not surprise you to know that, as used in the texts, its meaning has only a limited correlation with the term ‘suffering’ in its conventional meaning (!). Rather than confuse you with my own limited knowledge on the subject, however, I have pasted below copies of the entries from ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ on ‘Dukkha’ and ‘Dukkhataa’. I hope you find these informative and interesting. Jon From Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ at http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_d.htm ‘DUKKHA’ (1) 'pain', painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental (s. vedaná). (2) 'Suffering', 'ill'. As the first of the Four Noble Truths and the second of the three characteristics of existence, the term dukkha is not limited to painful experience as under (1), but refers to the unsatisfactory nature and the general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena which, on account of their impermanence, are all liable to suffering, and this includes also pleasurable experience. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to suffering' would be more adequate renderings, if not for stylistic reasons. Hence the first truth does not deny the existence of pleasurable experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. This is illustrated by the following texts: "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" -- (A. 111, 101). "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found in the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there were no escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" -- (A. 111, 102). ‘DUKKHATA’ (abstr. noun fr. dukkha): 'the state of suffering', painfulness, unpleasantness, the unsatisfactoriness of existence. "There are three kinds of suffering: (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatá), (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhára-dukkhatá), (3) the suffering in change (viparináma-dukkhatá)" -- (S. XLV, 165; D. 33). (1) is the bodily or mental feeling of pain as actual]y felt. (2) refers to the oppressive nature of all formations of existence (i.e. all conditioned phenomena), due to their continual arising and passing away; this includes also experiences associated with neutral feeling. (3) refers to bodily and mental pleasant feelings, "because they are the cause for the arising of pain when they change" -- (Vis.M. XIV, 34f). 9149 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 10:53pm Subject: A tentative question Dear Sarah, and All, Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help of the members of DSG. I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance of 'real' practice. I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a great joiner or in need of ritual. But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study of Realities. " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we create a system of categories we freeze the process of living experience and create a solid something in which our experience must now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use it, and not be used by it." Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the quote? Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. metta, Christine 9150 From: Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassanã Dear Mike, I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on the 12th Oct, because I've just come across other translations. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah and Howard, > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta Howard was > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta at > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > translation is at > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up with any > commentarial material on this sutta. Intuitively I > can see how it might support Howard's argument (much > to my chagrin). Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't had this particular sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a `pure' mind, blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this is not a correct paraphrase of your words.) The reason I couldn't find another translation at the time was because as I now see, it is given the reference of 3-103 above, but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, it is given the pali reference of 3-100. Furthermore, Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the Pali and English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to Nimitta Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The Refinement of the Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as `Gold-refiner'. No wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To confuse matters further, while the BB and PTS translations run in parallel and follow the same order (presumably following the Pali order), Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is completely reorganised and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, I don't know and really can't comment further. I don't thin the other translations are on line as yet. Following BB's translation for now,the sutta discusses the different impurities in the gold. First the gross impurities have to be removed and so on down to the minute impurities. Eventually the flaws are finally removed and `whatever ornament the goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold can now be used for that purpose'. In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training in the higher mind' abandons first the gross impurities such as `bad conduct of body, speech and mind', then those of a moderate degree, `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, and violent thoughts'. After this, `there are still some subtle impurities that cling to him, namely, thoughts about his relatives, his home country and his reputation' and so on and so on with regard to very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana levels. It goes on to discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) including the 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the taints).after mastery of the 4th jhana. I think this sutta relates to the discussion there's been on dsg about developing more understanding of more subtle defilements. As some people have mentioned, what was taken as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome with the development of more understanding. Instead of being cause for sorrow, this should be cause for joy. I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure mind that has been defiled. I just read an analogy to the different layers of defilements which need to be understood and eradicated, step by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand any suggestion of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. The natural way understanding develops is to know the grosser, more obvious defilements before the very subtle degrees. Again it is descriptive rather than prescriptive. With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the start of T's translation, this part is not included at all in BB's translation and comes at the end of the PTS one. From this translation I understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' on the gold in the crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it with water and examine it closely. `In the same way are these 3 characteristics to be attended to from time to time by a monk who is devoted to developing the higher consciousness..his mind becomes pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but perfectly poised for the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever branch of special knowledge he may direct his mind for the realization thereof, he attains the power personally to realize such, whatever be his range.' (reference to abhi~n~ns, I understand)> Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as there aren't any commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi writes a full AN (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes like the ones he's done for MN and SN at least. Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for your trip to Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good flights with plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure everyone hear will be very interested to hear any comments you care to share about your impressions and discussions after you meet Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. Best wishes, Sarah 9151 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 11:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Dear Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > My main question on the following, Sarah, is whether it is based > directly on the suttas involved or on commentaries about those suttas. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: The notes I wrote were based on the commentary to the Udana Sutta being discussed. The reason I quoted the Commentary in the first place was because some of us interpreted the Sutta itself in different ways. > > 1. Nibbana was spoken of as a ‘base’, as object condition for the ‘ > > knowledges > > associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on’, just as visible > > objects are the object conditions for eye-consciousness. > > > > 2. Nibbana is discussed as the ‘unconditioned element’ in contrast to > all > > other > > conditioned elements. > > > > 3. Paths and their fruitions (magga and phala cittas) are conditioned > > elements > > which take nibbana, the unconditioned element as object. > > > > 4. Nibbana has ‘its own nature’ which is ‘antithetical to all > formations > > (sankhara). and there is nothing conditioned to be found within it. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Certainly, when 'nibbana' refers to the state free of the three > poisons, there is nothing conditioned to be found. > --------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I understand from the quotes and other readings, that nibbana refers to the unconditioned element free of all conditioned elements, i.e the 5 khandhas. At the 4th stage of enlightenment (that of the arahat), the lokuttara cittas (supramundane consciousness) eradicates all 3 ‘poisons’ completely. > > 5. When describing the nature of nibbana, it is made clear that it does not > > contain the 4 great elements, derived materiality (rupas), the conditioned > > namas (and not even those experienced in the arupa planes which are not > > dependent on rupas). > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Understood, and not questioned. We talk here of the "realm" of no > separate conditions at all. --------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: ;-)) ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> There is of course no ‘who’ but merely> > > moments of consciousness falling away in fast succession as always. > > > > Following these cittas there are bhavanga cittas (as usual) and then mind > > door > > process cittas which review the enlightenment, the magga and phala cittas > > and > > the defilements which have been eradicated (and those still remaining if > > arahatship has not been ‘attained’ yet). Nibbana is also reviewed. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Surely as a memory, a conditioned, limited "summing up" (by the > conventional mind) of a glimpse of the undefiled state . > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Howard, I’m not really sure about this. As I recall (from my studies, and NOT direct experience;-)), the cittas which review the enlightenment and nibbana follow in the process(es) immediately following the process containing the lokuttara cittas (apart from bhavanga cittas) and therefore I would guess that it is the reality (rather than a concept) which is known, but then of course these are not lokuttara cittas themselves....Hopefully, Nina or someone else may add comments. I think you may find it interesting to read Nina’s translation w/footnotes of‘Survey of Paramatha Dhammas’, The Stages of Vipassana: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ I’m pretty sure most these details can be found there. --------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which > > the > > > Buddha was without wisdom? > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Sarah; > > Yes. For example whenever vipaka cittas (such as seeing, hearing and so on > > arise). These are never accompanied by wisdom or awareness. Only the 7 > > universal cetasikas arise with all cittas. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, this I find very interesting. So we have Abhidhamma seeming to > imply that there were times at which the Buddha was without wisdom. I think > this is likely to come as a surprise to *many* Buddhists, including many > Theravadins! > ------------------------------------------------------------- I’m sure it may (come as a surprise), because *many* Buddhists, including many Theravadins are not really very interested in the fine details. For example, not many people study the difference between kamma and its result and yet this is of great significance in our daily life and practice, I think. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: > Thanks much for writing, Sarah. It's always a pleasure! > .................................... Sarah: Likewise, Howard. Actually, to be honest, I often let other mails jump the queue because it’s usually pretty challenging finding the ‘right’ words to you, but I see you’ve given me a relatively easy time today;-) Best wishes, Sarah p.s sorry about some of the strange characters which seem to be appearing in my posts - I'm not sure why this is so. 9152 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 0:34am Subject: Nibbana And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had to say on the > subject, > > ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana? > > > > Jon > > > ================================== > With regard to "And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had > to > say on the subject, ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana?", I would > be > very interested in some references to where the Buddha said that. > > With metta, > Howard ++++++++++++++++++ Dear Howard and Jon, From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and thus have I heard: there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element with the groups of existence still remainin (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining. And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining. endquote robert 9153 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Dear Christine, --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, and All, > > Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it > has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not > feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have > been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help > of the members of DSG. It’s always good to hear your kind comments, Christine, but I wonder what you mean by not feeling ‘up to speed’. I sincerely hope dsg doesn’t look like a speed contest (though I must say I find it hard to keep up with Rob Ep and Ken O ;-) Please don’t ever feel rushed, anyway. > I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more > interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have > confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see > studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance > of 'real' practice. Yes, I understand and I think there is a trap of ‘irrelevant intellectualising’....Actually to give a ‘blunt opinion’ (and thanks for the confidence), I think there is a ‘meditator trap’ which has the idea that one should just do ‘real’ practice and any talk or discussion or study (ESPECIALLY abhidhamma study) is irrelevant. I also think there is a real ‘Abhidhamma trap’ where someone has the idea that the amount of detail collected and retained is an indication of progress or practice in itself. As I’ve mentioned, my first Buddhist teacher was Munindra, who had spent considerable time with Mahasi Sayadaw and the Mahasi technique was the ‘practice’ which I followed very intently and intensely in India and Sri lanka. Fortunately, Munindra himself also encouraged me to study and question the Teachings. He was one of the kindest people I’ve ever met and i still have the greatest respect and fond memories of him. Still, the meditation was considered the practice, rather than the study and subsequently I met many meditators who had hardly read a sutta, let alone discuss it. Since then, I’ve also met many in the ‘abhidhamma trap’ who think it is essential to study every detail and this is often not reflected or related to daily life or realities at this moment. In other words, the practice lags well behind the theory, .which on its own can be similar to studying any other intellectual subject. Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead me into one trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. > I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and > practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give > support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. > In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and > others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other > places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities > who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a > great joiner or in need of ritual. I understand. I think my comment so far would be that we don’t have to follow a rule or someone else’s regime. In other words, if you wish to have ritual, fine. If you wish to sit and meditate, fine. If you wish to study in detail, fine. I think the point some of us have been making here is that we all have different interests and inclinations. In the end it’s not the yoga or tai chi I do that counts, or the music Nina plays or the breathing exercises that Rob Ep is interested in. In the end it is the state of mind, now, whether we’re studying abhidhamma, concentrating on breath or beating drums that counts. We can make a structure in our day such as Ihr abhidhamma study, 1hr drum beating or whatever. There’s nothing wrong with this kind of structure and most poeple would say that I’m about as ‘structured’ or organised as it gets. I’m also very aware of how much attachment there is to these structures I have. Whenever my little structure gets ‘messed up’, I feel sorry ;-) So again, while following our inclinations or structures, if there is some understanding and awareness of the attachments, expectations, aversions, along with many other realities, this is more precious than the structure or framework, which after all is only a concept anyway. > But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this > warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study > of Realities. > > " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there > are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into > which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we > remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid > becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the > categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we > create a system of categories we freeze the process of living > experience and create a solid something in which our experience must > now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: > those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and > which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences > which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the > act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and > useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become > stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our > experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of > freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when > we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system > we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence > we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use > it, and not be used by it." > > Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is > intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the > quote? Christine, I might not use the same words, but actually I think there is a very good message here. If we take meditate as bhavana (mental development) and understand that the Buddha’s Teachings are not about intellectual exercies and categories and prisons, but about direct understanding or ‘meditation’ at this moment, then I fully agree with the comments. Being aware and understanding directly is the “Middle Way’ indeed. Having said this, if we do not hear, consider and study carefully what objects can be known and study their characteristics in theory and practice, then this ‘meditation’ cannot develop. For example, when some people reflect on compassion, they are overwhelmed with sorrow and think this is a good indication of the development of compassion. If we never read or consider the details of karuna (compassion) we won’t realise that it is in fact dosa (aversion) that is being accumulated and not compassion at all, which of course is never sad. The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the heart of your ‘quandry’, is that really there is no self at all to determine at what time and on what occasions there will be ‘practice’. If there is an attempt to be aware of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging to self to be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. As you’ve rightly mentioned before, it’s not easy at all to give up an idea of self and control. When I was a serious meditator, I was encouraged by teachers and myown wrong views to think I was attaining high levels of insight and indeed I seemed to float around in a permanently calm state. I might still have been floating on Cloud Nine if it weren’t for the help of K.Sujin and Nina who helped me see that there wasn’t even any awareness of seeing and visible object or the difference between them. My practice which I clung to so dearly wasn’t even at Ground Level because it was all undertaken with the idea of self and control. > Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this > area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am > not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the > time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. Christine, I’m not sure I have any idea of a ‘correct way to practice’. I don’t have any idea that studying abhidhamma texts is a time or way to practice anymore than teaching my students. What I am sure about, however, is that the time has to be now, there are realities now, and that it is sati and panna which have to do the work, not ‘I’. I’m also sure that for sati and panna to do their work, the conditions that the Buddha stressed so often are essential, i.e. meeting the ‘right people’, hearing the ‘right thing’, considering and applying. I’m not sure if any of this helps. I really appreciate these questions and comments of yours and am honoured that you addressed them here to me. You seem to have very keen interest and are considering a lot very carefully. There is bound to be plenty of thinking and wondering and doubt in between. However, these are also realities which can be known when they arise. Sometimes it even helps to smile or laugh at these tendencies;-) We’d all like to be told ‘what to do’ or to be given a short-cut. If it were so simple, wouldn’t we all be enlightened by now? I hope to hear back from you and follow this discussion further. I also hope this doesn’t sound like I think I have all the answers which is a long way from the truth. Thanks very much for sharing and I think you'll find that many others are interested in this same question. Sarah 9154 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] By request of Sarah :) Hi Jesse, --- jesse- wrote: > Sarah was kind enough to welcome me to the group and ask a few questions > about me, and I have shared with the level of apprehension I have of the > dharma. I have very little formal instruction in buddhism, in the way of > reading the texts of the tipitaka. Yes, actually I hadn't realised we were writing off-list! I think others would like to hear that you are a young male from Sacramento, US (not quite our youngest member though). The youngest are often the smartest here;-) (Now I'm missing Anders, a young Danish member). >My real learning comes from some > readings and more so their applications in life. I find that these > teachings are like a jewel, and thus the texts that cause one to bring out > these observations are like a diamond in the rough. > She has requested that I share with you a little something I wrote, so here > you are, verbatim. Thanks for this, Jesse. > In this message I am talking about a statement I made > prior about how the quote I have in my signature is very beautiful and has > "many meanings and no meanings" all at once: > > Sarah, > Actually, I sent this thread to you personally. I didn't know if I > should talk about IRC with everyone. :) I'm very glad, as I said that IRC led you here... > What I mean by 'many meanings and no meanings' is this: Consider a man > who is walking, but has no destination. A person who is in motion, but not > going anywhere, equivalent to standing still. Because he is not going > anywhere, but still moving, he can be at all places. He is untangled by so > many things; he is just walking. Just walking. This is the meaning of > 'many meanings and no meanings'. That the quote, and really the dharma, > which is what the Buddha is all about, is like this person walking. When > you understand it, it has innumerable applications; you can find it in > every possible situation. But when you understand it even further, you > discover that it is the only thing which actually has any meaning. > Therefore to say that it has meaning or does not have meaning is useless; > there is nothing else that has meaning. > I'm not very good with words, but this is my understanding of the dharma, > and these are the thoughts which bring beauty out of the dharma, for me. > Hope that was helpful. :) I'm sure you understand in what ways the > Buddha's teachings are beautiful, and how it's difficult to share that > beauty with other people using just words. The good thing with this study > group is that so many people bring their viewpoints together, that together > their posts form a somewhat comprehensive view of buddhism. Well, I appreciate your explanations and I think you have an excellent signature quote. I agree it's useful to consider different viewpoints and hope you find some which are of interest to you too, Jesse. We look forward to your comments and interpretations anytime. > "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out > your own salvation." This will be my 'mantra' or reflection for the evening, thanks. Sarah 9155 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:52am Subject: Music Dear Sarah and Nina et al, I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and I am so happy!!!!!!!! I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. Sorry, just a bit excited :-) Herman 9156 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 5:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Music Hi Herman, --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah and Nina et al, > > I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and > I am so happy!!!!!!!! I know Nina will be glad to read this and she'll be happy to add any details I'm sure. When I used to stay with her, she and her husband would play Bach (I think) on the piano and flute and they've always been real music lovers. She also used to go jogging in the park and cook a lot. I just mention these odd daily life details because so often people have the idea that being serious about the dhamma means foregoing all these pleasures and interests. However, unless one is a monk and following the monk's vinaya, one should live naturally and easily I think. Some time back on the list, Rob K was talking about karaoke and going to movies and how there can be awareness at any time. This led to a long discussion. When I mentioned our hiking trip in Switzerland in the summer, one friend from the list mentioned he was encouraged by it to start hiking again after a long break. I'm glad when I hear this or about your interest and joy in music, because it shows there isn't the kind of 'forcing' or 'suppressing' which can follow so easily with the idea of 'control'. The dhamma and abhidhamma should make our lives easier, not harder;-) A friend living in Bangkok recently was surprised when I told him that when I used to stay with K.Sujin (also a long time back), that she'd spend much of the day shopping with her father, reading newspapers, watching TV, playing scrabble, going out to lunch or helping with the food preparations. In between, she'd look up references in texts and prepare for her dhamma lectures, often interrupted by telephone calls. She's always stressed to me that the study and practice should be very natural without any rules at all. Again it is the understanding rather than the 'appearance' or 'activities' that counts. > I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going > to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are > one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the > meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). > Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being > played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. > > Sorry, just a bit excited :-) Well, I'm not a musician so I won't comment further, but hopefully Nina may when she's back into her routine. For sure there are realities while listening to or playing Bach and no reason at all why there can't be wise attention and awareness at these times. I'm excited that you appreciate this Herman :-) I'm also glad I've written something you like or gets your attention....when I was quoting the Atthasalini (The Expositor) to Ken O, I was very aware of pushing the limits in terms of your patience;-) Only one question: how do you fit work, bride, all those boys, dsg and Bach into your day??? "Play On.." Sarah 9157 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi All, I remember when I asked Sarah that do we need the organ of eye to see, she say yes. The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could be temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we could be seeing again. Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not be seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa and moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there for it to arise as what I always suspect. I believe the characteristics of such sense conscoiuness of one citta is pass to the next time cittas, just like the three poison which we accumulates. It will not cease even when cittas ceased. If these characteristics or function cease with each citta, then it will be impossible to accumulate, panna or cetana or sanna, because each citta will be bring us back to ground zero in accumulations. To me this there is a sense a constant passing of accumulations between cittas. It sounds like a some kind of "self" in these passing of accumulations which will not cease even if cittas cease. For your kind comments please Ken O 9158 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 2:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard and Jon, > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > thus have I heard: > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > with the groups of existence still remainin > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > groups of existence still remaining. > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > remaining. endquote > robert > > ============================= Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: "In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a minor point that it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished feelings instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. However, there is another point that may not be so minor, especially when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the following in talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining." What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only the remaining of the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of what is pleasant and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through them. This pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain experienced via the five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings extinguished at the death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental function ceasing upon the death of the arahant. 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) 9159 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 2:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 11/7/01 10:08:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could be > temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we could > be seeing again. Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not be > seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa and > moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there for it > to arise as what I always suspect. > ============================= When an automobile which has been moving brakes to a stop, the motion has ceased. The fact that the car can move again later on doesn't alter that fact. 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) 9160 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:52am Subject: Nibbana > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , > and > > thus have I heard: > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana > element > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, > as > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, > hatred > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with > the > > groups of existence still remaining. > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no > longer > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of > existence > > remaining. endquote > > robert > > > > > ============================= > Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: > "In > that case > a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished > , will > even > here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the > Nibbana- > element > with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a > minor > point that > it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished > > feelings > instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. > However, there is another point that may not be so > minor, > especially > when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the > following in > talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element > with > groups of > existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is > an > arahant; he > is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) > the five > sense > organs that have not yet disappeared and through > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > well > as bodily > ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in > him, > this is > called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still > remaining." > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only > the > remaining of > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of > what is > pleasant > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through > them. This > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain > experienced > via the > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings > extinguished > at the > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental > function > ceasing > upon the death of the arahant. > > With metta, > Howard >+++++++++++++++ Dear Howard, Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the pali-English dictionary. The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness (s. ariya-puggala). (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in other words, the coming to rest, or rather the 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: Nibbána).endquote _____ P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote I'll try and get an exact translation. robert 9161 From: m. nease Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 10:19am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassanã Hi Sarah, Just quickly, I noticed the same peculiarities you mentioned below. Also I think I'm beginning to see a bias in Ven. Thanissaro's translations (toward breath-centrism) if I'm thinking of the right guy--of course I'm no authority, but very good to compare translations. BB's are among the best I think (most rigorous). Yes, off to BKK tomorrow. I'll post from there when possible. Cheers, mn --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > > Dear Mike, > > I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on the > 12th Oct, > because I've just come across other translations. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Howard, > > > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta Howard > was > > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta at > > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > > translation is at > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up with > any > > commentarial material on this sutta. Intuitively > I > > can see how it might support Howard's argument > (much > > to my chagrin). > > Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't had > this particular > sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a `pure' > mind, > blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this is > not a correct > paraphrase of your words.) > > The reason I couldn't find another translation at > the time was > because as I now see, it is given the reference of > 3-103 above, > but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu > Bodhi's > translation, it is given the pali reference of > 3-100. Furthermore, > Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the > Pali and > English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to > Nimitta > Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The > Refinement of the > Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as > `Gold-refiner'. No > wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To > confuse matters > further, while the BB and PTS translations run in > parallel and > follow the same order (presumably following the Pali > order), > Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is > completely reorganised > and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, I > don't know and > really can't comment further. I don't thin the > other translations > are on line as yet. > > Following BB's translation for now,the sutta > discusses the > different impurities in the gold. First the gross > impurities have to > be removed and so on down to the minute impurities. > Eventually > the flaws are finally removed and `whatever ornament > the > goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold can > now be used > for that purpose'. > > In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training in > the higher > mind' abandons first the gross impurities such as > `bad conduct > of body, speech and mind', then those of a moderate > degree, > `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, and > violent > thoughts'. After this, `there are still some subtle > impurities that > cling to him, namely, thoughts about his relatives, > his home > country and his reputation' and so on and so on with > regard to > very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana levels. > It goes on to > discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) > including the > 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the > taints).after > mastery of the 4th jhana. > > I think this sutta relates to the discussion there's > been on dsg > about developing more understanding of more subtle > defilements. As some people have mentioned, what was > taken > as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome with > the > development of more understanding. Instead of being > cause for > sorrow, this should be cause for joy. > > I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure > mind that has > been defiled. I just read an analogy to the > different layers of > defilements which need to be understood and > eradicated, step > by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand any > suggestion > of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. The > natural way > understanding develops is to know the grosser, more > obvious > defilements before the very subtle degrees. Again it > is > descriptive rather than prescriptive. > > With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the start > of T's > translation, this part is not included at all in > BB's translation and > comes at the end of the PTS one. From this > translation I > understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' on > the gold in the > crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it with > water and examine > it closely. `In the same way are these 3 > characteristics to be > attended to from time to time by a monk who is > devoted to > developing the higher consciousness..his mind > becomes > pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but > perfectly poised for > the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever > branch of > special knowledge he may direct his mind for the > realization > thereof, he attains the power personally to realize > such, whatever > be his range.' (reference to abhi~n~ns, > I > understand)> > > Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as there > aren't any > commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi > writes a full AN > (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes like > the ones he's > done for MN and SN at least. > > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for > your trip to > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good > flights with > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure > everyone > hear will be very interested to hear any comments > you care to > share about your impressions and discussions after > you meet > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. > > Best wishes, > > Sarah 9162 From: manji Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:18am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Christine, Esoteric schools of Buddhism and I am mentioning Mikkyou Schools of Ch'an/Zen in Japan, there is a formula... Thought > Word > Deed. First making thought, making words, then making deeds. This is all right now dhamma. All the words and concepts... The moon reflected in water. Making "looking at moon". Making "looking at water". Making "looking at sound". So that moon in water gives an impression of a reality. Then finally maybe looking at moon, there is recognition of moon. There is recognition of water, there is recognition of sound. This is right now dhamma. Different marks. Different attributes. Sanna recognizes and marks. So the dhamma are marked. It is these marks that are categorized in sutras and abhidhamma. Recogntion of the cetasika as nama. Recognition of doubt, recognition of energy, recognition of sound impinging, recognition of mind-averting-consciousness. So many nama, so many rupa. Sati, mindfulness, is also rising and falling. So this concept learning first is making reflection of dhamma. Then reality recognition. "oh yes, it really is as the holy one has set forth, as if what has been turn upside down has been righted"... many times we are seeing this in sutras. :) No doubt that the dhamma can be experienced right now without abhidhamma, without sutras... that is the only way... because the marks do not change. Even in different languages... Abhidhamma literature and sutras; helping consolidate conventional understanding, conditioning sati, conditioning panna, conditioning the kusala cetasika. The Sutras, Abhidhamma, the Vinaya... The teachings? Spinning the wheel, setting the dhamma wheel into motion. This is right now dhamma, right now spinning, right now turning, the wheel of dhamma. As the spokes of the wheel, rising and falling, so too with nama, so too with rupa. Seeing with attachment, Seeing with aversion, Seeing with ignorance and delusion. Sensing in the mind door with attachment, Sensing in the mind door with aversion, Sensing in the mind door with ignorance and delusion. Right now dhamma... -manji- -----Original Message----- From: Christine Forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 1:53 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Dear Sarah, and All, Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help of the members of DSG. I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance of 'real' practice. I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a great joiner or in need of ritual. But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study of Realities. " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we create a system of categories we freeze the process of living experience and create a solid something in which our experience must now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use it, and not be used by it." Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the quote? Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. metta, Christine 9163 From: manji Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:33am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Ahh, after writing, a koan came to mind... maybe this is helping: >From The Gateless Gate. =============== Everyday Life is the Path Joshu asked Nansen: `What is the path?' Nansen said: `Everyday life is the path.' Joshu asked: `Can it be studied?' Nansen said: `If you try to study, you will be far away from it.' Joshu asked: `If I do not study, how can I know it is the path?' Nansen said: `The path does not belong to the perception world, neither does it belong to the nonperception world. Cognition is a delusion and noncognition is senseless. If you want to reach the true path beyond doubt, place yourself in the same freedom as sky. You name it neither good nor not-good.' At these words Joshu was enlightened. Mumon's Comment: Nansen could met Joshu's frozen doubts at once when Joshu asked his questions. I doubt that if Joshu reached the point that Nansen did. He needed thirty more years of study. In spring, hundreds of flowers; in autumn, a harvest moon; In the summer, a refreshing breeze; in winter snow will accompany your. If useless things do not hang in your mind, Any season is a good season for you. ================== -manji- -----Original Message----- From: manji [mailto:manji@s...] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:18 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Christine, Esoteric schools of Buddhism and I am mentioning Mikkyou Schools of Ch'an/Zen in Japan, there is a formula... Thought > Word > Deed. First making thought, making words, then making deeds. This is all right now dhamma. All the words and concepts... The moon reflected in water. Making "looking at moon". Making "looking at water". Making "looking at sound". So that moon in water gives an impression of a reality. Then finally maybe looking at moon, there is recognition of moon. There is recognition of water, there is recognition of sound. This is right now dhamma. Different marks. Different attributes. Sanna recognizes and marks. So the dhamma are marked. It is these marks that are categorized in sutras and abhidhamma. Recogntion of the cetasika as nama. Recognition of doubt, recognition of energy, recognition of sound impinging, recognition of mind-averting-consciousness. So many nama, so many rupa. Sati, mindfulness, is also rising and falling. So this concept learning first is making reflection of dhamma. Then reality recognition. "oh yes, it really is as the holy one has set forth, as if what has been turn upside down has been righted"... many times we are seeing this in sutras. :) No doubt that the dhamma can be experienced right now without abhidhamma, without sutras... that is the only way... because the marks do not change. Even in different languages... Abhidhamma literature and sutras; helping consolidate conventional understanding, conditioning sati, conditioning panna, conditioning the kusala cetasika. The Sutras, Abhidhamma, the Vinaya... The teachings? Spinning the wheel, setting the dhamma wheel into motion. This is right now dhamma, right now spinning, right now turning, the wheel of dhamma. As the spokes of the wheel, rising and falling, so too with nama, so too with rupa. Seeing with attachment, Seeing with aversion, Seeing with ignorance and delusion. Sensing in the mind door with attachment, Sensing in the mind door with aversion, Sensing in the mind door with ignorance and delusion. Right now dhamma... -manji- -----Original Message----- From: Christine Forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 1:53 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Dear Sarah, and All, Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help of the members of DSG. I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance of 'real' practice. I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a great joiner or in need of ritual. But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study of Realities. " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we create a system of categories we freeze the process of living experience and create a solid something in which our experience must now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use it, and not be used by it." Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the quote? Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. metta, Christine 9164 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 3:01pm Subject: Re: Music Dear Sarah, I love your ability to express yourself so clearly, gently and profoundly at the same time. I guess I still express myself harshly at times, but I think the bulldozer is shrinking :-) Please accept that there is no malice in anything I write, sometimes I can't resist what seems to be a nice turn of phrase. It is good that anyone can discuss whatever Theradava related topic they want, and that anyone can feel free to join in or not. With regards to all the activities that fill the day, I am reading some stuff re lucid dreaming / awareness during sleep (it seems such a waste to be "out of it" for eight hours every day). Are there any Theradava sources re sleeping with awareness? All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Herman, > > I'm also glad I've written something you like or gets your attention....when I > was quoting the Atthasalini (The Expositor) to Ken O, I was very aware of > pushing the limits in terms of your patience;-) > > Only one question: how do you fit work, bride, all those boys, dsg and Bach > into your day??? "Play On.." > > Sarah > 9165 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Robert - What you say at the end certainly shows how Ven. Nyantiloka thought about the matter. But it doesn't really address my question about what the sutta, itself, says. Why is the point I make about it incorrect? With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/7/01 10:54:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , > > and > > > thus have I heard: > > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana > > element > > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, > > as > > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, > > hatred > > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with > > the > > > groups of existence still remaining. > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no > > longer > > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of > > existence > > > remaining. endquote > > > robert > > > > > > > > ============================= > > Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: > > "In > > that case > > a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished > > , will > > even > > here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the > > Nibbana- > > element > > with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a > > minor > > point that > > it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished > > > > feelings > > instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. > > However, there is another point that may not be so > > minor, > > especially > > when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the > > following in > > talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element > > with > > groups of > > existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is > > an > > arahant; he > > is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) > > the five > > sense > > organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > well > > as bodily > > ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in > > him, > > this is > > called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still > > remaining." > > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only > > the > > remaining of > > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of > > what is > > pleasant > > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through > > them. This > > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain > > experienced > > via the > > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings > > extinguished > > at the > > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental > > function > > ceasing > > upon the death of the arahant. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > >+++++++++++++++ > > Dear Howard, > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > pali-English dictionary. > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > (s. ariya-puggala). > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > Nibbána).endquote > _____ > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > I'll try and get an exact translation. > robert > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 9166 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:05pm Subject: Re: Nibbana Dear Robert, The following is the definition of parinibbana from the same source. parinibbána: 'full Nibbána', is a synonym for Nibbána; this term, therefore, does not refer exclusively to the extinction of the 5 groups of existence at the death of the Holy One, though often applied to it. Cf. nibbána. This seems to contradict some of the previous discussions (not yours) All the best Herman > > Dear Howard, > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > pali-English dictionary. > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > (s. ariya-puggala). > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > Nibbána).endquote > _____ > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > I'll try and get an exact translation. > robert > > > 9167 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Howard, But the problem is the engine starts again when conditions permit. I was wondering the other day abt supramundane citta. Since the Abidhamma has such difference, where can't there be Nibbana citta or unconditional citta in Nibbana. My basis is that there is a sense of continuity in accumulations of panna amidst the instanteous rise and cease of cittas. These accumulation has help to add supramundane cittas. So I was thinking, why can't this panna accumulation change this supramundane cittas to Nibbana citta. Its like what Robert Ep says abt transform within. In that sense the cittas totally ceases from its original form of conditioning to unconditioning. It like caterpillar changes to a butterfly. Kind regards Kenneth ong --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Kenneth - > > In a message dated 11/7/01 10:08:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ashkenn@y... writes: > > > > The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could > be > > temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we > could > > be seeing again. Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not > be > > seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa > and > > moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there > for it > > to arise as what I always suspect. > > > ============================= > When an automobile which has been moving brakes to a stop, the > motion > has ceased. The fact that the car can move again later on doesn't alter > that > fact. > > 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) 9168 From: manji Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:47pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana ... Question... Has Nibbana anywhere been described as markless? -manji- 9169 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 8:11pm Subject: Re: Nibbana -- Dear Herman, Yes, that is right. Somtimes parinibbana is divided into two: kilesa parinibbana (cessation of kilesa)and khanda parinibbana (cessation of the khandas) . As a convention, and shorthand way of writing, many authors use parinibbana to refer solely to the latter, whereas nibbana refers most often to the former and to earlier stages on the path. best wishes robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > The following is the definition of parinibbana from the same source. > > parinibbána: 'full Nibbána', is a synonym for Nibbána; this term, > therefore, does not refer exclusively to the extinction of the 5 > groups of existence at the death of the Holy One, though often > applied to it. Cf. nibbána. > > This seems to contradict some of the previous discussions (not yours) > > All the best > > > Herman > > > > > Dear Howard, > > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > > pali-English dictionary. > > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > > (s. ariya-puggala). > > > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > > Nibbána).endquote > > _____ > > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > > I'll try and get an exact translation. > > robert 9170 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: Nibbana --- Dear Howard, I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada correctly here. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > What you say at the end certainly shows how Ven. Nyantiloka thought > about the matter. But it doesn't really address my question about what the > sutta, itself, says. Why is the point I make about it incorrect? > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/7/01 10:54:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , > > > and > > > > thus have I heard: > > > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana > > > element > > > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, > > > as > > > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, > > > hatred > > > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with > > > the > > > > groups of existence still remaining. > > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no > > > longer > > > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of > > > existence > > > > remaining. endquote > > > > robert > > > > > > > > > > > ============================= > > > Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: > > > "In > > > that case > > > a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished > > > , will > > > even > > > here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the > > > Nibbana- > > > element > > > with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a > > > minor > > > point that > > > it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished > > > > > > feelings > > > instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. > > > However, there is another point that may not be so > > > minor, > > > especially > > > when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the > > > following in > > > talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element > > > with > > > groups of > > > existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is > > > an > > > arahant; he > > > is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) > > > the five > > > sense > > > organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > > well > > > as bodily > > > ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in > > > him, > > > this is > > > called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still > > > remaining." > > > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only > > > the > > > remaining of > > > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of > > > what is > > > pleasant > > > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through > > > them. This > > > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain > > > experienced > > > via the > > > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings > > > extinguished > > > at the > > > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental > > > function > > > ceasing > > > upon the death of the arahant. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > >+++++++++++++++ > > > > Dear Howard, > > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > > pali-English dictionary. > > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > > (s. ariya-puggala). > > > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > > Nibbána).endquote > > _____ > > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > > I'll try and get an exact translation. > > robert > > > > > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 9171 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:49pm Subject: Re: Nibbana ... Question... Hi Manji, This is from Nyanatiloka - manual of Budhist terms vimokkha: 'liberation' (deliverance). I. the 3; II. the 8. I. The 3 liberations are: 1. the conditionless (or signless) liberation (animitta-v.), 2. the desireless liberation (apanihita- v.), 3. the emptiness (or void) liberation (suññatá-v. ). They are also called 'the triple gateway to liberation' (vimokkha-mukha; Vis.M. XXI, 66ff), as they are three different approaches to the paths of holiness. - See visuddhi VI, 8. Cf. Vis XXI, 6ff, 121ff; Pts.M. II. Vimokkha-Kathá. Signless, markless is it what you are looking for ? Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Has Nibbana anywhere been described as markless? > > -manji- 9172 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi all, a. When I read that Vedana feels, I am wondering does vedana really feel or it is the citta that cognize the feel. To me Vedana may be just like a filter or a prism that separate light into seven parts, but it does not feel. To me since citta played the role of knowing I tend to believe that citta is the one that know the feel and not cetasikas. Comment please. b. Similiarly, the function of citta, does citta really experience or it is just doing its job and say this is interpret as good and this is interpret as bad. Comment please. c. Third question, kuasala and akuasala are mutually exclusive and only certain beautiful cetasikas follow kusala and vice versa, please kindly quote any commentaries that say that? I am quite curious and perplex why are they mutually exclusive and why certain cetasikas follow certain cittas. Sorry for now these are my questions abt Abidhamma. If I got more time to read them, i asked more again. Much thanks Ken O 9173 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Howard, I was pondering on the part on citta cease. One explanation I have now is that they cease from their present form. It is like us, dying from this form and obtain a new form. This form has cease. But our consciousness is transferred to the next life. Similarily, to me this "physical" aspect of citta cease but the characteristics, its accumulations of our panna, cetana, sana does not cease, they are pass to the new citta. If these accumulations cease with the "physical" cittas, then we are back to ground zero. There is no point in accumulations of panna if it cease. To me citta could not out of nowhere and know where exactly our last accumulations. It got to pass this information of our accumulation to our next arise "physical" citta. Just guessing here:). Kind regards Kenneth Ong > > When an automobile which has been moving brakes to a stop, the > > motion > > has ceased. The fact that the car can move again later on doesn't > alter > > that > > fact. > > > > 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) > 9174 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 1:17am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Mike Have a good trip, or welcome to Bangkok, as the case may be. I hope you settle in well, and find good dhamma (I'm sure you will). I look forward to more of your very pertinent comments on the list from Thailand. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Just quickly, I noticed the same peculiarities you > mentioned below. Also I think I'm beginning to see a > bias in Ven. Thanissaro's translations (toward > breath-centrism) if I'm thinking of the right guy--of > course I'm no authority, but very good to compare > translations. BB's are among the best I think (most > rigorous). > > Yes, off to BKK tomorrow. I'll post from there when > possible. > > Cheers, > > mn > > --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > > > > Dear Mike, > > > > I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on the > > 12th Oct, > > because I've just come across other translations. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > > > wrote: > > > Hi Sarah and Howard, > > > > > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta Howard > > was > > > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta at > > > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > > > translation is at > > > > > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > > > > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up with > > any > > > commentarial material on this sutta. Intuitively > > I > > > can see how it might support Howard's argument > > (much > > > to my chagrin). > > > > Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't had > > this particular > > sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a `pure' > > mind, > > blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this is > > not a correct > > paraphrase of your words.) > > > > The reason I couldn't find another translation at > > the time was > > because as I now see, it is given the reference of > > 3-103 above, > > but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu > > Bodhi's > > translation, it is given the pali reference of > > 3-100. Furthermore, > > Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the > > Pali and > > English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to > > Nimitta > > Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The > > Refinement of the > > Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as > > `Gold-refiner'. No > > wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To > > confuse matters > > further, while the BB and PTS translations run in > > parallel and > > follow the same order (presumably following the Pali > > order), > > Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is > > completely reorganised > > and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, I > > don't know and > > really can't comment further. I don't thin the > > other translations > > are on line as yet. > > > > Following BB's translation for now,the sutta > > discusses the > > different impurities in the gold. First the gross > > impurities have to > > be removed and so on down to the minute impurities. > > Eventually > > the flaws are finally removed and `whatever ornament > > the > > goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold can > > now be used > > for that purpose'. > > > > In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training in > > the higher > > mind' abandons first the gross impurities such as > > `bad conduct > > of body, speech and mind', then those of a moderate > > degree, > > `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, and > > violent > > thoughts'. After this, `there are still some subtle > > impurities that > > cling to him, namely, thoughts about his relatives, > > his home > > country and his reputation' and so on and so on with > > regard to > > very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana levels. > > It goes on to > > discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) > > including the > > 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the > > taints).after > > mastery of the 4th jhana. > > > > I think this sutta relates to the discussion there's > > been on dsg > > about developing more understanding of more subtle > > defilements. As some people have mentioned, what was > > taken > > as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome with > > the > > development of more understanding. Instead of being > > cause for > > sorrow, this should be cause for joy. > > > > I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure > > mind that has > > been defiled. I just read an analogy to the > > different layers of > > defilements which need to be understood and > > eradicated, step > > by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand any > > suggestion > > of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. The > > natural way > > understanding develops is to know the grosser, more > > obvious > > defilements before the very subtle degrees. Again it > > is > > descriptive rather than prescriptive. > > > > With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the start > > of T's > > translation, this part is not included at all in > > BB's translation and > > comes at the end of the PTS one. From this > > translation I > > understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' on > > the gold in the > > crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it with > > water and examine > > it closely. `In the same way are these 3 > > characteristics to be > > attended to from time to time by a monk who is > > devoted to > > developing the higher consciousness..his mind > > becomes > > pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but > > perfectly poised for > > the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever > > branch of > > special knowledge he may direct his mind for the > > realization > > thereof, he attains the power personally to realize > > such, whatever > > be his range.' (reference to abhi~n~ns, > > I > > understand)> > > > > Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as there > > aren't any > > commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi > > writes a full AN > > (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes like > > the ones he's > > done for MN and SN at least. > > > > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for > > your trip to > > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good > > flights with > > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure > > everyone > > hear will be very interested to hear any comments > > you care to > > share about your impressions and discussions after > > you meet > > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Sarah 9175 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 1:33am Subject: Re: Seeing Dear Ken O, In between having a new bride, a Brady bunch, working, dsg-ing playing and listening to Bach and trying to get less sleep, I also wrote a little poem :-) Even as the eye does not see the eye even as the ear does not hear the ear even as the nose does not smell the nose so does the mind not know the mind Probably doesn't help at all :-) All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi all, > > a. When I read that Vedana feels, I am wondering does vedana really feel > or it is the citta that cognize the feel. To me Vedana may be just like a > filter or a prism that separate light into seven parts, but it does not > feel. To me since citta played the role of knowing I tend to believe that > citta is the one that know the feel and not cetasikas. Comment please. > > b. Similiarly, the function of citta, does citta really experience or it > is just doing its job and say this is interpret as good and this is > interpret as bad. Comment please. > > c. Third question, kuasala and akuasala are mutually exclusive and only > certain beautiful cetasikas follow kusala and vice versa, please kindly > quote any commentaries that say that? I am quite curious and perplex why > are they mutually exclusive and why certain cetasikas follow certain > cittas. > > > Sorry for now these are my questions abt Abidhamma. If I got more time to > read them, i asked more again. > > > Much thanks > Ken O > > > 9176 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 4:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Ken O > To Jon > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are conventional > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we > do > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be > mundane and Supramundane. Good issues to raise, Ken. However, we should not equate ‘effort of the mundane path’ with ‘conventional effort’. Conventional effort in and of itself doesn’t lead to anything, since it doesn’t necessarily connote kusala of the level of satipatthana, or kusala of any level for that matter. Effort of the mundane path (ie.‘right effort’ of the mundane level) is actually the mental factor effort that arises with a moment of satipatthana. Likewise, right view of the mundane level is the panna cetasika that arises with a moment of satipatthana. As to the difference between the mundane and the supramundane, the Visuddhimagga notes (XXIII, 2)-- "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the delimitation of mentality-materiality. Then one of the benefits of the supramundane development of understanding is the removal, at the path moment, of the various defilements beginning with the fetters." Jon 9177 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 5:04am Subject: Re: A tentative question Manji, Thank you for your reply about 'right now dhamma. The phrase is a concise reminder to stick on the front of the diary I carry everywhere each day. :) So......discovering 'ultimate Truth' does not come from collecting more data - i.e. reading, studying, discussing....the reflection of the moon. It comes from a clear, awake, dispassionate mind.......... In looking into the story you quoted from the Gateless Gate, I discovered a paragraph from Charlotte Joko Beck that resonated - "Intelligent practice always deals with just one thing: the fear at the base of human existence, the fear that 'I am not'. And of course I am not, but the last thing I want to know is that. I am impermanence itself in a rapidly changing human form that appears solid. I fear to see what I am: an everchanging energy field. I don't want to be that. So good practice is about fear. Fear takes the form of constantly thinking, speculating, analysing, fantasising. With all that activity we create a cloud cover to keep ourselves safe in make-believe practice. True practice is 'not' safe; it's anything but safe. But we don't like that, so we obsess with out feverish efforts to achieve our version of the personal dream. Such obsessing practice is itself just another cloud between ourselves and reality. The only thing that matters is seeing with an impersonal searchlight: seeing things as they are. When the personal barrier drops away, why do we have to call it anything? We just live our lives. And when we die, we just die. No problem anywhere." metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Christine, > > Esoteric schools of Buddhism and I am mentioning Mikkyou Schools of > Ch'an/Zen in Japan, there is a formula... Thought > Word > Deed. > > First making thought, making words, then making deeds. > > This is all right now dhamma. All the words and concepts... The moon > reflected in water. Making "looking at moon". Making "looking at water". > Making "looking at sound". So that moon in water gives an impression of > a reality. > > Then finally maybe looking at moon, there is recognition of moon. There > is recognition of water, there is recognition of sound. > > This is right now dhamma. Different marks. Different attributes. Sanna > recognizes and marks. So the dhamma are marked. > > It is these marks that are categorized in sutras and abhidhamma. > Recogntion of the cetasika as nama. Recognition of doubt, recognition of > energy, recognition of sound impinging, recognition of > mind-averting-consciousness. > > So many nama, so many rupa. Sati, mindfulness, is also rising and > falling. > > So this concept learning first is making reflection of dhamma. Then > reality recognition. "oh yes, it really is as the holy one has set > forth, as if what has been turn upside down has been righted"... many > times we are seeing this in sutras. :) > > No doubt that the dhamma can be experienced right now without > abhidhamma, without sutras... that is the only way... because the marks > do not change. Even in different languages... Abhidhamma literature and > sutras; helping consolidate conventional understanding, conditioning > sati, conditioning panna, conditioning the kusala cetasika. > > The Sutras, Abhidhamma, the Vinaya... The teachings? > Spinning the wheel, setting the dhamma wheel into motion. > > This is right now dhamma, > right now spinning, > right now turning, > the wheel of dhamma. > > As the spokes of the wheel, > rising and falling, > so too with nama, > so too with rupa. > > Seeing with attachment, > Seeing with aversion, > Seeing with ignorance and delusion. > > Sensing in the mind door with attachment, > Sensing in the mind door with aversion, > Sensing in the mind door with ignorance and delusion. > > Right now dhamma... > -manji- > 9178 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/8/01 1:45:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard, > > I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be > able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. > I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by > Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada > correctly here. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I concur that he is definitely expressing the standard Theravadin commentarial position here. It is not for me to "agree" with that or not, because I certainly have no basis for evaluating it - I haven't any actual knowledge as to the nature of nibbana, let alone parinibbana. I would be very interested in getting a better understanding, from the tipitaka itself, and mainly the suttas, what the Buddha had to say. However, the one strong prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and Mahayana says "yes".) ------------------------------------------------------ > best wishes > robert > ============================ 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) 9179 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 11/8/01 3:11:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I was pondering on the part on citta cease. One explanation I have now is > that they cease from their present form. It is like us, dying from this > form and obtain a new form. This form has cease. But our consciousness is > transferred to the next life. > > Similarily, to me this "physical" aspect of citta cease but the > characteristics, its accumulations of our panna, cetana, sana does not > cease, they are pass to the new citta. If these accumulations cease with > the "physical" cittas, then we are back to ground zero. There is no point > in accumulations of panna if it cease. To me citta could not out of > nowhere and know where exactly our last accumulations. It got to pass > this information of our accumulation to our next arise "physical" citta. > > > Just guessing here:). > > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > ============================== I believe you are correct here. Certainly patterns and characteristics are passed on. Moreover, even the notions of arising and cessation are purely conven tional. There is no arising of a real existent from nothing, nor is there ever the annihilation of a real existent. There are, in fact, no real existents at all, no separate, separable, self-existing "things" at all; there is just the seeming of such things. 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) 9180 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 6:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Robert Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Good material, Jon. Thanks. And this description of the arising, > duration and > ending of a citta is not so complicated really. Like everything else > within the > space-time continuum, it has a beginning, a middle and an end, which > take place > seemingly in time and in the physical world. This makes the citta > somewhat > accessible as an event, even if it happens too fast and subtly for us to > normally > be aware of it. As far as citta happening 'too fast and subtly for us to normally be aware of it' is concerned, my understanding is, yes and no. When awareness is being developed, it is not aware of an individual citta (I suppose only a Buddha would have that level of understanding), but it can be aware of the *characteristic* of citta. This can be known because awareness can take as its object several moments of, for example, the citta that sees or hears and thus something of the characteristic of that particular citta can be known. The following passage fro the Visuddhimagga (XXIII, 2), which I cited in a post to Ken O a few minutes ago, bears repeating. It says in effect that the beginning of mundane development of understanding is the understanding that knows the difference between nama (ie. citta and cetasika) and rupa-- "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the delimitation of mentality-materiality." As to the characteristic of citta, the Explanatory Guide in Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha states (CMA I, Guide to #3) "In the case of citta, its characteristic is the knowing of an object (vijaanana). Its function is to be a "forerunner" (pubbangama) of the mental factors in that it presides over them and is always accompanied by them. Its manifestation--the way it appears in the meditator's experience--is as a continuity of processes (sandhaana). Its proximate cause is mind-and-matter (naamaruupa) because consciousness cannot arise alone, in the complete absence of mental factors and material phenomena." Jon 9181 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 6:03am Subject: Re: Nibbana Dear Howard, Thanks for the detailed reply. On your point about khanda parinibbana being different from the materialists idea: absolutely. The texts are at pains to make this very point. The materialist believes that there is a self that arose out of matter and that this self ceases upon death. The Buddhist viewpoint is quite different. The materialist may believe very strongly that when they die this is the end of existence - but that view is at odds with the way things are. While the conditions exist, and the anihilationist view itself is a condition, then there will be conditioned phenomena. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > ........ However, the one strong > prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does > mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't > rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely > compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the > state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual > materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of > the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) ++++++++++++ +++++++++++= > The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: > (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all > dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to > nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly > satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a > "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, > and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no > longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can > be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and > Mahayana says "yes".) > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > best wishes > > robert > > > ============================ > 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) 9182 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 6:09am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Ken O You make several points here, and I will try to respond succinctly. The numbers refer to the numbers I have added to your comments below. 1/ Just because something is 'attractive' (ie., not repugnant) does not mean it should be the object of desire, any more than the fact that something that is 'suffering' (the opposite in this context?) need suggest aversion. 2/ I understand the Buddha's explanation to be as follows-- - There is the born (= the conditioned, ie. this existence) - The only escape from the born would be the unborn (= the unconditioned) - The discovery of the unborn (= nibbana) is the discovery that is made by a Buddha - If there were no such unborn, there would not be any escape from the world of the born. There is no suggestion here that nibbana is conditioned by the born, as far as I can see. 3/ I would agree that there is little in the way of description of nibbana in the suttas, and I imagine this is for precisely the reason you suggest, namely, that any description is pretty meaningless to us. In any event, a detailed understanding of such description is not necessary for the development of the path, it seems to me. Would you agree with this last point? 4/ & 5/ I am not sure I see your point here, Ken. The Buddha is affirming the existence of suffering/a path but pointing out the non-existence of any person who suffers/travels the path. You are then saying, if there is no person how can there be any suffering/path in the first place? This seems to be a semantic argument rather than a substantive one. Doesn't it go against your own experience in life? I'm not sure if I have understood your points. Please let me know. Jon --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Jon 1/ > >Thus is Nibbána visible in this life, immediate, inviting, attractive, > >and comprehensible to the wise" (A. III, 55). > > k: hmm attractive? Sounds like desiring to be in Nibbana? 2/ > "Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there > were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the > world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be > possible" (Ud. VIII, 3). > > k: I think when we are talk abt unborn we should not equate this with > the > born. Born should be equate with death and not unborn. Undeath is > equate > with unborn. It is like if there is no creation in the first place, > where > is there destruction. Furthermore when the commentary talk abt escape > from the world of born, isn't it implying we are going from one "born" > state to another state "where born does not exist". It sounds like > saying > that Nibbana is conditioned by the born, because without the born, where > is there a state "where born does not exist". 3/ > "One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only > for the actual realization of the goal of Nibbána, but also for a > theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary > condition to grasp fully the truth of anattá (q.v.), the egolessness and > insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an > understanding, > one will necessarily misconceive Nibbána - according to one's either > materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an > ego, > or as an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or > with which it merges. Hence it is said:" > > k: So what is the point of explaining Nibbana in the first place. That > is why I think Buddha says very few points in describing Nibbana. A > nature that are beyond words to described. 4/ > >"Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; > >The deed is, but no doer of the deed is there; > > k: Since there is no sufferer, where is there suffering in the first > place? 5/ > >Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; > >The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > >(Vis.M. XVI) > > k: Since there is no traveler, where is there a need for a path to > travel? Path is also anatta, same as the traveler, hence where is the > path? 9183 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Music > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah and Nina et al, >> >> I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and >> I am so happy!!!!!!!! Sarah: about Khun Sujin: She's always stressed to me that the study and practice should be very natural > without any rules at all. Again it is the understanding rather than the > 'appearance' or 'activities' that counts. > H: I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going >> to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are >> one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the >> meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). >> Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being >> played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. Sarah: For sure there are realities while listening > to or playing Bach and no reason at all why there can't be wise attention and > awareness at these times. Dear Hermann, Christine, Sarah and friends, That is an expressive Email, I had to laugh. I had conceit when I read that you pay attention to my music, there it is again: I and you. Conceit plays us many tricks. Playing music is the same as talking, thus, many different kinds of cittas arise and fall away very fast and these condition different rupas. Yes, Abidhamma is life, normal, natural life, even liking music is Abhidhamma. Liking the music, delight, you call it extasy, this is attachment. We do not have to force ourselves to refrain from it, it is normal, natural. But it is good to know it. The monk's lifestyle is different, he should live like the arahat who is without defilements. Therefore, he should not indulge in sense pleasures, such as music. What do you play, and do you teach? First a little more about our music. Lodewijk and I got to know each other through the music, 56 years ago, that must be before you were born? We play music for two pianos, and also recorder and harpsichord. We also play with my nephews, who play cello and also recorder. On Sunday my hundred year old father comes to dinner (a four course dinner) with his very intelligent asylum dog, Oscar (Christine likes this!) and on his request we have to play something. Oscar especially likes Bach or very quiet music and lays down between us. If it is less to his liking he walks up and down. Dogs know so much, Christine. Liking music does not fall from the blue sky, it ihas been accumulated from citta to citta, also from the past. Your five boys are all different, with different likings and talents and this is conditioned, accumulated. It is interesting to observe their different accumulations. Cittas arise and fall away very fast and akusala cittas can arise shortly after kusala cittas. When I am just enjoying music for myself, or when I play for my father and Oscar in order to give them a good time, is there a difference? You can prove such things to yourself. Some time ago you said that you find it difficult to know the difference between kusala and akusala, and that you like to prove everything yourself. That is right. However, learning some details about kusala and akusala from the teachings helps us to consider what is arising in our own life. When we think of our own enjoyment there is some selfishness, even though we do not harm others, it is attachment, and when we think of someone else, of his wellbeing, there is generosity and kindness. We had to play at a funeral ceremony, for my sister in law who recently died. This is a way of showing sympathy to the members of the family. But of course, there is also conceit and attachment. Again, music is just like talking, so many different cittas, and there are many moments of attachment to the sound. Also when we are talking in ordinary speech, there is attachment to my voice, or to the words we are expressing, there is hearing and sound, but mostly we are forgetful of realities. Did we consider hearing while we are talking ourselves, or are we just absorbed in what we are saying? We have accumulated forgetfulness and ignorance for aeons, how can that change immediately? Thus, when there is no dana, generosity, sila, observance of morality or mental development, we talk or play music, we act and think with akusala cittas. You may like to read "Deeds of Merit" by A. Sujin, Amara recently put on her Web, which is also on the Zolag web. Read it and check it for yourself, with regard to your own life. When you consider your own life, and you try to understand it more, it is kusala. There is sati, but it is of the level of considering, not yet direct awareness of characteristics appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind. We should not mind whether direct awareness arises or not yet, if we mind, it shows clinging to self. This works counteractive. It is not too difficult to know what is kusala and akusala in theory, but since many different cittas arise and fall away so quickly and we have so much ignorance and clinging, it is not easy to know exactly when the citta is kusala and when akusala. Through satipatthana realities can be known as they are, but it will take a long time of development, maybe eaons. Never mind, each little bit of understanding is a gain. An example of how we can be tricked: we see the usefulness of generosity, and indeed there can be moments of generosity, but then there can be other cittas which are attached to the idea of: I am generous, self again. But panna should know everything, all that arises in daily life. We hear music, we have to hear, we cannot choose, no self who can select this. Everything occurs already because there are the approriate conditions. I did not make my own earsense, it is being produced by kamma again and again. As Sarah explained, there are realities when playing music, hearing, seeing, knowing the meaning of the notes you read, hardness, like and dislike. Sometimes there can be awareness of a characteristic, but this cannot be forced. Awareness arises when there are conditions for it. Now Lodewijk is playing the piano. With best wishes, also to your family, Nina. 9184 From: manji Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:06pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana ... Question... Herman, Not really, but maybe in readings and sitting... and it will come of fruition. So not so much thinking about this, it came in passing. Maybe through reading sutras it will come up.... -manji- -----Original Message----- From: hhofman@d... [mailto:hhofman@d...] Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 2:50 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana ... Question... Hi Manji, This is from Nyanatiloka - manual of Budhist terms vimokkha: 'liberation' (deliverance). I. the 3; II. the 8. I. The 3 liberations are: 1. the conditionless (or signless) liberation (animitta-v.), 2. the desireless liberation (apanihita- v.), 3. the emptiness (or void) liberation (suññatá-v. ). They are also called 'the triple gateway to liberation' (vimokkha-mukha; Vis.M. XXI, 66ff), as they are three different approaches to the paths of holiness. - See visuddhi VI, 8. Cf. Vis XXI, 6ff, 121ff; Pts.M. II. Vimokkha-Kathá. Signless, markless is it what you are looking for ? Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Has Nibbana anywhere been described as markless? > > -manji- 9185 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 5:00pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi Jon I always appreciate your response. --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > You make several points here, and I will try to respond succinctly. The > numbers refer to the numbers I have added to your comments below. > > 1/ Just because something is 'attractive' (ie., not repugnant) does > not mean it should be the object of desire, any more than the fact that > something that is 'suffering' (the opposite in this context?) need > suggest aversion. k: I was rather prejudice when the commentary used the word attractive. It has a natural tendency to have a negative connotations in my conditioned mind. I more concern of its negative implications. Bc when we talk abt things being attractive, there is an implication of an underlying attachment to it. > > 2/ I understand the Buddha's explanation to be as follows-- > - There is the born (= the conditioned, ie. this existence) > - The only escape from the born would be the unborn (= the > unconditioned) - The discovery of the unborn (= nibbana) is the discovery that is made > by a Buddha > - If there were no such unborn, there would not be any escape from the > world of the born. > There is no suggestion here that nibbana is conditioned by the born, as > far as I can see. > 3/ > I would agree that there is little in the way of description of nibbana > in the suttas, and I imagine this is for precisely the reason you > suggest, namely, that any description is pretty meaningless to us. In any event, a detailed understanding of such description is not necessary for the development of the path, it seems to me. Would you agree with this last point? k: Yes I agree with you :). > 4/ & 5/ > I am not sure I see your point here, Ken. The Buddha is affirming the > existence of suffering/a path but pointing out the non-existence of any > person who suffers/travels the path. You are then saying, if there is > no person how can there be any suffering/path in the first place? This > seems to be a semantic argument rather than a substantive one. Doesn't it go against your own experience in life? > > I'm not sure if I have understood your points. Please let me know. > > Jon k: When the verse imply that is no sufferer - to me it would imply that we have understand reality. Then where is suffering to be found. On one hand we are talking abt anatta (no sufferer), on the other we are not viewing suffering as anatta (suffering exist). To me this is an incorrect perspective. Both are anatta. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9186 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 5:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Hi Jon For understanding of the Dhamma, we say that this is conventional and that is mundane. To me for real life practise, satipatthana is an application to the conventional life using right view and right understanding as a foundation. There should not be a worry abt mundane and conventional bc it has been merge as one. When such application is arise, there is no worry whether Panna (cetasiak) is arise as right view is already there. It will arise naturally with the moment of satipatthana just like moha will reinforce itself naturally when we enjoy ourselves in the six senses. Yes I agree with Nina that it will take us a long time to understand satipatthana, maybe eons. Every word I type now, there is lobha to these words. Kind regards Ken O --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > > To Jon > > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are > conventional > > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we > > do > > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be > > mundane and Supramundane. > > Good issues to raise, Ken. However, we should not equate ‘effort of the > mundane path’ with ‘conventional effort’. Conventional effort in and of > itself doesn’t lead to anything, since it doesn’t necessarily connote > kusala of the level of satipatthana, or kusala of any level for that > matter. > > Effort of the mundane path (ie.‘right effort’ of the mundane level) is > actually the mental factor effort that arises with a moment of > satipatthana. Likewise, right view of the mundane level is the panna > cetasika that arises with a moment of satipatthana. > > As to the difference between the mundane and the supramundane, the > Visuddhimagga notes (XXIII, 2)-- > "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane > development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements > beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the > delimitation of mentality-materiality. Then one of the benefits of the > supramundane development of understanding is the removal, at the path > moment, of the various defilements beginning with the fetters." > > Jon > 9187 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I suppose there are many reasons for having an interest in developing the > path. But a view as to a specific final goal of the spiritual path is not > essential to seeing the disadvantage in living forever in ignorance and > suffering. Indeed, if our interest in the dhamma is based on, for > example, a desire for a happy rebirth, or a goal of attaining nibbana as > we conceive it to be, then I am inclined to think that understanding the > right path could be a very difficult task. Dear Jon, Well we can agree on this for sure. And it is very hard to let go of one's view of what the path and nibbana consist of, no matter what our view may be. I am sure I am clinging pretty hard to mine. Best, Robert Ep. 9188 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana --- upasaka@a... wrote: ... As I understand it, for an > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" in the > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any longer > to be observed. Whether or not, or how, this might change with the death of > an arahant I just don't know. I see it as certainly possible that if no > association is maintained at that point with any realm of experience, then > the death of an arahant does, indeed, result in a radical change; but it > would be a change that the arahant would be indifferent to in any case, > inasmuch as once full liberation is attained, there is no longer any sense of > self or independent dhammas anyway,and there no longer is any grasping at > anything, including being and nonbeing. I can *imagine*, however, an arahant > *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an > association with some realm or realms of experience. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard, This is very well put. And, strange though it may seem, I agree with you! Robert Ep. 9189 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha (was, Concepts) Thanks, Jon. I did enjoy those entries. I would say, from reading those, that the word 'dukkha' is meant to include all experiences that have a quality of suffering or a tendency to create or lead to suffering in the present or future. This makes a lot of sense. Thanks again, Robert Ep. ================= --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert Ep > > On the subject of dukkha (‘suffering’), you commented in a post to > Herman-- > ------------------------------------------ > I would not say that the state in which one is happy but ignorant is > necessarily a state of suffering in itself. I would say it leads to a > future state of suffering. > I also think it is possible to be suffering but not be fully aware of it, > or to interpret it as non-suffering in order to justify one's attachment, > as in heroin addiction. > ------------------------------------------ > > and to Kenneth— > ------------------------------------------ > Since suffering is a 'state', ie, an 'experience', it is only real to the > extent it is experienced as real. It is a subjective sort of category. … > In terms of being permanent or being an object of some kind, you could say > it is not 'real'. But in terms of being something that takes place in > consciousness, I would say it is 'real' at the time it arises, and > non-existent at the time it is not being experienced. > ------------------------------------------ > > This subject of dukkha is a vast and detailed one, and it will not > surprise you to know that, as used in the texts, its meaning has only a > limited correlation with the term ‘suffering’ in its conventional meaning > (!). > > Rather than confuse you with my own limited knowledge on the subject, > however, I have pasted below copies of the entries from ‘Buddhist > Dictionary’ on ‘Dukkha’ and ‘Dukkhataa’. I hope you find these > informative and interesting. > > Jon > > From Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ at > http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_d.htm > > ‘DUKKHA’ > (1) 'pain', painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental (s. vedaná). > (2) 'Suffering', 'ill'. > As the first of the Four Noble Truths and the second of the three > characteristics of existence, the term dukkha is not limited to painful > experience as under (1), but refers to the unsatisfactory nature and the > general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena which, on account of their > impermanence, are all liable to suffering, and this includes also > pleasurable experience. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to > suffering' would be more adequate renderings, if not for stylistic > reasons. > Hence the first truth does not deny the existence of pleasurable > experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. > This is illustrated by the following texts: > "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That > satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in > the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in the > world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In > so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. > Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That > escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world > existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" -- (A. 111, 101). > "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would > not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found in > the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there were no > escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" -- (A. 111, > 102). > > > ‘DUKKHATA’ > (abstr. noun fr. dukkha): 'the state of suffering', painfulness, > unpleasantness, the unsatisfactoriness of existence. > "There are three kinds of suffering: > (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatá), > (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhára-dukkhatá), > (3) the suffering in change (viparináma-dukkhatá)" > -- (S. XLV, 165; D. 33). > > (1) is the bodily or mental feeling of pain as actual]y felt. > (2) refers to the oppressive nature of all formations of existence (i.e. > all conditioned phenomena), due to their continual arising and passing > away; this includes also experiences associated with neutral feeling. > (3) refers to bodily and mental pleasant feelings, "because they are the > cause for the arising of pain when they change" -- (Vis.M. XIV, 34f). > > > > 9190 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassanã --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for your trip to > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good flights with > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure everyone > hear will be very interested to hear any comments you care to > share about your impressions and discussions after you meet > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. And Mike, don't forget to let me know how to keep in touch with you! Good journey! Robert Ep. 9191 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abidhamma books Hi Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > Thanks for the explanation and could you kindly provide the English name > for the first book of Abidhamma and its commentary. Dhammasangani: Buddhist Psychological Ethics Atthasalani: The Expositor (Commentary to this) >Udana commentary > accompanies which book of Abidhamma. Udaana Com. is the Com to: Udaana: Verses of Uplift, (under Khuddaka-nikaaya, NOT abhidhamma) I've been quoting from Masefield's PTS translation of both of these texts. I think a list of the seven books and > its English translated titles and their commentaries will be very helpful. All texts w/English titles and commentaries are listed in the Pali Text Society catalogue...it also indicates which ones the PTS has translated and published: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/ You'll see all the Sutta-pitaka and other parts of the Tipitaka are listed too. > Visuddhimagga, is the English title known as Path of Liberation or Path of > Purity. Usually it's called 'The Path of Purification', but the English translations vary I'm sure. Glad to see your keen interest in these texts, Ken. For the Sutta-pitaka translations, I prefer B.Bodhi's, published by Wisdom Books, (Digha Nikaya trans. by M.Walshe) partly because these also contain some commentary notes at the back and tend to be more readable. We've been slowly replacing our PTS ones with these. Sarah 9192 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana --- upasaka@a... wrote: > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only the remaining of > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of what is pleasant > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through them. This > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain experienced via the > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings extinguished at the > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental function ceasing > upon the death of the arahant. Hey Howard. You don't think you can get away with that, do you? [hope you do of course]. Regards, Robert Ep. 9193 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:25pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question --- manji wrote: > If useless things do not hang in your mind, > Any season is a good season for you. beautiful! Robert Ep. 9194 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for being so welcoming to my questions. I very much appreciate your > thoughtful answers, and it is also a pleasure to converse on these questions, > which as you said, are so 'directly related to....realities to be known now.' .................... S:Thanks Rob. We seem to post at the same time every day (for me, it’s late lunch-time, for you it must be about 2am!.....) I’m pretty ‘addicted’ to your daily ‘splash’ of posts too;-) .................... S:> > I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it > is...and > > our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason > why.....The > > only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and > cannot be > > any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to > be > > like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya > > which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially > and > > so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta > > arising. > R:> I do think this is a good explanation of why each present moment is both > unique > and in a sense solitary, even though it is also completely connected to each > other > factor coming before and after, and all those which surround it in the > present. A > very clear paradox, but a reality. .................... S:Good..you’ve got the idea I was trying to express. .................... .................... S:>> Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of > moral > > states” (Atth.) > > > > Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). As we’ve > > discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but of the > > characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware of a > > process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which thinks > > about a process of consciousness. > R:> Very good. I am still trying to imagine in a sense what a 'citta' is 'formed > like' and how the 'cetasikas' interact or support it, and how 'sati' sort of > overlooks or opens insight into the whole thing, and how satipathana, like a > mature sati, can see into the full nature of the momentary arising, whereas > sati > would only see its more obvious qualities...... .................... S:Did my post with Atthasalani and Visuddhimagga quotes to Ken O help at all? Like those ingredients in the curry, all the skilful mental factors have to intereact together, perform their own functions and condition each other and the citta and vice versa. Of course, if there isn’t precise awareness of a reality itself, there cannot be awareness of the ‘momentary arising’ or ‘ceasing’ or that reality. That’s why there has to be the clear distinction between different realities and in particular between namas and rupas first. As you suggest, sati has to develop and be aware of these realities more and more precisely. .................... R:> I'd sort of like a kind of molecular chart of these relationships, however > I'm > sure in a way that would give the wrong impression that these events are like > little 'things' that sit there for a second, when in truth they must be more > in > the nature of an open quality of mind and not really occupy any place or > space but > simply co-occur together in spaceless, formless function. .................... S:Yes, we can read all the detail we wish in the abhidhamma texts (with many charts), but it’s still possible to ‘work it all out’ and take all these realities for ‘self’. When awareness is aware of a characteristic of reality, it’s not concerned with time or place or even relationship at that moment, it’s just aware of what is presenting itself, e.g seeing which sees or visible object which is seen at this moment. .................... R:> Since they really have no entity, it is hard to imagine how they arise or > function > at all. Unlike the physical realities, which maintain physical forms that > sort of > 'house' them, the cittas and cetasikas and sati have no such place to dwell. > So > in a sense it is hard to see how or where they really occur at all. > > It is only in conjunction with physical sense organs and physical objects, I > guess > that they can find the conditions to cohere for a moment within the > functioning of > these mechanisms, and so they are associated with sense-door, mind-door and > mind > itself. .................... S:Realities have no entity in the sense of a self, but they still ‘exist’ and have characteristics which can be known when they arise briefly. I don’t think we can say namas or rupas ‘dwell’ anywhere, and although we can talk about the importance of eye-base or heart-base for seeing or thinking to arise, at the moment of awareness of seeing or thinking, there’s no idea of eye-base or heart-base. We know from our studies however, that without these various bases and doorways and other conditions, there couldn’t be seeing or thinking. In this way, reading about these details (all found in ‘Abhidhamma in Daily Life’), helps to get rid of wrong views and ideas of self controlling rather than conditions ‘forming up’ realities. .................... R:> But it would be nice to have alittle more conceptual clarity, which I guess > will > come in time....and then perhaps obscure their reality even more! .................... S:Again it depends on the purpose for study, I think, as I mentioned to Christine, and whether there’s any awareness and understanding while reading and considering. If there’s more confusion, there can be awareness of the confusion too;-) .................... S:>>..... Being aware of these different realities, and understanding > the > > difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the > idea of > > a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very > specific > > function and characteristic. > R:> Very good. Thanks for going from my abstract to the clarity of the concrete > moment. ..................... S:The Teachings are very ‘concrete’ I find and there is nothing mystical or abstract about sati or the objects it is aware of. .................... S:> even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, > > can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). > > I wouldn't say so. I think you are sincere and very clear, and I appreciate > your > level-headedness, something that I've been missing most of my life. .................... S:Well, the level-headedness is turning quickly to big-headedness......Let me assure you that moments of level-headedness are rare in my day....thanks anyway. .................... R:> Thanks, Sarah. I also find it very enjoyable to dig into the possibilities > of > this present reality. As I said before, I was surprised at my first exposure > to > the commentaries to find them very illuminating and to have a 'warmth' about > them. > They seem to understand the 'luminosity of mind' or at least to express it, > even > if we can't yet get a handle on it ourselves. > > These conversations with you are very special, a kind of Dhamma oasis for me, > for > which I give you much thanks. .................... S:Big bow... You bring out the best in us all, Rob...and we’re very fortunate to have you around.. Sarah ============================= 9195 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Vietnamese Tipitaka G'Day Binh, Thanks for your prompt response. I have no doubt that you and your website play a big role in encouraging the translation of these excellent texts into Vietnamese and I sincerely hope that further texts and commentaries will be translated too. Alex, it was good to see you on the list recently and I hope your translation efforts are also going well, however slowly. Translators always tell me that they really learn a lot in the process;-) thanks for the info, Binh. Seeya, Sarah --- binh_anson@y... wrote: > > G'day, > > As requested by Sarah, below is a brief overview of the Vietnamese > Tipitaka. (This information will be updated after January 2002). > http://www.budsas.org and http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom > > -ooOoo- 9196 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 0:10am Subject: Web-based Distance Learning MA in Buddhist Studies Dear All, The University of Sunderland proposes an MA, Postgraduate Diploma, and Postgraduate Certificate in Distance-Learning, entirely on the Net. The Program is led by Professor Peter Harvey, Professor of Buddhist Studies, University of Sunderland. Probable start date Sept. 02. For details: http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/buddhist/ metta, Christine 9197 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 4:18am Subject: Re: A tentative question Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > It's always good to hear your kind comments, Christine, but I wonder what you > mean by not feeling `up to speed'. I sincerely hope dsg doesn't look like a > speed contest (though I must say I find it hard to keep up with Rob Ep and Ken > O ;-) Please don't ever feel rushed, anyway. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Sorry, I wasn't clear - it means "not feeling able to compare favourably to, in the expression of knowledge or skill" the other members of this List. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I think there is a trap of `irrelevant > intellectualising'....Actually to give a `blunt opinion' (and thanks for the > confidence), I think there is a `meditator trap' which has the idea that one > should just do `real' practice and any talk or discussion or study (ESPECIALLY > abhidhamma study) is irrelevant. I also think there is a real `Abhidhamma trap' > where someone has the idea that the amount of detail collected and retained is > an indication of progress or practice in itself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I appreciate your explanation of the two traps - 'meditation' and 'abhidhamma'. But I wonder if it is almost a necessary stage to pass through - spending some time in the trap before one recognises the constriction and steps out? .......Is it a trap - or is it a temporary raft? --------------------------------------------------------------------- > As I've mentioned, my first Buddhist teacher was Munindra, who had spent > considerable time with Mahasi Sayadaw and the Mahasi technique was the > `practice' which I followed very intently and intensely in India and Sri lanka. > Fortunately, Munindra himself also encouraged me to study and question the > Teachings. He was one of the kindest people I've ever met and i still have the > greatest respect and fond memories of him. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: May I ask if your first Buddhist teacher Munindra is the same Munindra who was the teacher of Joseph Goldstein and Lama Surya Das? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Still, the meditation was considered > the practice, rather than the study and subsequently I met many meditators who > had hardly read a sutta, let alone discuss it. > Since then, I've also met many in the `abhidhamma trap' who think it is > essential to study every detail and this is often not reflected or related to > daily life or realities at this moment. In other words, the practice lags well > behind the theory, .which on its own can be similar to studying any other > intellectual subject. > Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead me into one > trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. I think my comment so far would be that we don't have to follow a > rule or someone else's regime. In other words, if you wish to have ritual, > fine. If you wish to sit and meditate, fine. If you wish to study in detail, > fine. I think the point some of us have been making here is that we all have > different interests and inclinations. In the end it's not the yoga or tai chi I > do that counts, or the music Nina plays or the breathing exercises that Rob Ep > is interested in. In the end it is the state of mind, now, whether we're > studying abhidhamma, concentrating on breath or beating drums that counts. > > We can make a structure in our day such as Ihr abhidhamma study, 1hr drum > beating or whatever. There's nothing wrong with this kind of structure and most > poeple would say that I'm about as `structured' or organised as it gets. I'm > also very aware of how much attachment there is to these structures I have. > Whenever my little structure gets `messed up', I feel sorry ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I don't think it was 'structure in our day' so much as 'structure in my learning and practice'. There is so much information and opinion on the Internet. As a beginner, it is difficult initially to find a way of knowing what is worthwhile to study and what is not. In the Buddhist Dictionary 'Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines' by Nyanatiloka Mahathera, the meaning of 'panna' distinguishes 3 kinds of knowledge with regard to the condition of its arising. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm "knowledge knowledge based on thinking (cintá-mayá-paññá), knowledge based on learning (suta-mayá-paññá), knowledge based on mental development (bhávaná-mayá-paññá) (D. 33)." - 'Based on thinking' is that knowledge which one has accquired through one's own thinking, without having learnt it from others. - 'Based on learning' is that knowledge which one has heard from others and thus acquired through learning. - 'Based on mental development' is that knowledge which one has acquired through mental development in this or that way, and which has reached the stage of full concentration" (appaná, q.v.) (Vis.M. XIV). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So again, > while following our inclinations or structures, if there is some understanding > and awareness of the attachments, expectations, aversions, along with many > other realities, this is more precious than the structure or framework, which > after all is only a concept anyway. > The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the heart of your > `quandry', is that really there is no self at all to determine at what time and > on what occasions there will be `practice'. If there is an attempt to be aware > of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging to self to > be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. > > As you've rightly mentioned before, it's not easy at all to give up an idea of > self and control. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I am familiar with the terms Impermanence, Suffering and Not-Self - but No Control is not so familiar. Could you quote some references please? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine, I'm not sure I have any idea of a `correct way to practice'. I don't > have any idea that studying abhidhamma texts is a time or way to practice > anymore than teaching my students. What I am sure about, however, is that the > time has to be now, there are realities now, and that it is sati and panna > which have to do the work, not `I'. I'm also sure that for sati and panna to do > their work, the conditions that the Buddha stressed so often are essential, > i.e. meeting the `right people', hearing the `right thing', considering and > applying. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Much of what I am learning is from contact with people on the List, whether directly or as the stimulus to search further. The benefits of having admirable people as friends - "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and colleagues, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, easily and without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and conducive to the opening of awareness, i.e., talk on having few wants, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, and on the knowledge and vision of release. "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and colleagues, it is to be expected that he will keep his persistence aroused for abandoning unskillful qualities, and for taking on skillful qualities -- steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his duties with regard to skillful qualities. "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and colleagues, it is to be expected that he will be discerning, endowed with discernment of arising and passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress." -- Ud IV.1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not sure if any of this helps. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Tremendously! :-) Much gratitude...... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I really appreciate these questions and > comments of yours and am honoured that you addressed them here to me. You > seem to have very keen interest and are considering a lot very carefully. There > is bound to be plenty of thinking and wondering and doubt in between. However, > these are also realities which can be known when they arise. Sometimes it even > helps to smile or laugh at these tendencies;-) > > We'd all like to be told `what to do' or to be given a short-cut. If it were so > simple, wouldn't we all be enlightened by now? > > I hope to hear back from you and follow this discussion further. I also hope > this doesn't sound like I think I have all the answers which is a long way from > the truth. > > Thanks very much for sharing and I think you'll find that many others are > interested in this same question. > > Sarah 9198 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A tentative question Hi Christine, to choose a method to practise is indeed a very difficult choice. This is I think the most difficult is to start to learn Buddhism that of one inclinations. My experience of learning is based on the traditional Chinese Sangha method where one stick to a few suttas for five years. To stick a few suttas for five years is I think a very difficult thing to do. Once in a while, I tends to read others but the focus is still the few suttas basing our practise on these few suttas. Then after the teacher will suggest us the other suttas to read other the five years discipline approach. I think mine is very lucky, because the day I pick up a book on Pure Land, it has been with me for six years. I am still practising now with more clarity after I read more on Satipatthana and Abidhamma. The logic given by one Chinese monk is that our mind is full of diverting thoughts, by focusing on a few, one thoughts is less diverse, more focus. Secondly, the monk say as one begin the Buddhism way, one will get confuse easily if one read too many. Thirdly is that the Chinese believe that if one understand one sutta, the rest of the sutta will be much more clearar. Furthermore on the point of controlling, I think when I start the path, I was also thinking of controlling my thoughts which I realise is also incorrect bc thoughts cannot be control. They got to be let go or to be investigate. To control something that was come from nowhere and goes to nowhere to me is quite futile. These are just my personal experience which I like to share with you. To me your keeness in learning the way is indeed much to be rejoice and commendable. No matter what, we hope we could assist you in your path as you have assisted us. Together let us strive with vigour. Kind regards Ken O --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > > It's always good to hear your kind comments, Christine, but I > wonder what you > > mean by not feeling `up to speed'. I sincerely hope dsg > doesn't > look like a > > speed contest (though I must say I find it hard to keep up with Rob > Ep and Ken > > O ;-) Please don't ever feel rushed, anyway. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Sorry, I wasn't clear - it means "not feeling able to > compare favourably to, in the expression of knowledge or skill" the > other members of this List. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > I think there is a trap of `irrelevant > > intellectualising'....Actually to give a `blunt > opinion' (and > thanks for the > > confidence), I think there is a `meditator trap' which has > the idea > that one > > should just do `real' practice and any talk or discussion > or study > (ESPECIALLY > > abhidhamma study) is irrelevant. I also think there is a > real `Abhidhamma trap' > > where someone has the idea that the amount of detail collected and > retained is > > an indication of progress or practice in itself. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I appreciate your explanation of the two traps - > 'meditation' and 'abhidhamma'. But I wonder if it is almost a > necessary stage to pass through - spending some time in the trap > before one recognises the constriction and steps out? > .......Is it a trap - or is it a temporary raft? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > As I've mentioned, my first Buddhist teacher was Munindra, who > had > spent > > considerable time with Mahasi Sayadaw and the Mahasi technique was > the > > `practice' which I followed very intently and intensely in > India > and Sri lanka. > > Fortunately, Munindra himself also encouraged me to study and > question the > > Teachings. He was one of the kindest people I've ever met and i > still have the > > greatest respect and fond memories of him. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: May I ask if your first Buddhist teacher Munindra is the > same Munindra who was the teacher of Joseph Goldstein and Lama Surya > Das? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Still, the meditation was considered > > the practice, rather than the study and subsequently I met many > meditators who > > had hardly read a sutta, let alone discuss it. > > Since then, I've also met many in the `abhidhamma trap' > who think > it is > > essential to study every detail and this is often not reflected or > related to > > daily life or realities at this moment. In other words, the > practice lags well > > behind the theory, .which on its own can be similar to studying > any other > > intellectual subject. > > Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead > me into one > > trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. > > I think my comment so far would be that we don't have to follow a > > rule or someone else's regime. In other words, if you wish to > have > ritual, > > fine. If you wish to sit and meditate, fine. If you wish to study > in detail, > > fine. I think the point some of us have been making here is that we > all have > > different interests and inclinations. In the end it's not the > yoga > or tai chi I > > do that counts, or the music Nina plays or the breathing exercises > that Rob Ep > > is interested in. In the end it is the state of mind, now, whether > we're > > studying abhidhamma, concentrating on breath or beating drums that > counts. > > > > We can make a structure in our day such as Ihr abhidhamma study, > 1hr drum > > beating or whatever. There's nothing wrong with this kind of > structure and most > > poeple would say that I'm about as `structured' or > organised as it > gets. I'm > > also very aware of how much attachment there is to these structures > I have. > > Whenever my little structure gets `messed up', I feel sorry > ;-) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I don't think it was 'structure in our day' so much > as 'structure in my learning and practice'. There is so much > information and opinion on the Internet. As a beginner, it is > difficult initially to find a way of knowing what is worthwhile to > study and what is not. > > In the Buddhist Dictionary 'Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines' > by Nyanatiloka Mahathera, the meaning of 'panna' distinguishes 3 > kinds of knowledge with regard to the condition of its arising. > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm > > "knowledge knowledge based on thinking (cintá-mayá-paññá), > knowledge > based on learning (suta-mayá-paññá), knowledge based on mental > development (bhávaná-mayá-paññá) (D. 33)." > - 'Based on thinking' is that knowledge which one has accquired > through one's own thinking, without having learnt it from others. > - 'Based on learning' is that knowledge which one has heard from > others and thus acquired through learning. > - 'Based on mental development' is that knowledge which one has > acquired through mental development in this or that way, and which > has reached the stage of full concentration" (appaná, q.v.) > (Vis.M. > XIV). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > So again, > > while following our inclinations or structures, if there is some > understanding > > and awareness of the attachments, expectations, aversions, along > with many > > other realities, this is more precious than the structure or > framework, which > > after all is only a concept anyway. > > > The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the > heart of your > > `quandry', is that really there is no self at all to > determine at > what time and > > on what occasions there will be `practice'. If there is an > attempt > to be aware > > of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging > to self to > > be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. > > > > As you've rightly mentioned before, it's not easy at all to > give up > an idea of > > self and control. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I am familiar with the terms Impermanence, Suffering and > Not-Self - but No Control is not so familiar. Could you quote some > references please? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Christine, I'm not sure I have any idea of a `correct way > to > practice'. I don't > > have any idea that studying abhidhamma texts is a time or way to > practice > > anymore than teaching my students. What I am sure about, however, > is that the > > time has to be now, there are realities now, and that it is sati > and panna > > which have to do the work, not `I'. I'm also sure that > for sati and > panna to do > > their work, the conditions that the Buddha stressed so often are > essential, > > i.e. meeting the `right people', hearing the `right > thing', > considering and > > applying. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Much of what I am learning is from contact with people on > the List, whether directly or as the stimulus to search further. > > The benefits of having admirable people as friends - > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, > easily and without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and > conducive to the opening of awareness, i.e., talk on having few > wants, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing > persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, > and on the knowledge and vision of release. > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will keep his persistence > aroused for abandoning unskillful qualities, and for taking on > skillful qualities -- steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking > his duties with regard to skillful qualities. > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will be discerning, endowed > with discernment of arising and passing away -- noble, penetrating, > leading to the right ending of stress." > > -- Ud IV.1 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm not sure if any of this helps. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Tremendously! :-) Much gratitude...... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I really appreciate these questions and > > comments of yours and am honoured that you addressed them here to > me. You > > seem to have very keen interest and are considering a lot very > carefully. There > > is bound to be plenty of thinking and wondering and doubt in > between. However, > > these are also realities which can be known when they arise. > Sometimes it even > > helps to smile or laugh at these tendencies;-) > > > > We'd all like to be told `what to do' or to be given a > short-cut. > If it were so > > simple, wouldn't we all be enlightened by now? > > > > I hope to hear back from you and follow this discussion further. I > also hope > > this doesn't sound like I think I have all the answers which is > a > long way from > > the truth. > > > > Thanks very much for sharing and I think you'll find that many > others are > > interested in this same question. > > > > Sarah 9199 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Hi Sarah Thanks for your patient in quoting the text. Presently I am trying to learn the Abidhamma systems of practising. Hence recently I have been asking Abidhammaic questions which sometimes do off track due to my previous views. I try ordering the Book of Analysis and Dispeller of Delusion which Robert has kindly introduced to me. I am still waiting for PTS to respond my email of my ordering, but till date I have no reply. Is there any other way to buy it, do you know of any good web on line store that sells these books. I believe they are impt to my studies on Satipatthana and Abidhamma. Thanks once again and at times I feel guilty that you have spend so much time in explaining Abidhamma terms to me and also to many others that have assist me in the understanding of Abidhamma. Kind regards Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > > Sarah: > >.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this > > way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions > > (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises > sequentially > > because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the > > preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other > conditions > > to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. > .................... > > > k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and > falling > > of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is > maybe > > of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel > rather > > than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes > or > > links that help us understand more on this sequential process. > .................... > > Sarah: > I’d like to give some links, but most of the detail in this area that I > have is > in texts that are not on-line as yet, so I’ll try to quote selectively > (i.e > choose the shorter ones;-) Why can’t there be seeing and hearing at the > same > time? Why do cittas (consciusness) arise as they do? I think these > questions > are the imponderables and that it is better to understand that this is > the way > it is (because of all those conditions). > > One of the most useful commentaries is the Atthasalini (The Expositor), > available from PTS. It’s not a big book and much easier to read, I > think, than > the English translation of Dhammasangani (1st book of the > Abhidhamma)which it > accompanies. > > The following quote is from Atth (63): > > ‘....... is termed ‘consciousness’ , because it arranges itself > in a > series (‘cintoti’, or, its own series or continuity) by way of > apperception in > a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed ‘consciousness’ > because > it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and corruptions. > > Moreover, all (four classes) are > termed > ‘consciousness’ because they are variegated (citra) acording to > circumstance. > The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of > producing a variety of diversity of effects. > > Herein consciousness with lust is one thing, that with hate is > another..........’ > > This one comes a little later from the same text at (112). Again citta > is being > described: > > ‘.....As to its characteristic, etc., cognizing object is its > characteristic, > forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental > and > material organism is its proximate cause. There is no such > thing > as consciousness in the four planes of existence without the > characteristic of > cognizing. All consciousness has it. But when a ‘door’ is reached at > the > place where the ‘object’ is evolved, consciousness is the forerunner, > the > precursor. A visible object seen by the eye is cognized by > consciousness > etc...an idea known by the mind is cognized by > consciousness.............. > > The consciousness which arises next does so immediately after the > preceding > consciousness, forming a connected series. Thus it has connection as > manifestation...’ > > ******************** > > Finally on this question of cittas, let me just refer you also to the > Visuddhimagga, which many people have already. At XX30, it describes in > detail > the 89 kinds of consciousness. At 1V n13, there is a lengthy discussion > on > bhavanga and other cittas and also a discussion of the treatment of > these in > the Suttas, Abhidhamma and Commentaries and the ‘inter-connection’. > > A shorter passage which I’ll quote comes from V11139 addressing the > question > you’ve raised before about the cessation of cittas: > > ‘...As to the shortness of the moment; in the ultimate sense the > life-moment > of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the > occurrence of a > single conscious moment. Just as the chariot wheel, when it is rolling, > rolls > (that is, touches the ground) only on one point of (the circumference > of) its > tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life > of > living beings lasts only for a single conscius moment. When that > consciusness > has ceased, the being is said to have ceased, according it is said: ‘In > a past > conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a > future > conscious moment not he did live. not he does live, he will live. In > the > present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will > live. > > ‘ “Life, person, pleasure, pain-just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not > produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > The highest sense this concept will allow’ ‘(Nd.1.42). > > This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the > moment.’ > > > ******************** > Thanks Ken, for giving me an opportunity to reflect on these quotes, > especially > the last one which is always a condition for ‘wise attention’ for me.> > .................... > > Sarah: > > > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes > accompanies > > > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas > and > > is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any > > reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the > level > > of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for > example, > > if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the > Buddha’s > > teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome > > cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents > > that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. > > Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) > > .................. > > > k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting > idea > > that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the > kusala > > citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for > eg > > metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the > falling of > > kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. > .................... > > Sarah: > There are many excellent details about the characteristic of sati > (mindfulness) > in Atthasalini again (121f): > > ‘....As the young treasurer of the king, in charge of the tenfold > treasure, > both early and late causes the king to take note of and remember the > royal > possession, so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act. Hence > the > Elder said: ‘As, your majesty, the king’s confidential adviser early and > late > makes the universal monarch remember: so many, lord, are your > elephants, so > many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so much bullion, so > much gold, > so much property; let your majesty remember it- even so, your majesty, > mindfulness does not allow the floating away of moral states, such as > the four > applications of mindfulness, the four supreme efforts........... > And as > that jewel, the confidential adviser of the universal monarch, knowing > what is > diadvantageous and what is advantageous, removes the disadvantageous and > promotes the advantageous, so mindfulness, searching well the courses of > advantageous and disadvantageous states;- ‘these are disadvantageous > states, > misconduct in body’, etc, removes the disadvantageous states, misconduct > in > body.............It should > be > regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the object, and > as a > door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses.’ > > Ken, I think I’ve got a bit carried away with the typing of quotes, so > I’ll > just address the other points in brief with no more quotes;-) > > To be accurate, sati accompanies all the sobhana cittas which include > the > kusala cittas, vipaka cittas and kiriya cittas (of the arahat). You can > find > full details of these in Nina’s books on the websites linked here: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > We’re not aware of anything (as you know) but sati is aware of any > reality > presenting itself, regardless of whether it is metta, unkindness, wise > consideration, aversion, seeing or visible object. Any selection or > choice > shows there is no sati at that moment. The reason sati (of satipatthana) > needs > to develop is in order to be mindful of what really is appearing now, > not what > we’ve always taken to be appearing now. By being aware (with > understading) of > these realities, it becomes more and more apparent what their > characteristics > are and what the meaning of anatta is. However, if we don’t hear and > consider a > lot of details about metta and compassion for example, we’ll think there > is > awareness of them when really it is attachment or sorrow that is the > reality. > > I’d just like to stress that ‘we’ don’t need to practise anything. > Understanding is the key, rather than a wrong idea of ‘self that can do > or > prctise’. > .................... > > Sarah: > > > ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > > > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to > be > > > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical > > phenomena) > > > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so > on, > > this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different > realities, > > and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to > develop > > detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is > > very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. > .................... > > > k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why > do > > we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. > Also > > does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. > Is > > memory a universal cetasikas. > > .................... > > Sarah: > Panna (rt understanding) and sati need to know and be aware of many, > many > different realities without any selection. They can then ‘see’ the > advantageous > and disadvantageous as discussed in the quote I gave. The lack of sati > and > panna is due to ignorance and wrong view and the lack of ‘guarding’ the > sense > doors. Sanna, (perception or memory) is one key universal cetasika but I > think > this post has already become too long ;-) > > Thanks for your patience and that of others who’ve read through all the > quotes. > Hope this helps;-) > > Sarah 9200 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Seeing Hi Herman Much thanks for the poem. Congrats on your impending marriage and I am married myself with two little kids :). I hope one day I have the privilege and honour to listen to your music as well as Nina or others who have this wonderful and beautiful talent. Kind regards Ken O --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > In between having a new bride, a Brady bunch, working, dsg-ing > playing and listening to Bach and trying to get less sleep, I also > wrote a little poem :-) > > Even as the eye does not see the eye > even as the ear does not hear the ear > even as the nose does not smell the nose > so does the mind not know the mind > > Probably doesn't help at all :-) > > > All the best > > Herman > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > a. When I read that Vedana feels, I am wondering does vedana > really feel > > or it is the citta that cognize the feel. To me Vedana may be just > like a > > filter or a prism that separate light into seven parts, but it does > not > > feel. To me since citta played the role of knowing I tend to > believe that > > citta is the one that know the feel and not cetasikas. Comment > please. > > > > b. Similiarly, the function of citta, does citta really experience > or it > > is just doing its job and say this is interpret as good and this is > > interpret as bad. Comment please. > > > > c. Third question, kuasala and akuasala are mutually exclusive and > only > > certain beautiful cetasikas follow kusala and vice versa, please > kindly > > quote any commentaries that say that? I am quite curious and > perplex why > > are they mutually exclusive and why certain cetasikas follow certain > > cittas. > > > > > > Sorry for now these are my questions abt Abidhamma. If I got more > time to > > read them, i asked more again. > > > > > > Much thanks > > Ken O > > > > > > 9201 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Sarah, S:Realities have no entity in the sense of a self, but they still ‘exist’ and have characteristics which can be known when they arise briefly. I don’t think we can say namas or rupas ‘dwell’ anywhere, and although we can talk about the importance of eye-base or heart-base for seeing or thinking to arise, at the moment of awareness of seeing or thinking, there’s no idea of eye-base or heart-base. We know from our studies however, that without these various bases and doorways and other conditions, there couldn’t be seeing or thinking. In this way, reading about these details (all found in ‘Abhidhamma in Daily Life’), helps to get rid of wrong views and ideas of self controlling rather than conditions ‘forming up’ realities. k: Just a point abt sense base. To me cittas are not dependent of rupa based to have the six senses. To hear physically or to see physically, I do agree that it is rupa dependent. As you say before, during sleep we do not see as the senses are not working and there is a contiunation of cittas which is bavanga cittas. But i more prefer to think that such latent characteristics of seeing is not cease, it is just not arise as there is no right conditions and causes for it to arise. This is similar to lobha and panna, they do not cease with cittas cease, they are passed to the next arising cittas. Hence there is the reasons I believe we could accumulate. If such pannas or lobha cease together with these cittas, then whatever we accumulate will be back to square one. Such characteristics of passing is definitely annatta similar to the nature of cittas and cetasikas. Kind regards Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for being so welcoming to my questions. I very much appreciate > your > > thoughtful answers, and it is also a pleasure to converse on these > questions, > > which as you said, are so 'directly related to....realities to be > known now.' > .................... > > S:Thanks Rob. We seem to post at the same time every day (for me, it’s > late > lunch-time, for you it must be about 2am!.....) I’m pretty ‘addicted’ to > your > daily ‘splash’ of posts too;-) > .................... > S:> > I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how > it > > is...and > > > our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason > > why.....The > > > only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way > and > > cannot be > > > any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause > them to > > be > > > like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara > paccaya > > > which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise > sequentially > > and > > > so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other > citta > > > arising. > > > R:> I do think this is a good explanation of why each present moment is > both > > unique > > and in a sense solitary, even though it is also completely connected > to each > > other > > factor coming before and after, and all those which surround it in the > > present. A > > very clear paradox, but a reality. > .................... > > S:Good..you’ve got the idea I was trying to express. > .................... > > .................... > S:>> Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of > > moral > > > states” (Atth.) > > > > > > Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). > As we’ve > > > discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but > of the > > > characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware > of a > > > process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which > thinks > > > about a process of consciousness. > > > R:> Very good. I am still trying to imagine in a sense what a 'citta' > is > 'formed > > like' and how the 'cetasikas' interact or support it, and how 'sati' > sort of > > overlooks or opens insight into the whole thing, and how satipathana, > like a > > mature sati, can see into the full nature of the momentary arising, > whereas > > sati > > would only see its more obvious qualities...... > .................... > > S:Did my post with Atthasalani and Visuddhimagga quotes to Ken O help at > all? > Like those ingredients in the curry, all the skilful mental factors have > to > intereact together, perform their own functions and condition each other > and > the citta and vice versa. Of course, if there isn’t precise awareness of > a > reality itself, there cannot be awareness of the ‘momentary arising’ or > ‘ceasing’ or that reality. That’s why there has to be the clear > distinction > between different realities and in particular between namas and rupas > first. As > you suggest, sati has to develop and be aware of these realities more > and more > precisely. > .................... > R:> I'd sort of like a kind of molecular chart of these relationships, > however > > I'm > > sure in a way that would give the wrong impression that these events > are like > > little 'things' that sit there for a second, when in truth they must > be more > > in > > the nature of an open quality of mind and not really occupy any place > or > > space but > > simply co-occur together in spaceless, formless function. > .................... > > S:Yes, we can read all the detail we wish in the abhidhamma texts (with > many > charts), but it’s still possible to ‘work it all out’ and take all these > realities for ‘self’. When awareness is aware of a characteristic of > reality, > it’s not concerned with time or place or even relationship at that > moment, it’s > just aware of what is presenting itself, e.g seeing which sees or > visible > object which is seen at this moment. > .................... > R:> Since they really have no entity, it is hard to imagine how they > arise or > > function > > at all. Unlike the physical realities, which maintain physical forms > that > > sort of > > 'house' them, the cittas and cetasikas and sati have no such place to > dwell. > > So > > in a sense it is hard to see how or where they really occur at all. > > > > It is only in conjunction with physical sense organs and physical > objects, I > > guess > > that they can find the conditions to cohere for a moment within the > > functioning of > > these mechanisms, and so they are associated with sense-door, > mind-door and > > mind > > itself. > .................... > > S:Realities have no entity in the sense of a self, but they still > ‘exist’ and > have characteristics which can be known when they arise briefly. I don’t > think > we can say namas or rupas ‘dwell’ anywhere, and although we can talk > about the > importance of eye-base or heart-base for seeing or thinking to arise, at > the > moment of awareness of seeing or thinking, there’s no idea of eye-base > or > heart-base. We know from our studies however, that without these various > bases > and doorways and other conditions, there couldn’t be seeing or thinking. > In > this way, reading about these details (all found in ‘Abhidhamma in Daily > Life’), helps to get rid of wrong views and ideas of self controlling > rather > than conditions ‘forming up’ realities. > .................... > R:> But it would be nice to have alittle more conceptual clarity, which > I guess > > will > > come in time....and then perhaps obscure their reality even more! > > .................... > > S:Again it depends on the purpose for study, I think, as I mentioned to > Christine, and whether there’s any awareness and understanding while > reading > and considering. If there’s more confusion, there can be awareness of > the > confusion too;-) > .................... > S:>>..... Being aware of these different realities, and understanding > > the > > > difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from > the > > idea of > > > a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a > very > > specific > > > function and characteristic. > > > R:> Very good. Thanks for going from my abstract to the clarity of the > concrete > > moment. > ..................... > > S:The Teachings are very ‘concrete’ I find and there is nothing mystical > or > abstract about sati or the objects it is aware of. > .................... > S:> even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, > > > can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). > > > > I wouldn't say so. I think you are sincere and very clear, and I > appreciate > > your > > level-headedness, something that I've been missing most of my life. > .................... > > S:Well, the level-headedness is turning quickly to > big-headedness......Let me > assure you that moments of level-headedness are rare in my day....thanks > anyway. > .................... > R:> Thanks, Sarah. I also find it very enjoyable to dig into the > possibilities > > of > > this present reality. As I said before, I was surprised at my first > exposure > > to > > the commentaries to find them very illuminating and to have a 'warmth' > about > > them. > > They seem to understand the 'luminosity of mind' or at least to > express it, > > even > > if we can't yet get a handle on it ourselves. > > > > These conversations with you are very special, a kind of Dhamma oasis > for me, > > for > > which I give you much thanks. > .................... > > S:Big bow... You bring out the best in us all, Rob...and we’re very > fortunate > to have you around.. > > Sarah 9202 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friendly Greetings Norman --- nymchan0@n... wrote: > Dear dhamma comrades, > > I've just joined the dhammastudygroup and would like to send a > greeting to all of you. > > Namaste, > Norman :-) Hi, and welcome to the list. Thanks for joining us. I'm sorry I wasn't able to join you, Sarah and Linda for discussion at the Peak Cafe but, as you know, I was away (in India). Please feel free to come in with any comments at any time. Jon 9203 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 6:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Rid of impurities... Alex --- axtran@h... wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > > It's good to read everyone's posts, here. As always, yours are > thoughtful and full of wisdom. I feel very fortunate that I found > this group. It's a treat to read your answers to my confusing > questions. > > Thank you, > Alex I also feel extremely fortunate to have found this group. Your comments (and questions) are always much appreciated -- do share your thoughts with us from time to time. Jon 9204 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 9:45am Subject: Re: cittas- sequential and sati You can try www.pariyatti.com. They have a wondeful selection of books and an easy-to-order-from website. > I try ordering the Book of Analysis and Dispeller of Delusion which Robert > has kindly introduced to me. I am still waiting for PTS to respond my > email of my ordering, but till date I have no reply. Is there any other > way to buy it, do you know of any good web on line store that sells these > books. I believe they are impt to my studies on Satipatthana and > Abidhamma. > > Thanks once again and at times I feel guilty that you have spend so much > time in explaining Abidhamma terms to me and also to many others that have > assist me in the understanding of Abidhamma. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > > > > --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > > > > > Sarah: > > >.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this > > > way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions > > > (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises > > sequentially > > > because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the > > > preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other > > conditions > > > to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. > > .................... > > > > > k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and > > falling > > > of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is > > maybe > > > of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel > > rather > > > than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes > > or > > > links that help us understand more on this sequential process. > > .................... > > > > Sarah: > > I'd like to give some links, but most of the detail in this area that I > > have is > > in texts that are not on-line as yet, so I'll try to quote selectively > > (i.e > > choose the shorter ones;-) Why can't there be seeing and hearing at the > > same > > time? Why do cittas (consciusness) arise as they do? I think these > > questions > > are the imponderables and that it is better to understand that this is > > the way > > it is (because of all those conditions). > > > > One of the most useful commentaries is the Atthasalini (The Expositor), > > available from PTS. It's not a big book and much easier to read, I > > think, than > > the English translation of Dhammasangani (1st book of the > > Abhidhamma)which it > > accompanies. > > > > The following quote is from Atth (63): > > > > `....... is termed `consciousness' , because it arranges itself > > in a > > series (`cintoti', or, its own series or continuity) by way of > > apperception in > > a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed `consciousness' > > because > > it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and corruptions. > > > > Moreover, all (four classes) are > > termed > > `consciousness' because they are variegated (citra) acording to > > circumstance. > > The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of > > producing a variety of diversity of effects. > > > > Herein consciousness with lust is one thing, that with hate is > > another..........' > > > > This one comes a little later from the same text at (112). Again citta > > is being > > described: > > > > `.....As to its characteristic, etc., cognizing object is its > > characteristic, > > forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental > > and > > material organism is its proximate cause. There is no such > > thing > > as consciousness in the four planes of existence without the > > characteristic of > > cognizing. All consciousness has it. But when a `door' is reached at > > the > > place where the `object' is evolved, consciousness is the forerunner, > > the > > precursor. A visible object seen by the eye is cognized by > > consciousness > > etc...an idea known by the mind is cognized by > > consciousness.............. > > > > The consciousness which arises next does so immediately after the > > preceding > > consciousness, forming a connected series. Thus it has connection as > > manifestation...' > > > > ******************** > > > > Finally on this question of cittas, let me just refer you also to the > > Visuddhimagga, which many people have already. At XX30, it describes in > > detail > > the 89 kinds of consciousness. At 1V n13, there is a lengthy discussion > > on > > bhavanga and other cittas and also a discussion of the treatment of > > these in > > the Suttas, Abhidhamma and Commentaries and the `inter-connection'. > > > > A shorter passage which I'll quote comes from V11139 addressing the > > question > > you've raised before about the cessation of cittas: > > > > `...As to the shortness of the moment; in the ultimate sense the > > life-moment > > of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the > > occurrence of a > > single conscious moment. Just as the chariot wheel, when it is rolling, > > rolls > > (that is, touches the ground) only on one point of (the circumference > > of) its > > tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life > > of > > living beings lasts only for a single conscius moment. When that > > consciusness > > has ceased, the being is said to have ceased, according it is said: `In > > a past > > conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a > > future > > conscious moment not he did live. not he does live, he will live. In > > the > > present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will > > live. > > > > ` "Life, person, pleasure, pain-just these alone > > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > > Are all alike, gone never to return. > > No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not > > produced; when that is present, then it lives; > > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > > The highest sense this concept will allow' `(Nd.1.42). > > > > This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the > > moment.' > > > > > > ******************** > > Thanks Ken, for giving me an opportunity to reflect on these quotes, > > especially > > the last one which is always a condition for `wise attention' for me.> > > .................... > > > > Sarah: > > > > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes > > accompanies > > > > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas > > and > > > is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any > > > reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the > > level > > > of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for > > example, > > > if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the > > Buddha's > > > teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome > > > cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents > > > that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. > > > Mindfulness "does not allow the floating away of moral states" (Atth.) > > > > .................. > > > > > k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting > > idea > > > that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the > > kusala > > > citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for > > eg > > > metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the > > falling of > > > kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. > > .................... > > > > Sarah: > > There are many excellent details about the characteristic of sati > > (mindfulness) > > in Atthasalini again (121f): > > > > `....As the young treasurer of the king, in charge of the tenfold > > treasure, > > both early and late causes the king to take note of and remember the > > royal > > possession, so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act. Hence > > the > > Elder said: `As, your majesty, the king's confidential adviser early and > > late > > makes the universal monarch remember: so many, lord, are your > > elephants, so > > many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so much bullion, so > > much gold, > > so much property; let your majesty remember it- even so, your majesty, > > mindfulness does not allow the floating away of moral states, such as > > the four > > applications of mindfulness, the four supreme efforts........... > > And as > > that jewel, the confidential adviser of the universal monarch, knowing > > what is > > diadvantageous and what is advantageous, removes the disadvantageous and > > promotes the advantageous, so mindfulness, searching well the courses of > > advantageous and disadvantageous states;- `these are disadvantageous > > states, > > misconduct in body', etc, removes the disadvantageous states, misconduct > > in > > body.............It should > > be > > regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the object, and > > as a > > door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses.' > > > > Ken, I think I've got a bit carried away with the typing of quotes, so > > I'll > > just address the other points in brief with no more quotes;-) > > > > To be accurate, sati accompanies all the sobhana cittas which include > > the > > kusala cittas, vipaka cittas and kiriya cittas (of the arahat). You can > > find > > full details of these in Nina's books on the websites linked here: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > > > We're not aware of anything (as you know) but sati is aware of any > > reality > > presenting itself, regardless of whether it is metta, unkindness, wise > > consideration, aversion, seeing or visible object. Any selection or > > choice > > shows there is no sati at that moment. The reason sati (of satipatthana) > > needs > > to develop is in order to be mindful of what really is appearing now, > > not what > > we've always taken to be appearing now. By being aware (with > > understading) of > > these realities, it becomes more and more apparent what their > > characteristics > > are and what the meaning of anatta is. However, if we don't hear and > > consider a > > lot of details about metta and compassion for example, we'll think there > > is > > awareness of them when really it is attachment or sorrow that is the > > reality. > > > > I'd just like to stress that `we' don't need to practise anything. > > Understanding is the key, rather than a wrong idea of `self that can do > > or > > prctise'. > > .................... > > > > Sarah: > > > > ...I think it's most useful to consider what are the > > > > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to > > be > > > > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical > > > phenomena) > > > > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so > > on, > > > this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different > > realities, > > > and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to > > develop > > > detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is > > > very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. > > .................... > > > > > k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why > > do > > > we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. > > Also > > > does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. > > Is > > > memory a universal cetasikas. > > > > .................... > > > > Sarah: > > Panna (rt understanding) and sati need to know and be aware of many, > > many > > different realities without any selection. They can then `see' the > > advantageous > > and disadvantageous as discussed in the quote I gave. The lack of sati > > and > > panna is due to ignorance and wrong view and the lack of `guarding' the > > sense > > doors. Sanna, (perception or memory) is one key universal cetasika but I > > think > > this post has already become too long ;-) > > > > Thanks for your patience and that of others who've read through all the > > quotes. > > Hope this helps;-) > > > > Sarah > > > > > > 9205 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 1:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana A lot of these questions are skirting the issue which at least makes the alternative view possible, which is whether there is a supernatural reality of consciousness which exists independent of the body. Obviously, if consciousness is just a byproduct of being in a psychophysical organism, then there is no question that all experience absolutely ceases at death. If this were the case, there would be no reincarnation of one's 'consciousness and/or karmas' from one lifetime to a new one, which then picks up where the other one left off to keep working off those tendencies. It seems to me that some have suggested this here, in saying that the real meaning of reincarnation is the birth and death of each citta in each moment, which is picked up in essence by a following citta which continues its tendencies along. To me, one who believes that the psychophysical process is the beginning and ending of life and experience, is a materialist. This is not an insult, it just means that they believe that the physical reality of existence predominates in whether we have sentience or not. Without the body, consciousness is not possible. The alterative view is mysticism. That there is something that remains independent of whether physical bodies are created or not. Even one who believes that there are 'bodies' in other dimensions of existence that one can be reborn into, are necessarily 'mystics' in the sense that they believe in the supernatural. IE, they can get hit by a truck and wake up a moment later in another realm of existence where they will still be conscious, as in the etheric or mental body. Mahayana seems to be more directly acknowledging of the mystical or supernatural dimension of experience. It speaks about the Buddha's past lives and what he was doing, etc. There are references to past lives in Theravada too, I believe, however, but it doesn't seem to be a necessary structure for belief. Mahayana talks about 'direct transmission of mind' and things like that, which are not seen in Theravada. There are more mystical categories, especially in Tibetan Buddhism. If one doesn't even believe in the different dimensions that the Buddha talks about in both the Tipitaka and Mahayana, I think that person is denying part of the Buddha's clear speech. But when it comes to Parinibbana, there is still room for controversy. However, it seems to me that those who are relatively certain that there is no awareness, even unmodified pure awareness, after Parinibbana, are tending to think that once the body is gone, experience is eradicated. I wonder if this reflects somewhat the idea that there is no consciousness independent of a physical body, or whether it just reflects the idea that once the kandhas have been laid to rest, there is no condition for the arising of any more cittas? If the latter were the case, I don't see why some arahants would not just stop having any experience or action even while the body was still there. In other words, they could enter a kind of divine catatonia, where the sense organs and mind were still functionally present, but simply refused to respond to any external or internal stimuli, since there was no longer a notion of a self reacting that would need to arise to do anything. This arahant would simply whither, like plant that has been cut off at the root, and eventually the body, being unused, would simply pass away. But this doesn't seem to be the experience of any aranhants of record. What I am mainly trying to clarify is that it seems that there is a basic conflict between those who believe that the Universe represents a kind of life-form in its own right, and those who feel that we are sort of mistaken beings that showed up through a kind of flaw of cause and effect, the rectification of which is the eradication of same. The Universe as a life-form, of course, gets you into the trouble of an ultimate divine entity. The alternate view has the problem of real nullity, or nothingness. I keep trying to find a real middle ground, where there is beingness, but without a being. And that, to me, is the middle path. Best, Robert Ep. =================== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/8/01 1:45:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be > > able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. > > I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by > > Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada > > correctly here. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I concur that he is definitely expressing the standard Theravadin > commentarial position here. It is not for me to "agree" with that or not, > because I certainly have no basis for evaluating it - I haven't any actual > knowledge as to the nature of nibbana, let alone parinibbana. I would be very > interested in getting a better understanding, from the tipitaka itself, and > mainly the suttas, what the Buddha had to say. However, the one strong > prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does > mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't > rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely > compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the > state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual > materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of > the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) > The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: > (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all > dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to > nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly > satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a > "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, > and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no > longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can > be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and > Mahayana says "yes".) > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > best wishes > > robert > > > ============================ > 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) 9206 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 1:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Thank you Jon. That gives a concrete [nama v. rupa] hook for beginning to discern cittas. Very useful. This can be employed as a very good device whether one believes in the 'single unit citta' theory or not. Even with a continuous consciounsess, one can look at the characteristic of the mental or physical object. Best, Robert Ep. ====== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert Ep > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Good material, Jon. > Thanks. And this description of the arising, > > duration and > > ending of a citta is not so complicated really. Like everything else > > within the > > space-time continuum, it has a beginning, a middle and an end, which > > take place > > seemingly in time and in the physical world. This makes the citta > > somewhat > > accessible as an event, even if it happens too fast and subtly for us to > > normally > > be aware of it. > > As far as citta happening 'too fast and subtly for us to normally be aware > of it' is concerned, my understanding is, yes and no. When awareness is > being developed, it is not aware of an individual citta (I suppose only a > Buddha would have that level of understanding), but it can be aware of the > *characteristic* of citta. This can be known because awareness can take > as its object several moments of, for example, the citta that sees or > hears and thus something of the characteristic of that particular citta > can be known. > > The following passage fro the Visuddhimagga (XXIII, 2), which I cited in a > post to Ken O a few minutes ago, bears repeating. It says in effect that > the beginning of mundane development of understanding is the > understanding that knows the difference between nama (ie. citta and > cetasika) and rupa-- > "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane > development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements > beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the > delimitation of mentality-materiality." > > As to the characteristic of citta, the Explanatory Guide in Bhikkhu > Bodhi's translation of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha states (CMA I, Guide to > #3) > "In the case of citta, its characteristic is the knowing of an object > (vijaanana). Its function is to be a "forerunner" (pubbangama) of the > mental factors in that it presides over them and is always accompanied by > them. Its manifestation--the way it appears in the meditator's > experience--is as a continuity of processes (sandhaana). Its proximate > cause is mind-and-matter (naamaruupa) because consciousness cannot arise > alone, in the complete absence of mental factors and material phenomena." > > Jon 9207 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 9:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/9/01 1:12:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only the > remaining of > > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of what is > pleasant > > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through them. This > > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain experienced via > the > > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings extinguished at > the > > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental function ceasing > > > upon the death of the arahant. > > Hey Howard. > You don't think you can get away with that, do you? [hope you do > of > course]. > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > ================================ Heh, heh, heh!! ;-)) No, I didn't expect to get off easily on this, and the fact that no major "fight" on this has erupted yet is frankly getting me quite nervous! I am having nightmares about an entire Abhidhammic arsenal being assembled! (Just kidding, Sarah, Jon, Robert K, et alia ;-) 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) 9208 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 9:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Web-based Distance Learning MA in Buddhist Studies Hi, Christine - In a message dated 11/9/01 3:12:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Dear All, > > The University of Sunderland proposes an MA, Postgraduate Diploma, > and Postgraduate Certificate in Distance-Learning, entirely on the > Net. > > The Program is led by Professor Peter Harvey, Professor of Buddhist > Studies, University of Sunderland. Probable start date Sept. 02. > For details: http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/buddhist/ > > metta, > Christine > ============================ Ooooh! Wow! What a great opportunity for those with the time, money (I assume there is a fee), and inclination. Peter Harvey is my favorite Buddhist academician (closely followed by Richard Hayes and David Kalupahana). 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) 9209 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 10:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/9/01 4:36:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > A lot of these questions are skirting the issue which at least makes the > alternative view possible, which is whether there is a supernatural reality > of > consciousness which exists independent of the body. > > Obviously, if consciousness is just a byproduct of being in a > psychophysical > organism, then there is no question that all experience absolutely ceases > at > death. If this were the case, there would be no reincarnation of one's > 'consciousness and/or karmas' from one lifetime to a new one, which then > picks up > where the other one left off to keep working off those tendencies. > > It seems to me that some have suggested this here, in saying that the real > meaning > of reincarnation is the birth and death of each citta in each moment, which > is > picked up in essence by a following citta which continues its tendencies > along. > > To me, one who believes that the psychophysical process is the beginning > and > ending of life and experience, is a materialist. This is not an insult, it > just > means that they believe that the physical reality of existence predominates > in > whether we have sentience or not. Without the body, consciousness is not > possible. > > The alterative view is mysticism. That there is something that remains > independent of whether physical bodies are created or not. Even one who > believes > that there are 'bodies' in other dimensions of existence that one can be > reborn > into, are necessarily 'mystics' in the sense that they believe in the > supernatural. IE, they can get hit by a truck and wake up a moment later > in > another realm of existence where they will still be conscious, as in the > etheric > or mental body. > > Mahayana seems to be more directly acknowledging of the mystical or > supernatural > dimension of experience. It speaks about the Buddha's past lives and what > he was > doing, etc. There are references to past lives in Theravada too, I > believe, > however, but it doesn't seem to be a necessary structure for belief. > Mahayana > talks about 'direct transmission of mind' and things like that, which are > not seen > in Theravada. There are more mystical categories, especially in Tibetan > Buddhism. > > If one doesn't even believe in the different dimensions that the Buddha > talks > about in both the Tipitaka and Mahayana, I think that person is denying > part of > the Buddha's clear speech. But when it comes to Parinibbana, there is > still room > for controversy. > > However, it seems to me that those who are relatively certain that there is > no > awareness, even unmodified pure awareness, after Parinibbana, are tending > to think > that once the body is gone, experience is eradicated. I wonder if this > reflects > somewhat the idea that there is no consciousness independent of a physical > body, > or whether it just reflects the idea that once the kandhas have been laid > to rest, > there is no condition for the arising of any more cittas? > > If the latter were the case, I don't see why some arahants would not just > stop > having any experience or action even while the body was still there. In > other > words, they could enter a kind of divine catatonia, where the sense organs > and > mind were still functionally present, but simply refused to respond to any > external or internal stimuli, since there was no longer a notion of a self > reacting that would need to arise to do anything. This arahant would > simply > whither, like plant that has been cut off at the root, and eventually the > body, > being unused, would simply pass away. But this doesn't seem to be the > experience > of any aranhants of record. > > What I am mainly trying to clarify is that it seems that there is a basic > conflict > between those who believe that the Universe represents a kind of life-form > in its > own right, and those who feel that we are sort of mistaken beings that > showed up > through a kind of flaw of cause and effect, the rectification of which is > the > eradication of same. The Universe as a life-form, of course, gets you into > the > trouble of an ultimate divine entity. The alternate view has the problem > of real > nullity, or nothingness. I keep trying to find a real middle ground, where > there > is beingness, but without a being. And that, to me, is the middle path. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > ========================== I think that you are correct in making an association between materialism and the the view of parinibbana as a complete cutting of of experience in *every* sense. I also think that that view has helped contribute to the notion of Theravada being nihilist. 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) 9210 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 4:57pm Subject: Re: Nibbana --- Dear Robert Ep., I think if you read Abhidhamma in Daily life(Nina van Gorkom) this will make these matters clearer. You can read it on the internet at several different sites. In the arupa Brahma planes there is no physical base, there is no materialty at all, there are only citta and cetasika. The Buddhas earlier teachers are now in these worlds, they had developed the jhanas that give the result to arise here and they thought that this was nibbana and that they were fully enlightened. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > A lot of these questions are skirting the issue which at least makes the > alternative view possible, which is whether there is a supernatural reality of > consciousness which exists independent of the body. > > Obviously, if consciousness is just a byproduct of being in a psychophysical > organism, then there is no question that all experience absolutely ceases at > death. If this were the case, there would be no reincarnation of one's > 'consciousness and/or karmas' from one lifetime to a new one, which then picks up > where the other one left off to keep working off those tendencies. > > It seems to me that some have suggested this here, in saying that the real meaning > of reincarnation is the birth and death of each citta in each moment, which is > picked up in essence by a following citta which continues its tendencies along. > > To me, one who believes that the psychophysical process is the beginning and > ending of life and experience, is a materialist. This is not an insult, it just > means that they believe that the physical reality of existence predominates in > whether we have sentience or not. Without the body, consciousness is not > possible. > > The alterative view is mysticism. That there is something that remains > independent of whether physical bodies are created or not. Even one who believes > that there are 'bodies' in other dimensions of existence that one can be reborn > into, are necessarily 'mystics' in the sense that they believe in the > supernatural. IE, they can get hit by a truck and wake up a moment later in > another realm of existence where they will still be conscious, as in the etheric > or mental body. > > Mahayana seems to be more directly acknowledging of the mystical or supernatural > dimension of experience. It speaks about the Buddha's past lives and what he was > doing, etc. There are references to past lives in Theravada too, I believe, > however, but it doesn't seem to be a necessary structure for belief. Mahayana > talks about 'direct transmission of mind' and things like that, which are not seen > in Theravada. There are more mystical categories, especially in Tibetan > Buddhism. > > If one doesn't even believe in the different dimensions that the Buddha talks > about in both the Tipitaka and Mahayana, I think that person is denying part of > the Buddha's clear speech. But when it comes to Parinibbana, there is still room > for controversy. > > However, it seems to me that those who are relatively certain that there is no > awareness, even unmodified pure awareness, after Parinibbana, are tending to think > that once the body is gone, experience is eradicated. I wonder if this reflects > somewhat the idea that there is no consciousness independent of a physical body, > or whether it just reflects the idea that once the kandhas have been laid to rest, > there is no condition for the arising of any more cittas? > > If the latter were the case, I don't see why some arahants would not just stop > having any experience or action even while the body was still there. In other > words, they could enter a kind of divine catatonia, where the sense organs and > mind were still functionally present, but simply refused to respond to any > external or internal stimuli, since there was no longer a notion of a self > reacting that would need to arise to do anything. This arahant would simply > whither, like plant that has been cut off at the root, and eventually the body, > being unused, would simply pass away. But this doesn't seem to be the experience > of any aranhants of record. > > What I am mainly trying to clarify is that it seems that there is a basic conflict > between those who believe that the Universe represents a kind of life-form in its > own right, and those who feel that we are sort of mistaken beings that showed up > through a kind of flaw of cause and effect, the rectification of which is the > eradication of same. The Universe as a life-form, of course, gets you into the > trouble of an ultimate divine entity. The alternate view has the problem of real > nullity, or nothingness. I keep trying to find a real middle ground, where there > is beingness, but without a being. And that, to me, is the middle path. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > =================== > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 11/8/01 1:45:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > > > I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be > > > able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. > > > I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by > > > Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada > > > correctly here. > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I concur that he is definitely expressing the standard Theravadin > > commentarial position here. It is not for me to "agree" with that or not, > > because I certainly have no basis for evaluating it - I haven't any actual > > knowledge as to the nature of nibbana, let alone parinibbana. I would be very > > interested in getting a better understanding, from the tipitaka itself, and > > mainly the suttas, what the Buddha had to say. However, the one strong > > prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does > > mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't > > rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely > > compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the > > state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual > > materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of > > the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) > > The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: > > (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all > > dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to > > nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly > > satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a > > "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, > > and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no > > longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can > > be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and > > Mahayana says "yes".) > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > best wishes > > > robert > > > > > ============================ > > 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) 9211 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:03pm Subject: Re: Web-based Distance Learning MA in Buddhist Studies Hi Howard, I am not sure about fees - but as it is a course with an academic award, I would imagine the fees could be a hurdle for some people (me). Peter Harvey is also said to be a Meditation Teacher at Samatha Trust. The Samatha Trust has its roots in Thai Theravada Buddhism. It is a lay organization with around 80 teachers, mostly in the UK. It teaches a carefully structured form of mindfulness of breathing, along with a range of other meditations and Pali chanting. It explores a range of texts, Sutta, Abhidhamma and a few Mahayana texts to bring alive their relevance to contemporary practice. Interestingly, it's only Publication to date is "Abhidhamma Papers" ed. by Mark Rowhands http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/ (click on Publications) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Christine - > > In a message dated 11/9/01 3:12:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, > cforsyth@v... writes: > > > > Dear All, > > > > The University of Sunderland proposes an MA, Postgraduate Diploma, > > and Postgraduate Certificate in Distance-Learning, entirely on the > > Net. > > > > The Program is led by Professor Peter Harvey, Professor of Buddhist > > Studies, University of Sunderland. Probable start date Sept. 02. > > For details: http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/buddhist/ > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > ============================ > Ooooh! Wow! What a great opportunity for those with the time, money (I > assume there is a fee), and inclination. Peter Harvey is my favorite Buddhist > academician (closely followed by Richard Hayes and David Kalupahana). > > 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) 9212 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:05pm Subject: (2) The Vietnamese Tipitaka --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > I have no doubt that you and your website play a big role in encouraging the > translation of these excellent texts into Vietnamese and I sincerely hope that > further texts and commentaries will be translated too. --------------------------------------------------------------- BA: :-) Not sure if my humble contribution has played a "big role"! However, I hope that at least, it would create some awareness within our VN Buddhist community (which are largely Mahayana-orientated) - both inside Vietnam and overseas - to have a true appreciation of the Pali Tipitaka and the Theravada tradition. Metta, Binh 9213 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 0:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Web-based Distance Learning MA in Buddhist Studies Hi, Christine - Thanks for the info! I've bookmarked the publications page to look over "the Abhidhamma Papers" and in anticipation of more publications being added. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/9/01 8:07:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I am not sure about fees - but as it is a course with an academic > award, I would imagine the fees could be a hurdle for some people > (me). > > Peter Harvey is also said to be a Meditation Teacher at Samatha > Trust. The Samatha Trust has its roots in Thai Theravada Buddhism. > It is a lay organization with around 80 teachers, mostly in the UK. > It teaches a carefully structured form of mindfulness of breathing, > along with a range of other meditations and Pali chanting. It > explores a range of texts, Sutta, Abhidhamma and a few Mahayana texts > to bring alive their relevance to contemporary practice. > > Interestingly, it's only Publication to date is "Abhidhamma Papers" > ed. by Mark Rowhands > http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/ (click on Publications) > /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) 9214 From: Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 9:33pm Subject: Re: A tentative question --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead me into one > trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. > > Hello Sarah and Christine, Your discussion has impressed upon me that the Dhamma is very much about finding ourselves, however incongruous that sounds. I remember reading about a sutta which used that sort of language, and I am trying to track it down again. Some young noblemen were too busy to listen to the Buddha because they were searching for a thief who had made off with their valuables. The Buddha asked them, `what do you want to do, find your possessions, or find your selves?' I've been immersed in `homework,' over the last couple of weeks, and will be glad to get back into the discussions. Kind regards Ken H. 9215 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 11:39pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Hi All, First of all I like to thank Christine for this wonderful web sites. Another wonderful site to study the Abidhamma. When I read its introduction, I find that maybe I have not a clear picture of cetasikas. This is written in its introduction "The term cetasika (paragraph three) was also discussed, and one major difficulty proved to be finding a suitable translation - as for many terms in abhidhamma. The word comes from the same root as citta, 'cit', which means 'think'. '-ika' means 'belonging to'. Cetasika is that which supports citta. English has no adequate translation for the word. 'Property' of mind has too many connotations of possession to be accurate. In this book we have used the translation 'mental factor'; if rather meaningless, it is at least neutral. But other words can also be used to give the feel of the term, such as the translation 'ingredients' used in the present essay." I hope some of you here would kindly explain more of this term. Quotes from commetary will be very helpful and appreciated. Much thanks Ken O 9216 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 2:00am Subject: Re: A tentative question - Ken Dear Ken, Thank you for sharing that information about the Chinese Sangha method of learning and practice......I have heard of similar instructions being given to westerners when they begin a long retreat (months to years). They are forbidden to read anything. I think it is because we live in our heads too much and can mistake unmindful thinking/reading/discussing for practice. I like what you said about the impossibility of controlling thoughts - that, I've always known - the Mahasi method involves gently mentally noting the thought, sound ,whatever that captures the mind, and the mind then recalls the meditation object.(breath, rising and falling of the abdomen). But, about Sarahs' allusion to 'no control'......I wonder if it covers a much wider field. Thoughts arise and attempting to control/suppress/blank them out is useless. Agreed. But is everything unable to be controlled or shaped to a desired result ? Wouldn't that mean we are just like flotsam on the ocean, washed unwillingly anywhere the tides take us....... metta, Christine "Sarah wrote: The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the heart of your `quandry', is that really there is no self at all to determine at what time and on what occasions there will be `practice'. If there is an attempt to be aware of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging to self to be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. As you've rightly mentioned before, it's not easy at all to give up an idea of self and control. When I was a serious meditator, I was encouraged by teachers and myown wrong views to think I was attaining high levels of insight and indeed I seemed to float around in a permanently calm state. I might still have been floating on Cloud Nine if it weren't for the help of K.Sujin and Nina who helped me see that there wasn't even any awareness of seeing and visible object or the difference between them. My practice which I clung to so dearly wasn't even at Ground Level because it was all undertaken with the idea of self and control." --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Christine, > > to choose a method to practise is indeed a very difficult choice. This is > I think the most difficult is to start to learn Buddhism that of one > inclinations. My experience of learning is based on the traditional > Chinese Sangha method where one stick to a few suttas for five years. To > stick a few suttas for five years is I think a very difficult thing to do. > Once in a while, I tends to read others but the focus is still the few > suttas basing our practise on these few suttas. Then after the teacher > will suggest us the other suttas to read other the five years discipline > approach. I think mine is very lucky, because the day I pick up a book on > Pure Land, it has been with me for six years. I am still practising now > with more clarity after I read more on Satipatthana and Abidhamma. The > logic given by one Chinese monk is that our mind is full of diverting > thoughts, by focusing on a few, one thoughts is less diverse, more focus. > Secondly, the monk say as one begin the Buddhism way, one will get confuse > easily if one read too many. Thirdly is that the Chinese believe that if > one understand one sutta, the rest of the sutta will be much more clearar. > > > Furthermore on the point of controlling, I think when I start the path, I > was also thinking of controlling my thoughts which I realise is also > incorrect bc thoughts cannot be control. They got to be let go or to be > investigate. To control something that was come from nowhere and goes to > nowhere to me is quite futile. > > These are just my personal experience which I like to share with you. To > me your keeness in learning the way is indeed much to be rejoice and > commendable. No matter what, we hope we could assist you in your path as > you have assisted us. Together let us strive with vigour. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O 9217 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 4:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A tentative question - Ken Hi Christine But, about Sarahs' allusion to 'no control'......I wonder if it > covers a much wider field. Thoughts arise and attempting to > control/suppress/blank them out is useless. Agreed. But is > everything unable to be controlled or shaped to a desired > result ? Wouldn't that mean we are just like flotsam on the ocean, > washed unwillingly anywhere the tides take us....... This is a million dollar question. Are we willingly surrender our clinging so as to be in the "flotsam", is indeed a very difficult choice. Whether we should follow such a "flotsum" in a sense losing what we use to think as a self, losing our self control and do not know where the tide will bring us, I think for me, I would choose this path even though I do not know in the end where this tide will bring me to. Kind regards Ken O 9218 From: Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 7:40am Subject: Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body Dear Robert Epstein How are you? You wrote: "To me, one who believes that the psychophysical process is the beginning and ending of life and experience, is a materialist. This is not an insult, it just means that they believe that the physical reality of existence predominates in whether we have sentience or not. Without the body, consciousness is not possible." I think you are describing Gotama the Buddha and his Theravada disciples as materialists. The Buddha taught the Five Psychophysical Components of Existence (Pancakkhandhaa), one of them is, of course, physical reality. If you would recall, I have posted "Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation?!" (Message 6721, Sun Jul 22, 2001 5:23 pm) I produced the following quote: Section 53, Upaya Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, within Khandha Samyuttam, Khandha Vaggo, Samyutta Nikayo. The paragraph is as follows. "Yo, bhikkhave, evam vadeyya– `ahamaññatra rupam aññatra vedanaya aññatra saññaya aññatra sankharehi viññanassa agatim va gatim va cutim va upapattim va vuddhim va virulhim va vepullam va paññapessami'ti, netam thanam vijjati. Full Translation "Monks, whoever might thus say that he (I in Pali syntax) would declare consciousness's coming, or going, or dying, or being born, or growth, or development, or expansion, without matter, without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, the foundation (for that declaration) does not exist." The above discourse clearly states that "without the body, consciousness is not possible.(as you wrote in your post)" With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > A lot of these questions are skirting the issue which at least makes the > alternative view possible, which is whether there is a supernatural reality of > consciousness which exists independent of the body. > > Obviously, if consciousness is just a byproduct of being in a psychophysical > organism, then there is no question that all experience absolutely ceases at > death. If this were the case, there would be no reincarnation of one's > 'consciousness and/or karmas' from one lifetime to a new one, which then picks up > where the other one left off to keep working off those tendencies. > > It seems to me that some have suggested this here, in saying that the real meaning > of reincarnation is the birth and death of each citta in each moment, which is > picked up in essence by a following citta which continues its tendencies along. > > To me, one who believes that the psychophysical process is the beginning and > ending of life and experience, is a materialist. This is not an insult, it just > means that they believe that the physical reality of existence predominates in > whether we have sentience or not. Without the body, consciousness is not > possible. > > The alterative view is mysticism. That there is something that remains > independent of whether physical bodies are created or not. Even one who believes > that there are 'bodies' in other dimensions of existence that one can be reborn > into, are necessarily 'mystics' in the sense that they believe in the > supernatural. IE, they can get hit by a truck and wake up a moment later in > another realm of existence where they will still be conscious, as in the etheric > or mental body. > > Mahayana seems to be more directly acknowledging of the mystical or supernatural > dimension of experience. It speaks about the Buddha's past lives and what he was > doing, etc. There are references to past lives in Theravada too, I believe, > however, but it doesn't seem to be a necessary structure for belief. Mahayana > talks about 'direct transmission of mind' and things like that, which are not seen > in Theravada. There are more mystical categories, especially in Tibetan > Buddhism. > > If one doesn't even believe in the different dimensions that the Buddha talks > about in both the Tipitaka and Mahayana, I think that person is denying part of > the Buddha's clear speech. But when it comes to Parinibbana, there is still room > for controversy. > > However, it seems to me that those who are relatively certain that there is no > awareness, even unmodified pure awareness, after Parinibbana, are tending to think > that once the body is gone, experience is eradicated. I wonder if this reflects > somewhat the idea that there is no consciousness independent of a physical body, > or whether it just reflects the idea that once the kandhas have been laid to rest, > there is no condition for the arising of any more cittas? > > If the latter were the case, I don't see why some arahants would not just stop > having any experience or action even while the body was still there. In other > words, they could enter a kind of divine catatonia, where the sense organs and > mind were still functionally present, but simply refused to respond to any > external or internal stimuli, since there was no longer a notion of a self > reacting that would need to arise to do anything. This arahant would simply > whither, like plant that has been cut off at the root, and eventually the body, > being unused, would simply pass away. But this doesn't seem to be the experience > of any aranhants of record. > > What I am mainly trying to clarify is that it seems that there is a basic conflict > between those who believe that the Universe represents a kind of life-form in its > own right, and those who feel that we are sort of mistaken beings that showed up > through a kind of flaw of cause and effect, the rectification of which is the > eradication of same. The Universe as a life-form, of course, gets you into the > trouble of an ultimate divine entity. The alternate view has the problem of real > nullity, or nothingness. I keep trying to find a real middle ground, where there > is beingness, but without a being. And that, to me, is the middle path. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > =================== > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 11/8/01 1:45:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > > > I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be > > > able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. > > > I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by > > > Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada > > > correctly here. > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I concur that he is definitely expressing the standard Theravadin > > commentarial position here. It is not for me to "agree" with that or not, > > because I certainly have no basis for evaluating it - I haven't any actual > > knowledge as to the nature of nibbana, let alone parinibbana. I would be very > > interested in getting a better understanding, from the tipitaka itself, and > > mainly the suttas, what the Buddha had to say. However, the one strong > > prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does > > mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't > > rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely > > compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the > > state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual > > materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of > > the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) > > The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: > > (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all > > dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to > > nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly > > satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a > > "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, > > and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no > > longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can > > be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and > > Mahayana says "yes".) > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > best wishes > > > robert > > > > > ============================ > > 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) 9219 From: Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 4:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body Hi, Suan (and Robert) - In a message dated 11/10/01 10:41:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, abhidhammika@y... writes: > "Monks, whoever might thus say that he (I in Pali syntax) would > declare consciousness's coming, or going, or dying, or being > born, or growth, or development, or expansion, without matter, > without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, > the foundation (for that declaration) does not exist." > > The above discourse clearly states that "without the body, > consciousness is not possible.(as you wrote in your post)" > > =========================== There are two comments I would make with regard to these. The more specific one is that supposedly the Buddha did speak of realms where there is vi~n~nana but not rupa. The more general comment is that exactly what is meant by 'rupa' is quite important here. One view is that rupa is material substance, existing "out there" quite independently of being able to be observed, and, somehow, observable by mind. (Whether or not that "mind" is an epiphenomenon of such externally existing matter when organized properly is a separate question). But another view is that rupa is merely the objective pole of subject-object discernment (with "mind" being the subjective pole), not existing as an independent, self-existing principle, but existing only as an aspect of the discernment operation, artificially isolated by the reification tendency of worldling (just as the "mind" is so isolated). In this view, consciousness of rupa does not imply an independent, se;f-existing rupa. To be aware of the two aspects, subjective and objective, of the discernment process without reifying either is, I think, a bit of wisdom. Getting back to the main point: The quoted material above seems to merely say that there is no discernment unless it is discernment of matter, feeling, memory, or other. There is no question that whatever is discerned are aspects of the five khandhas. but that doesn't imply that there is ruled out states in which discernment of memories, concepts, thoughts, mental feelings, emotions, etc occurs without any visual, auditory, gustatory, or olfactory discernment occurring. 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, a0 phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 9220 From: Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 4:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body Hi, all - I forgot tactile discernment in the following. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/10/01 12:01:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Getting back to the main point: The quoted material above seems to > merely say that there is no discernment unless it is discernment of matter, > > feeling, memory, or other. There is no question that whatever is discerned > are aspects of the five khandhas. but that doesn't imply that there is > ruled > out states in which discernment of memories, concepts, thoughts, mental > feelings, emotions, etc occurs without any visual, auditory, gustatory, or > olfactory discernment occurring. > > /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) 9221 From: Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Hi Ken, If you have time, check out Nina's book, Cetasika, esp. on the introduction page. Her book is online at http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas2.html Nina put an analogy of the king and his retinues (from Atthasalini) as for the relation between citta and cetasika. This is an excellent book. You also reminded me of a conversation in Milindapanha. Hence said the reverend Nagasena : "A difficult thing, sire, has been done by the Blessed One. What difficult thing reverend Nagasena has been done by the Blessed One? A difficult thing, sire, has done by Blessed One when he declared the determination of these immaterial states, mind and its coefficients, which have arisen in one object, saying, this is contact, this is feeling, this is perception, this is volition, this is mind." The more I read and study, the more I know how little I know. Best wishes and anumodhana in your study. Num 9222 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 5:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body Hi Suan and Robert Ep How does one explain the immaterial-sphere plane as against to the idea that conscious need rupa to be in existence? Kind regards Ken O 9223 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 5:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Hi Num, I have read a few chapters of the book. I wish to have a more thorough understanding of this term (just this term only :)). I think commentary will be of great help when I ask Sarah why cittas must be sequential and I ask Amara in DL list abt Sanna. the commentaries they quoted indeed help me to understand the intracies of such meaning of pali words. As i do not understand pali, hence a thorough definition of this term will be very meaning to me. I have also read cetasikas defintion from the book by Bhikkhu Bodhi. But I feel there is a lack of thorough presentation to this term which I feel of paramount importance to our development as panna is a cetasika. As I do not have the commentaries, a few quotes to me will be indeed very appreciative. Kind regards Ken O --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Hi Ken, > > If you have time, check out Nina's book, Cetasika, esp. on the > introduction > page. > Her book is online at http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas2.html > > Nina put an analogy of the king and his retinues (from Atthasalini) as > for > the relation between citta and cetasika. This is an excellent book. > > You also reminded me of a conversation in Milindapanha. > > Hence said the reverend Nagasena : > > "A difficult thing, sire, has been done by the Blessed One. > > What difficult thing reverend Nagasena has been done by the Blessed One? > > A difficult thing, sire, has done by Blessed One when he declared the > determination of these immaterial states, mind and its coefficients, > which > have arisen in one object, saying, this is contact, this is feeling, > this is > perception, this is volition, this is mind." > > > The more I read and study, the more I know how little I know. > > Best wishes and anumodhana in your study. > > > Num 9224 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:21pm Subject: Re: Cetasikas Dear Ken, I hesitate to offer yet another link....:-) but I operate on the belief that if the same things are said in two or three different ways, sometimes there is a "Eureka!" response and understanding can occur. There is a set of five lessons on Introduction to Abhidhamma Studies at "The Learning Site" in Cyberspace. The Lessons are: Lesson 1 Introduction Lesson 2 The Compendium of Consciousness Lesson 3 The Compenium of Mental Factors (cetasikas) Lesson 4 Continuation of Lesson 3 Lesson 5 Rounding up of Lessons 1 - 4 Link to Summary The lessons are at the very bottom of the Homepage....just above the picture of the elephant in the river at sunset in Sri Lanka. metta, Christine a bit about 'where the study group is coming from': "Since we are a Study Group in the Theravada Buddhist tradition, most of the material herein presented will be from the "inside" as it is upheld by the Theravada Orthodoxy. The textbook we will use is the Abhidhammatta Sangraha, an introductory manual for new students and monks alike. The text is ascribed to Acarya Anuruddha but details of his time and whereabouts are not known for certain although it became a most influential textbook. Recent(well known) translations of the text were made by the late Ven. Mahathera Narada. Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. U Rewata Dhamma of Burma in 1993; 2000. Although this class is based on the Theravada Orthodoxy, there is consideration of Modern Critical Scholarship in dialogue with it as well as interpolated opinions of other schools. For instance, Bhikkhu Dhammajoti translated Skandhila's Abhidharmavatara entitled "Entrance into the Supreme Doctrine" (which is extant only in Chinese) which has many very useful points and will therefore be consider at the appropriate time." http://skybusiness.com/buddh/ --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Num, > > I have read a few chapters of the book. I wish to have a more thorough > understanding of this term (just this term only :)). I think commentary > will be of great help when I ask Sarah why cittas must be sequential and I > ask Amara in DL list abt Sanna. the commentaries they quoted indeed help > me to understand the intracies of such meaning of pali words. As i do not > understand pali, hence a thorough definition of this term will be very > meaning to me. I have also read cetasikas defintion from the book by > Bhikkhu Bodhi. But I feel there is a lack of thorough presentation to > this term which I feel of paramount importance to our development as panna > is a cetasika. As I do not have the commentaries, a few quotes to me will > be indeed very appreciative. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O 9225 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 10:51pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > k: When the verse imply that is no sufferer - to me it would imply that > we have understand reality. Then where is suffering to be found. On one > hand we are talking abt anatta (no sufferer), on the other we are not > viewing suffering as anatta (suffering exist). To me this is an incorrect > perspective. Both are anatta. Dear Kenneth, To me if you see suffering as 'only anatta', you are in an annihilationist mode. If you see suffering as a 'real existing event' then you are in the mode of asserting that a dharma exists as an actual entity. Both are wrong. If you see that suffering has no real permanent being [anatta/anicca] but that the experience of suffering is still a real *experience* which cannot be denied, then, to me, you are in the middle way. You deny the ultimate reality of the suffering, but you acknowledge the present pain that it causes, and you help the sufferer both ultimately, but also provisionally right now. Regards, Robert Ep. 9226 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 11:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Sarah, I just wanted to say how much I appreciated your points here, once again. I have been enjoying being engaged with these micro-topics within the discernment of realities, and I appreciate all of your interesting insights. I am a little slower lately in picking up threads and responding. Unfortunately I have gotten a little overwhelmed and I may lose my reputation for being voluminous [a great relief to all!]. But I am still following as best I can, and I really enjoy our cyber-colloquies. Thanks for your kind remarks as well. It's strange that so much dhamma friendship can exist over the internet, but it just shows that the means of understanding and communication are not dependent on any particular physical conditions. The little look I've been getting at the reality of cittas and cetasikas is pretty fascinating. I'll look foward to continuing these exchanges. More comments below: ============================ --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for being so welcoming to my questions. I very much appreciate your > > thoughtful answers, and it is also a pleasure to converse on these questions, > > which as you said, are so 'directly related to....realities to be known now.' > .................... > > S:Thanks Rob. We seem to post at the same time every day (for me, it’s late > lunch-time, for you it must be about 2am!.....) I’m pretty ‘addicted’ to your > daily ‘splash’ of posts too;-) > .................... Thanks. I'm sorry for being a little less present lately. My life has caught up with me!! Help! > S: Like those ingredients in the curry, all the skilful mental factors have to > intereact together, perform their own functions and condition each other and > the citta and vice versa. This is a good metaphor and is helpful. I like the idea of the 'flavors' of the different factors affecting each other and interacting. This makes a lot of sense. Let me ask one question: would you say that the citta is like a window, a sort of open door of awareness, through which the cetasikas perform more specific acts? I am getting the feeling that the real intelligence is carried by the cetasikas, that they do the work, and the citta is more of a passive opening of awareness through which they function. ......... Of course, if there isn’t precise awareness of a > reality itself, there cannot be awareness of the ‘momentary arising’ or > ‘ceasing’ or that reality. That’s why there has to be the clear distinction > between different realities and in particular between namas and rupas first. As > you suggest, sati has to develop and be aware of these realities more and more > precisely. I still appreciate that basic idea you expressed about this the other day: that the first thing to look at is the distinction between namas and rupas in a general way. If you are having several moments of an experience you can keep looking at what it is and try to distinguish its basic area of reality. This is confusing enough and a good place to start. Then i guess you can try to get a sense of the types of qualities or functions that are present. ........ > S:Realities have no entity in the sense of a self, but they still ‘exist’ and > have characteristics which can be known when they arise briefly. I don’t think > we can say namas or rupas ‘dwell’ anywhere, and although we can talk about the > importance of eye-base or heart-base for seeing or thinking to arise, at the > moment of awareness of seeing or thinking, there’s no idea of eye-base or > heart-base. We know from our studies however, that without these various bases > and doorways and other conditions, there couldn’t be seeing or thinking. In > this way, reading about these details (all found in ‘Abhidhamma in Daily > Life’), helps to get rid of wrong views and ideas of self controlling rather > than conditions ‘forming up’ realities. So it is more for the view than for the detail that these mechanics are important. One can see that on various levels, anicca and anatta are the functional principles? ......... > S:Big bow... You bring out the best in us all, Rob...and we’re very fortunate > to have you around.. That is so very kind. I feel very lucky to have these exchanges. It's a pleasure to be here! Best, Robert Ep. 9227 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 11:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Robert Ep., > I think if you read Abhidhamma in Daily life(Nina van Gorkom) this > will make these matters clearer. You can read it on the internet at > several different sites. > In the arupa Brahma planes there is no physical base, there is no > materialty at all, there are only citta and cetasika. The Buddhas > earlier teachers are now in these worlds, they had developed the > jhanas that give the result to arise here and they thought that this > was nibbana and that they were fully enlightened. > robert Thanks, Rob. This is a helpful clarification. So the philosophy does include the idea of supernatural planes of existence. They just aren't seen as the 'real deal' and still contain seeds of future suffering. Best, Robert Ep. 9228 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 11:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A tentative question - Ken --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Ken, > > Thank you for sharing that information about the Chinese Sangha > method of learning and practice......I have heard of similar > instructions being given to westerners when they begin a long retreat > (months to years). They are forbidden to read anything. I think it is > because we live in our heads too much and can mistake unmindful > thinking/reading/discussing for practice. > > I like what you said about the impossibility of controlling thoughts - > that, I've always known - the Mahasi method involves gently mentally > noting the thought, sound ,whatever that captures the mind, and the > mind then recalls the meditation object.(breath, rising and > falling of the abdomen). > > But, about Sarahs' allusion to 'no control'......I wonder if it > covers a much wider field. Thoughts arise and attempting to > control/suppress/blank them out is useless. Agreed. But is > everything unable to be controlled or shaped to a desired > result ? Wouldn't that mean we are just like flotsam on the ocean, > washed unwillingly anywhere the tides take us....... I think that's the implication, Christine. We are not entities who have the control we think we do, but we experience events and react to them according to a variety of factors to which we are passive. Some of Buddhist philosophies are divided on to what extent, or whether, there is actual volition in the human being. The point of view that I believe exists in Abhidhamma is that since there is no 'self' to have a will or intent of its own and exercise it through volitional acts, the idea of exerting control is an illusion of mind. If I am wrong, I am sure I will be corrected by those who are more expert here. Best, Robert Ep. 9229 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > "Monks, whoever might thus say that he (I in Pali syntax) would > declare consciousness's coming, or going, or dying, or being > born, or growth, or development, or expansion, without matter, > without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, > the foundation (for that declaration) does not exist." > > The above discourse clearly states that "without the body, > consciousness is not possible.(as you wrote in your post)" Dear Suan, Where does this leave the existence of the other non-physical planes of existence, and the Buddha's various discussions of reincarnation? Best Regards, Robert Ep. 9230 From: Binh Anson Date: Sat Nov 10, 2001 11:58pm Subject: A new mirror site for BuddhaSasana web page G'day, The Buddhasasana web page has an additional mirror site at: ==> http://buddhanet.net/budsas Please come and have a look. Let me know if you have any problem. To date, BuddhaSasana web site is stored at 3 separate locations: Main site: http://www.budsas.org Mirror site 1: http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom Mirror site 2: http://buddhanet.net/budsas I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Bhante Pannyavaro and David Bassin of the BuddhaNet host for generous assistance. Metta, ===== Binh ANSON - Perth, Western Australia http://www.budsas.org & http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom 9231 From: Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 0:22am Subject: Re: Nibbana --- Dear Rob. E., Yes: except that supernatural is not a good term. These planes are entirely natural, just different from our plane. As you say they are still dukkha, still anicca. After 1000's of aeons the beings here die and are reborn in other planes. In fact, in the long samsara all of us must have been lived in these rarified existences at least a few times. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- > > Dear Robert Ep., > > I think if you read Abhidhamma in Daily life(Nina van Gorkom) this > > will make these matters clearer. You can read it on the internet at > > several different sites. > > In the arupa Brahma planes there is no physical base, there is no > > materialty at all, there are only citta and cetasika. The Buddhas > > earlier teachers are now in these worlds, they had developed the > > jhanas that give the result to arise here and they thought that this > > was nibbana and that they were fully enlightened. > > robert > > Thanks, Rob. > This is a helpful clarification. So the philosophy does include the idea of > supernatural planes of existence. They just aren't seen as the 'real deal' and > still contain seeds of future suffering. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9232 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 1:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A tentative question Dear Christine, > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Sorry, I wasn't clear - it means "not feeling able to > compare favourably to, in the expression of knowledge or skill" the > other members of this List. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Thanks for replying back and considering my comments so carefully. (Actually, you were clear and I was just showing my ignorance and not being 'up to speed') It seems to me that your posts are much appreciated by us all. If I find myself thinking and comparing like in your quote, it’s usually our old friend (or rather foe) of mana (conceit) popping up again I find... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I appreciate your explanation of the two traps - > 'meditation' and 'abhidhamma'. But I wonder if it is almost a > necessary stage to pass through - spending some time in the trap > before one recognises the constriction and steps out? > .......Is it a trap - or is it a temporary raft? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I see moments of wise consideration and reflection and any awareness or other wholesome states as being very beneficial and productive, regardless of whether we are or were ‘meditating’, ‘studying abhidhamma’ or ‘playing tennis’ when they arose. On the contrary, any unskilful states (including moments of wrong view and ignorance) in these ‘situations’ merely ensnare ‘us’ further. Mike wrote a helpful post, I thought, a while back (2458), saved under ‘Anatta’ in Useful Posts which I’ll quote from below: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts ‘Whether pariyatti or patipada or panyatti arises, whether samatha or vipassana bhavana is cultivated, whether dhammas are investigated or not, or buddhadhamma listened to or ignored, even whether kusala or akusala kamma is committed, NO ONE IS THERE in the arising, or the cultivation, or the investigation, listening, ignoring, thinking, speaking or acting. If there is no chooser, how can there be, or have been, a choice? Just wisdom or ignorance, in any possible situation, tipping the scale one way or the other depending on how much of each has accumulated. I think that's why right effort is defined by its outcomes, rather than its intent. It leads to: the going down of unskilled states already arisen; the non-arising unskilled states as yet unarisen; the arising of skilled states as yet unarisen; and the continuation, development and perfection of skilled states already arisen. (sorry I can't cite the source of this translation) No one choosing or intending in any of these--just cause, and effect. So it really doesn't make much sense to argue about whether we'll meditate or not, or study abhidhamma or not, or contemplate our breath rather than aggregates or bases or elements. 'We' will do what conditions, internal and external, allow us to do, and not otherwise--ever. If sufficient wisdom has accumulated for us to think, say and do intelligent things, and not to think, say or do stupid things, that's just wisdom at work--not 'us'. ‘ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: May I ask if your first Buddhist teacher Munindra is the > same Munindra who was the teacher of Joseph Goldstein and Lama Surya > Das? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Yes, that would be right. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I don't think it was 'structure in our day' so much > as 'structure in my learning and practice'. There is so much > information and opinion on the Internet. As a beginner, it is > difficult initially to find a way of knowing what is worthwhile to > study and what is not. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Again, I think it’s not so much a matter of choices and dilemmas, but of developing understanding. As your quote and detail about panna suggests (appreciated but snipped for now), what is important is to develop understanding of realities. At any moment of direct understanding, there isn’t any concern about what is right or wrong to be ‘doing’ at this moment, because it just understands the characteristic appearing. We’re really all beginners and what each of us may study (in a book sense) or not will depend on so many conditions. I understand your concern from a conventional point of view, however. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I am familiar with the terms Impermanence, Suffering and > Not-Self - but No Control is not so familiar. Could you quote some > references please? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I think it’s a matter of interpretation and understanding when we read (the same) suttas. When I read about realities or about not-self, I understand them to be about ‘No control’. For example, I've just been reading from The Life of the Buddha by B.Nanamoli: ‘The discourse on the Not-Self characteristic’ ‘Bhikkhus, material form is not self. If material form were self, this material form would not lead to affliction, and it could be had of material form: Let my material form be thus; let my material form be not thus. And it is because material form is not self that it leads to affliction, and that it cannot be had of material form: Let my material form be thus: let my material form be not thus... ‘Feeling is not self... ‘Perception is not self... ‘Formations are not self... Consciousness is not self. If consciousness were self, this consciousness would not lead to affliction and it could be had of consciousness: let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness be not thus. And it is because consciousness is not self that it therefore leads to affliction, and that it cannot be had of consciousness: Let my consciousnes be thus; let my consciousness be not thus...........’ (Vin, Mv. Kh; cf S.X11,59) The following paragraph and Visuddhimagga quote are from a post of Rob K’s saved under ‘Anatta’:(5265) which you may find it useful to review as well: ‘XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agrregate of formations) this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc. "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and because of precluding a self". This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self and control. Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer". This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it is itself conditioned. What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Much of what I am learning is from contact with people on > the List, whether directly or as the stimulus to search further. > > The benefits of having admirable people as friends - > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, > easily and without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and > conducive to the opening of awareness, i.e., talk on having few > wants, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing > persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, > and on the knowledge and vision of release. > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will keep his persistence > aroused for abandoning unskillful qualities, and for taking on > skillful qualities -- steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking > his duties with regard to skillful qualities. > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will be discerning, endowed > with discernment of arising and passing away -- noble, penetrating, > leading to the right ending of stress." > > -- Ud IV.1 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Thanks for this wonderful sutta. I think we’re all ‘here’ because at some level and for some parts of the day, we appreciate the value of having ‘admirable people as friends’. I really learn a lot from everyone here and writing is a condition for more useful consideration too. We’re all fortunate nowadays to have this internet access. You’ve mentioned once or twice about living in rather isolated surroundings in terms of othe dhamma students or practitioners. Of course, the Buddha encourages us all to really learn to live alone with the objects experienced through the 6 senses: ‘There are, Migajala, sounds cognizable by the ear..odours cognizable by the nose..tastes cognizable by the tongue..tactile objects cognizable by the body..mental phenomena cognizable by the mind that are desirable, lovely, agreeable, pleasing, sensually enticing, tantalizing. If a bhikkhu does not seek delight in them..he is called alone dweller. ‘Migajala, even though a bhikkhu who dwells thus lives in the vicinity of a village, associating with bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, with male and felmale lay follower, with kings and royal ministers, with sectarian teachers and their disciples, he is still called a lone dweller. For what reason? Because craving is his partner and he has abandoned it; therefore his is called a lone dweller.” (SN, Bk of 6 Sense Bases.63, B.Bodhi trans) May we all continue with the help of ‘admirable friends’ to learn to truly live ‘alone’. Christine, I think these are all really useful areas for discussion and I look forward to hearing your further thoughts. Best wishes, Sarah 9233 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 5:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > Is there a particular area in the commentaries that is translated, that > shows how > the scheme you have explained below is derived from the Suttas on the 4 > Noble > Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path? > > I would like to see how this interpretation of the Path was conceived. Rob, I appreciate your wanting to trace this interpretation back to a particular passage or passages in the suttas. However, I don't think this can be done, in the sense that you are asking about. This is not to say that the commentaries are purely a product of the compiler's mind. Rather, the commentaries represent an explanation of the sutta text pitched at a level that is comprehensible to those whose understanding is not of the same level as that of the Buddha's original audience. I will try to explain what I mean by this. A person who is able to fully understand a complex and highly detailed scientific principle may, in order to make the principle intelligible to lay-people, explain it using a kind of language and detail that on the face of it differs from that used by the scientist who discovered the principle and expounded it to the scientific community. This does not make the explanation in layman's terms any less the principle as expounded by its discoverer. Similarly, as I understand it, the commentaries are merely an exposition in more detailed form of what was actually said by the Buddha, given by those who have fully grasped the teaching. There are several passages in the commentaries that assume or directly support the interpretation I have given. Indeed, I believe this interpretation has been the accepted one until comparatively recent times. The current day notion of the Noble Eightfold Path as being a prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path factors is to be developed separately and individually, somehow culminating in supramundane consciousness, is not as far as I know found in any of the ancient commentaries. I think also that there are a number of contextual 'clues' in the suttas that point to the interpretation I have given. I have mentioned some of these before, but perhaps this would be a good time to recap. 1. The Noble Eightfold Path is given as one of the Four Noble Truths. The significance of this is perhaps not always appreciated. The Four Noble Truths are *understandings to be realised*, and this applies as much to the 4th truth (the Noble Eightfold Path) as it does the other 3 truths. As such (ie. a truth to be realised) it is descriptive of a moment of attainment rather than a way of practice leading to that attainment. (Likewise, the Four Noble Truths are given as one of the ‘mental objects’ of the development of satipatthana in the Satipatthana Sutta. This again shows their nature as ‘truths to be realised’ by one who is developing awareness). 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once this moment has been experienced final enlightenment is inevitable in the fullness of time. Prior to the first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. at the mundane level), attainment to final enlightenment is not assured. The texts refer to one who has attained to stream entry as a *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', whereas one who has not attained to a moment of supramundane experience is referred to as an ‘uninstructed worldling’. So it is not a path in the sense of being a 'path of practice' for the worldling, as the term seems to be understood nowadays. 3. The Four Noble Truths, with the Noble Eightfold Path as the 4th, are given as the culmination of the so-called 'gradual instruction' (anupubbii-kathaa -- see entry from Buddh. Dict. pasted below) found throughout the suttas. As I understand it, the teaching of the gradual instruction was in many cases followed by the enlightenment of the listener, that is to say, without any period of 'practice' between hearing the 4th Noble Truths about the Noble Eightfold Path and the attainment of enlightenment. 5. The factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are also given as 'factors for enlightenment' (bodhipakkhiya-dhamma, lit. 'things pertaining to enlightenment', of which there are 37 in 7 groups -- see entry from Buddh. Dict. pasted below). If the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, developed individually and separately, are the path to enlightenment, what is the significance of the other 29 factors? And why is the Noble 8-fold Path given as the last of the 7 groups of factors? 6. Finally, a general comment on the view that the Noble Eightfold Path is a prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path factors are to be developed separately and individually, somehow culminating in supramundane consciousness. If that were so, then it would mean that each of the path factors (except for right view) could be developed, and indeed is presumably even now being developed, by persons who have never heard of the dhamma. I say this because, taking 'right effort' as an example, people who have never heard the dhamma do exert conventional effort to have more kusala. I can see no difference between this person and the dhamma practitioner who likewise exerts conventional effort to have more kusala -- or am I missing something here? > Also, is there a part of the commentaries that explains the discovery of > one citta > arising at a time and passing on its attributes to the next citta, based > on a > particular aspect of parts of the Suttas? I would like to understand > from where > this was derived as well by the Arahats that composed the commentaries. The 'single stream of cittas' concept is I believe found in or derived from the abhidhamma, although it is of course entirely consistent with everything found in the suttas. There may be some passages in the suttas that imply this, but I am not aware of any at the moment. Rob, I don't know if I have addressed the exact point you were interested in -- I do hope I have. Jon From Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' ánupubbí-kathá: 'gradual instruction', progressive sermon; given by the Buddha when it was necessary to prepare first the listener's mind before speaking to him on the advanced teaching of the Four Noble Truths. The stock passage (e.g. D. 3; D 14; M. 56) runs as follows: "Then the Blessed One gave him a gradual instruction - that is to say, he spoke on liberality ('giving', dána), on moral conduct (síla) and on the heaven (sagga); he explained the peril, the vanity and the depravity of sensual pleasures, and the advantage of renunciation. When the Blessed One perceived that the listener's mind was prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated and lucid; then he explained to him that exalted teaching particular to the Buddhas (buddhánam sámukkamsiká desaná), that is: suffering, its cause, its ceasing, and the path." bodhipakkhiya-dhammá: The 37 'things pertaining to enlightenment', or 'requisites of enlightenment' comprise the entire doctrines of the Buddha. They are: the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthána, q.v.), the 4 right efforts (s. padhána), the 4 roads to power (iddhi-páda, q.v.), the 5 spiritual faculties (indriya; s. bala), the 5 spiritual powers (bala, q.v.), the 7 factors of enlightenment (bojjhanga, q.v.), the Noble 8-fold Path (s. magga). 9234 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 5:57am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi Robert Ep, Conventionally speaking when there is sufferer then there is suffering since the verse which I interpret is talking abt absolute then anatta should be consistently be apply to such a verse. To me by mixing both convention and absolute terms in a verse, then it is going to be confusing. Suffering is also anatta bc no one owns them, nor does it have a self entity on its own. It is experience bc we are still sufferer even if we have mundane right understanding of anatta, until the time we reach arahant. Kind regards Ken O --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > k: When the verse imply that is no sufferer - to me it would imply > that > > we have understand reality. Then where is suffering to be found. On > one > > hand we are talking abt anatta (no sufferer), on the other we are not > > viewing suffering as anatta (suffering exist). To me this is an > incorrect > > perspective. Both are anatta. > > Dear Kenneth, > To me if you see suffering as 'only anatta', you are in an > annihilationist mode. > If you see suffering as a 'real existing event' then you are in the mode > of > asserting that a dharma exists as an actual entity. Both are wrong. > > If you see that suffering has no real permanent being [anatta/anicca] > but that the > experience of suffering is still a real *experience* which cannot be > denied, then, > to me, you are in the middle way. You deny the ultimate reality of the > suffering, > but you acknowledge the present pain that it causes, and you help the > sufferer > both ultimately, but also provisionally right now. > > Regards, > Robert Ep. 9235 From: manji Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 6:04am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body This does not limit citta to a body. What it does say is that "whoever might say that the dhamma has ceased, this cannot be so." As to citta arising with non-physical planes of existence, just mere though of existence implies citta. Smushing citta together into "consciousness" might be misleading, there are many citta, arising falling, passing one to the next. Even in daily life, sometimes there is citta at "mind door". I am thinking of saying that sometimes citta is confused with certain cetasika... But that is for later discussion. :) Walk softly, manji -----Original Message----- From: Robert Epstein [mailto:epsteinrob@Y...] Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 2:26 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > "Monks, whoever might thus say that he (I in Pali syntax) would > declare consciousness's coming, or going, or dying, or being > born, or growth, or development, or expansion, without matter, > without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, > the foundation (for that declaration) does not exist." > > The above discourse clearly states that "without the body, > consciousness is not possible.(as you wrote in your post)" Dear Suan, Where does this leave the existence of the other non-physical planes of existence, and the Buddha's various discussions of reincarnation? Best Regards, Robert Ep. 9236 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 6:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Rob. E., > Yes: except that supernatural is not a good term. These planes are > entirely natural, just different from our plane. > As you say they are still dukkha, still anicca. After 1000's of aeons > the beings here die and are reborn in other planes. In fact, in the > long samsara all of us must have been lived in these rarified > existences at least a few times. > best wishes > robert I agree. My question was as to whether Abhidhamma included a belief in 'non-physical' reality, in other words, planes beyond the material world. I used 'supernatural' in worldly terms, because from the materialist standpoint, such planes certainly would be. But I understand and agree that in terms of manifest realities that beings experience there is no inherent difference between a physical plane and an extra-physical one, other than the idea that they may have different laws or durations. Robert Ep [the 'other' Robert - wasn't there a third one here, what happened to him?] 9237 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 6:21am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert Ep, > > Conventionally speaking when there is sufferer then there is suffering > since the verse which I interpret is talking abt absolute then anatta > should be consistently be apply to such a verse. To me by mixing both > convention and absolute terms in a verse, then it is going to be > confusing. > > Suffering is also anatta bc no one owns them, nor does it have a self > entity on its own. It is experience bc we are still sufferer even if we > have mundane right understanding of anatta, until the time we reach > arahant. Yes, I would agree that it is the definition of self as sufferer that allows suffering to be experienced as suffering, and particularly as suffering that is happening to 'someone'. On his deathbed, dying of cancer, the great Advaita master Nisargardatta was asked if he was in great pain. He replied: "There is great pain, but it is not mine." Even at the moment of death, he was clear that there was no self to suffer. Regards, Robert 9238 From: Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 6:29am Subject: Re: Nibbana --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Robert Ep > [the 'other' Robert - wasn't there a third one here, what happened to him?] +++++++++\ Actually I wrote Rob Eddison a private letter a couple of days ago. Hope he is ok; the last time he wrote he mentioned he had been ill. He lives in Iceland I believe. rob k. 9239 From: Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 8:03am Subject: Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body Dear Robert Epstein, Howard, Kenneth Ong, and Manji How are you, Dhamma friends? Howard wrote: "The more specific one is that supposedly the Buddha did speak of realms where there is vi~n~nana but not rupa." Ken wrote: "How does one explain the immaterial-sphere plane as against to the idea that conscious need rupa to be in existence?" Robert wrote: "Where does this leave the existence of the other non-physical planes of existence, and the Buddha's various discussions of reincarnation?" Manji also wrote along the same lines. Well, friends, I have expected that you would ask the above question. To attain the Aruupa Bhuumi (non-physical planes, or immaterial- sphere plane), one must first start as a human being who, of course, has the body as part of the Five Khandhas. Aruupa bhuumi is merely a rebirth state experienced by an attainer of Aruupa jhaanas. The absence of physical body for an Aruupa god is the result of the kamma power of an Aruupa jhaana. As soon as that kamma power is used up, he was reborn with a physical body. He can't escape from the BONDAGE of physical reality. In a sense, we can think of the absence of physical body in Aruupa bhuumi as merely suspended limbo state which is regarded as nibbana by pre-Buddhist ascetics (including the Buddha's two Aruupa jhaana teachers), but which is regarded by the Buddha as a useless existence because one cannot practise the Noble Eightfold Path without the Five Khandhas with a physical body. Without attaining Aruupa jhaanas in this life from the venue of a human body, no one can be reborn as a bodyless god. The bodyless state in Aruupa bhuumi is merely an exceptional case made possible by obsessive wish of bodylessness through the power of Aruupa jhaanas. With regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > "Monks, whoever might thus say that he (I in Pali syntax) would > > declare consciousness's coming, or going, or dying, or being > > born, or growth, or development, or expansion, without matter, > > without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, > > the foundation (for that declaration) does not exist." > > > > The above discourse clearly states that "without the body, > > consciousness is not possible.(as you wrote in your post)" > > Dear Suan, > Where does this leave the existence of the other non-physical planes of existence, > and the Buddha's various discussions of reincarnation? > > Best Regards, > Robert Ep. > 9240 From: Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 3:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/11/01 8:45:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, you give the best presentation yet for your understanding of the noble path! I think it is very well done and quite interesting. The only part of it I will comment on is the following, because it is the only part easy enough for me to say anything cogent about! ;-)) You write the following: > 6. Finally, a general comment on the view that the Noble Eightfold Path > is a prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path > factors are to be developed separately and individually, somehow > culminating in supramundane consciousness. If that were so, then it would > mean that each of the path factors (except for right view) could be > developed, and indeed is presumably even now being developed, by persons > who have never heard of the dhamma. I say this because, taking 'right > effort' as an example, people who have never heard the dhamma do exert > conventional effort to have more kusala. I can see no difference between > this person and the dhamma practitioner who likewise exerts conventional > effort to have more kusala -- or am I missing something here? > =============================== Actually, what I think may be what is described here is the practice and progress of a person who could eventually become a paccekabuddha. No? 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) 9241 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 8:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > Robert Ep > > [the 'other' Robert - wasn't there a third one here, what happened > to him?] > +++++++++\ > Actually I wrote Rob Eddison a private letter a couple of days ago. > Hope he is ok; the last time he wrote he mentioned he had been ill. > He lives in Iceland I believe. > rob k. I certainly hope he's okay as well. Best, Robert Ep. 9242 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 8:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana: No Consciousness Without The Body Dear Suan, Thanks for your good explanation. Best, Robert Ep. ======= --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > Dear Robert Epstein, Howard, Kenneth Ong, and Manji > > How are you, Dhamma friends? > > Howard wrote: > > "The more specific one is that supposedly the Buddha did speak of > realms where there is vi~n~nana but not rupa." > > Ken wrote: > > "How does one explain the immaterial-sphere plane as against to the > idea that conscious need rupa to be in existence?" > > Robert wrote: > > "Where does this leave the existence of the other non-physical planes > of existence, and the Buddha's various discussions of reincarnation?" > > Manji also wrote along the same lines. > > Well, friends, I have expected that you would ask the above question. > > To attain the Aruupa Bhuumi (non-physical planes, or immaterial- > sphere plane), one must first start as a human being who, of course, > has the body as part of the Five Khandhas. Aruupa bhuumi is merely a > rebirth state experienced by an attainer of Aruupa jhaanas. The > absence of physical body for an Aruupa god is the result of the kamma > power of an Aruupa jhaana. As soon as that kamma power is used up, he > was reborn with a physical body. He can't escape from the BONDAGE of > physical reality. In a sense, we can think of the absence of physical > body in Aruupa bhuumi as merely suspended limbo state which is > regarded as nibbana by pre-Buddhist ascetics (including the Buddha's > two Aruupa jhaana teachers), but which is regarded by the Buddha as a > useless existence because one cannot practise the Noble Eightfold > Path without the Five Khandhas with a physical body. > > Without attaining Aruupa jhaanas in this life from the venue of a > human body, no one can be reborn as a bodyless god. > > The bodyless state in Aruupa bhuumi is merely an exceptional case > made possible by obsessive wish of bodylessness through the power of > Aruupa jhaanas. > > With regards, > > Suan > > http://www.bodhiology.org > > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > > > "Monks, whoever might thus say that he (I in Pali syntax) would > > > declare consciousness's coming, or going, or dying, or being > > > born, or growth, or development, or expansion, without matter, > > > without feeling, without memory, and without other mental > components, > > > the foundation (for that declaration) does not exist." > > > > > > The above discourse clearly states that "without the body, > > > consciousness is not possible.(as you wrote in your post)" > > > > Dear Suan, > > Where does this leave the existence of the other non-physical > planes of existence, > > and the Buddha's various discussions of reincarnation? > > > > Best Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > > > > 9243 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 11:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Dear Howard and Jon, This is the portion of Jon's good talk that also interested me quite a bit. I would say that there is a difference between one who attempts to cultivate kusala states without the benefit of Buddhist understandings, and someone who attempts to realize the steps of the Eightfold Path with an understanding of anatta, anicca and dukkha. It is the clarity of these distinctions that gives the context for Buddhist cultivation. This in itself, I don't think, necessitates a view of the 'real' 8-fold path as supramundane, although it doesn't speak against that possibility either. I tend to think that all beings are striving in their own way for liberation. Everyone has a subconscious drive to end delusion and suffering, and reach a place of freedom. And at some point in their journey, they will find the higher principles that will allow them to actually achieve liberation. Is there an inherent difference between Buddhists and non-Buddhists? As 'beings', I would say there isn't. We're all in the same boat. But Buddhism allows one to go beyond the final illusions of a separate or permenant self or entity. Just because all spiritual people are trying to cultivate kusala, to me neither dictates that Buddhists and non-Buddhists are inherently different, or inherently the same. To me, the question remains as to whether there is volition in the path, or whether the Eight-Fold path is a set of factors that occur only in Enlightenment. It seems sensible to me to think that the various mundane cultivations that non-enlightened Buddhists do in order to increase their awareness and see into realities are the necessary steps that lead to reaping the benefits of higher stages, even if these higher stages include a different level of the Eightfold factors, and even if the earlier efforts are not in fact volitional but only seem that way. I apologize for this circuitous discussion that doesn't really reach any conclusion. I also apologize for airing a few half-baked thoughts here which may not be very clear. For me, I would still like to know how the Arahats who wrote the commentaries derived their definition of the Noble Eightfold Path's path-factors at the moment of enlightenment from the Suttas, but it looks like I will have to read the commentaries myself at some point and see for myself, since the connection seems to be implied rather than explicit. Does anyone know how to reach Bikkhu Bodhi? Perhaps I should ask him what he thinks about this. I'm just kidding. Best, Robert Ep. =========================== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 11/11/01 8:45:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, you give > the best presentation yet for your understanding of the noble path! I think > it is very well done and quite interesting. The only part of it I will > comment on is the following, because it is the only part easy enough for me > to say anything cogent about! ;-)) You write the following: > > > > > 6. Finally, a general comment on the view that the Noble Eightfold Path > > is a prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path > > factors are to be developed separately and individually, somehow > > culminating in supramundane consciousness. If that were so, then it would > > mean that each of the path factors (except for right view) could be > > developed, and indeed is presumably even now being developed, by persons > > who have never heard of the dhamma. I say this because, taking 'right > > effort' as an example, people who have never heard the dhamma do exert > > conventional effort to have more kusala. I can see no difference between > > this person and the dhamma practitioner who likewise exerts conventional > > effort to have more kusala -- or am I missing something here? > > > =============================== > Actually, what I think may be what is described here is the practice > and progress of a person who could eventually become a paccekabuddha. No? > > 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) 9244 From: Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 10:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas <> Hi Ken, Let me reverse the order of things a little bit. I think I have to put in some definitions of citta to compare with cetasika. I am not sure I can really answer your question and not sure exactly what you want to know. This is good for me to review the material on this topic as well. I pretty much cut and paste from various books, ok. Pls pardon me for some Pali terms. Let me start with 1) Panna cetasika. From Nina's book: "The Atthasalini then gives another definition of understanding: Understanding has the penetration of intrinsic nature, unfaltering penetration as its characteristic, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a skilled archer; illumination of the object as its function, as it were a lamp; non perplexity as its proximate cause, as it were a good guide in the forest. The Visuddhimagga (Chapter XIV, 143) gives a similar definition. " As Christine mentioned there are different levels of panna. There can only be direct understanding of realities when there is mindfulness of them. This is my idea, no matter how much we read or discuss, if there is no direct understanding at the moment of mindfulness, it is all pretty much panatti (conventional) level. As I understand the goal of study is not to know the theory or term but the reality. Studying, listening and discussing dhamma can condition understanding. As I mentioned earlier, for me, from the quote from Milindapanha, that it is hard to know the differences between the two. 2) Citta From Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin .."The 4 characteristics of citta are 1. Called "citta" because it experiences arammana clearly. 2. Called "citta" because it accumulates innate tendencies with the efficiency of javana-vithi. 3. Called "citta" because it is a reality where kamma and kilesa accumulate vipaka. 4. Every citta is called "citta" because of its complex and intricate nature according to the efficiency of the sampayutta-dhamma". Sampayutta-dhamma of citta is cetasika. From Atthasalini : "citta ….conizing object(aramana) is its characteristic, forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental(nama) and material(rupa) organism is its proximate cause. …" From Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin. "Citta is eminent and presiding in knowing or experiencing. In the Atthasalini Cittupadakandha there is a passage saying "Citta is the bhumi or place of origin of the sampayutta-dhamma such as happiness. If there were no citta, the happy feeling could not arise because there would be no basis, no point of origin for happiness. Whenever sukha-vedana arises, citta is the bhumi, the basis, the home of that sukha-vedana that arose with that citta. Therefore citta is the bhumi, the home of its sampayutta-dhamma, which are the sukha-vedana and other cetasika." Analogy from Milindapanha V.Nagasena "….. Just, sire, as the town-guard, seated at the cross-roads in middle of the town, would see a man coming from the west, the south, the north: so your majesty, the object seen by the eyes, the sound heard by the ear, the smell smelt by the nose, the taste tasted by the tongue, the tangible touched by the body, the idea cognized by the mind, is cognized by consciousness' (citta)". There for it is said to have the function of forerunning". 3) Cetasika From abhidhammattha sangaha "Cetasika = Ceta + s + ika That which is associated with mind or consciousness is cetasika. (Sanskrit - caitasika or caitti). Definition- Cetasika is (i) that which arises together with consciousness, (ii) that which perishes together with it, (iii) that which has an identical object with it, (iv) that which has a common basis with it." Another analogy from abhidhammattha sangaha, Thai version. In watercolor painting, citta is like water, cetasika is like colors. Only water alone cannot make the painting appear, nor only the color alone. When there are paper, water and color then the painting can appear on the paper or canvas, and of course the view or a model is like the object. (like conscious needs citta&cetasika, material base (vathu) and object(aramana) to arise). Hope I put something relevant to your question. Best wishes, Num 9245 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 4:29pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Thanks, Jon, Settled in nicely now, jet-lagged but very glad to be here. Got in on the English discussion Saturday and had the great good luck to have Khun Amara interpret the Thai talk and subsequent Foundation meeting (on anusaya) following. All quite exhilarating. Time on the computer here ties up the foundation phone line, so I limit it strictly. I'll try to get back into correspondence when I've located the local internet cafe. Best Wishes to All, mn --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > Have a good trip, or welcome to Bangkok, as the case > may be. I hope you > settle in well, and find good dhamma (I'm sure you > will). I look forward > to more of your very pertinent comments on the list > from Thailand. > > Jon > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi > Sarah, > > > > Just quickly, I noticed the same peculiarities you > > mentioned below. Also I think I'm beginning to > see a > > bias in Ven. Thanissaro's translations (toward > > breath-centrism) if I'm thinking of the right > guy--of > > course I'm no authority, but very good to compare > > translations. BB's are among the best I think > (most > > rigorous). > > > > Yes, off to BKK tomorrow. I'll post from there > when > > possible. > > > > Cheers, > > > > mn > > > > --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mike, > > > > > > I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on > the > > > 12th Oct, > > > because I've just come across other > translations. > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > Hi Sarah and Howard, > > > > > > > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta > Howard > > > was > > > > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta > at > > > > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > > > > translation is at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > > > > > > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up > with > > > any > > > > commentarial material on this sutta. > Intuitively > > > I > > > > can see how it might support Howard's argument > > > (much > > > > to my chagrin). > > > > > > Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't > had > > > this particular > > > sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a > `pure' > > > mind, > > > blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this > is > > > not a correct > > > paraphrase of your words.) > > > > > > The reason I couldn't find another translation > at > > > the time was > > > because as I now see, it is given the reference > of > > > 3-103 above, > > > but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu > > > Bodhi's > > > translation, it is given the pali reference of > > > 3-100. Furthermore, > > > Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the > > > Pali and > > > English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to > > > Nimitta > > > Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The > > > Refinement of the > > > Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as > > > `Gold-refiner'. No > > > wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To > > > confuse matters > > > further, while the BB and PTS translations run > in > > > parallel and > > > follow the same order (presumably following the > Pali > > > order), > > > Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is > > > completely reorganised > > > and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, > I > > > don't know and > > > really can't comment further. I don't thin the > > > other translations > > > are on line as yet. > > > > > > Following BB's translation for now,the sutta > > > discusses the > > > different impurities in the gold. First the > gross > > > impurities have to > > > be removed and so on down to the minute > impurities. > > > Eventually > > > the flaws are finally removed and `whatever > ornament > > > the > > > goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold > can > > > now be used > > > for that purpose'. > > > > > > In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training > in > > > the higher > > > mind' abandons first the gross impurities such > as > > > `bad conduct > > > of body, speech and mind', then those of a > moderate > > > degree, > > > `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, > and > > > violent > > > thoughts'. After this, `there are still some > subtle > > > impurities that > > > cling to him, namely, thoughts about his > relatives, > > > his home > > > country and his reputation' and so on and so on > with > > > regard to > > > very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana > levels. > > > It goes on to > > > discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) > > > including the > > > 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the > > > taints).after > > > mastery of the 4th jhana. > > > > > > I think this sutta relates to the discussion > there's > > > been on dsg > > > about developing more understanding of more > subtle > > > defilements. As some people have mentioned, what > was > > > taken > > > as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome > with > > > the > > > development of more understanding. Instead of > being > > > cause for > > > sorrow, this should be cause for joy. > > > > > > I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure > > > mind that has > > > been defiled. I just read an analogy to the > > > different layers of > > > defilements which need to be understood and > > > eradicated, step > > > by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand > any > > > suggestion > > > of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. > The > > > natural way > > > understanding develops is to know the grosser, > more > > > obvious > > > defilements before the very subtle degrees. > Again it > > > is > > > descriptive rather than prescriptive. > > > > > > With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the > start > > > of T's > > > translation, this part is not included at all in > > > BB's translation and > > > comes at the end of the PTS one. From this > > > translation I > > > understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' > on > > > the gold in the > > > crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it > with > > > water and examine > > > it closely. `In the same way are these 3 > > > characteristics to be > > > attended to from time to time by a monk who is > > > devoted to > > > developing the higher consciousness..his mind > > > becomes > > > pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but > > > perfectly poised for > > > the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever > > > branch of > > > special knowledge he may direct his mind for the > > > realization > > > thereof, he attains the power personally to > realize > > > such, whatever > > > be his range.' (reference to > abhi~n~ns, > > > I > > > understand)> > > > > > > Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as > there > > > aren't any > > > commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi > > > writes a full AN > > > (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes > like > > > the ones he's > > > done for MN and SN at least. > > > > > > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready > for > > > your trip to > > > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good > > > flights with > > > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm > sure > > > everyone > > > hear will be very interested to hear any > comments > > > you care to > > > share about your impressions and discussions > after > > > you meet > > > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Sarah 9246 From: ppp Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 8:40am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hi, Mike: Nice to hear that you've sort of setteled in Bangkok. Good luck! tadao 9247 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 5:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Music Nina Thanks for this note which I thoroughly enjoyed reading. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah and Nina et al, > Dear Hermann, Christine, Sarah and friends, > > That is an expressive Email, I had to laugh. > I had conceit when I read that you pay attention to my music, there it > is > again: I and you. Conceit plays us many tricks. I appreciated the discussion we had in India about conceit. I think this particular form of akusala is much more prevalent than we realise. It is conceit that conditions much of the dosa when we get annoyed because of the way other people behave, especially perhaps in cases where the person’s behaviour has no impact on us personally. Even though there is no conscious comparing between oneself and the other, there is nonetheless an innate concept of ‘me’ and ‘you’. Thanks also for the many useful reminders in your note. Jon 9248 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 10:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Hi Num, Much thanks (I hungry for more info on cetasikas, if you have I would be most appreciative), just one simple question that seen to perplex me. Is the cetasikas (Vedana) that feels or it is the Citta that feel? My thinking was that cetasikas are just prism that filter and it is the cittas that knows the feeling and not vedana. For your advise please. Kind regards Ken O --- srnsk@a... wrote: > > < understanding of this term (just this term only :)). I think commentary > will be of great help when I ask Sarah why cittas must be sequential and > I > ask Amara in DL list abt Sanna. the commentaries they quoted indeed > help > me to understand the intracies of such meaning of pali words. As i do > not > understand pali, hence a thorough definition of this term will be very > meaning to me. I have also read cetasikas defintion from the book by > Bhikkhu Bodhi. But I feel there is a lack of thorough presentation to > this term which I feel of paramount importance to our development as > panna > is a cetasika. As I do not have the commentaries, a few quotes to me > will > be indeed very appreciative.>> > > > > Hi Ken, > > Let me reverse the order of things a little bit. I think I have to put > in > some definitions of citta to compare with cetasika. I am not sure I can > > really answer your question and not sure exactly what you want to know. > This > is good for me to review the material on this topic as well. I pretty > much > cut and paste from various books, ok. Pls pardon me for some Pali terms. > > > Let me start with > > 1) Panna cetasika. > > From Nina's book: > "The Atthasalini then gives another definition of understanding: > Understanding has the penetration of intrinsic nature, unfaltering > penetration as its characteristic, like the penetration of an arrow shot > by a > skilled archer; illumination of the object as its function, as it were a > > lamp; non perplexity as its proximate cause, as it were a good guide in > the > forest. > The Visuddhimagga (Chapter XIV, 143) gives a similar definition. " > > As Christine mentioned there are different levels of panna. There can > only be > direct understanding of realities when there is mindfulness of them. > This is > my idea, no matter how much we read or discuss, if there is no direct > understanding at the moment of mindfulness, it is all pretty much > panatti > (conventional) level. As I understand the goal of study is not to know > the > theory or term but the reality. Studying, listening and discussing > dhamma can > condition understanding. As I mentioned earlier, for me, from the quote > from > Milindapanha, that it is hard to know the differences between the two. > > > 2) Citta > > From Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin > > .."The 4 characteristics of citta are > 1. Called "citta" because it experiences arammana clearly. > 2. Called "citta" because it accumulates innate tendencies with the > efficiency of javana-vithi. > 3. Called "citta" because it is a reality where kamma and kilesa > accumulate > vipaka. > 4. Every citta is called "citta" because of its complex and intricate > nature > according to the efficiency of the sampayutta-dhamma". > > Sampayutta-dhamma of citta is cetasika. > > From Atthasalini : "citta ….conizing object(aramana) is its > characteristic, > forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a > mental(nama) > and material(rupa) organism is its proximate cause. …" > > From Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin. "Citta is eminent and > presiding in knowing or experiencing. In the Atthasalini > Cittupadakandha > there is a passage saying "Citta is the bhumi or place of origin of the > sampayutta-dhamma such as happiness. If there were no citta, the happy > feeling could not arise because there would be no basis, no point of > origin > for happiness. Whenever sukha-vedana arises, citta is the bhumi, the > basis, > the home of that sukha-vedana that arose with that citta. Therefore > citta is > the bhumi, the home of its sampayutta-dhamma, which are the sukha-vedana > and > other cetasika." > > Analogy from Milindapanha > V.Nagasena "….. Just, sire, as the town-guard, seated at the > cross-roads in > middle of the town, would see a man coming from the west, the south, the > > north: so your majesty, the object seen by the eyes, the sound heard by > the > ear, the smell smelt by the nose, the taste tasted by the tongue, the > tangible touched by the body, the idea cognized by the mind, is cognized > by > consciousness' (citta)". There for it is said to have the function of > forerunning". > > > 3) Cetasika > > From abhidhammattha sangaha > "Cetasika = Ceta + s + ika > That which is associated with mind or consciousness is cetasika. > (Sanskrit - > caitasika or caitti). > Definition- > Cetasika is > (i) that which arises together with consciousness, > (ii) that which perishes together with it, > (iii) that which has an identical object with it, > (iv) that which has a common basis with it." > > Another analogy from abhidhammattha sangaha, Thai version. In > watercolor > painting, citta is like water, cetasika is like colors. Only water alone > > cannot make the painting appear, nor only the color alone. When there > are > paper, water and color then the painting can appear on the paper or > canvas, > and of course the view or a model is like the object. (like conscious > needs > citta&cetasika, material base (vathu) and object(aramana) to arise). > > > Hope I put something relevant to your question. > > Best wishes, > > Num 9249 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 10:23pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hi Mike & Tadao, Good to hear from both of you... Mike, sounds like a good start....hope you catch up some sleep and find a nearby internet cafe soon too. Meanwhile, perhaps no one needs to use the tel line early morning and late evening? How was the English discussion on Saturday? I'm pretty excited to hear from you from Bkk...still can't quite believe you're there;-) It'll be great if you're still around end Dec when we visit, hopefully with Ken O and another dsg 'surprise' ..;-) Tadao, good to hear you're still around...I know you've been very busy. It'll be good to hear any (brief OK) 'titbits' from you if you have time/inspiration. Any chance of meeting us in Bkk too???? (..and if it's an extended stay, you get to meet Rob K for the same ticket price;-) Best wishes to you both, Sarah --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Mike: > Nice to hear that you've sort of setteled in Bangkok. > Good luck! tadao > 9250 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 11, 2001 10:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Hi Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > Thanks for your patient in quoting the text. Presently I am trying to > learn the Abidhamma systems of practising. Hence recently I have been > asking Abidhammaic questions which sometimes do off track due to my > previous views. I'm always delighted to read your questions and interest in Abhidhamma. Never mind about whether they are on or off-track....like you say, 'previous views' take us off-track all the time and we're all here to help each other on-track..;-) > > I try ordering the Book of Analysis and Dispeller of Delusion which Robert > has kindly introduced to me. I am still waiting for PTS to respond my > email of my ordering, but till date I have no reply. Is there any other > way to buy it, do you know of any good web on line store that sells these > books. I believe they are impt to my studies on Satipatthana and > Abidhamma. Someone gave you another website for orders....we've always found PTS (direct) quite efficient (tho' sometimes they send the wrong book;-)....If you become a member of PTS, you get a discount and free book...all the details are on their website I expect. I also recommend the Expositor (Atthasalani) to add to the 2 texts above. > > Thanks once again and at times I feel guilty that you have spend so much > time in explaining Abidhamma terms to me and also to many others that have > assist me in the understanding of Abidhamma. Now, Ken O, what kind of cetasika is this 'feel guilty'???? Sounds like a kind of dosa (aversion);-) Seriously, I'm really glad if I can help a little and only sorry (Oops that could be dosa too) that sometimes I can't express myself as well as I'd like or am too busy to add more detail. Thanks again for your keen interest which encourages us all, Sarah 9251 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 1:49am Subject: Commentaries Dear All, I have received a long-awaited copy of "The Discourse on The Fruits of Recluseship - The Samannaphala Sutta and its Commentaries" by Bhikkhu Bodhi.(Sutta + approx. 150 pages of commentary). Is there any 'best' way to study this discourse - just have both together perhaps, and read one section of the Sutta then the relevant part in the commentary , followed by pondering on what has been read? May I post any questions to this List? (I can see why the commentaries grew - ?commentaries on commentaries?) metta, Christine 9252 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Commentaries Dear Christine, --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > > I have received a long-awaited copy of "The Discourse on The Fruits > of Recluseship - The Samannaphala Sutta and its Commentaries" by > Bhikkhu Bodhi.(Sutta + approx. 150 pages of commentary). > > Is there any 'best' way to study this discourse - just have both > together perhaps, and read one section of the Sutta then the relevant > part in the commentary , followed by pondering on what has been read? That sounds sensible to me....;-) > > May I post any questions to this List? (I can see why the > commentaries grew - ?commentaries on commentaries?) Please do...I think several people have copies and will be happy to discuss/share understandings. Pls give a page no and....perhaps if you give brief summaries or short quotes for those that don't so anyone can follow, that would be helpful.. Must rush to my Tai Chi class, Sarah 9253 From: Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 4:13am Subject: List Bulletin Dear Fellow List-Members Some announcements and reminders: a/ Change of subject-tag We have changed the subject tag that appears in messages, from [DhammaStudyGroup] to [dsg]. (Don't forget to re-set any filters you may have for the group's posts.) b/ Opening of list We have made the group's messages 'open', by allowing non-members to browse the messages. This was done on a trial basis initially, and will be continued until further notice. Our main purpose in doing this is to make the dhamma as accessible as possible. It also makes it easier to recommend the list to others who can take a look before deciding whether to join or not. c/ Back-up archives at eScribe All posts are backed-up to an archive site called eScribe. In addition to the security of a duplicate set of posts, eScribe offers a more powerful search function, such as searching for posts by a particular member or by a particular thread. You will need to use the User ID and password given below to access the website. http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup Username: dsgarchives Password: metta d/ 'Files' section In the 'Files' section of the dsg homepage there are files containing: - a list of useful posts from the archives, indexed by subject-matter - a glossary of Pali terms - guidelines (do's and don't's) for members - how to change your delivery options (how you receive messages from the list) Here is the link to the Files page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ e/ 'Bookmarks' section In the `Bookmarks' section of the group's homepage there are some links to useful dhamma websites, including Tipitaka sources, publishers and websites with useful materials or links. Here is the link to the Bookmarks page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links If you have any comments or queries on any of these points, please send them OFF-LIST. Jon & Sarah 9254 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 4:31am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Mike Thanks for the news, and glad to hear you've settled in already. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks, Jon, > > Settled in nicely now, jet-lagged but very glad to be > here. Got in on the English discussion Saturday and > had the great good luck to have Khun Amara interpret > the Thai talk and subsequent Foundation meeting (on > anusaya) following. All quite exhilarating. > > Time on the computer here ties up the foundation phone > line, so I limit it strictly. I'll try to get back > into correspondence when I've located the local > internet cafe. There is an internet cafe quite close by. Khun Suphee at the Foundation will tell you how to get there (out the back of the Soi, turn right, on the road running parallel with Charoen Nakorn). Please give Khun Suphee my regards (faak kwaam kit tyyng). Best wishes for an enjoyable and rewarding stay in Thailand. Jon 9255 From: Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 0:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Commentaries Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/12/01 5:18:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Must rush to my Tai Chi class ====================== Never rush T'ai Chi, Sarah! ;-)) BTW, what style are you learning, if I may ask? 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) 9256 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 5:46am Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: Jon: > > I would have to start looking. But I sense from your response, > Howard, > > that you are confident I won't find what I'm looking for (knowing how > > meticulous you are, and rightly so, about sources)!. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > First of all, I'm really not at all meticulous in this. I am the > quintessential non-expert! Not as I see it, Howard. You are extremely well-read, and have given the teachings a lot of mature thought and reflection. More expert than you care to admit, I think! While I would not be surprised to find that a > characterization of parinibbana as a final and complete ending of > the khandas > in every sense does not occur except in the commentaries, I would > hope that > some discussion of parinibbana can be found in the suttas. I would > *like* to > read what the Buddha directly said about it in order to better > understand his > meaning on that subject. I honestly do not know. Yes, it would be an interesting area to explore, but I'm not sure about the relevance or practical benefit. Which brings me to something I have been wondering lately. Why are people (apparently) so fascinated with nibbana and with what 'happens' at parinibbana? I have always considered this whole area as something of little practical significance, of curiosity value only and more or less unrelated to the task of understanding the reality appearing at the present moment. Yet there has been some pretty intense speculation on this list about the ins and outs of parinibbana. So I'm wondering what is the significance/appeal -- or am I missing something? > As I understand it, for an > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" in > the > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any > longer > to be observed. I'm not sure what this refers to, Howard. Would you mind giving a reference/explanation? Thanks. >Whether or not, or how, this might change with the death of > an arahant I just don't know. I see it as certainly possible that if no > association is maintained at that point with any realm of experience, > then > the death of an arahant does, indeed, result in a radical change; but it > would be a change that the arahant would be indifferent to in any case, > inasmuch as once full liberation is attained, there is no longer any > sense of > self or independent dhammas anyway, and there no longer is any grasping > at anything, including being and nonbeing. I can *imagine*, however, an > arahant > *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an > association with some realm or realms of experience. I think this is somewhat in the realm of speculation, of the kind I was referring to above. Is it productive to consider, would you say? Not trying to change the subject, just to understand. Jon 9257 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 5:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas-(Jon) Num Thanks very much for this fascinating information. --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Hi Jon and everyone, > > Jon, this is brief summary from the book. I do not even want to say I > am > parroting, b/c the parrot still has a brain. In Thai we have an idiom, > the > serving spoon never tastes the flavor of a curry. I, feel like I am a > spoon, > cannot absorb a flavor from this book. It's pretty complicated. Yes, I have an English translation (Bhikkhu Bodhi, BPS) and I know what you mean. (By the way, this translation has an extensive history of the work and its place in Buddhist learning.) > Manodvara-vithi which continues the object (aramana) from 5-sense-door > process (panca-dvara-vithi) > > 1.Atitak-kahana-vithi (atita = past, kahana = grasping or forming) > 2.Smuhak-kahana-vithi (smuha = group, mass) > 3.Atthak-kahana-vithi (attha = meaning) > 4.Namak-kahana-vithi (nama = name) > > In Eye-door-process, after eye-door-process, (1) Atitak-kahana-vithi occurs > alternatively and repeatedly with eye-door-process for numerous times. > Then follows by (2) Smuhak-kahana-vithi. It's function is to gather colors > together, again occurs repeatedly many times. Then follows by (3) Attak-kahana-vithi, knows the meaning of what has just been seen and > finally (4) Namak-kahana-vithi functions as recognition of the name of > the objects. (3) & (4) also occur repeatedly many times. > > To sum. up (1) and (2) have paramattha as aramana, (3) & (4) have > pannatti as aramana. > > There is also another type of manodvara-vithi which does not occur after > sense-door-process as well. > > Well, that's my own rough translation from Thai and my poor Pali. Please > check with other sources. > > > Num Much of this I do not recall having seen before, and I have been frantically searching through my translation to try and find it. It doesn't seem to be there. Perhaps it's from the commentary rather than the actual text. Never mind, I'm sure I'll come across it somewhere. Thanks anyway for the glimpse of a new area of detail. Is (4) anything to do with conventional memory, I wonder? Thanks again, Num Jon 9258 From: Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 4:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/12/01 8:46:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoa bb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Jon: > > > I would have to start looking. But I sense from your response, > > Howard, > > > that you are confident I won't find what I'm looking for (knowing how > > > meticulous you are, and rightly so, about sources)!. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > First of all, I'm really not at all meticulous in this. I am the > > quintessential non-expert! > > Not as I see it, Howard. You are extremely well-read, and have given the > teachings a lot of mature thought and reflection. More expert than you > care to admit, I think! > > While I would not be surprised to find that a > > characterization of parinibbana as a final and complete ending of > > the khandas > > in every sense does not occur except in the commentaries, I would > > hope that > > some discussion of parinibbana can be found in the suttas. I would > > *like* to > > read what the Buddha directly said about it in order to better > > understand his > > meaning on that subject. I honestly do not know. > > Yes, it would be an interesting area to explore, but I'm not sure about > the relevance or practical benefit. Which brings me to something I have > been wondering lately. Why are people (apparently) so fascinated with > nibbana and with what 'happens' at parinibbana? I have always considered > this whole area as something of little practical significance, of > curiosity value only and more or less unrelated to the task of > understanding the reality appearing at the present moment. Yet there has > been some pretty intense speculation on this list about the ins and outs > of parinibbana. So I'm wondering what is the significance/appeal -- or am > I missing something? ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: As far as any "practical benefit" to one's practice, I agree with you completely that knowing the details of parinibbana affords none. As far as the *appeal* of it, I suppose this differs from person to person. I *think* my main interest is a matter of wanting to understand (intellectually, of course) what it is that the Buddha actually taught. However, I can certainly see how clinging to "self" can enter into this matter as well, and I am not so foolish as to exempt myself from that. -------------------------------------------------------- > > > As I understand it, for an > > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" in > > the > > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any > > longer > > to be observed. > > I'm not sure what this refers to, Howard. Would you mind giving a > reference/explanation? Thanks. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I am thinking here in terms of an arahant's direct apprehension of patticasamupada as the "middle way". See, for example, the Kaccayangotta Sutta. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Whether or not, or how, this might change with the death of > > an arahant I just don't know. I see it as certainly possible that if no > > association is maintained at that point with any realm of experience, > > then > > the death of an arahant does, indeed, result in a radical change; but it > > would be a change that the arahant would be indifferent to in any case, > > inasmuch as once full liberation is attained, there is no longer any > > sense of > > self or independent dhammas anyway, and there no longer is any grasping > > at anything, including being and nonbeing. I can *imagine*, however, an > > arahant > > *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an > > association with some realm or realms of experience. > > I think this is somewhat in the realm of speculation, of the kind I was > referring to above. Is it productive to consider, would you say? Not > trying to change the subject, just to understand. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: The *speculation* as to whether "an arahant *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some realm or realms of experience" is a possibility is not, in itself, productive. But the *knowledge* of whether or not that is a possibility would be very useful. For example, some Mahayanists have expressed the notion that vowing, prior to being an arahant, to maintain such an association is necessary, and that without having already established, quite strongly, such an intention, it is too late to do so once one is an arahant. As regards myself, just on the off chance ;-)) that, beyond parinibbana, keeping some sort of connection with a samsaric realm is still possible, I have personally vowed (in my own mind) to make such a connection. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 9259 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas-(Jon) op 12-11-2001 14:47 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > Num > > >> Manodvara-vithi which continues the object (aramana) from 5-sense-door >> process (panca-dvara-vithi) >> >> 1.Atitak-kahana-vithi (atita = past, kahana = grasping or forming) >> 2.Smuhak-kahana-vithi (smuha = group, mass) >> 3.Atthak-kahana-vithi (attha = meaning) >> 4.Namak-kahana-vithi (nama = name) >> >> In Eye-door-process, after eye-door-process, > (1) Atitak-kahana-vithi occurs >> alternatively and repeatedly with eye-door-process for numerous times. >> Then follows by > (2) Smuhak-kahana-vithi. It's function is to gather colors >> together, again occurs repeatedly many times. Then follows by > (3) Attak-kahana-vithi, knows the meaning of what has just been seen and >> finally > (4) Namak-kahana-vithi functions as recognition of the name of >> the objects. (3) & (4) also occur repeatedly many times. >> >> To sum. up (1) and (2) have paramattha as aramana, (3) & (4) have >> pannatti as aramana. >> >> There is also another type of manodvara-vithi which does not occur after >> sense-door-process as well. >> > Dear Jonothan, there is another edition of Abhidhammatta Sangaha, translated as Compendium of Buddhist Philosophy. It has an introductory essay with the same info (p. 32,33): atiitaggaha.na, samudaayaggaha.na, atthaggaha.na, naamagggaha.na. (Num's kk become gg). I shall not add more, I lack time. Nina. 9260 From: ppp Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 5:34am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hi, Sarah: I am busy during the summer 2002, but I will think about going to Thailand the summer 2003. I am qurioius about knowing the general atmousphere of the Thai Sangha. tadao 9261 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 2:33pm Subject: Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup --- p Sallakachat wrote: > > > hello i interest in Buddhism for 31 years. last > month i went toIndia with > dhamma group (SUJIN BORIHARNWANAKET).JONOTHAN ABBOTT > gave > me e-mail address to join dhammastudygroup. > > > pirmsombat > 9262 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 6:29pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hi Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Mike & Tadao, > > Good to hear from both of you... > > Mike, sounds like a good start....hope you catch up > some sleep and find a > nearby internet cafe soon too. There now. > Meanwhile, perhaps no > one needs to use the tel > line early morning and late evening? Some language barrier problems added to multiple passwords (mai mee) and an unstable connection. I'll try to keep in touch from here, though... > How was the English discussion on Saturday? I'm > pretty excited to hear from you > from Bkk...still can't quite believe you're there;-) Outstanding, though the Thai interpreted for my by Khun Amara was much better. Really great abhidhamma. A lotta smart people here I'd never heard of... > It'll be great if you're still around end Dec when > we visit, hopefully with Ken > O and another dsg 'surprise' ..;-) It's looking like a possibility at this point--yang mai naa... > Tadao, good to hear you're still around...I know > you've been very busy. It'll > be good to hear any (brief OK) 'titbits' from you if > you have time/inspiration. > Any chance of meeting us in Bkk too???? (..and if > it's an extended stay, you > get to meet Rob K for the same ticket price;-) > > Best wishes to you both, Back at you all, mike 9263 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 6:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Welcome Pirmsombat! Where are you? mike --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- p Sallakachat wrote: > > > > hello i interest in Buddhism for 31 years. last > > month i went toIndia with > > dhamma group (SUJIN BORIHARNWANAKET).JONOTHAN > ABBOTT > > gave > > me e-mail address to join dhammastudygroup. > > > > > > > pirmsombat 9264 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 7:45pm Subject: Daily Words of the Buddha >If you wish to recieve daily words by the Buddha (short stanzas) you >can >do so at the following website. > >http://www.pariyatti.com ~meththa Ranil 9265 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 8:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Mor Pirm Welcome to the list. Please feel free to contribute comments or views any time, and share the benefit of your 31 years of dhamma interest. Jon --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- p Sallakachat wrote: > > > > hello i interest in Buddhism for 31 years. last > > month i went toIndia with > > dhamma group (SUJIN BORIHARNWANAKET).JONOTHAN ABBOTT > > gave > > me e-mail address to join dhammastudygroup. > > > > > > pirmsombat 9266 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 8:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Daily Words of the Buddha --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > >If you wish to recieve daily words by the Buddha (short stanzas) you >can > >do so at the following website. > > > >http://www.pariyatti.com > > ~meththa > Ranil thanks, Ranil. Robert 9267 From: Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike "waddee krap Mike, It's good to hear from someone back home. How come you pick up Thai so quick? It's getting cold back here. But as you know nobody can predict the weather in St.Louis. Nov, in BKK in not too bad. If you can stand the summer here in St.Louis before, BKK is a piece of cake. Well, hope you have a great time there. Anumodhana in your good deed. Hope you get what you want ,and also hope you want what you get. Good to hear you have a good time there. Hope to hear a whole lot more from you. Best wishes, Num 9268 From: Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 4:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Waddee krap, Welcome to dsg krap. I am excited. I do not know how to address properly yet. I like studying dhamma a lot as well, but definitely less than 31 yr krap. see you on dsg later krap. I may send you an off-list mail. Num 9269 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 9:29pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hey Mike! When you're settled in, let us know more. Good to hear you've arrived okay. Best, Robert ========= --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks, Jon, > > Settled in nicely now, jet-lagged but very glad to be > here. Got in on the English discussion Saturday and > had the great good luck to have Khun Amara interpret > the Thai talk and subsequent Foundation meeting (on > anusaya) following. All quite exhilarating. 9270 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Ken O, I’m going to reply to two of your messages on ‘Seeing’ here: .................... Post (1)--- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > k: Just a point abt sense base. To me cittas are not dependent of rupa > based to have the six senses. To hear physically or to see physically, I > do agree that it is rupa dependent. As you say before, during sleep we do > not see as the senses are not working and there is a contiunation of > cittas which is bavanga cittas. While we’re fast asleep, But i more prefer to think that such > latent characteristics of seeing is not cease, it is just not arise as > there is no right conditions and causes for it to arise. .................... S: As I understand, in order for seeing (cakkhu vinnana) to take place, there must be a reality (a visible object) which is seen and there must also be eye-base or eye-sense. If kamma doesn’t produce eye-sense, there is no seeing. Furthermore, seeing is the result of kamma, it’s vipaka citta. It’s not the result of will or nutrition or temperature, for example. When we talk about eye-base/sense, it’s not the same as that sense or organ we think about conventionally or scientifically. Here, it’s a rupa (reality which doesn’t experience anything) termed cakkuppasada rupa (eye-base) and it falls away all the time, very rapidly, just as the visible object does. Because we have different ideas of what eye-base/sense is, it’s a little easier to use the Pali term, I think. While we’re fast asleep, the cakkuppasada rupa (eye-base) is not a condition for seeing, even though there is still light. The reason is that there’s no contact between the visible object and the cakkuppasada rupa. One mor point to stress, cakkuppasada rupa doesn’t know that visible objects contact with it and visible objects don’t know they contact with cakkuppasada rupa. They don’t know anything at all. Only namas (mental phenomena) know or experience anything. .................... >...... This is similar > to lobha and panna, they do not cease with cittas cease, they are passed > to the next arising cittas. Hence there is the reasons I believe we could > accumulate. If such pannas or lobha cease together with these cittas, > then whatever we accumulate will be back to square one. Such > characteristics of passing is definitely annatta similar to the nature of > cittas and cetasikas. .................... S: As I just mentioned, seeing is vipaka citta (result of kamma).These cittas are quite different from those which are accompanied by lobha and panna which ‘accumulate’ these tendencies. When seeing sees something pleasant or unpleasant, it is a citta which is the result of a good or bad deed we have performed. Lobha or panna accompany bad or good cittas afterwards and may themselves condition further bad or good deeds. As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or Buddha ‘sees’, there cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas. Like you say, they are all anatta, regardless. .................... ==================== Post (2)- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi All, > > I remember when I asked Sarah that do we need the organ of eye to see, she > say yes. .................... S: Perhaps I should clarify (emphasise) and say that what is needed is eye-base (cakkhuppasada rupa). When we talk about organ or brain, we’re talking about concepts and not the precise realities the Buddha explained. ..................... > The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could be > temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we could > be seeing again. .................... S: As I mentioned, cakkuppasada rupa arises and falls away like all other rupas. Like when we’re asleep, if there is no contact, there cannot be seeing. The use of the anti-venom would be the condition for contact to take place again, I'd think. Actually, when I’ve taught ‘blind’ children, usually there is some seeing or eye consciousness taking place, but because of various conditions (i.e including the nature of the cakkuppasada rupa and contact and kamma produced seeing at those moments), it is not as ‘clear’ as for others. .................... >Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not be > seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa and > moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there for it > to arise as what I always suspect. .................... S: As discussed above. .................... > I believe the sharacteristics of such sense conscoiuness of one citta is > pass to the next time cittas, just like the three poison which we > accumulates. It will not cease even when cittas ceased. If these > characteristics or function cease with each citta, then it will be > impossible to accumulate, panna or cetana or sanna, because each citta > will be bring us back to ground zero in accumulations. .................... S: It really helps to clearly understand the difference between kusala, akusala and vipaka cittas. This has very direct relevance in our daily life which I’d be happy to discuss further. .................... > To me this there is a sense a constant passing of accumulations between > cittas. It sounds like a some kind of "self" in these passing of > accumulations which will not cease even if cittas cease. > > > For your kind comments please .................... S: It only sounds like a ‘self’ passing in the accumulations if there is no awareness of their characteristics. The momentary cessation of cittas and cetasikas does not mean that as a result of many conditions, these tendencies cannot be ‘accumulated’. However, I don’t want to complicate further an already complicated post ;-). Thanks for helping me to consider seeing and eye-sense more carefully, Ken O. I appreciate your interest a lot and hope I’ve got my facts right. Please let me know if anything isn't clear in this post. Sarah ==================== 9271 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 11:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A tentative question Dear Ken H, --- khow14@h... wrote: > > Hello Sarah and Christine, > > Your discussion has impressed upon me that the Dhamma is very > much about finding ourselves, however incongruous that sounds. > > I remember reading about a sutta which used that sort of language, > and I am trying to track it down again. Some young noblemen > were too busy to listen to the Buddha because they were searching > for a thief who had made off with their valuables. The Buddha > asked them, `what do you want to do, find your possessions, or find > your selves?' I'll look forward to the reference when you find it. It's a good reminder abouty the priorities we set in a day or even at this moment. I had a long swim this morning and was reflecting towards the end on how most the thinking that had been taking place whilst I was swimming was quite useless with very few moments of useful reflection, let alone sati. Still, at least I reflected on and composed my response on 'Seeing' to Ken O and this was helpful;-) We take the seeing for granted, but it just arises for a moment depending on many different conditions. When it's the object of awareness, there's no concern or thought about self and no confusion with what is seen. Just a nama experiencing for a moment and then gone. > I've been immersed in `homework,' over the last couple of weeks, > and will be glad to get back into the discussions. Now you've reminded me about kids' homework and housework Always glad to hear from you Ken H. Sarah 9272 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 11:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental function ceasing > > > > > > upon the death of the arahant. > > > > Hey Howard. > > You don't think you can get away with that, do you? [hope you do > > of > > course]. > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > ================================ > Heh, heh, heh!! ;-)) > No, I didn't expect to get off easily on this, and the fact that no > major "fight" on this has erupted yet is frankly getting me quite nervous! I > am having nightmares about an entire Abhidhammic arsenal being assembled! > (Just kidding, Sarah, Jon, Robert K, et alia ;-) Hey, Howard, I wouldn't like to play any part in giving you nightmares, so I'm taking a 'nibbana-leave' for now and leaving it to others....;-) On the more peaceful question of Tai Chi, I always forget what 'system' it is I do (sorry, hopeless with names). It's the 'long' one that is 'standard' in Hong Kong. I liked your reminder about rushing to class;-) It's the story of my life - I rush around like mad and then wonder why it takes me the first half of the session to 'get my bearings' and 'focus' on the steps;-) It also doubles up as my Cantonese class as my teacher doesn't speak a word of English, so there's plenty of detail that goes over my head, I'm sure. To add a 'dhamma' comment, some others may think that the Tai Chi (performed very slowly) is like slow walking meditation. Perhaps, but again it depends on the view and attitude. If one has the idea that this is THE time or place for developing awareness (as opposed to the frantic bustle getting there on time in my case) and if one has the idea that the slow movements themselves are the condition for sati, I wouldn't agree at all. Seeing and other realities are just as real in the frantic bustle and can be known at any time. Still, I highly recommend Tai Chi as a kind of exercise in terms of promoting flexibility, eneregising 'chi' (energy) and for many other benefits such as a real 'cut off' from teaching and students;-) Howard, I'm sure meanwhile you'll have no problems coping with the 'Abhidhammic arsenal' with your usual equanimity (and you can usually call on Rob Ep for a bit of extra support;-) ) Sarah 9273 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 11:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Music Dear Herman, --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > I love your ability to express yourself so clearly, gently and > profoundly at the same time. > > I guess I still express myself harshly at times, but I think the > bulldozer is shrinking :-) Many thanks and another big bow.... I assure you that I'm only too aware of how often the bulldozer gets into my speech in a day too....I should get my students to put you right on this score;-) I found Jon's reminder about conceit helpful and actually I hope he or Nina will add more details from their discussions in India. We feel indignant or even outraged when someone makes a comment on an issue which may not even be directed to us. Isn't there an aspect of conceit in the indignation and ruffled feathers we feel? I'd like to explore this further and would be interested in your comments. >Please accept that there is no malice in > anything I write, sometimes I can't resist what seems to be a nice > turn of phrase. It is good that anyone can discuss whatever Theradava > related topic they want, and that anyone can feel free to join in or > not. Herman, I know you wish us all well and (like I said to Erik), your bark is worse than your bite on the rare occasions recently that we hear it at all. It's very natural that some posts and topics are more appealing to us than others, don't you think? (,,,,and Erik, hoping the wedding celebrations went well last week - we thought of you many times during the day;-) > With regards to all the activities that fill the day, I am reading > some stuff re lucid dreaming / awareness during sleep (it seems such > a waste to be "out of it" for eight hours every day). > > Are there any Theradava sources re sleeping with awareness? I don't think so;-) So often when we feel 'exhausted' though, isn't it exhausted from our defilements? Maybe with more kusala in a day, we need less sleep and then there is less 'wastage'. Also, the arahat doesn't dream, you know. That's the best I can do on that question;-) Like Rob Ep, may I just add a note to say that I also sympathised with past 'hardships' and wish you, Tori and the boys many happy years together. iIalso know there are others on the list who've also experienced great personal losses and hope we can all help each other to reflect wisely and develop more understanding. Sarah 9274 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Sarah What kamma decides our sense faculty is only physically base (sense organs and sense bases) that resulted us able to physically to see and hear. To me it is the cittas that cognize the seeing and it is the eye base with eye organs that facilites or support the physically seeing. My view is that it is in the function of the cittas that cognize/knowing the seeing as such physical seeing is not manifested0if the right kamma and the right conditions are not there. But I like to stress that I am not talking abt an outter ego here. Hence even when we have an out of body experience, we are able to see bc of the function of cittas to cognize. "As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or Buddha ‘sees’, there cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas." As each successive cittas conditioned the next, there is still the ability to cognize even when one is Buddha just the Buddha could cognize it with perfect clarity and with reality. That does mean that panna is not accompanying the vipaka cittas. I tend to believe that panna is there just that our panna is not strong to be manifested unlike Buddha. Without such panna accompanying, Buddha would not known what is vipaka cittas and how it works and its speed etc.... Kind regards Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Ken O, > > I’m going to reply to two of your messages on ‘Seeing’ here: > .................... > > Post (1)--- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > > k: Just a point abt sense base. To me cittas are not dependent of > rupa > > based to have the six senses. To hear physically or to see > physically, I > > do agree that it is rupa dependent. As you say before, during sleep > we do > > not see as the senses are not working and there is a contiunation of > > cittas which is bavanga cittas. While we’re fast asleep, But i more > prefer > to think that such > > latent characteristics of seeing is not cease, it is just not arise as > > there is no right conditions and causes for it to arise. > > .................... > > S: As I understand, in order for seeing (cakkhu vinnana) to take place, > there > must be a reality (a visible object) which is seen and there must also > be > eye-base or eye-sense. If kamma doesn’t produce eye-sense, there is no > seeing. > Furthermore, seeing is the result of kamma, it’s vipaka citta. It’s not > the > result of will or nutrition or temperature, for example. > > When we talk about eye-base/sense, it’s not the same as that sense or > organ we > think about conventionally or scientifically. Here, it’s a rupa (reality > which > doesn’t experience anything) termed cakkuppasada rupa (eye-base) and it > falls > away all the time, very rapidly, just as the visible object does. > Because we > have different ideas of what eye-base/sense is, it’s a little easier to > use the > Pali term, I think. > > While we’re fast asleep, the cakkuppasada rupa (eye-base) is not a > condition > for seeing, even though there is still light. The reason is that there’s > no > contact between the visible object and the cakkuppasada rupa. > > One mor point to stress, cakkuppasada rupa doesn’t know that visible > objects > contact with it and visible objects don’t know they contact with > cakkuppasada > rupa. They don’t know anything at all. Only namas (mental phenomena) > know or > experience anything. > > .................... > > >...... This is similar > > to lobha and panna, they do not cease with cittas cease, they are > passed > > to the next arising cittas. Hence there is the reasons I believe we > could > > accumulate. If such pannas or lobha cease together with these cittas, > > then whatever we accumulate will be back to square one. Such > > characteristics of passing is definitely annatta similar to the nature > of > > cittas and cetasikas. > > .................... > > S: As I just mentioned, seeing is vipaka citta (result of kamma).These > cittas > are quite different from those which are accompanied by lobha and panna > which > ‘accumulate’ these tendencies. When seeing sees something pleasant or > unpleasant, it is a citta which is the result of a good or bad deed we > have > performed. Lobha or panna accompany bad or good cittas afterwards and > may > themselves condition further bad or good deeds. As I mentioned recently, > even > when the arahat or Buddha ‘sees’, there cannot be panna accompanying > these > vipaka cittas. > > Like you say, they are all anatta, regardless. > > .................... > ==================== > > Post (2)- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi All, > > > > I remember when I asked Sarah that do we need the organ of eye to see, > she > > say yes. > > .................... > > S: Perhaps I should clarify (emphasise) and say that what is needed is > eye-base > (cakkhuppasada rupa). When we talk about organ or brain, we’re talking > about > concepts and not the precise realities the Buddha explained. > > ..................... > > > The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could > be > > temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we > could > > be seeing again. > > .................... > > S: As I mentioned, cakkuppasada rupa arises and falls away like all > other > rupas. Like when we’re asleep, if there is no contact, there cannot be > seeing. > The use of the anti-venom would be the condition for contact to take > place > again, I'd think. Actually, when I’ve taught ‘blind’ children, usually > there is > some seeing or eye consciousness taking place, but because of various > conditions (i.e including the nature of the cakkuppasada rupa and > contact and > kamma produced seeing at those moments), it is not as ‘clear’ as for > others. > > .................... > > >Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not be > > seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa > and > > moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there > for it > > to arise as what I always suspect. > > .................... > > S: As discussed above. > > .................... > > > I believe the characteristics of such sense conscoiuness of one citta > is > > pass to the next time cittas, just like the three poison which we > > accumulates. It will not cease even when cittas ceased. If these > > characteristics or function cease with each citta, then it will be > > impossible to accumulate, panna or cetana or sanna, because each citta > > will be bring us back to ground zero in accumulations. > > .................... > > S: It really helps to clearly understand the difference between kusala, > akusala > and vipaka cittas. This has very direct relevance in our daily life > which I’d > be happy to discuss further. > > .................... > > > To me this there is a sense a constant passing of accumulations > between > > cittas. It sounds like a some kind of "self" in these passing of > > accumulations which will not cease even if cittas cease. > > > > > > For your kind comments please > > .................... > > S: It only sounds like a ‘self’ passing in the accumulations if there is > no > awareness of their characteristics. The momentary cessation of cittas > and > cetasikas does not mean that as a result of many conditions, these > tendencies > cannot be ‘accumulated’. However, I don’t want to complicate further an > already > complicated post ;-). > > Thanks for helping me to consider seeing and eye-sense more carefully, > Ken O. I > appreciate your interest a lot and hope I’ve got my facts right. Please > let me > know if anything isn't clear in this post. > > Sarah > ==================== 9275 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 2:13am Subject: same old questions/same old views Dear Sarah, Your quotes from the posts on Anatta were interesting - I am starting to explore the 'Useful Posts' in the files section. Because many parts of the Dhamma are so interwoven with other parts, a question or doubt or misunderstanding arising about one part cascades across other areas. And so, my not quite understanding Anatta, can raise questions for me about Kamma..... . So - if no-one is 'responsible'.....why do *I* get hurt, or *I* have loses, or *I* suffer, or in any way inherit the results of past kamma? How do the fruits of kamma get attracted to/inherited by/follow a particular entity/conglomeration throughout time? *Something* seems to stay together......... . Sometimes I seem to understand not-self, but then at other times find myself back at the beginning, holding the same old views - as if it hadn't been explained to me before, and I hadn't felt I understood. Sorry, I know I'm asking the same type of questions that I thought I had sorted out a while ago. Once I had a conversation with some fundamentalist Christians who called at my home to save my soul - and left disappointed. The basic unwritten, unspoken rule for the conversation, was that the discussion had to take place within the boundaries of the texts in the Christian Bible. Any question was settled by "proofs" extracted from the texts "Jehovah God said...." . They were unable to grasp that, for me, this form of discussion 'within a capsule', wasn't a valid way of discovering truth. It sometimes seems to me that some buddhists use similar methods when discussing self only from 'within a set of rules' regarding what can be mentioned about the characteristics of a self. e.g. in the quote . Why does one of the characteristics of a self have to be that it can magically 'will' or 'control' changes to facets of itself......otherwise there is not a self? I read U Silanand's "No Inner Core - Anatta" and could agree with it all as I read it........but what and why is this constant reversion to old ways of thinking? (It is almost as if I cannot store new memories on this one subject only ). Maybe I should drop it for a while........... metta, Christine 9276 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 3:57am Subject: meththa meditation Dear Dhamma friends, Recently I recieved the text below from one of my frineds. I found it very interesting. So I list it here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Most importantly, mettha towards your own self. A lot of young people who are being brought up under the influence of western cultures experience subtle lack of self esteem, subtle self hatred, feelings of worthlessness and thinking they are not good enough. Mettha meditation can play a big role in unravelling this knot. Giving oneself unconditional forgiveness regardless of whatever has happened in the past and thinking ALL your actions are good enough and thinking what you do is just fine and so on helps greatly. This is all compassion towards the self. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also would like to know your ideas on how meththa meditaion, meththa itself is helping our selvs to build self esteem, peace within us...etc. Thank you, ~meththa to all Ranil 9277 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 5:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Howard and Rob Ep Thanks to you both for taking the trouble to respond to my post (and my apologies for being over wordy). I am glad you have picked this particular point to comment on. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - Jon: > > 6. Finally, a general comment on the view that the Noble Eightfold > Path > > is a prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path > > factors are to be developed separately and individually, somehow > > culminating in supramundane consciousness. If that were so, then it > would > > mean that each of the path factors (except for right view) could be > > developed, and indeed is presumably even now being developed, by > persons > > who have never heard of the dhamma. I say this because, taking 'right > > effort' as an example, people who have never heard the dhamma do exert > > conventional effort to have more kusala. I can see no difference > between > > this person and the dhamma practitioner who likewise exerts > conventional > > effort to have more kusala -- or am I missing something here? > > > =============================== Howard: > Actually, what I think may be what is described here is the > practice > and progress of a person who could eventually become a paccekabuddha. > No? I think have not explained myself very well. Let me try to restate. We are discussing the meaning of the references in the texts to the Noble Eightfold Path. In particular, we are looking at what is meant by 'right effort' as one of the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. In previous discussions on this topic, Howard, you have indicated what I believe to be a fairly widely held view, namely, that right effort means or at least includes the effort that one makes to have kusala when there is no kusala, or not to have more akusala when akusala is present. You have illustrated how this may apply either in normal daily life or during one's 'practice'. My point is this. Since people who are not Buddhists can also strive to have kusala of exactly the same kind (except for right view) in the same way, does this mean that a non-Buddhist who is so making an effort is also developing the path factor of right effort? The question could be stated another way: is there *necessarily* a difference between the striving to have more kusala of someone who has never heard the dhamma, and the striving to have more kusala of someone who has heard the dhamma? It might perhaps be suggested that the fact that someone who has not heard the dhamma has no notion of the teaching of 'not-self' makes a difference. However, I do not think this can truly be said. Both the one who has studied dhamma and the non-Buddhist have an innate view of self, and both can strive without at that moment there being a manifest view of a self who is making effort. So there is not necessarily any difference between the two here. I would be interested to hear your views on this. Jon --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Howard and Jon, > This is the portion of Jon's good talk that also interested me quite a > bit. > > I would say that there is a difference between one who attempts to > cultivate > kusala states without the benefit of Buddhist understandings, and > someone who > attempts to realize the steps of the Eightfold Path with an > understanding of > anatta, anicca and dukkha. > > It is the clarity of these distinctions that gives the context for > Buddhist > cultivation. This in itself, I don't think, necessitates a view of the > 'real' > 8-fold path as supramundane, although it doesn't speak against that > possibility > either. > > I tend to think that all beings are striving in their own way for > liberation. > Everyone has a subconscious drive to end delusion and suffering, and > reach a place > of freedom. And at some point in their journey, they will find the > higher > principles that will allow them to actually achieve liberation. Is > there an > inherent difference between Buddhists and non-Buddhists? As 'beings', I > would say > there isn't. We're all in the same boat. But Buddhism allows one to go > beyond > the final illusions of a separate or permenant self or entity. > > Just because all spiritual people are trying to cultivate kusala, to me > neither > dictates that Buddhists and non-Buddhists are inherently different, or > inherently > the same. > > To me, the question remains as to whether there is volition in the path, > or > whether the Eight-Fold path is a set of factors that occur only in > Enlightenment. > It seems sensible to me to think that the various mundane cultivations > that > non-enlightened Buddhists do in order to increase their awareness and > see into > realities are the necessary steps that lead to reaping the benefits of > higher > stages, even if these higher stages include a different level of the > Eightfold > factors, and even if the earlier efforts are not in fact volitional but > only seem > that way. > > I apologize for this circuitous discussion that doesn't really reach any > conclusion. I also apologize for airing a few half-baked thoughts here > which may > not be very clear. For me, I would still like to know how the Arahats > who wrote > the commentaries derived their definition of the Noble Eightfold Path's > path-factors at the moment of enlightenment from the Suttas, but it > looks like I > will have to read the commentaries myself at some point and see for > myself, since > the connection seems to be implied rather than explicit. > > Does anyone know how to reach Bikkhu Bodhi? Perhaps I should ask him > what he > thinks about this. I'm just kidding. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > 9278 From: Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 4:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/13/01 2:26:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hey, Howard, I wouldn't like to play any part in giving you nightmares, so > I'm > taking a 'nibbana-leave' for now and leaving it to others....;-) --------------------------------------------- Whew! ;-)) -------------------------------------------- > > On the more peaceful question of Tai Chi, I always forget what 'system' it > is I > do (sorry, hopeless with names). It's the 'long' one that is 'standard' in > Hong > Kong. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps it's the Yang style? Specifically the Yang "long form" (108 steps). That's what I'm learning. I'm about half-way through at this point. (I previously learned the standard PRC government-issue 24-step form.) ---------------------------------------------------------- I liked your reminder about rushing to class;-) It's the story of my life> > - I rush around like mad and then wonder why it takes me the first half of > the > session to 'get my bearings' and 'focus' on the steps;-) It also doubles > up as > my Cantonese class as my teacher doesn't speak a word of English, so > there's > plenty of detail that goes over my head, I'm sure. > > To add a 'dhamma' comment, some others may think that the Tai Chi > (performed > very slowly) is like slow walking meditation. Perhaps, but again it depends > on > the view and attitude. If one has the idea that this is THE time or place > for > developing awareness (as opposed to the frantic bustle getting there on > time in > my case) and if one has the idea that the slow movements themselves are the > condition for sati, I wouldn't agree at all. Seeing and other realities are > just as real in the frantic bustle and can be known at any time. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that one of the several benefits in going slowly in t'ai chi (and elsewhere) is that it helps one to stay "present" without anticipating what comes up next, a facility which is important in meditation. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Still, I highly recommend Tai Chi as a kind of exercise in terms of > promoting > flexibility, eneregising 'chi' (energy) and for many other benefits such as > a > real 'cut off' from teaching and students;-) > > Howard, I'm sure meanwhile you'll have no problems coping with the > 'Abhidhammic > arsenal' with your usual equanimity (and you can usually call on Rob Ep for > a > bit of extra support;-) ) > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it is very comforting having Robert "around"! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ > > 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) 9279 From: Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/13/01 8:03:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > I think have not explained myself very well. Let me try to restate. > > We are discussing the meaning of the references in the texts to the Noble > Eightfold Path. In particular, we are looking at what is meant by 'right > effort' as one of the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. > > In previous discussions on this topic, Howard, you have indicated what I > believe to be a fairly widely held view, namely, that right effort means > or at least includes the effort that one makes to have kusala when there > is no kusala, or not to have more akusala when akusala is present. You > have illustrated how this may apply either in normal daily life or during > one's 'practice'. > > My point is this. Since people who are not Buddhists can also strive to > have kusala of exactly the same kind (except for right view) in the same > way, does this mean that a non-Buddhist who is so making an effort is also > developing the path factor of right effort? > > The question could be stated another way: is there *necessarily* a > difference between the striving to have more kusala of someone who has > never heard the dhamma, and the striving to have more kusala of someone > who has heard the dhamma? > > It might perhaps be suggested that the fact that someone who has not heard > the dhamma has no notion of the teaching of 'not-self' makes a difference. > However, I do not think this can truly be said. Both the one who has > studied dhamma and the non-Buddhist have an innate view of self, and both > can strive without at that moment there being a manifest view of a self > who is making effort. So there is not necessarily any difference between > the two here. > > I would be interested to hear your views on this. > > Jon > ============================= I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could still end up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), and that practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, be a paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser approximation of that). I suspect - quite strongly - that the Buddha's path really is ekayana (in the sense of "the only way", and not just "the direct way"), but that anyone who follows that path even inadvertently, whether having heard the Dhamma or not, is on the path to nibbana. 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) 9280 From: Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 5:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas <<>> Hi Ken, Good to see that you have been reflecting about the topic. I am too, it's good for me to consider about the subject as well. I did also read your post to Sarah on Seeing. I do not understand what you referred to as physical seeing. You said that it's citta that cognizes the object, that is my understanding as well. Rupa, material, cannot cognize anything. Seeing conscious needs a lot of conditions to arise, and only stay extremely briefly and then falls away the same as conditions. Again, let me repeat myself that, …<> I think this is very important. Now get back to your question Vedana and citta. May I refer to Nina's chapter 2, Vedana, http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas4.html Her writing can explain your question pretty clearly. My understanding is citta is a leader of the band in cognizing object but citta and cetasika (nama-dhamma: reality which is able to know) are mutually supportive (as characters of cetasika in Abhidhammattha Sangaha). There is no citta without cetasika and vice versa. This is my guess to your question. Because the nature of this two phenomena is so well blended, and the ability of citta that can know different kinds of object including material (rupa), citta, cetasika, nibbana as well as concept/signification/name (pannatti). So cetasika as well as citta can also be an object (arammana) for the later citta to cognize. If Nina have time, I am sure that she can explain this better than me. So previous vedana can be an object for later citta as well. I'd better stop here. This is not easy for me either. I enjoy your good questions. Addendum comment from anyone are appreciated. Num PS. Let me cut from Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin regarding the importance of vedana. << In the Anguttaranikaya Ekanipata Dutiyapannasaka Sanimitta the third vagga, 328, there is a passage saying: Behold, Bhikkhu, dhamma that is sinful akusala arises because there is vedana. Without vedana, it does not arise. By abandoning the vedana the dhamma that is sinful akusala would no longer be. (Other passages are about sanna-cetasika, which is the sanna-khandha, other cetasika that are sankhara-khandha and the citta which are vinnana-khandha.) This shows that the vedana-cetasika, which are feelings, are the basis of tenacious attachments. Since there is no knowledge of the truth about vedana-cetasika, one cannot abandon the feeling that there is oneself. The knowledge of the characteristics of vedana-cetasika would condition and support sati to arise and know the characteristics of vedana. Otherwise one would not realize that every day there is vedana in the same way that each day there are only realities that appear through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind, only because citta arise to know these realities. But imagine if one does not feel anything, when one sees the world there would be no perturbation. If one does not feel any emotion after hearing, one would not feel disturbed either. And the same applies to smelling, tasting, knowing bodysense contact, there would be no akusala of any kind. But because feelings arise, there is attachment and clinging to the feelings and desiring the objects that make us feel glad and happy, which cause akusala-dhamma to arise frequently without our awareness. All dhamma are anatta and none can prevent vedana-cetasika from arising. Whenever citta arises there must be vedana-cetasika that feels the arammana of the moment. Even now there must be vedana-cetasika of one kind or another being upekkha-vedana, sukha-vedana, dukkha-vedana, somanassa-vedana or domanassa-vedana. The aim of studying dhamma is not merely to know the number or names but the characteristics of the feelings one is having. If sati does not arise to be conscious of the feelings that we are having now, even though that feeling is real: it has arisen and fallen away, since we do not know the true characteristics of that feeling, we would take it for the selves, which are happy, unhappy, glad, sad or indifferent. >> 9281 From: m. nease Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 6:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Ranil, --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > > Recently I recieved the text below from one of my > frineds. I found it very > interesting. So I list it here. > Most importantly, mettha towards your own self. Is there someone who can will the arising of mettaa or any other cetasika? If mettaa does arise, what are it's characteristics at that moment? Will it last? For how long? Is there attachment to the pleasant feeling attending it? Aversion to its absence or loss? > A > lot of > young people who are being brought up under the > influence of western > cultures experience subtle lack of self esteem, > subtle self hatred, feelings > of worthlessness and thinking they are not good > enough. Aversion is always akusala, no matter what the object--self-image, injustice, Ronald MacDonald, whatever. It's also always accompanied by an upleasant feeling. Adosa (just the absence of aversion) is always kusala and (I think--not certain about this) always accompanied by a pleasant feeling. Unfortunately, lobha is also accompanied by pleasant feeling and is very difficult to distinguish from adosa, not to mention mettaa. So understanding of the characteristics of all these phenomena is so much more important than any reflection that might, for the moment, cause 'us' to 'feel better about 'ourselves''. "Young people who are being brought up under the influence of western cultures" is just an idea, no reality to it at all. If one wants to truly undermine unhappiness, the way is to begin to understand the characteristics of the present moment--at what other moment could understanding arise? As I understand it, this is the only way to even begin to truly eradicate the underlying tendency to aversion of any kind--including 'low self-esteem'. Did western culture create suffering? Didn't people suffer in the Buddha's day too? And from what roots? Just the same as today--ignorance, aversion and desire. Don't "young people who are being brought up under the influence of eastern cultures" suffer too--maybe even from 'low self-esteem'? > Mettha meditation can play a big role in unravelling > this knot. Certainly various kinds of concentration can temporarily suppress the kilesas and the unpleasant feelings which accompany some of them. The key word is 'suppress'--once the samadhi is gone, the underlying tendency for the arising of the kilesas is still in place, if not strengthened--and the kilesa and its attendant feeling is free to arise again, probably also to condition yet more akusala kamma and vipakka--this is endless. > Giving > oneself unconditional forgiveness regardless of > whatever has happened in the > past and thinking ALL your actions are good enough > and thinking what you do > is just fine and so on helps greatly. This is all > compassion towards the > self. Compassion is always kusala, but what conditions its arising? Who is there to give 'oneself' anything? Where is the lasting virtue of all this thinking? It might condition a pleasant feeling for a little while (or it might not--very frustrating!)--but when the conditions that led to it are exhausted it's gone--it was just a temporary distraction from a real and persistent problem, that of dukkha. Mettaa-bhavana and all the other kinds of kusala are fine (if they're real--difficult to know)--except that they all just lead to more samsara. Only the cultivation of understanding will lead (eventually) to the eradication of the defilements and liberation. Offering little distractions to young people isn't doing them a favor, I think--just postponing the real (and by the way, really enjoyable) work of beginning to investigate the realities of the present moment. Please excuse the rant--just my opinions... mike 9282 From: kelvin liew peng chuan Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 6:36pm Subject: hello all! Dear All, May you all be well, happy & peaceful! i was requested by an e-friend to give a short write up to introduce Buddhism in a Christian website. can you all help me? sorry for being silent all this while, i see the pace of discussion's very fast & deep! it's enlightening to read the discussions, though.i hope someone can help me. thanks in advance, saddhu ! saddhu! saddhu! ~ sampuna 9283 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 7:59pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike :o)) Sir Mike the Bird has arrived in the 'Land that was never Conquered'.! Mudita cittena, gayan -----Original Message----- From: m. nease [mailto:mlnease@y...] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 8:30 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hi Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Mike & Tadao, > > Good to hear from both of you... > > Mike, sounds like a good start....hope you catch up > some sleep and find a > nearby internet cafe soon too. There now. > Meanwhile, perhaps no > one needs to use the tel > line early morning and late evening? Some language barrier problems added to multiple passwords (mai mee) and an unstable connection. I'll try to keep in touch from here, though... > How was the English discussion on Saturday? I'm > pretty excited to hear from you > from Bkk...still can't quite believe you're there;-) Outstanding, though the Thai interpreted for my by Khun Amara was much better. Really great abhidhamma. A lotta smart people here I'd never heard of... > It'll be great if you're still around end Dec when > we visit, hopefully with Ken > O and another dsg 'surprise' ..;-) It's looking like a possibility at this point--yang mai naa... > Tadao, good to hear you're still around...I know > you've been very busy. It'll > be good to hear any (brief OK) 'titbits' from you if > you have time/inspiration. > Any chance of meeting us in Bkk too???? (..and if > it's an extended stay, you > get to meet Rob K for the same ticket price;-) > > Best wishes to you both, Back at you all, mike 9284 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Commentaries --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > > > May I post any questions to this List? (I can see why the > > commentaries grew - ?commentaries on commentaries?) > > Please do...I think several people have copies and will be happy to > discuss/share understandings. Pls give a page no and....perhaps if you give > brief summaries or short quotes for those that don't so anyone can follow, > that would be helpful.. or large quotes. I wanna see more commentaries! > Must rush to my Tai Chi class, > > Sarah Are there any types of classes you don't take, Sarah?? Actually, we have a lot in common. I studied Yang Style T'ai Chi, long form for a couple of years, then short form with William Chen in New York and others for several years, and a style that I believe was called K'ung Ping T'ai Chi for a year or two. With my long form teacher, I also studied Taoist standing meditation. I also studied and taught Iyengar style yoga for a couple of decades after that. I'm also a licensed [in New York] massage therapist, studied and practiced deep tissue work, lightwork, cranio-sacral work, etc. I don't know if it's right for the list, but if you want to have a thread on how discernment of realities relates to yoga and t'ai chi practices, that might be fun. Or maybe you don't see them as related. I would certainly be interested. Best Regards, Robert Ep. 9285 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: ...Why are people (apparently) so fascinated with > nibbana and with what 'happens' at parinibbana? I have always considered > this whole area as something of little practical significance, of > curiosity value only and more or less unrelated to the task of > understanding the reality appearing at the present moment. Yet there has > been some pretty intense speculation on this list about the ins and outs > of parinibbana. So I'm wondering what is the significance/appeal -- or am > I missing something? Dear Jon, I think you are right that the 'experience' of nibbana or parinibbana is speculative for us, and is not of practical benefit on a moment-to-moment everyday level on which we must focus in order to develop. However, I think the limited benefit of these topics is simple: If we are committing ourselves to a path, possibly an extremely long one, we want to know at least provisionally that the end goal of that path is something that we at least theoretically understand, and, if it is not too bold, that it is something that we actually want to achieve. I don't think there's anyone who follows Buddhism who does not attempt to some extent to emulate and understand the Buddha, his experience and his reasons for prescribing the path he does. Even to come to understand that the path is a path of discernment, and not one of achievement or self-transformation [in the sense that anatta does not allow for personal ownership of the process] is to focus on both the method or lack thereof, and the goal of the path. So I think that some of us rightly want to know where our long focus should be, where we are headed if we are able to continue on this path, and why it is the way it is. Of course, we won't understand directly until we get there, if and when we get there, but it still seems important to understand the components of the whole system on some level. And then, I would agree with you, at some point we have to put our focus on right where we are and what we need to do now to keep learning. Best, Robert Ep. 9286 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana --- Sarah wrote: > On the more peaceful question of Tai Chi, I always forget what 'system' it is I > do (sorry, hopeless with names). It's the 'long' one that is 'standard' in Hong > Kong. It's got to be either Yang, or Wu, the two major styles from China. Yang is the rounded-arm style, where the line of the arm, wrist fingers are a continuous curve. We has a sharp cutoff at the wrist and the hand is held at almost a 90 degree angle to the wrist. A very different style, but apparently equally effective in its own way. [I always studied Yang Forms]. There is also Kuang Ping, I believe, but that is a more restricted school that isn't present in most places in the world. > Howard, I'm sure meanwhile you'll have no problems coping with the 'Abhidhammic > arsenal' with your usual equanimity (and you can usually call on Rob Ep for a > bit of extra support;-) ) I'm always waiting in the wings, trying to process the day's interaction with my three year old daughter, who has inherited the accumulated will of both her mother and father! But when Howard calls, I am at the ready to log on and agree with him! Best, Robert Ep. 9287 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] same old questions/same old views --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > I read U Silanand's "No Inner Core - Anatta" and could agree with it > all as I read it........but what and why is this constant reversion > to old ways of thinking? (It is almost as if I cannot store new > memories on this one subject only ). Maybe I should drop it for a > while........... Dear Christine, I would recommend being kind and gentle to yourself, and taking these kinds of things slowly. I was deeply interested in Zen for many years without ever looking hard at Anatta. Why? Because our 'sense of self' does not want to encounter this concept and will do almost anything to avoid it. It is the death of the idea of everything that we tend to think we are as human beings. And so I suggest 'sipping' at it gradually, and tasting its content and possibilities -- advice that I am taking myself. I take a different little look at anatta every day, but I don't try to force myself to totally realize that there is not any internal or permanent entity within. I just take this as a concept and allow it to seep in as it will. Since playing with it this way, I have had some interesting flashes of insight. Once or twice I have had these moments when it is clear that there is 'just listening' with no one listening, or something of that sort. Rather than being scary, at the moment of actually encountering this it is liberating, like a clear space where there used to be a heavy mass in consciousness. There is no one to 'save' and so a lot of pressure is off for that moment. And then, as Joseph Conrad once said, 'the return to an eternal rest'. No one can decide when they'll 'get it' that there is no one to get it. It has to be a slow process by its nature, and the biggest requirement is patience, which doesn't come easily to any of us. Best, Robert Ep. 9288 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > It might perhaps be suggested that the fact that someone who has not heard > the dhamma has no notion of the teaching of 'not-self' makes a difference. > However, I do not think this can truly be said. Both the one who has > studied dhamma and the non-Buddhist have an innate view of self, and both > can strive without at that moment there being a manifest view of a self > who is making effort. So there is not necessarily any difference between > the two here. > > I would be interested to hear your views on this. > > Jon Well Jon, for some reason this question is very confusing to me. I kind of enjoy being confused, but I'll see if I can get out of it. I have always thought that the difference between Buddhism and all other teachings, is that the Buddha inherently recognized that the path was one of consciousness and not of changing, altering or somehow fixing up the self. If a Buddhist is doing Buddhism to accumulate kusala, in the sense of 'bettering his self', then he is not really practicing Buddhism at that time. :Perhaps eventually he will see that the self is an illusion in the sense that he normally thinks of it, and then he will be practicing Buddhism. The attempt to see through the ordinary self and see that it is not one's actual identity, and the attempt to see what the nature of consciousness is beyond that, based on that discovery, to me is the Buddhist path. So the person who was trying to accumulate kusala without this understanding may call himself a Buddhist or something else, but he is not rightly on the path the Buddha discovered. The truth of anatta, that the psychophysical being that we find ourselves being in this life, is not a 'self', but a filter for the experience of consciousness, I think in some language or another we can all agree on -- you may not like my wording, or you may disagree on my emphasis on 'consciousness', but we can agree that the ordinary self is really not-self, or an empty concept that we mistake for the being that we think we are. That's what makes it a 'Buddhist' discussion. Beyond this, I see no reason to differentiate between mundane and supra-mundane Right Effort, in the sense that all Effort should be made with the understanding that there is no one at the center of such effort. Does that mean that effort is non-volitional? Does there need to be a self in order to have volition or will? Can consciousness, through focussing on certain factors, increase it's discernment? And is such focussing totally predetermined by kamma and khandas? These questions are open to dispute and might be disagreed about between us. But the basic truth that there is no central self coordinating the action, we would agree upon. And that would be a basic Buddhist perspective. So I see this view as making all the difference, and I don't see the path as being basically about accumulating kusala states, except in so far as this allows for greater discernment. In the past, I have argued for the application of Buddhist principles to the experience of kusala in the affairs of daily life. But this is because I was focussed in those issues on daily life and how to improve it. In truth, being around this list has 'killed' some of that for me. I have realized that fixing daily living is more a property of attachment and aversion than of progressing on the path of discernment. So perhaps I have either made some progress, or fallen into a trap of another kind. Anyway, Right Effort in a Buddhist sense does not exist without a notion of anatta. Without that, it is not Buddhist, and if it has that, it is Buddhist, whether it is on the mundane level or on the supramundane. I will be anxious to hear your comments on this. both Jon and Howard, and others. Best, Robert Ep. 9289 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 9:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could still end > up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), and that > practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could > eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, be a > paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser approximation of > that). I suspect - quite strongly - that the Buddha's path really is ekayana > (in the sense of "the only way", and not just "the direct way"), but that > anyone who follows that path even inadvertently, whether having heard the > Dhamma or not, is on the path to nibbana. > > With metta, > Howard Howard, Sorry to agree with you again so soon, but I would enter into evidence the vedantic sages I enjoy mentioning: Ramana Maharshi and Nisargardatta. By their pronouncements, I am personally quite convinced that they were fully enlightened and had no false notion remaining of a separate self or entity. I think they understood and experienced anatta fully without having the benefit of studying Buddhism. Best, Robert Ep. 9290 From: Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] same old questions/same old views --- Well put Rob. E., Anatta is the BIG one and it is not easy to see or accept even at the intellectual level - especially the fact that it means there is no one who can control. However, seeing it properly is not at all scary and does take a weight off. It is always the sense of self that hinders and sucks away our energy, that causes our fears. Knowing more about conditions and kamma - which is intimately tied in with anatta - means that one knows that many of our 'efforts' may be counterproductive. Letting go of these frees up much vitality. But we have to let anatta 'seep in slowly' as you say. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > > > I read U Silanand's "No Inner Core - Anatta" and could agree with it > > all as I read it........but what and why is this constant reversion > > to old ways of thinking? (It is almost as if I cannot store new > > memories on this one subject only ). Maybe I should drop it for a > > while........... > > Dear Christine, > I would recommend being kind and gentle to yourself, and taking these kinds of > things slowly. I was deeply interested in Zen for many years without ever looking > hard at Anatta. Why? Because our 'sense of self' does not want to encounter this > concept and will do almost anything to avoid it. It is the death of the idea of > everything that we tend to think we are as human beings. And so I suggest > 'sipping' at it gradually, and tasting its content and possibilities -- advice > that I am taking myself. I take a different little look at anatta every day, but > I don't try to force myself to totally realize that there is not any internal or > permanent entity within. I just take this as a concept and allow it to seep in as > it will. > > Since playing with it this way, I have had some interesting flashes of insight. > Once or twice I have had these moments when it is clear that there is 'just > listening' with no one listening, or something of that sort. Rather than being > scary, at the moment of actually encountering this it is liberating, like a clear > space where there used to be a heavy mass in consciousness. There is no one to > 'save' and so a lot of pressure is off for that moment. > > And then, as Joseph Conrad once said, 'the return to an eternal rest'. No one can > decide when they'll 'get it' that there is no one to get it. It has to be a slow > process by its nature, and the biggest requirement is patience, which doesn't come > easily to any of us. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9291 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] same old questions/same old views Thanks for your response, Robert. Your comments bolster the idea that anatta is ultimately not frightening, but liberating. Regards, Robert Ep. ================= --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Well put Rob. E., > Anatta is the BIG one and it is not easy to see or accept even at the > intellectual level - especially the fact that it means there is no > one who can control. > However, seeing it properly is not at all scary and does take a > weight off. It is always the sense of self that hinders and sucks > away our energy, that causes our fears. Knowing more about conditions > and kamma - which is intimately tied in with anatta - means that one > knows that many of our 'efforts' may be counterproductive. Letting go > of these frees up much vitality. But we have to let anatta 'seep in > slowly' as you say. > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > > > > > I read U Silanand's "No Inner Core - Anatta" and could agree > with it > > > all as I read it........but what and why is this constant > reversion > > > to old ways of thinking? (It is almost as if I cannot store new > > > memories on this one subject only ). Maybe I should drop it > for a > > > while........... > > > > Dear Christine, > > I would recommend being kind and gentle to yourself, and taking > these kinds of > > things slowly. I was deeply interested in Zen for many years > without ever looking > > hard at Anatta. Why? Because our 'sense of self' does not want to > encounter this > > concept and will do almost anything to avoid it. It is the death > of the idea of > > everything that we tend to think we are as human beings. And so I > suggest > > 'sipping' at it gradually, and tasting its content and > possibilities -- advice > > that I am taking myself. I take a different little look at anatta > every day, but > > I don't try to force myself to totally realize that there is not > any internal or > > permanent entity within. I just take this as a concept and allow > it to seep in as > > it will. > > > > Since playing with it this way, I have had some interesting flashes > of insight. > > Once or twice I have had these moments when it is clear that there > is 'just > > listening' with no one listening, or something of that sort. > Rather than being > > scary, at the moment of actually encountering this it is > liberating, like a clear > > space where there used to be a heavy mass in consciousness. There > is no one to > > 'save' and so a lot of pressure is off for that moment. > > > > And then, as Joseph Conrad once said, 'the return to an eternal > rest'. No one can > > decide when they'll 'get it' that there is no one to get it. It > has to be a slow > > process by its nature, and the biggest requirement is patience, > which doesn't come > > easily to any of us. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. 9292 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 11:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > I just wanted to say how much I appreciated your points here, once again. I > have > been enjoying being engaged with these micro-topics within the discernment of > realities, and I appreciate all of your interesting insights. Me too, and thanks again.... > I am a little slower lately in picking up threads and responding. > Unfortunately I > have gotten a little overwhelmed and I may lose my reputation for being > voluminous > [a great relief to all!]. I’m sure it wouldn’t be any relief to any of us and fortunately (looking ahead) it seems to have only lasted for a day or two;-) > But I am still following as best I can, and I really enjoy our > cyber-colloquies. > Thanks for your kind remarks as well. It's strange that so much dhamma > friendship > can exist over the internet, but it just shows that the means of > understanding and > communication are not dependent on any particular physical conditions. > > The little look I've been getting at the reality of cittas and cetasikas is > pretty > fascinating. I'll look foward to continuing these exchanges. Good, anytime....and I agree about the dhamma friendship;-) > This is a good metaphor and is helpful. I like the idea of the 'flavors' of > the > different factors affecting each other and interacting. This makes a lot of > sense. Let me ask one question: would you say that the citta is like a > window, a > sort of open door of awareness, through which the cetasikas perform more > specific > acts? I am getting the feeling that the real intelligence is carried by the > cetasikas, that they do the work, and the citta is more of a passive opening > of > awareness through which they function. I know that many people here have an idea of citta or consciousness as some kind of awareness which doesn’t ‘fit’ with my understanding of Abhidhamma and Tipitaka. As Num’s quote from the Atthasalani showed, the citta is more like a ‘king’ accompanied by his retune of advisers (cetasikas) who all have their specific tasks and duties. The king is still the leader (if he’s a good king) and not a mere ‘passive opening’. Seeing (as a citta) knows, in the sense of experiences, the visible object, but it needs phassa (contact) to connect, vedana (feeling) to feel, sanna (perception) to mark and so on. It’s true that if awareness and undestanding (which of course are cetasikas) are never developed to be aware of and understand the different namas, as not selves, and distinct from rupas, that these namas will never be comprehended. So we could say, perhaps that they (ie sati and panna) are the real intelligence if you like;-) > I still appreciate that basic idea you expressed about this the other day: > that > the first thing to look at is the distinction between namas and rupas in a > general > way. If you are having several moments of an experience you can keep looking > at > what it is and try to distinguish its basic area of reality. This is > confusing > enough and a good place to start. Then i guess you can try to get a sense of > the > types of qualities or functions that are present. Yes. Of course, this is all on a thinking level and in the end realities won’t be known by mere thinking. However, if the conceptual clarity is not there to quite some extent, then we’re bound to have the wrong idea of what awareness and other realities are, I think. > So it is more for the view than for the detail that these mechanics are > important. > One can see that on various levels, anicca and anatta are the functional > principles? This is a good question. I think the details have value both for the view (ie to eradicate the wrong view of self and control, conceptually, in the beginning) and in order to be a condition for awareness. We read and consider the difference between seeing and visible object and it may seem like academic nit-picking, and then one day, by conditions, awareness is aware of seeing or visible object. When I was writing about eye-base yesterday, I was reflecting on how its characteristic really can be known through the mind-door. It just depends on accumulations as to what reality will be known at what time. One thing for sure, however, is that if we have the idea of eye-base as being a physical organ or 'thing', there wond't be any awareness of these rupas. If we find, however, we’re just thinking and thinking and trying ‘to work it out’, it’s not so helpful. It always comes back to the present moment and reality. There can be awareness of thinking at those times which is more valuable than trying to work out the story. I’m just reminded about how Mike used to have aversion if there were too many Abhidhammic details and now, there he is in Bangkok, waxing lyrical about the Abhidhammic expertise at hand;-) It just depends on time and conditions (such as how it's being explained) as to what will be of interest and appeal to us. I do think, though, as Nina reminded us so well in her ‘Music’ post, that we should remember that Abhidhamma is not anything other than daily life. ......... > That is so very kind. I feel very lucky to have these exchanges. It's a > pleasure > to be here! Likewise, Rob I certainly learn a lot from your open-minded and sincere attitude. Hope you keep ahead of Life so we keep benefiting from your insights. Please let me know anytime if I write anything which isn't clear or which you don't agree with;-. Sarah 9293 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > The *speculation* as to whether "an arahant *choosing*, based on > compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some realm or > realms of experience" is a possibility is not, in itself, productive. But the > *knowledge* of whether or not that is a possibility would be very useful. For > example, some Mahayanists have expressed the notion that vowing, prior to > being an arahant, to maintain such an association is necessary, and that > without having already established, quite strongly, such an intention, it is > too late to do so once one is an arahant. As regards myself, just on the off > chance ;-)) that, beyond parinibbana, keeping some sort of connection with a > samsaric realm is still possible, I have personally vowed (in my own mind) to > make such a connection. Wow. Robert Ep. 9294 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 11:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard Hi Howard, > > Hey, Howard, I wouldn't like to play any part in giving you nightmares, so > > I'm > > taking a 'nibbana-leave' for now and leaving it to others....;-) > --------------------------------------------- > Whew! ;-)) > -------------------------------------------- I didn’t think you’d be too upset..... > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Perhaps it's the Yang style? Specifically the Yang "long form" (108 > steps). That's what I'm learning. I'm about half-way through at this point. > (I previously learned the standard PRC government-issue 24-step form.) > ---------------------------------------------------------- Yes, you and Rob Ep know better than I do. I’ve now been through 3times under instruction (and the fast version with lots of circles once), but recently found I was making lots of mistakes in my own practise after a break when I moved house, so have resumed lessons. I’m a pretty slow learner (probably because I tend to still be thinking about students or posts here ;-), but I love it as a kind of exercise and when sufficiently motivated, get up very early to go outside and go through the sequence. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think that one of the several benefits in going slowly in t'ai chi > (and elsewhere) is that it helps one to stay "present" without anticipating > what comes up next, a facility which is important in meditation. > --------------------------------------------------------- Hmmm, conventionally, I think this is very true. I’ve always been the rush around type, doing many things at once (like now;-) As a result, I’ve never enjoyed team or competitive sports as they just add more ‘stress’ and ‘rush around’. Yoga , tai chi , swimming and walking are perfect for me and realistically, as we get older and are more prone to injuries, they make more sense too. On the other hand, I don’t have any idea that in terms of sati being aware or ‘present’ or for any other kind of skilful mental states, that these kinds of exercise in themselves have any more benefit than tennis or squash. I know you and Rob Ep (and all my yoga friends) will probably disagree on this. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, it is very comforting having Robert "around"! ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------------ See, Rob, you manage to be a comfort to us all....quite a skill;-) You know, Howard, we’ve never visited New York. One day we will and we can have dhamma discussion AND Tai Chi together;-) So sorry New York has had yet another ‘blow’...hope you’re all doing OK. Sarah 9295 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Pirmsombat, May I also add my warm welcome to dsg. We forwarded your message from our dsg moderator account. In future you can just reply to anything here by using the 'reply' tag. It sounds as though you all had a wonderful trip to India. Jonothan's (Jon on dsg) been so busy since his return that I 've still only heard a little about the discussions (i.e. what he shares here). If you have any comments to add about the trip or discussions, I'd be delighted to hear them. May I ask if you've been studying with A.Sujin for long and whether we've met? If not, I hope to meet you on our next visit to Bkk. We're rather informal here and tend to drop titles (unless requested otherwise), except for bhikkhus of course. Hope you don't mind and please tell us anything further about your interest and studies in Buddhism. (Btw, I think we have a few doctors here, including Num). From your message, you've already joined dsg, but please let us know if you have any problems. Sarah --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- p Sallakachat wrote: > > > > hello i interest in Buddhism for 31 years. last > > month i went toIndia with > > dhamma group (SUJIN BORIHARNWANAKET).JONOTHAN ABBOTT > > gave > > me e-mail address to join dhammastudygroup. > > > > > > pirmsombat 9296 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 0:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Thanks for the helpful definitions and info! Robert Ep. ===== --- srnsk@a... wrote: > > < understanding of this term (just this term only :)). I think commentary > will be of great help when I ask Sarah why cittas must be sequential and I > ask Amara in DL list abt Sanna. the commentaries they quoted indeed help > me to understand the intracies of such meaning of pali words. As i do not > understand pali, hence a thorough definition of this term will be very > meaning to me. I have also read cetasikas defintion from the book by > Bhikkhu Bodhi. But I feel there is a lack of thorough presentation to > this term which I feel of paramount importance to our development as panna > is a cetasika. As I do not have the commentaries, a few quotes to me will > be indeed very appreciative.>> > > > > Hi Ken, > > Let me reverse the order of things a little bit. I think I have to put in > some definitions of citta to compare with cetasika. I am not sure I can > really answer your question and not sure exactly what you want to know. This > is good for me to review the material on this topic as well. I pretty much > cut and paste from various books, ok. Pls pardon me for some Pali terms. > > > Let me start with > > 1) Panna cetasika. > > From Nina's book: > "The Atthasalini then gives another definition of understanding: > Understanding has the penetration of intrinsic nature, unfaltering > penetration as its characteristic, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a > skilled archer; illumination of the object as its function, as it were a > lamp; non perplexity as its proximate cause, as it were a good guide in the > forest. > The Visuddhimagga (Chapter XIV, 143) gives a similar definition. " > > As Christine mentioned there are different levels of panna. There can only be > direct understanding of realities when there is mindfulness of them. This is > my idea, no matter how much we read or discuss, if there is no direct > understanding at the moment of mindfulness, it is all pretty much panatti > (conventional) level. As I understand the goal of study is not to know the > theory or term but the reality. Studying, listening and discussing dhamma can > condition understanding. As I mentioned earlier, for me, from the quote from > Milindapanha, that it is hard to know the differences between the two. > > > 2) Citta > > From Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin > > .."The 4 characteristics of citta are > 1. Called "citta" because it experiences arammana clearly. > 2. Called "citta" because it accumulates innate tendencies with the > efficiency of javana-vithi. > 3. Called "citta" because it is a reality where kamma and kilesa accumulate > vipaka. > 4. Every citta is called "citta" because of its complex and intricate nature > according to the efficiency of the sampayutta-dhamma". > > Sampayutta-dhamma of citta is cetasika. > > From Atthasalini : "citta â€|.conizing object(aramana) is its characteristic, > forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental(nama) > and material(rupa) organism is its proximate cause. â€|" > > From Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin. "Citta is eminent and > presiding in knowing or experiencing. In the Atthasalini Cittupadakandha > there is a passage saying "Citta is the bhumi or place of origin of the > sampayutta-dhamma such as happiness. If there were no citta, the happy > feeling could not arise because there would be no basis, no point of origin > for happiness. Whenever sukha-vedana arises, citta is the bhumi, the basis, > the home of that sukha-vedana that arose with that citta. Therefore citta is > the bhumi, the home of its sampayutta-dhamma, which are the sukha-vedana and > other cetasika." > > Analogy from Milindapanha > V.Nagasena "â€|.. Just, sire, as the town-guard, seated at the cross-roads in > middle of the town, would see a man coming from the west, the south, the > north: so your majesty, the object seen by the eyes, the sound heard by the > ear, the smell smelt by the nose, the taste tasted by the tongue, the > tangible touched by the body, the idea cognized by the mind, is cognized by > consciousness' (citta)". There for it is said to have the function of > forerunning". > > > 3) Cetasika > > From abhidhammattha sangaha > "Cetasika = Ceta + s + ika > That which is associated with mind or consciousness is cetasika. (Sanskrit - > caitasika or caitti). > Definition- > Cetasika is > (i) that which arises together with consciousness, > (ii) that which perishes together with it, > (iii) that which has an identical object with it, > (iv) that which has a common basis with it." > > Another analogy from abhidhammattha sangaha, Thai version. In watercolor > painting, citta is like water, cetasika is like colors. Only water alone > cannot make the painting appear, nor only the color alone. When there are > paper, water and color then the painting can appear on the paper or canvas, > and of course the view or a model is like the object. (like conscious needs > citta&cetasika, material base (vathu) and object(aramana) to arise). > > > Hope I put something relevant to your question. > > Best wishes, > > Num 9297 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] same old questions/same old views Dear Christine, --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Your quotes from the posts on Anatta were interesting - I am > starting to explore the 'Useful Posts' in the files section. .................... S:You may like to look at the ones under ‘Intention’ and ‘Right Effort’ which are also closely related. (The groupings and selections are very arbitrary and subjective). .................... > Because many parts of the Dhamma are so interwoven with other parts, > a question or doubt or misunderstanding arising about one part > cascades across other areas. And so, my not quite understanding > Anatta, can raise questions for me about Kamma..... in the arising, or the cultivation, or the investigation, listening, > ignoring, thinking, speaking or acting. If there is no chooser, how > can there be,or have been a choice>. So - if no-one > is 'responsible'.....why do *I* get hurt, or *I* have loses, or *I* > suffer, or in any way inherit the results of past kamma? How do the > fruits of kamma get attracted to/inherited by/follow a particular > entity/conglomeration throughout time? *Something* seems to stay > together......... .................... S: Excellent questions and comments. As you’re appreciating, the different aspects and topics in the Dhamma are all interwoven. This is why some of us don’t distinguish the meanings found in different baskets or subjects. So, as you say, there’s no chooser or choice. There are however, various mental factors such as intention and effort. However, these mental factors like all others, arise momentarily with a moment of consciousness, perform their tasks and are gone. We certainy have the illusion, as you suggest, that *I* get hurt and so on. What is it, really, that is experienced at these times? Let’s say we hear some bad news (conventionally speaking) and suffer as a result. Do we really hear bad news or aren’t there just moments of hearing sounds, marking, remembering and noting those sounds and then lots of thinking about the ‘bad news’, accompanied by unpleasant feelings and aversion? We think it’s what we hear that has caused the suffering, but in fact the hearing of sounds, (good or bad vipaka, result of kamma), doesn’t ‘hurt’ us at all. If there were no thinking, no story, no aversion, where would the bad news be? When Jon had a tumour a couple of years ago, he experienced no pain at all (ie no unpleasant bodily feelings) and yet as soon as we were told ‘the news’ our lives were turned upside down by the thinking and the stories. We can say conventionally that it is ‘Christine’s’ deed as opposed to ‘Sarah’s’ deed that will bring a result for Christine and on one level it’s true. In reality, however, they are just cittas, cetana (intention) and vipaka and so on that are ‘specific’ but contain no ‘Christine’ or ‘Sarah’ at all. I understand and appreciate your question. I’m not at all sure my answer will help. I think Nina wrote a good post on kamma (look under this title). Let me know if you’d like any of us to try and say more. It's not an easy one .................... > . Sometimes I seem to understand not-self, but then at other times > find myself back at the beginning, holding the same old views - as if > it hadn't been explained to me before, and I hadn't felt I > understood. Sorry, I know I'm asking the same type of questions > that I thought I had sorted out a while ago. .................... S: I think it’s like this for everyone. When I see Khun Sujin, she talks to me about just the same realities she talked to me about 25yrs ago. I’m sure Nina would say the same, but add on even more years. Please keep asking and questioning;-) .................... > Once I had a conversation with some fundamentalist Christians who > called at my home to save my soul - and left disappointed. The > basic unwritten, unspoken rule for the conversation, was that the > discussion had to take place within the boundaries of the texts in > the Christian Bible. Any question was settled by "proofs" extracted > from the texts "Jehovah God said...." quote>. They were unable to grasp that, for me, this form of > discussion 'within a capsule', wasn't a valid way of discovering > truth. > > It sometimes seems to me that some buddhists use similar methods > when discussing self only from 'within a set of rules' regarding > what can be mentioned about the characteristics of a self. e.g. in > the quote exercised over them, they are therefore not-self because void>. > Why does one of the characteristics of a self have to be that it can > magically 'will' or 'control' changes to facets of > itself......otherwise there is not a self? .................... S: I think I understand what you’re saying. I don’t quite agree perhaps. You wondered why some of us (me most recently) had mentioned there is no ‘control’ and asked for references on this from the Tipitaka. To approach ‘anatta’ from another angle, we can just talk about seeing, feeling, hardness and aversion and their characteristics and functions. We don’t have to mention self or non-self at all. However, by understanding these realities more and more precisely, the understanding knows that they are just mental and pysical phenomena, not belonging to or containing anyone in their natures or characteristics and merely conditioning but not controlling other realities. When there is awareness of one of these realities, there is no mention of self or non-self at all. .................... > I read U Silanand's "No Inner Core - Anatta" and could agree with it > all as I read it........but what and why is this constant reversion > to old ways of thinking? (It is almost as if I cannot store new > memories on this one subject only ). Maybe I should drop it for a > while........... .................... S: Don’t feel frustrated! How long have we wandered around in samsara with an idea of self? How long has there been any consideration of anatta? Just the fact that you’re here asking these essential questions, reading very useful articles like the one you referred us to, aware of old and new ways of thinking and so on, shows just how much exmination and questioning there is. The real answer, of course, is that there can be some wise consideration, maybe a little awareness, and then there’s bound to be doubt, wondering, thinking with wrong views and so on. Just like the giant jig-saw puzzle, the pieces will slot into place, but they need a little time and patience;-) Christine, I’d fel very honoured if you come back with anything you don’t like, disagree with or wish to question further in this post (or my last one) to you. It really isn’t an easy path for any of us and your questions and difficulties are helpful for us all. ................... metta to you too, Sarah 9298 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 0:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Music Dear Herman, p.s. to my message yesterday, > > With regards to all the activities that fill the day, I am reading > > some stuff re lucid dreaming / awareness during sleep (it seems such > > a waste to be "out of it" for eight hours every day). > > > > Are there any Theradava sources re sleeping with awareness? you might try asking Rob Ep for advice as he seems to survive well by staying up most the night - maybe he's sleeping with awareness while he types at his 'super' speed;-)) S. 9299 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 0:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Jon, Your explanations are to the point and do a good job of answering the questions. I guess it's just a matter of not trusting any secondary source completely on such a comprehensive interpretation. Since there is not a direct link between the suttas and the commentaries, I will have to rely on my own study to see if the explanations make sense to me over time. I just don't think that one can grant the complete faith, the 'automatic' acceptance, as it were, even to arahants, that one would grant to the Buddha himself and his direct statements. That is not to say that the arahants are not great masters and worthy of taking extremely seriously in conjunction with the suttas. But I would want to know exactly who was writing the commentaries and what their relation was to the direct lineage of the Buddha. As I have said recently, however, I find the glimpses of the commentaries I have seen to be 'warm' and clear. The warmth is a kind of spiritual emanation which I believe is perceptible in the words and presence of great Masters. More than anything else, this convinces me at least to the extent that I have experienced it, that the commentaries are genuine and worthy of deep attention. Another issue remains as well: how we interpret the commentaries. They are not so simple and straightforward in many aspects, and require study and discernment in their own right. So much for a simple, direct path! I guess it's not meant to be that way! But it is very exciting. Best, Robert Ep. ====================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob Ep > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Is there a particular area in the commentaries that is translated, that > > shows how > > the scheme you have explained below is derived from the Suttas on the 4 > > Noble > > Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path? > > > > I would like to see how this interpretation of the Path was conceived. > > Rob, I appreciate your wanting to trace this interpretation back to a > particular passage or passages in the suttas. However, I don't think this > can be done, in the sense that you are asking about. > > This is not to say that the commentaries are purely a product of the > compiler's mind. Rather, the commentaries represent an explanation of the > sutta text pitched at a level that is comprehensible to those whose > understanding is not of the same level as that of the Buddha's original > audience. I will try to explain what I mean by this. > > A person who is able to fully understand a complex and highly detailed > scientific principle may, in order to make the principle intelligible to > lay-people, explain it using a kind of language and detail that on the > face of it differs from that used by the scientist who discovered the > principle and expounded it to the scientific community. This does not > make the explanation in layman's terms any less the principle as expounded > by its discoverer. > > Similarly, as I understand it, the commentaries are merely an exposition > in more detailed form of what was actually said by the Buddha, given by > those who have fully grasped the teaching. > > There are several passages in the commentaries that assume or directly > support the interpretation I have given. Indeed, I believe this > interpretation has been the accepted one until comparatively recent times. > The current day notion of the Noble Eightfold Path as being a > prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path factors > is to be developed separately and individually, somehow culminating in > supramundane consciousness, is not as far as I know found in any of the > ancient commentaries. > > I think also that there are a number of contextual 'clues' in the suttas > that point to the interpretation I have given. I have mentioned some of > these before, but perhaps this would be a good time to recap. > > 1. The Noble Eightfold Path is given as one of the Four Noble Truths. > The significance of this is perhaps not always appreciated. The Four > Noble Truths are *understandings to be realised*, and this applies as much > to the 4th truth (the Noble Eightfold Path) as it does the other 3 truths. > As such (ie. a truth to be realised) it is descriptive of a moment of > attainment rather than a way of practice leading to that attainment. > (Likewise, the Four Noble Truths are given as one of the ‘mental objects’ > of the development of satipatthana in the Satipatthana Sutta. This again > shows their nature as ‘truths to be realised’ by one who is developing > awareness). > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once this moment has been experienced > final enlightenment is inevitable in the fullness of time. Prior to the > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. at the mundane level), > attainment to final enlightenment is not assured. The texts refer to one > who has attained to stream entry as a *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > whereas one who has not attained to a moment of supramundane experience is > referred to as an ‘uninstructed worldling’. So it is not a path in the > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the worldling, as the term seems > to be understood nowadays. > > 3. The Four Noble Truths, with the Noble Eightfold Path as the 4th, are > given as the culmination of the so-called 'gradual instruction' > (anupubbii-kathaa -- see entry from Buddh. Dict. pasted below) found > throughout the suttas. As I understand it, the teaching of the gradual > instruction was in many cases followed by the enlightenment of the > listener, that is to say, without any period of 'practice' between hearing > the 4th Noble Truths about the Noble Eightfold Path and the attainment of > enlightenment. > > 5. The factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are also given as 'factors for > enlightenment' (bodhipakkhiya-dhamma, lit. 'things pertaining to > enlightenment', of which there are 37 in 7 groups -- see entry from Buddh. > Dict. pasted below). If the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, > developed individually and separately, are the path to enlightenment, what > is the significance of the other 29 factors? And why is the Noble 8-fold > Path given as the last of the 7 groups of factors? > > 6. Finally, a general comment on the view that the Noble Eightfold Path > is a prescription for a method of practice whereby each of the 8 path > factors are to be developed separately and individually, somehow > culminating in supramundane consciousness. If that were so, then it would > mean that each of the path factors (except for right view) could be > developed, and indeed is presumably even now being developed, by persons > who have never heard of the dhamma. I say this because, taking 'right > effort' as an example, people who have never heard the dhamma do exert > conventional effort to have more kusala. I can see no difference between > this person and the dhamma practitioner who likewise exerts conventional > effort to have more kusala -- or am I missing something here? > > > Also, is there a part of the commentaries that explains the discovery of > > one citta > > arising at a time and passing on its attributes to the next citta, based > > on a > > particular aspect of parts of the Suttas? I would like to understand > > from where > > this was derived as well by the Arahats that composed the commentaries. > > The 'single stream of cittas' concept is I believe found in or derived > from the abhidhamma, although it is of course entirely consistent with > everything found in the suttas. There may be some passages in the suttas > that imply this, but I am not aware of any at the moment. > > Rob, I don't know if I have addressed the exact point you were interested > in -- I do hope I have. > > Jon > > From Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' > > ánupubbí-kathá: > 'gradual instruction', progressive sermon; given by the Buddha when it was > necessary to prepare first the listener's mind before speaking to him on > the advanced teaching of the Four Noble Truths. > The stock passage (e.g. D. 3; D 14; M. 56) runs as follows: > "Then the Blessed One gave him a gradual instruction - that is to say, he > spoke on liberality ('giving', dána), on moral conduct (síla) and on the > heaven (sagga); he explained the peril, the vanity and the depravity of > sensual pleasures, and the advantage of renunciation. When the Blessed One > perceived that the listener's mind was prepared, pliant, free from > obstacles, elevated and lucid; then he explained to him that exalted > teaching particular to the Buddhas (buddhánam sámukkamsiká desaná), that > is: suffering, its cause, its ceasing, and the path." > > bodhipakkhiya-dhammá: > The 37 'things pertaining to enlightenment', or 'requisites of > enlightenment' comprise the entire doctrines of the Buddha. They are: > the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthána, q.v.), > the 4 right efforts (s. padhána), > the 4 roads to power (iddhi-páda, q.v.), > the 5 spiritual faculties (indriya; s. bala), > the 5 spiritual powers (bala, q.v.), > the 7 factors of enlightenment (bojjhanga, q.v.), > the Noble 8-fold Path (s. magga). > > 9300 From: Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: Seeing Dear Sarah You wrote to Ken O; > S: Perhaps I should clarify (emphasise) and say that what is needed is eye-base (cakkhuppasada rupa). When we talk about organ or brain, we're talking about concepts and not the precise realities the Buddha explained. > --------------------- KH: I have seen this explained so many times, and yet it is still hard to appreciate that there is not only `eye the concept,' there is also `eye the paramattha dhamma.' Perhaps I need to revise my mental image of a rupa. It has been discussed here that it is unhelpful to think of a citta as being like a physical object with cetasikas inside it; equally, a rupa must be something entirely different from any physical object. Changing the subject, I have made some progress in tracking down that odd-sounding phrase, `to find yourselves.' It is in Narada Maha Thera's "The Buddha and His Teachings" Chapter 7. Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to give a reference for it. (You may remember I've had this trouble before.) My recollection was basically correct; the young men, who had been robbed by a courtesan, "seeing the Buddha, inquired of him whether he had seen a woman passing that way. "Which do you think, young men, is better; seeking a woman or seeking oneself?" questioned the Buddha. "Seeking oneself is better, O Lord!" replied the young men."" They listened attentively and, "obtained the eye of truth (dhammacakkhu)." I'm not particularly anxious to track this down any further, are you? We can safely assume that it doesn't refer to that eternal self we are all secretly hoping to discover. :-) Kind regards Ken H 9301 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 1:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard --- Sarah wrote: > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes, it is very comforting having Robert "around"! ;-)) > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > See, Rob, you manage to be a comfort to us all....quite a skill;-) Well, gee, Sarah, I guess that's making up for all the trouble I cause in person!! Seriously, though, the feeling is mutual, to you and Howard both. > You know, Howard, we’ve never visited New York. One day we will and we can have > dhamma discussion AND Tai Chi together;-) So sorry New York has had yet another > ‘blow’...hope you’re all doing OK. > > Sarah Well, if you all meet in New York, I will be there! I'm a native New Yorker and live just 'around the corner' now, in Washington, D.C. Are you in New York, Howard? Glad to see we're well represented there. Best, Robert Ep. 9302 From: Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 1:21am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Dear Robert Ep. You wrote to Howard and Jon: > Is there an inherent difference between Buddhists and non-Buddhists? As 'beings', I would say there isn't. We're all in the same boat. But Buddhism allows one to go beyond the final illusions of a separate or permanent self or entity > ------------------------------- KH: I would like to agree with, and comment on, the point you are making here. Being without panna of the lokuttara kind, worldling Dhamma-students are, as you say, in the same boat as worldling non-Dhamma-students. Robert K recently explained how, without panna, even the most highly developed kusala can only lead to aeon upon aeon of heavenly existence. In time, the chain of rebirths (samsara), must lead even the greatest worldlings back to lowly realms. For some of us, conditions are such that, in this lifetime, we are able to hear the Dhamma. Those of us who have encountered people like K. Sujin, Nina, and co., are able to have the Dhamma *correctly explained.* Given this opportunity, we should act with the urgency of that proverbial fellow whose turban is on fire. But it is not effort of the conventional kind that is called for. The right effort (samma-vayama), which leads to release from samsara, is an absolute reality; it is brought about, not by illusory beings, but by another absolute reality, right understanding (samma-ditthi). I gather from your message as a whole, that you don't entirely agree with this -- needless to say you may be right. In any case, no harm will be done, provided we worldlings treat all views (ditthi), as descriptive, not prescriptive. Kind regards Ken H. 9303 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 1:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Music --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Herman, > > p.s. to my message yesterday, > > > > > With regards to all the activities that fill the day, I am reading > > > some stuff re lucid dreaming / awareness during sleep (it seems such > > > a waste to be "out of it" for eight hours every day). > > > > > > Are there any Theradava sources re sleeping with awareness? > > you might try asking Rob Ep for advice as he seems to survive well by staying > up most the night - maybe he's sleeping with awareness while he types at his > 'super' speed;-)) > > S. ha ha. I hate to admit it, but I'm pretty tired. Still, I'm doing with less sleep than I thought possible and getting *most* things done. Best, Robert Ep. 9304 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 1:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa --- khow14@h... wrote: > I gather from your message as a whole, that you don't entirely agree > with this -- needless to say you may be right. In any case, no harm > will be done, provided we worldlings treat all views (ditthi), as > descriptive, not prescriptive. Hi Ken. Rather than saying that I don't agree, I think I would say that I am still in a process of gradual discernment.... Sounds pretty vague, eh? I am just not sure or clear about the question of volition and intention. I believe it is possible for volition and intention to exist without a 'self'. They may be the properties of consciousness just as easily as any other properties that we talk about. So I just don't think that anatta in itself settles the question of whether volition and intention can be exercised on the mundane level and make a difference in the path. As I say, I am mainly 'just not clear' about this yet. I think it needs more reflection on my part. I may then agree that there is no effort other than in the sense that it is usually talked about here -- as a product rather than a cause of understanding. Meanwhile, i don't really 'disagree' either, although this view was not my initial impression. I find the distinctions here provocative and I tend to hold onto them and chew them over slowly. Thanks for your response. I appreciate the dialogue. Best, Robert Ep. 9305 From: Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 9:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/14/01 2:44:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > You know, Howard, we’ve never visited New York. One day we will and we can > have > dhamma discussion AND Tai Chi together;-) > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That would be lovely, Sarah! ------------------------------------------------------------- So sorry New York has had yet another> > ‘blow’...hope you’re all doing OK. > > ============================ Thanks. We're all fine, and we don't personally know any people who were affected. BTW, I *believe* I may have heard the explosion of the plane. I live maybe 10 miles from the crash site. Exactly at the time of the crash I heard a very odd "popping" or concussion sound outside the house to which my (internal) reaction was "Oh, no, what's that!", thinking that something terrible might have happened. I looked around outside but there was nothing unusual. On the other hand, I have heard no reports of other people hearing what I heard, so it might have been something else entirely. In any case, there *is* getting to be a bit of a nightmarish quality to life here. Thanks for your kind inquiry, 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) 9306 From: Date: Tue Nov 13, 2001 10:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/14/01 4:18:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Are you in New York, Howard? Glad to see we're well represented there. > ========================= Yep. I live on Long Island, and I teach at Queens College. 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) 9307 From: Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 3:12am Subject: worldling --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once this moment has been experienced > final enlightenment is inevitable in the fullness of time. Prior to the > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. at the mundane level), > attainment to final enlightenment is not assured. The texts refer to one > who has attained to stream entry as a *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > whereas one who has not attained to a moment of supramundane experience is > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. So it is not a path in the > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the worldling, as the term seems > to be understood nowadays. > > +++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Jon, The commentaries talk about two types of putthujana (worldling): 1) the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the kalyana-putthujana (good worldling) who is learning and developing the path. best wishes robert 9308 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 4:09am Subject: Re: Commentaries Dear Robert K., I am so glad you recommended The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, among others. Being at the mercy of the book dealers, it just happened to be the one they had in stock of a number I ordered - I am told that there is now a wait of about four months until the others arrive..... I am looking forward to the 'All Embracing Net of Views: The Brahmajala Sutta and its Commentaries', as its' main aim apparently is to clear away the conceptual and intellectual distortions that hinder the acquisition of right view - and I have lots of those distortions. I'm only up to page 29 (the end of The More Excellent Fruits of Recluseship) and I have no questions so far that Bhikkhu Bodhi hasn't covered in his translation of the commentary, only the same aversion I always feel when 'faith' is mentioned....left over from my Christian (blind belief) days I suppose.....On p.29 42-43 the first step along the path, is described as the gaining of faith in the Tathagata. "A householder, or a householders son, or one born into some other family, hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, he gains faith in the Tathagata. Endowed with such faith.....(leads to going forth into homelessness). I enjoy Bhikku Bodhi's writing style, but one extra bonus is the description of people's backgrounds and the culture of that time. The people and their relatives mentioned in the sutta are much more real. Their personalities are fleshed out. For instance, to know that King Ajatasattu of Magadha (who asks the question on whether there were any fruits of recluseship visible here and now) was a parricide (killed his father King Bimbisara) from a line of parricides with a number of descendents who would commit the same crime, explains his sudden panic attack and suspicion when approaching the Mango Farm to speak with the Buddha. How poignant is his love for his son, who would eventually kill him also. While Ajatasattu's mother was pregnant with him 2500 years ago, she experienced an exotic variety of what many pregnant women go through today - cravings. It is uncommon, but not unknown, for women I see in the Maternity Unit to experience 'pica'. One I knew began eating dirt and clay - the midwives told me it was possibly a sign of calcium and magnesium deficiency. When I mentioned Ajatasattus's mother (though not by name!), they thought it was within the bounds of possibility that she may have had some nutritional (?iron ) deficiency.....the Queen had a craving to drink the kings' blood - which he lovingly provided for her to mix with water. The Astrologers on hearing this, and knowing the family history, not unreasonably predicted "This child in her womb will be the king's enemy. He will kill the king". The Queen was beside herself and tried to procure an abortion, but was prevented, and also stopped from killing him after the birth. (?post-natal depression or psychosis). One wonders how often Ajattasatu heard the story about the prediction that he would kill his father King Bimbisara - self fulfilling prophecy? family tradition? ..... Anyway, I won't ramble on, but the people in the sutta don't seem like cardboard story book characters anymore. Apart from differences in culture and lifestyle, I see them on the T.V. news every night. It's like dressing the actors in a 'period piece' in modern day clothes. keeping on, metta, Christine 9309 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 4:19am Subject: Re: meththa meditation Dear Mike, >Is there someone who can will the arising of mettaa or >any other cetasika? If a person start to do mettha meditaion I thought you can get the feeling of meththa... well may be you can go a little far, say from yourself, your parents...etc. (But also I think even to arise the feeling of mettha towards yourself is difficult). >If mettaa does arise, what are it's characteristics at that moment? Will >it last? For how long? Is there attachment to the pleasant feeling attending it? Aversion to its absence orloss?> A> lot of >young people who are being brought up under the> influence of western >cultures experience subtle lack of self esteem,> subtle self hatred, >feelings of worthlessness and thinking they are not good> enough. Aversion is always akusala, no matter what the object--self-image, injustice, Ronald MacDonald, whatever. It's also always accompanied by an upleasant feeling. Adosa (just the absence of aversion) is always kusala and (I think--not certain about this) always accompanied by a pleasant feeling. Unfortunately, lobha is also accompanied by pleasant feeling and is very difficult to distinguish from adosa, not to mention mettaa. So understanding of the characteristics of all these phenomena is so much more important than any reflection that might, for the moment, cause 'us' to 'feel better about 'ourselves''. Mike; I get your point. the feeling of meththa too is impermanent. But dont you think without it there would be something missing in the path? >If one wants to truly undermine unhappiness, the way is to begin to >understand the characteristics of the present moment--at what other moment could understanding arise? As I understand it, this is the only way to even begin to truly eradicate the underlying tendency to aversion of anykind--including 'low self-esteem'. Yes, but is it to a person who has done a lot of meditation or can a beginer also do it. >Certainly various kinds of concentration can temporarily suppress the kilesas and the unpleasant feelings which accompany some of them. The key word is 'suppress'--once the samadhi is gone, the underlying tendency for the arising of the kilesas is still in place, >>>>>if not strengthened>>>>>>> I dont get you here. Is kilesas strengthened here due to a kind of a strengthened mind due to various kinds of concentration? >Who is there to give 'oneself' anything? Where is the lasting virtue of all this thinking? It might condition a pleasant feeling for a little while (or it might not--very frustrating!)--but when the conditions that led to it are exhausted it's gone--it was just a temporary distraction from a real and persistent problem, that of dukkha. Mettaa-bhavana and all the other kinds of kusala are fine (if they're real--difficult to know)-- >>>>>except that they all just lead to more samsara.>>>>> Mike; but isnt it easy for a person to cultivate understanding (I hope by doing vipassana meditaion) if he has already practissed some kind of meditation? Also, I cant understand how kusala will lead to more samsara. >Only the cultivation of understanding will lead (eventually) to the eradication of the defilements and liberation. Dear Mike; what is the method of cultivating understanding? >>>Please excuse the rant--just my opinions... I am so grateful to you for your comments and thank you for your teachings. ~meththa, Ranil 9310 From: Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 5:20am Subject: Re: Commentaries --- Very glad the book is upholding the promise I made, Christine. I think the surrounding stories give us hints of the deeper reasons for our habits and foibles. Cultures have all sorts of reasons for behaviour and result and our current 'scientific' worldview propounds many reasons why this and that happens. What it can't see is the long history of accumulations and past kamma that is always influencing our paths. This the Buddhist scriptures reveal by the stories they explain. I find this is something I begin to sense personally in a way that is hard to prove but that feels very comforting. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > Dear Robert K., > > I am so glad you recommended The Discourse on the Fruits of > Recluseship, among others. Being at the mercy of the book dealers, > it just happened to be the one they had in stock of a number I > ordered - I am told that there is now a wait of about four months > until the others arrive..... I am looking forward to the 'All > Embracing Net of Views: The Brahmajala Sutta and its Commentaries', > as its' main aim apparently is to clear away the conceptual and > intellectual distortions that hinder the acquisition of right view - > and I have lots of those distortions. > > I'm only up to page 29 (the end of The More Excellent Fruits of > Recluseship) and I have no questions so far that Bhikkhu Bodhi hasn't > covered in his translation of the commentary, only the same aversion > I always feel when 'faith' is mentioned....left over from my > Christian (blind belief) days I suppose.....On p.29 42-43 the first > step along the path, is described as the gaining of faith in the > Tathagata. "A householder, or a householders son, or one born into > some other family, hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, he > gains faith in the Tathagata. Endowed with such faith.....(leads to > going forth into homelessness). > > I enjoy Bhikku Bodhi's writing style, but one extra bonus is the > description of people's backgrounds and the culture of that time. The > people and their relatives mentioned in the sutta are much more real. > Their personalities are fleshed out. > For instance, to know that King Ajatasattu of Magadha (who asks the > question on whether there were any fruits of recluseship visible here > and now) was a parricide (killed his father King Bimbisara) from a > line of parricides with a number of descendents who would commit the > same crime, explains his sudden panic attack and suspicion when > approaching the Mango Farm to speak with the Buddha. How poignant is > his love for his son, who would eventually kill him also. > While Ajatasattu's mother was pregnant with him 2500 years ago, she > experienced an exotic variety of what many pregnant women go through > today - cravings. It is uncommon, but not unknown, for women I see > in the Maternity Unit to experience 'pica'. One I knew began eating > dirt and clay - the midwives told me it was possibly a sign of > calcium and magnesium deficiency. When I mentioned Ajatasattus's > mother (though not by name!), they thought it was within the bounds > of possibility that she may have had some nutritional (?iron ) > deficiency.....the Queen had a craving to drink the kings' blood - > which he lovingly provided for her to mix with water. The > Astrologers on hearing this, and knowing the family history, not > unreasonably predicted "This child in her womb will be the king's > enemy. He will kill the king". The Queen was beside herself and > tried to procure an abortion, but was prevented, and also stopped > from killing him after the birth. (?post-natal depression or > psychosis). One wonders how often Ajattasatu heard the story about > the prediction that he would kill his father King Bimbisara - self > fulfilling prophecy? family tradition? ..... Anyway, I won't ramble > on, but the people in the sutta don't seem like cardboard story book > characters anymore. Apart from differences in culture and lifestyle, > I see them on the T.V. news every night. It's like dressing the > actors in a 'period piece' in modern day clothes. > > keeping on, > metta, > Christine 9311 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 5:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Hi Num Come to think abt it. The problem is initially I been diversifying vedana as sought of different entity on its own. Further reading from other sources what is cetasikas, it leads me to view that cetasikas are part of nama like citta. They are classified so that we have a better understanding of nama. Hence to me when we experience vedana, it is vedana that tell citta it is a feeling but it is the citta that actually experience the feeling. Citta needs vedana to feel without it, it cannot know what is feeling and differentiate the feeling. To me they are part and parcel of nama. What I was trying to say abt seeing is that it is the cittas that actually experience the see, it is the eye base and eye sense that facilitates the seeing. Without this eye base and eye sense, that does not mean the ability to see is lost bc it is cittas that knows/cognize the seeing. I think these are two totally different issues here. Thanks on the passage on Vedana by Aj, Sujin. A lot of Buddhist teachers, emphasis on this particular part of the dependent origination bc it is the most noticeable one and that makes it easy for practising sati. Personally in my view it is sanna that condition feeling. To me, through perception and memory, we tends to preceive words that we listen or images that we have seen in a certain way due to past habits, resulting a pleasant or unpleasant feeling to arise to words or images except for bodily causes of feelings. One question, does citta can only cognize one object at a time or a few objects at a time simultaneously during its momentary existence. Kind regards Ken O --- srnsk@a... wrote: > > << the cetasikas (Vedana) that feels or it is the Citta that feel? My > thinking was that cetasikas are just prism that filter and it is the > cittas that knows the feeling and not vedana.>>> > > Hi Ken, > > Good to see that you have been reflecting about the topic. I am too, > it's good for me to consider about the subject as well. I did also read your post to Sarah on Seeing. I do not understand what you referred to as physical seeing. You said that it's citta that cognizes the object, that is my understanding as well. Rupa, material, cannot cognize anything. Seeing conscious needs a lot of conditions to arise, and only stay extremely briefly and then falls away the same as conditions. > > Again, let me repeat myself that, …< understanding of realities when there is mindfulness (sati) of them. This is my idea, no matter how much we read or discuss, if there is no direct understanding at the moment of mindfulness, it is all pretty much panatti (conventional) level. As I understand the goal of study is not to know the theory or term but the reality.>> I think this is very important. > > Now get back to your question Vedana and citta. May I refer to Nina's > chapter > 2, Vedana, http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas4.html Her writing > can > explain your question pretty clearly. My understanding is citta is a > leader > of the band in cognizing object but citta and cetasika (nama-dhamma: > reality > which is able to know) are mutually supportive (as characters of > cetasika in > Abhidhammattha Sangaha). There is no citta without cetasika and vice > versa. > > This is my guess to your question. Because the nature of this two > phenomena > is so well blended, and the ability of citta that can know different > kinds of > object including material (rupa), citta, cetasika, nibbana as well as > concept/signification/name (pannatti). So cetasika as well as citta can > also be an object (arammana) for the later citta to cognize. If Nina have time, I am sure that she can explain this better than me. So previous vedana can be an object for later citta as well. > > I'd better stop here. This is not easy for me either. I enjoy your good > questions. Addendum comment from anyone are appreciated. > > > Num > > > PS. Let me cut from Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin regarding > the importance of vedana. > > << In the Anguttaranikaya Ekanipata Dutiyapannasaka Sanimitta the third > vagga, 328, there is a passage saying: Behold, Bhikkhu, dhamma that is > sinful akusala arises because there is vedana. Without vedana, it does not arise. By abandoning the vedana the dhamma that is sinful akusala would no longer be. > (Other passages are about sanna-cetasika, which is the sanna-khandha, > other cetasika that are sankhara-khandha and the citta which are > vinnana-khandha.) > This shows that the vedana-cetasika, which are feelings, are the basis > of tenacious attachments. Since there is no knowledge of the truth about vedana-cetasika, one cannot abandon the feeling that there is oneself. The knowledge of the characteristics of vedana-cetasika would condition and support sati to arise and know the characteristics of vedana. Otherwise one would not realize that every day there is vedana in the same way that each day there are only realities that appear through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind, only because citta arise to know these realities. > But imagine if one does not feel anything, when one sees the world > there would be no perturbation. If one does not feel any emotion after > hearing, one would not feel disturbed either. And the same applies to smelling, tasting, knowing bodysense contact, there would be no akusala of any kind. > But because feelings arise, there is attachment and clinging to the > feelings and desiring the objects that make us feel glad and happy, which cause akusala-dhamma to arise frequently without our awareness. All dhamma are anatta and none can prevent vedana-cetasika from arising. Whenever citta arises there must be vedana-cetasika that feels the arammana of the moment. > Even now there must be vedana-cetasika of one kind or another being > upekkha-vedana, sukha-vedana, dukkha-vedana, somanassa-vedana or > domanassa-vedana. The aim of studying dhamma is not merely to know the > number or names but the characteristics of the feelings one is having. > If sati does not arise to be conscious of the feelings that we are havin now, even though that feeling is real: it has arisen and fallen away, since we do not know the true characteristics of that feeling, we would take it for the selves, which are happy, unhappy, glad, sad or indifferent. >> 9312 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 6:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas Hi Num, Just like to share something that I have been reflecting on cittas and cetasika. A king has many retinues. During war, a king change hat to a military commander, it has arms, soldiers retinue in time of war. This I call akusala and its cetasikas. In times of peace work, a king has change hat to the development of society charity works etc. This I called kuasala and its cetasikas. During other arise cittas, a king just change hats. But it is still the king that calls the shots, the rest supports what the king is doing. The king still has its retinues just that they are not manifested when the king takes on different roles. Kind regards Ken O --- srnsk@a... wrote: > > << the cetasikas (Vedana) that feels or it is the Citta that feel? My > thinking was that cetasikas are just prism that filter and it is the > cittas that knows the feeling and not vedana.>>> > > Hi Ken, > > Good to see that you have been reflecting about the topic. I am too, > it's > good for me to consider about the subject as well. I did also read your > post > to Sarah on Seeing. I do not understand what you referred to as > physical > seeing. You said that it's citta that cognizes the object, that is my > understanding as well. Rupa, material, cannot cognize anything. Seeing > conscious needs a lot of conditions to arise, and only stay extremely > briefly > and then falls away the same as conditions. > > Again, let me repeat myself that, …< understanding > of realities when there is mindfulness (sati) of them. This is my idea, > no > matter how much we read or discuss, if there is no direct understanding > at > the moment of mindfulness, it is all pretty much panatti (conventional) > level. As I understand the goal of study is not to know the theory or > term > but the reality.>> I think this is very important. > > Now get back to your question Vedana and citta. May I refer to Nina's > chapter > 2, Vedana, http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas4.html Her writing > can > explain your question pretty clearly. My understanding is citta is a > leader > of the band in cognizing object but citta and cetasika (nama-dhamma: > reality > which is able to know) are mutually supportive (as characters of > cetasika in > Abhidhammattha Sangaha). There is no citta without cetasika and vice > versa. > > This is my guess to your question. Because the nature of this two > phenomena > is so well blended, and the ability of citta that can know different > kinds of > object including material (rupa), citta, cetasika, nibbana as well as > concept/signification/name (pannatti). So cetasika as well as citta can > also > be an object (arammana) for the later citta to cognize. If Nina have > time, > I am sure that she can explain this better than me. So previous vedana > can > be an object for later citta as well. > > I'd better stop here. This is not easy for me either. I enjoy your good > questions. Addendum comment from anyone are appreciated. > > > Num > > > PS. Let me cut from Summary of Paramatthadhamma by Aj.Sujin regarding > the > importance of vedana. > > << In the Anguttaranikaya Ekanipata Dutiyapannasaka Sanimitta the third > vagga, 328, there is a passage saying: Behold, Bhikkhu, dhamma that is > sinful > akusala arises because there is vedana. Without vedana, it does not > arise. > By abandoning the vedana the dhamma that is sinful akusala would no > longer > be. > (Other passages are about sanna-cetasika, which is the sanna-khandha, > other > cetasika that are sankhara-khandha and the citta which are > vinnana-khandha.) > This shows that the vedana-cetasika, which are feelings, are the basis > of > tenacious attachments. Since there is no knowledge of the truth about > vedana-cetasika, one cannot abandon the feeling that there is oneself. > The knowledge of the characteristics of vedana-cetasika would condition > and > support sati to arise and know the characteristics of vedana. Otherwise > one > would not realize that every day there is vedana in the same way that > each > day there are only realities that appear through the eyes, ears, nose, > tongue, bodysense and mind, only because citta arise to know these > realities. > But imagine if one does not feel anything, when one sees the world > there > would be no perturbation. If one does not feel any emotion after > hearing, > one would not feel disturbed either. And the same applies to smelling, > tasting, knowing bodysense contact, there would be no akusala of any > kind. > But because feelings arise, there is attachment and clinging to the > feelings > and desiring the objects that make us feel glad and happy, which cause > akusala-dhamma to arise frequently without our awareness. All dhamma > are > anatta and none can prevent vedana-cetasika from arising. Whenever > citta > arises there must be vedana-cetasika that feels the arammana of the > moment. > Even now there must be vedana-cetasika of one kind or another being > upekkha-vedana, sukha-vedana, dukkha-vedana, somanassa-vedana or > domanassa-vedana. The aim of studying dhamma is not merely to know the > number or names but the characteristics of the feelings one is having. > If > sati does not arise to be conscious of the feelings that we are having > now, > even though that feeling is real: it has arisen and fallen away, since > we do > not know the true characteristics of that feeling, we would take it for > the > selves, which are happy, unhappy, glad, sad or indifferent. >> > 9313 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:32am Subject: Somewhat O/T: New York (was: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/14/01 4:18:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Are you in New York, Howard? Glad to see we're well represented there. > > ========================= > Yep. I live on Long Island, and I teach at Queens College. > > With metta, > Howard Yer kiddin' me. Whaddaya teach? I grew up in Canarsie, Brooklyn, and South Jamaica, Queens. High School in Great Neck, then Massachussetts and settled back in Manhattan for about twenty years, before my wife's work exiled me to Washington, D.C. a few years ago. We visit New York when we can. Perhaps we'll say hello to you next time we're in town! My parents still have an apartment in Chelsea, and they saw the Trade Towers get hit and collapse out of their window, even took home photos. We always used to go on about their great view. [All things are impermanent]. They see the Empire State building out of their other window. My mother still needs psychotherapy after seeing the collapse, and my dad had flashbacks of the buildings blowing up in Germany in World War II. Sarah???? Want some new patients??? Anyway, I know this is all off-topic, so I will desist engaging the coincidences of our khandas and go back to serious talk of anatta. But I can't resist saying [sorry everyone] in line with our New Yawk tawk: "Anatta day, anatta dollar". I am truly sorry about that! Best Regards, Robert Ep. =========================== > /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) > 9314 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 9:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentaries Dear Christine, I really enjoyed your description of the characters in the Suttas/Commentaries. Any further details you'd like to provide will be of great interest. Best, Robert Ep. ============ --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Robert K., > > I am so glad you recommended The Discourse on the Fruits of > Recluseship, among others. Being at the mercy of the book dealers, > it just happened to be the one they had in stock of a number I > ordered - I am told that there is now a wait of about four months > until the others arrive..... I am looking forward to the 'All > Embracing Net of Views: The Brahmajala Sutta and its Commentaries', > as its' main aim apparently is to clear away the conceptual and > intellectual distortions that hinder the acquisition of right view - > and I have lots of those distortions. > > I'm only up to page 29 (the end of The More Excellent Fruits of > Recluseship) and I have no questions so far that Bhikkhu Bodhi hasn't > covered in his translation of the commentary, only the same aversion > I always feel when 'faith' is mentioned....left over from my > Christian (blind belief) days I suppose.....On p.29 42-43 the first > step along the path, is described as the gaining of faith in the > Tathagata. "A householder, or a householders son, or one born into > some other family, hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, he > gains faith in the Tathagata. Endowed with such faith.....(leads to > going forth into homelessness). > > I enjoy Bhikku Bodhi's writing style, but one extra bonus is the > description of people's backgrounds and the culture of that time. The > people and their relatives mentioned in the sutta are much more real. > Their personalities are fleshed out. > For instance, to know that King Ajatasattu of Magadha (who asks the > question on whether there were any fruits of recluseship visible here > and now) was a parricide (killed his father King Bimbisara) from a > line of parricides with a number of descendents who would commit the > same crime, explains his sudden panic attack and suspicion when > approaching the Mango Farm to speak with the Buddha. How poignant is > his love for his son, who would eventually kill him also. > While Ajatasattu's mother was pregnant with him 2500 years ago, she > experienced an exotic variety of what many pregnant women go through > today - cravings. It is uncommon, but not unknown, for women I see > in the Maternity Unit to experience 'pica'. One I knew began eating > dirt and clay - the midwives told me it was possibly a sign of > calcium and magnesium deficiency. When I mentioned Ajatasattus's > mother (though not by name!), they thought it was within the bounds > of possibility that she may have had some nutritional (?iron ) > deficiency.....the Queen had a craving to drink the kings' blood - > which he lovingly provided for her to mix with water. The > Astrologers on hearing this, and knowing the family history, not > unreasonably predicted "This child in her womb will be the king's > enemy. He will kill the king". The Queen was beside herself and > tried to procure an abortion, but was prevented, and also stopped > from killing him after the birth. (?post-natal depression or > psychosis). One wonders how often Ajattasatu heard the story about > the prediction that he would kill his father King Bimbisara - self > fulfilling prophecy? family tradition? ..... Anyway, I won't ramble > on, but the people in the sutta don't seem like cardboard story book > characters anymore. Apart from differences in culture and lifestyle, > I see them on the T.V. news every night. It's like dressing the > actors in a 'period piece' in modern day clothes. > > keeping on, > metta, > Christine 9315 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 9:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentaries You know what's scary, Rob. I'm at the point of awareness where I can see that certain things I do are going to lead to future unpleasant results. Some of these things I'm sure I don't see, but some things are obvious, and I even sometimes experience the direct result of my impatience, anger, fearful actions, etc. When you see yourself doing something, but you can't actually stop, you find yourself watching these things, knowing they will have a negative result and you can almost brace yourself for what will eventually come. I believe that the discernment of these things begins to have a gradual 'braking' effect. I can feel that when some of these things take place, the awareness kicks in, and the action 'starts to stop'. It slows down and holds back a little. I assume that eventually some of the negative actions/reactions will fall away. I can't really 'do' anything, but it's interesting to watch. Best, Robert Ep. ========== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Very glad the book is upholding the promise I made, Christine. > I think the surrounding stories give us hints of the deeper reasons > for our habits and foibles. > Cultures have all sorts of reasons for behaviour and result and our > current 'scientific' worldview propounds many reasons why this and > that happens. What it can't see is the long history of accumulations > and past kamma that is always influencing our paths. This the > Buddhist scriptures reveal by the stories they explain. > I find this is something I begin to sense personally in a way that is > hard to prove but that feels very comforting. > best wishes > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Robert K., > > > > I am so glad you recommended The Discourse on the Fruits of > > Recluseship, among others. Being at the mercy of the book dealers, > > it just happened to be the one they had in stock of a number I > > ordered - I am told that there is now a wait of about four months > > until the others arrive..... I am looking forward to the 'All > > Embracing Net of Views: The Brahmajala Sutta and its Commentaries', > > as its' main aim apparently is to clear away the conceptual and > > intellectual distortions that hinder the acquisition of right view - > > > and I have lots of those distortions. > > > > I'm only up to page 29 (the end of The More Excellent Fruits of > > Recluseship) and I have no questions so far that Bhikkhu Bodhi > hasn't > > covered in his translation of the commentary, only the same > aversion > > I always feel when 'faith' is mentioned....left over from my > > Christian (blind belief) days I suppose.....On p.29 42-43 the first > > step along the path, is described as the gaining of faith in the > > Tathagata. "A householder, or a householders son, or one born into > > some other family, hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, he > > gains faith in the Tathagata. Endowed with such faith.....(leads to > > going forth into homelessness). > > > > I enjoy Bhikku Bodhi's writing style, but one extra bonus is the > > description of people's backgrounds and the culture of that time. > The > > people and their relatives mentioned in the sutta are much more > real. > > Their personalities are fleshed out. > > For instance, to know that King Ajatasattu of Magadha (who asks > the > > question on whether there were any fruits of recluseship visible > here > > and now) was a parricide (killed his father King Bimbisara) from a > > line of parricides with a number of descendents who would commit > the > > same crime, explains his sudden panic attack and suspicion when > > approaching the Mango Farm to speak with the Buddha. How poignant > is > > his love for his son, who would eventually kill him also. > > While Ajatasattu's mother was pregnant with him 2500 years ago, she > > experienced an exotic variety of what many pregnant women go > through > > today - cravings. It is uncommon, but not unknown, for women I see > > in the Maternity Unit to experience 'pica'. One I knew began > eating > > dirt and clay - the midwives told me it was possibly a sign of > > calcium and magnesium deficiency. When I mentioned Ajatasattus's > > mother (though not by name!), they thought it was within the bounds > > of possibility that she may have had some nutritional (?iron ) > > deficiency.....the Queen had a craving to drink the kings' blood - > > which he lovingly provided for her to mix with water. The > > Astrologers on hearing this, and knowing the family history, not > > unreasonably predicted "This child in her womb will be the king's > > enemy. He will kill the king". The Queen was beside herself and > > tried to procure an abortion, but was prevented, and also stopped > > from killing him after the birth. (?post-natal depression or > > psychosis). One wonders how often Ajattasatu heard the story > about > > the prediction that he would kill his father King Bimbisara - self > > fulfilling prophecy? family tradition? ..... Anyway, I won't > ramble > > on, but the people in the sutta don't seem like cardboard story > book > > characters anymore. Apart from differences in culture and > lifestyle, > > I see them on the T.V. news every night. It's like dressing the > > actors in a 'period piece' in modern day clothes. > > > > keeping on, > > metta, > > Christine 9316 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 10:02am Subject: Co to Kitagirisutta Dear Jon, Robert K and friends, Recently the Kitagirisutta was quoted, and since I like this sutta I consulted the Co, which I have in Thai. I am using the PTS translation. The translation used yesterday was another one, namely, 23. "And how does there come to be gradual training, gradual practice, gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; when he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, he gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective acceptance of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when zeal has sprung up, he applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinises; having scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he realises with the [mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by penetrating it with wisdom." N:We read: he scrutinizes: my P T S text has: he weighs it up. The Pali tuleti means weighing or examining. The Co has: he considers thoroughly :sees impermanence, dukkha, anatta. Having weight it up he strives. The Co: he investigates through vipassana, and by this way of investigation he strives after the Path, magga. The Co. then explains that he realizes the truth of nibbana by the mental body, nama-kaya. He thoroughly penetrates it. He sees it by magga panna which is accompanied by (sampayutta) the nama kaya (the other nama dhammas). Just a few notes, and my translation is coarse. Nina. 9317 From: Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 1:05pm Subject: Re: Somewhat O/T: New York (was: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard) Hi, Robert - I will reply to this via the group, but I suppose that if we continue this discussion further, it should be off-list. In a message dated 11/14/01 11:34:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > Yep. I live on Long Island, and I teach at Queens College. > With metta,> > > Howard > Yer kiddin' me. Whaddaya teach? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm a prof in the computer science dept teaching courses in the theory of computation and computational complexity. (I'm a theory person, because all my training is in mathematics.) ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I grew up in Canarsie, Brooklyn, and South Jamaica, Queens. High School in > Great > Neck, then Massachussetts and settled back in Manhattan for about twenty > years, > before my wife's work exiled me to Washington, D.C. a few years ago. > We visit > New York when we can. Perhaps we'll say hello to you next time we're in > town! > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That would be great. Please e-mail me if you ever plan to come in. ------------------------------------------------------- > > My parents still have an apartment in Chelsea, and they saw the Trade > Towers get > hit and collapse out of their window, even took home photos. We always > used to go > on about their great view. [All things are impermanent]. They see the > Empire > State building out of their other window. My mother still needs > psychotherapy > after seeing the collapse, and my dad had flashbacks of the buildings > blowing up > in Germany in World War II. Sarah???? Want some new patients??? > > Anyway, I know this is all off-topic, so I will desist engaging the > coincidences > of our khandas and go back to serious talk of anatta. But I can't > resist > saying [sorry everyone] in line with our New Yawk tawk: "Anatta day, > anatta > dollar". > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yo! If ya got anicca, ya gotta scratch it!! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------- > > I am truly sorry about that! > > Best Regards, > Robert Ep. > =========================== 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) 9318 From: m. nease Date: Wed Nov 14, 2001 7:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meththa meditation Dear Ranil, --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > If a person start to do mettha meditaion I thought > you can get the feeling > of meththa... well may be you can go a little far, > say from yourself, your > parents...etc. (But also I think even to arise the > feeling of mettha towards > yourself is difficult). Not sure what you mean by the feeling of mettaa. If by feeling you refer to the cetasika vedanaa, then I think you mean sukha-vedana--pleasant feeling. Unfortunately this feeling is a highly unreliable indication of kusala--far more akusala than kusala arises with pleasant feelings. So it's good I think to hear as much Dhamma as possible in order to be able to distinguish between kusala and akusala. Does pleasant feeling arise with a sense of attachment? If so, can this be kusala? > Mike; I get your point. the feeling of meththa too > is impermanent. But dont > you think without it there would be something > missing in the path? Leaving aside for the moment what we mean when we talk about the path, is mettaa a path factor? On the other hand, a moment of satipatthaana includes all the (mundane) path factors. This being the case, which is more worthwhile--a moment of mettaa, or a moment of satipatthaana? > The key word > is 'suppress'--once the samadhi is gone, the > underlying tendency for the arising of the kilesas > is > still in place, > > >>>>>if not strengthened>>>>>>> > > I dont get you here. Is kilesas strengthened here > due to a kind of a > strengthened mind due to various kinds of > concentration? If concentration is developed to the point of samadhi, it can be kusala or akusala. Since there are hugely more moments of akusala than kusala (moments conditioned by aversion, desire and/or ignorance), there is a much greater chance that samadhi will strengthen akusala rather than kusala, unless accompanied by strong understanding--conditioned by hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma. > Mettaa-bhavana > and all the other kinds of kusala are fine (if > they're > real--difficult to know)-- > >>>>>except that they all just lead to more > samsara.>>>>> > Mike; but isnt it easy for a person to cultivate > understanding (I hope by > doing vipassana meditaion) if he has already > practissed some kind of > meditation? I don't think so--there were many cases in the Buddha's day of people hearing the Dhamma for the first time and experiencing profound vipassanaa, even to the point of magga-citta--without ever having practiced samadhi meditation. Others can answer this question much better than I can, though. > Also, I cant understand how kusala will > lead to more samsara. All kamma conditions vipakka--kusala kamma conditions kusala vipakka, which still contributes to more and more samsaara. This is why satipatthaana is unique among kusala--only it can (usually very gradually) eradicate the kilesas. > I am so grateful to you for your comments and thank > you for your teachings. Good heavens, Ranil, I'm NO teacher! Just expressing a few of my own half-baked opinions. Always a pleasure to hear from you, sir... mike 9319 From: Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 2:40am Subject: Re: Music Dear Nina, Thank you for your post. I don't quite know what to do with knowing that something I write is a condition for conceit elsewhere, I'll just do what comes with the least effort :-). For me music is quite different to talking. Talking , whether in the mind or with the tongue, is the means of endless papanca. There is idle chit-chat, idle thought, gossip, lies, expressions of ignorance, ill-will, lust, all these are vaci-kamma and vaci-sankhara. When I listen to a Bach fugue, I do not intend for the hair to rise on the back of my neck, nor can I prevent the flood of well being that fills awareness. And there is this awareness of the perfection of the musical architecture. And so it is with the Dhamma . There is no papanca, no conceit, no I (the biggest conceit). In some Christian sects there is the phenomenon of speaking in tongues. It is making unintelligible sounds, and it switches of that talking mind. And so it is with music, for me. After high school I was apprenticed to a pipe organ builder, working both in Australia and the Netherlands. I did learn to play the organ then, was church organist for some time, as well as teaching a number of pupils. I gave the odd recital, and sometimes my first wife would join in on the flute. With ever changing realities, I ended up tuning pianos for a number of years. I haven't played for a long time, now I just listen, intently (and most of it is Bach. I have over 200 CD's of just JS Bach, and then some more. I consider it my sutta library) Some of my boys are very musical. This may sound like pride, but I understand full well that they are what they are, not much to do with me. The younger one of mine got his first guitar less than two years ago. The band he is in with my older son and some friends just won the NSW Battle of the Bands. It is all conditions, and wise attention. My wife's oldest boy recently received a ranking of 95% in his final exams. His middle brother is a farm hand who loves being with the animals all day. The youngest one watches the Simpsons all day and all night. Everyone is different, and each must find their own way. We differ on a number of issues, Nina, including (I quote from NanaVira) Cittavíthi, 'mental process, cognitive series'. Visuddhimagga, Ch. XIV etc. It is, perhaps, not superfluous to remark that this doctrine, of which so much use is made in the Visuddhimagga (and see also the Abhidhammatthasangaha), is a pure scholastic invention and has nothing at all to do with the Buddha's Teaching (or, indeed, with anything else). (I unquote) That we differ in this is not important. I imagine you, Lodewijk and Oscar and the rich harmonics of a well tempered harpsichord, and I imagine it to be "just so". All the best Herman Brady --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah and Nina et al, > >> > >> I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and > >> I am so happy!!!!!!!! > > Sarah: about Khun Sujin: She's always stressed to me that the study and > practice should be very natural > > without any rules at all. Again it is the understanding rather than the > > 'appearance' or 'activities' that counts. > > H: I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going > >> to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are > >> one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the > >> meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). > >> Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being > >> played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. > > Sarah: For sure there are realities while listening > > to or playing Bach and no reason at all why there can't be wise attention and > > awareness at these times. > > Dear Hermann, Christine, Sarah and friends, > > That is an expressive Email, I had to laugh. > I had conceit when I read that you pay attention to my music, there it is > again: I and you. Conceit plays us many tricks. Playing music is the same as > talking, thus, many different kinds of cittas arise and fall away very fast > and these condition different rupas. Yes, Abidhamma is life, normal, natural > life, even liking music is Abhidhamma. Liking the music, delight, you call > it extasy, this is attachment. We do not have to force ourselves to refrain > from it, it is normal, natural. But it is good to know it. The monk's > lifestyle is different, he should live like the arahat who is without > defilements. Therefore, he should not indulge in sense pleasures, such as > music. > What do you play, and do you teach? > First a little more about our music. Lodewijk and I got to know each other > through the music, 56 years ago, that must be before you were born? We play > music for two pianos, and also recorder and harpsichord. We also play with > my nephews, who play cello and also recorder. On Sunday my hundred year old > father comes to dinner (a four course dinner) with his very intelligent > asylum dog, Oscar (Christine likes this!) and on his request we have to play > something. Oscar especially likes Bach or very quiet music and lays down > between us. If it is less to his liking he walks up and down. Dogs know so > much, Christine. > Liking music does not fall from the blue sky, it ihas been accumulated from > citta to citta, also from the past. Your five boys are all different, with > different likings and talents and this is conditioned, accumulated. It is > interesting to observe their different accumulations. > Cittas arise and fall away very fast and akusala cittas can arise shortly > after kusala cittas. When I am just enjoying music for myself, or when I > play for my father and Oscar in order to give them a good time, is there a > difference? You can prove such things to yourself. Some time ago you said > that you find it difficult to know the difference between kusala and > akusala, and that you like to prove everything yourself. That is right. > However, learning some details about kusala and akusala from the teachings > helps us to consider what is arising in our own life. When we think of our > own enjoyment there is some selfishness, even though we do not harm others, > it is attachment, and when we think of someone else, of his wellbeing, there > is generosity and kindness. We had to play at a funeral ceremony, for my > sister in law who recently died. This is a way of showing sympathy to the > members of the family. But of course, there is also conceit and attachment. > Again, music is just like talking, so many different cittas, and there are > many moments of attachment to the sound. Also when we are talking in > ordinary speech, there is attachment to my voice, or to the words we are > expressing, there is hearing and sound, but mostly we are forgetful of > realities. Did we consider hearing while we are talking ourselves, or are we > just absorbed in what we are saying? We have accumulated forgetfulness and > ignorance for aeons, how can that change immediately? > Thus, when there is no dana, generosity, sila, observance of morality or > mental development, we talk or play music, we act and think with akusala > cittas. You may like to read "Deeds of Merit" by A. Sujin, Amara recently > put on her Web, which is also on the Zolag web. Read it and check it for > yourself, with regard to your own life. > When you consider your own life, and you try to understand it more, it is > kusala. There is sati, but it is of the level of considering, not yet direct > awareness of characteristics appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, > body and mind. We should not mind whether direct awareness arises or not > yet, if we mind, it shows clinging to self. This works counteractive. > It is not too difficult to know what is kusala and akusala in theory, but > since many different cittas arise and fall away so quickly and we have so > much ignorance and clinging, it is not easy to know exactly when the citta > is kusala and when akusala. Through satipatthana realities can be known as > they are, but it will take a long time of development, maybe eaons. Never > mind, each little bit of understanding is a gain. > An example of how we can be tricked: we see the usefulness of generosity, > and indeed there can be moments of generosity, but then there can be other > cittas which are attached to the idea of: I am generous, self again. But > panna should know everything, all that arises in daily life. We hear music, > we have to hear, we cannot choose, no self who can select this. Everything > occurs already because there are the approriate conditions. I did not make > my own earsense, it is being produced by kamma again and again. > As Sarah explained, there are realities when playing music, hearing, seeing, > knowing the meaning of the notes you read, hardness, like and dislike. > Sometimes there can be awareness of a characteristic, but this cannot be > forced. Awareness arises when there are conditions for it. > Now Lodewijk is playing the piano. With best wishes, also to your family, > Nina. 9320 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 3:32am Subject: Re: Commentaries Dear All, Slowly going through the Moral Discipline sections - Samannaphala Sutta 'The Small Section on Moral Discipline' p.31 of The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship - Bhikkhu Bodhi verse 45 'He abstains from accepting uncooked grain, raw meat,women and girls, male and female slaves, goats and sheep, fowl and swine, elephants, cattle, horses and mares.' Hmmmm....a little uncomfortable at coming behind the uncooked grain and raw meat - but at least women were listed ahead of the fowl and swine. :-) Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged buddhism?) recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? verse 62 'Whereas some recluses and brahmins, while living on the food offered by the faithful, earn their living by a wrong means of livelihood, by such debased arts as: promising gifts to deities in return for favours; fulfilling such promises; demonology; reciting spells after entering an earthen house; inducing virility and impotence; preparing and consecrating sites for a house; giving ceremonial mouthwashes and ceremonial bathing; offering sacrificial fires;' I'm O.K. up to here, - but the next sentences seem to include the practice of Medicine and Surgery in 'wrong means of livelihood'....Is there any other explanation? 'administering emetics, purgatives, expectorants and phlegmagogues; administering ear-medicine, eye-medicine nose-medicine, collyrium, and counter-ointments; 'curing cataracts, practising surgery, practising as a children's doctor; administering medicines to cure bodily diseases and balms to counter their after-effects - he abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased arts. This too pertains to his moral discipline.' The Commentary merely says: 45-62 The Sections on Moral Discipline "For explanations of the training rules observed by the bhikkhu, the commentator refers to the exegesis of the sections on moral discipline included in the commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta. Some of these remarks have been incorporated into the English renderings themselves. For further amplification, see The All-Embracing Net of Views, pp. 118-25)" Which isn't helpful when one doesn't own a copy.... Does anyone? Perhaps there is another interpretation, as many esteemed Bhikkus are medically trained and practice....... Metta, Christine 9321 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:01am Subject: Cambodia, Ch 9, (1) Lectures in Cambodia, by A.Sujin. Ch 9, no. 1. Chapter 9 Dhamma Discussion in Hotel Sofitel, Phnom Penh (I) Sujin: When paññå of the degree of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa arises, it arises even against our expectations. We should not think ahead of time that it should arise in a moment, very soon. This is wrong, because the development of pañña must be with detachment. If desire slips in, we are not on the right way and we shall not reach the goal. The right way, the development of paññå, is very intricate, very subtle. As has been appropriately stated in the scriptures: it is difficult to understand the four noble Truths because they are profound. For the development of satipaììhåna, we should not sit and think of getting hold of sati in order to ³use² it. We cannot ³use² pañña, but there should be correct understanding from the beginning, from now on. This understanding is included in the khandha of formations, saòkhårakkhandha, which forms up conditions for the arising of sammåsati that is aware of realities. When one touches things which are hard during the day there is no sati, because one has the notion of touching things such as a table. But when we have listened to the Dhamma we understand that hardness is only a kind of reality. If we often listen and have more understanding, there can be firm saññå, we can remember that everything is dhamma, reality, and this is the first level of understanding. We should not forget that everything is dhamma. If we do not forget this, there are conditions for the arising of sati that is aware of the reality of hardness, odour or other dhammas. It depends on conditions whether sati arises and is aware of realities. When sati arises it can be aware precisely of a characteristic of the dhamma that we used to take for something hard. When there is awareness, paññå can know that this is only a kind of dhamma, and that the element that experiences hardness is not self. However, before we can know that it is an element that experiences, not self, we should develop paññå for a long time until there is no longer the concept of the whole world that we used to have. Then only the element that experiences remains, and this is the characteristic of nåma that is not blended or mixed with rúpa. Nåma dhamma is the reality that can know everything. From birth to death there is nåma dhamma, at every moment. When sati arises we can gradually begin to understand the characteristics of rúpa dhamma and nåma dhamma which we used to know from listening to the Dhamma and from the study of the different texts of the scriptures. When we are aware of the realities that are appearing we shall begin to understand the characteristic of rúpa and the characteristic of nåma. Sati is aware, not because we cause its arising or do something special to induce it. We should understand that each life is citta, cetasika and rúpa. When sati is aware and there is gradually more understanding, little by little, satipaììhåna develops, so that one day insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa, can arise. This kind of paññå can penetrate the true nature of the characteristics of nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma, without there being concepts of people and things blended in. The element that experiences appears through the mind-door. At the moments of insight knowledge nothing else exists but the element that experiences, nåma dhamma, and rúpa dhamma, and these appear one at a time. Insight knowledge is the paññå that realizes the difference between nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma, it realizes their characteristics as distinct from each other, as they appear one at a time through the mind-door. We have heard of sense-door process and mind-door process, and also now a mind-door process is in between the sense-door processes, it follows upon each sense-door process. However, the mind-door process is not evident because it is, as it were, hidden by the sense-door processes. Also when there is thinking of names and concepts on account of sense objects, the mind-door process is not apparent. At such moments the arising and falling away of realities is not evident. Realities have already arisen and disappeared anyway. When concepts hide the truth one does not know paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities. However, when pañña has been developed to the degree of insight knowledge, the mind-door process appears and then there is no more doubt about it. At this moment realities appear through the sense-doors, through the eyes or the ears, but while one is thinking, nothing appears through the eyes or the ears. While one is thinking, there is no colour, no sound. We know through the study of the Dhamma and by memorizing what we learnt that there is the mind-door process, but the reality of the mind-door process does not appear. However, the paññå that is insight knowledge knows all realities through the mind-door. Realities appear one at a time through the mind-door. How does one feel about that? Jarurin: Perhaps one is frightened. Sujin: It depends on conditions. It is an experience that never before arose in life, but pañña at that moment is able to know that characteristic as nåma, and that is vipassanå ñåùa. One may be frightened or astonished while thinking why realities appear in this way, because one never thought that the world one is familiar with does, in the ultimate sense, not exist. Usually the whole wide world appears, because one has eyes and ears and thus this world one is familiar with appears. It appears in this way until the time comes when the world appears as empty; then there is only the citta which knows the characteristics of dhammas that appear, and which knows that the realities arise and appear because there are the appropriate conditions. Paññå will clearly realize that rúpa appears through the sense-door and subsequently through the mind-door. This is according to the truth. The saying: ³There is nothing, then there is something and after that there is nothing to be found², is according to the truth. Paññå knows that everything the Buddha taught is the truth that appears and that can be known, from the first level of paññå on, which is knowing the characteristics of nåma and of rúpa. People should not forego any stage of paññå and try to do something else. They should develop paññå so that they know first of all the characteristics of realities that are nåma and rúpa. We cannot know yet as it is lobha-múla-citta, and we cannot know yet whether it is accompanied by wrong view or not. When we study and we have theoretical knowledge of realities, the characteristics of nåma and rúpa do not appear, because we only know the terms. We may say that this type of lobha is accompanied by wrong view and that type by conceit, but this does not mean that we know the realities that arise and appear and then fall away. Realities arise and then fall away, they disappear very rapidly, but we only know the names of dhammas. If one wants to understand the true nature of realities, it is not sufficient to know only terms and concepts of the different dhammas. The purpose of listening to the Dhamma should not merely be theoretical understanding of realities, but it should be the practice, that is the development of paññå according to the method of the Suttanta, of the Abhidhamma and of the Vinaya, the Book of Discipline for the monks. 9322 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Mike & Ranil, I've been appreciating your discussion on metta here..very interesting questions from Ranil and excellent responses from Mike. Like you say, Ranil, we all learn a lot from his 'teaching';-) I'd just like to add a comment on one aspect which you quoted from your friend initially: --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Most importantly, mettha towards your own self. ......... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I understand the nature of metta, it can never be directed towards one's 'own self'. All the brahma viharas must be directed to others, such as now when we're considering and showing friendliness or assistance to each other. There has also been some earlier useful discussion on metta (which you can find on escribe or under 'useful posts'). This is an extract from a post I wrote to Erik who also had (has?) the same idea, like your friend that metta can be directed to oneself: ==================== Sarah:>.................in the Vism. above, it explains that by using > oneself as an example, ''I am happy. Just as I want to be happy and dread pain, > as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too'. Later (1X, 92) it > explains that metta 'comes about with respect to a friend (mitta), or it is > behaviour towards a friend, thus it is lovingkindness (metta). When there is > suffering in OTHERS (my caps) it causes (karoti) good people's hearts to be > moved (kampana), thus it is compassion (karuna).......' > > I know this causes confusion, but all the 4 brahmaviharas should be understood > as directed to other beings. As I mentioned, there can be other kinds of adosa > (non-aversion) which are not to other beings and it's common for metta and > adosa to be mixed up, but i find it helpful to consider these details and > realities a little more precisely, even though it's not the label that is our > concern! > Erik: > > To put it question form: can the designation "other" arise without > > the implicit designation "self"? In other words, is there really any > > fundamental separation between the khandas we designate "me" and the > > khandas we designate "other"? Does this "me" exist in total > > separation from all other things, in a causal vacuum, as it were? > Sarah:> There can be metta with or without right understanding of realities. Those who > have reached stages of enlightenment have no wrong view of self and yet are > more likely to have metta. When there is awareness of realities, there can > still be thinking of beings. Thinking can be with metta or dosa still. > Actually, if there is no idea of it being 'my metta' it will be purer and more > likely to arise I think. ==================== Ranil, please continue with your suggestions and observations and Mike, please don't ever underestimate the value of your helpful comments here;-) Best wishes, Sarah 9323 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] hello all! Dear Kelvin, Good to hear from you after your long break;-) --- kelvin liew peng chuan wrote: > > Dear All, > > May you all be well, happy & peaceful! i was requested by an e-friend to > give a short write up to introduce Buddhism in a Christian website. can you > all help me? I don't think I can help very much, but I remember ago in London, I was asked to give some talks to a Christian group and my approach was to start by stressing areas of similarity with regard to sila, the precepts and the foundations of the Commandments.....i.e qualities such as friendliness, neighbourliness, honesty and so on. Later I talked about what makes Buddhism distinct from other religions and in particular anatta, no being, no God and so on. Just a few ides. Others may help more. > > sorry for being silent all this while, i see the pace of discussion's very > fast & deep! it's enlightening to read the discussions, though.i hope > someone can help me. Glad you're finding the discussions so 'enlightening', Kelvin...perhaps you can help us too;-) > thanks in advance, saddhu ! saddhu! saddhu! One other suggestion would be to read the first chapter of Nina's book 'Buddhism in Daily Life' in which she talks about why she, as a Catholic at that time, became interested in Buddhism: http://www.dhammastudy.com/outlook.html If you wish to share parts of your article here as you write it, others may give you some useful feedback. Sarah 9324 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentaries Dear Christine, i'm enjoying your modern commentary on the commentaries too...pls keep it up ..very amusing and interesting to hear the points that are of special interest. Just a couple of very brief comments (one here and one on your next post): wrote: > I'm only up to page 29 (the end of The More Excellent Fruits of > Recluseship) and I have no questions so far that Bhikkhu Bodhi hasn't > covered in his translation of the commentary, only the same aversion > I always feel when 'faith' is mentioned....left over from my > Christian (blind belief) days I suppose.....On p.29 42-43 the first > step along the path, is described as the gaining of faith in the > Tathagata. "A householder, or a householders son, or one born into > some other family, hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, he > gains faith in the Tathagata. Endowed with such faith.....(leads to > going forth into homelessness). I know what you mean, and I'm not keen on 'faith' either...one reason Buddhism has such appeal is that it doesn't rely on any blind faith. I'm sure that here it will be 'saddha' or similar in the pali that is used and perhaps we can think of it more as 'confidence'. This is the confidence that only grows AFTER having heard (as above), considered and begun to develop understanding of the Teachings. Sarah 9325 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 11:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentaries (2) Dear Christine, --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > > I'm O.K. up to here, - but the next sentences seem to include the > practice of Medicine and Surgery in 'wrong means of livelihood'....Is > there any other explanation? > > 'administering emetics, purgatives, expectorants and phlegmagogues; > administering ear-medicine, eye-medicine nose-medicine, collyrium, > and counter-ointments; 'curing cataracts, practising surgery, > practising as a children's doctor; administering medicines to cure > bodily diseases and balms to counter their after-effects - he > abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased > arts. This too pertains to his moral discipline.' > > The Commentary merely says: > 45-62 The Sections on Moral Discipline > "For explanations of the training rules observed by the bhikkhu, the > commentator refers to the exegesis of the sections on moral > discipline included in the commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta. Some > of these remarks have been incorporated into the English renderings > themselves. For further amplification, see The All-Embracing Net of > Views, pp. 118-25)" > Which isn't helpful when one doesn't own a copy.... Does anyone? > Perhaps there is another interpretation, as many esteemed Bhikkus are > medically trained and practice....... I'm a little pressed for time, so i'll see if there's anything special to add from the texts later (or let someone else;-). Just a quick comment, though: as I understand it, the practice of Medicine and Surgery is wrong livelihood for a bhikkhu and this would come under the rules and precepts that the bhikkhu follows. In the same way, teaching subjects other than the dhamma, practising law or anything else not directly related to teaching, studying, practising dhamma would not be included. This doesn't mean a bhikkhu could not help someone in need, such as applying a bandage to a bleeding wound if someone collapsed in front of him. I also understand there are very good reasons for all these rules which are given in the stories behind the laying down of each one. They are all aimed at the preservation of the Sangha in order to preserve the Teachings. Again, I don't have time now to check the Vinaya on these points, but Tadao or Mike or any other vinaya aspect should be able to help with more details and correct me if I've made any mistake. With regard to your question on human rights, I think your observation is correct that the aim of the Teachings is to help us learn 'the way out of Samsara'. Ultimately, the real problems in life are not how many conventional 'rights' we have or don't have, but the latent tendencies of greed, hate and ignorance, wouldn't you say? Sarah 9326 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 15, 2001 11:33pm Subject: discernment or realities- yoga/tai chi --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Are there any types of classes you don't take, Sarah?? Actually, mostly I just do my yoga or Tai Chi on my own;-) we > have a > lot in common. I studied Yang Style T'ai Chi, long form for a couple of > years, > then short form ..... I'm quite a newbie at Tai chi (same forms), but like you, have been doing Iyengar yoga for well over 20yrs. > I don't know if it's right for the list, > but > if you want to have a thread on how discernment of realities relates to yoga > and > t'ai chi practices, that might be fun. Or maybe you don't see them as > related. I > would certainly be interested. You'll see I've changed the heading. I gave Howard my brief comments. Perhaps because I became so interested in Dhamma at a fairly young age, this has always given me my 'perspective' or understanding of realities. I've never felt any conflict, but I think the reason I've followed Iyengar yoga for so long is because of the emphasis on the physical activity and action and detail of the asanas rather than the Hindu philosophy which has never made sense to me. We have quite a few good us teachers passing through here. Recently Ramanand Patel came. I went to all the classes I could except the 'philosophy session' ;-) Maybe one reason, I've stuck at it for so long is because i don't have any expectations of the yoga or the teachers as anything in the slightest 'enlightening' and hence, unlike others, I'm never disappointed about it in this regard. Does that make any sense? Num likes to play tennis and Herman and Nina like to play music....just different accumulations and interests, but ultimately still just visible objects, sounds, attachments and thinking about concepts. I'm sure you and Howard will have different ideas and are bound to 'gang up';-) hope I haven't been too blunt... (I don't put it so bluntly to my yoga friends..) I'm trying to sign off for the busy weekend, Sarah 9327 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Co to Kitagirisutta Nina Many thanks for your interesting and useful explanations from the commentary. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, Robert K and friends, > Recently the Kitagirisutta was quoted, and since I like this sutta I > consulted the Co, which I have in Thai. I am using the PTS translation. > The > translation used yesterday was another one, namely, > 23. "And how does there come to be gradual training, gradual > practice, > gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; > when > he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, > he > gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the > Dhamma > he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has > memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective > acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective > acceptance > of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when zeal has sprung up, > he > applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinises; having > scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he realises with the > [mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by penetrating it with > wisdom." > > N:We read: he scrutinizes: my P T S text has: he weighs it up. The Pali > tuleti means weighing or examining. The Co has: he considers thoroughly > :sees impermanence, dukkha, anatta. This is obviously a reference to an advanced level of panna, as one might perhaps expect given its position in the 'scale' of development discussed here. > Having weight it up he strives. The Co: he investigates through > vipassana, > and by this way of investigation he strives after the Path, magga. Likewise here, I think. > The Co. then explains that he realizes the truth of nibbana by the > mental > body, nama-kaya. He thoroughly penetrates it. He sees it by magga panna > which is accompanied by (sampayutta) the nama kaya (the other nama > dhammas). Reference to citta and cetasika as 'body' takes a little getting used to! However, I am coming to realise it is an established way of referring to citta and cetasika in the context of the attainment of the path. > Just a few notes, and my translation is coarse. Nina. Very helpful, thanks Nina. If only we had these Com. in English! Jon 9328 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 2:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cambodia, Ch 9, (1) Hi Nina Thanks for sharing I think the whether we know when is theoretical understanding is helpful or when it suppose to be not, is a difficult line to draw. It is a difficult decision as we need theoretical basis for practising the dhamma, and from pratising dhamma understand theoreticial basis. It is like a cycle. But when is such theortical basis going to stop benefitting and when to stop getting bottom of certain theories, that is I find the most difficult for me at present. I have stop investigation theoretical understanding for a long while, but since knowing this group abt Abidhamma, the interest of theoreticial understanding is again fire up. Maybe one day, the thirst will quench when there is adequate theoretical understanding but for now, it is a relentless search for answers in this Abidhammic studies and how it relates to my previous school of thoughts and its beneficial support for the development in the liberation of oneself. Kind regards Ken O --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Lectures in Cambodia, by A.Sujin. Ch 9, no. 1. > Chapter 9 > > Dhamma Discussion in Hotel Sofitel, Phnom Penh (I) > > Sujin: When paññå of the degree of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa > arises, > it arises even against our expectations. We should not think ahead of > time > that it should arise in a moment, very soon. This is wrong, because the > development of pañña must be with detachment. If desire slips in, we are > not > on the right way and we shall not reach the goal. The right way, the > development of paññå, is very intricate, very subtle. As has been > appropriately stated in the scriptures: it is difficult to understand > the > four noble Truths because they are profound. For the development of > satipaììhåna, we should not sit and think of getting hold of sati in > order > to ³use² it. We cannot ³use² pañña, but there should be correct > understanding from the beginning, from now on. This understanding is > included in the khandha of formations, saòkhårakkhandha, which forms up > conditions for the arising of sammåsati that is aware of realities. When > one > touches things which are hard during the day there is no sati, because > one > has the notion of touching things such as a table. But when we have > listened > to the Dhamma we understand that hardness is only a kind of reality. If > we > often listen and have more understanding, there can be firm saññå, we > can > remember that everything is dhamma, reality, and this is the first level > of > understanding. We should not forget that everything is dhamma. If we do > not > forget this, there are conditions for the arising of sati that is aware > of > the reality of hardness, odour or other dhammas. It depends on > conditions > whether sati arises and is aware of realities. When sati arises it can > be > aware precisely of a characteristic of the dhamma that we used to take > for > something hard. When there is awareness, paññå can know that this is > only a > kind of dhamma, and that the element that experiences hardness is not > self. > However, before we can know that it is an element that experiences, not > self, we should develop paññå for a long time until there is no longer > the > concept of the whole world that we used to have. Then only the element > that > experiences remains, and this is the characteristic of nåma that is not > blended or mixed with rúpa. Nåma dhamma is the reality that can know > everything. From birth to death there is nåma dhamma, at every moment. > When > sati arises we can gradually begin to understand the characteristics of > rúpa > dhamma and nåma dhamma which we used to know from listening to the > Dhamma > and from the study of the different texts of the scriptures. When we are > aware of the realities that are appearing we shall begin to understand > the > characteristic of rúpa and the characteristic of nåma. Sati is aware, > not > because we cause its arising or do something special to induce it. We > should > understand that each life is citta, cetasika and rúpa. When sati is > aware > and there is gradually more understanding, little by little, > satipaììhåna > develops, so that one day insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa, can arise. > This > kind of paññå can penetrate the true nature of the characteristics of > nåma > dhamma and rúpa dhamma, without there being concepts of people and > things > blended in. The element that experiences appears through the mind-door. > At > the moments of insight knowledge nothing else exists but the element > that > experiences, nåma dhamma, and rúpa dhamma, and these appear one at a > time. > Insight knowledge is the paññå that realizes the difference between nåma > dhamma and rúpa dhamma, it realizes their characteristics as distinct > from > each other, as they appear one at a time through the mind-door. We have > heard of sense-door process and mind-door process, and also now a > mind-door > process is in between the sense-door processes, it follows upon each > sense-door process. However, the mind-door process is not evident > because it > is, as it were, hidden by the sense-door processes. Also when there is > thinking of names and concepts on account of sense objects, the > mind-door > process is not apparent. At such moments the arising and falling away of > realities is not evident. Realities have already arisen and disappeared > anyway. When concepts hide the truth one does not know paramattha > dhammas, > ultimate realities. However, when pañña has been developed to the degree > of > insight knowledge, the mind-door process appears and then there is no > more > doubt about it. At this moment realities appear through the sense-doors, > through the eyes or the ears, but while one is thinking, nothing appears > through the eyes or the ears. While one is thinking, there is no > colour, no > sound. We know through the study of the Dhamma and by memorizing what we > learnt that there is the mind-door process, but the reality of the > mind-door > process does not appear. However, the paññå that is insight knowledge > knows > all realities through the mind-door. Realities appear one at a time > through > the mind-door. How does one feel about that? > > Jarurin: Perhaps one is frightened. > > Sujin: It depends on conditions. It is an experience that never before > arose > in life, but pañña at that moment is able to know that characteristic as > nåma, and that is vipassanå ñåùa. One may be frightened or astonished > while > thinking why realities appear in this way, because one never thought > that > the world one is familiar with does, in the ultimate sense, not exist. > Usually the whole wide world appears, because one has eyes and ears and > thus > this world one is familiar with appears. It appears in this way until > the > time comes when the world appears as empty; then there is only the citta > which knows the characteristics of dhammas that appear, and which knows > that > the realities arise and appear because there are the appropriate > conditions. > Paññå will clearly realize that rúpa appears through the sense-door and > subsequently through the mind-door. This is according to the truth. > > The saying: ³There is nothing, then there is something and after that > there > is nothing to be found², is according to the truth. Paññå knows that > everything the Buddha taught is the truth that appears and that can be > known, from the first level of paññå on, which is knowing the > characteristics of nåma and of rúpa. People should not forego any stage > of > paññå and try to do something else. They should develop paññå so that > they > know first of all the characteristics of realities that are nåma and > rúpa. > We cannot know yet as it is lobha-múla-citta, and we cannot know yet > whether > it is accompanied by wrong view or not. When we study and we have > theoretical knowledge of realities, the characteristics of nåma and rúpa > do > not appear, because we only know the terms. We may say that this type of > lobha is accompanied by wrong view and that type by conceit, but this > does > not mean that we know the realities that arise and appear and then fall > away. Realities arise and then fall away, they disappear very rapidly, > but > we only know the names of dhammas. If one wants to understand the true > nature of realities, it is not sufficient to know only terms and > concepts of > the different dhammas. The purpose of listening to the Dhamma should not > merely be theoretical understanding of realities, but it should be the > practice, that is the development of paññå according to the method of > the > Suttanta, of the Abhidhamma and of the Vinaya, the Book of Discipline > for > the monks. 9329 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 3:30am Subject: Re: meththa meditation Dear Mike, more questions... :) >>> If concentration is developed to the point of samadhi, it can be kusala or akusala. Since there are hugely more moments of akusala than kusala (moments conditioned by aversion, desire and/or ignorance), there is a much greater chance that samadhi will strengthen akusala rather than kusala, unless accompanied by strong understanding--conditioned by hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma. Dear mike; could you please give me some examples of what akusala feelings would come in samadi. I know Buddha has told that if you want to go to nirwana you should discipline your self in sila, samadi & prangna. >This is why satipatthaana is unique among kusala--only it can (usually very >gradually)eradicate the kilesas. mike; could you please tell me how to do satipatthaana... >Just expressing a few of my own half-baked opinions. Enjoying every bit of it... Also, I want to ask another question... We have a desire within us to be liked by other people. in other words we like if other people like us. Now, is this an akusala? if so how should we think? we do things and avoid things sometimes thinking of this feeling... Say... if I do this he may not like it. So actually I am thinking about me rather than him even though I do something good to him... how should these situations be handled? (well I can think of pages to write here. but want to get your openion...) ~meththa Ranil 9330 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 3:34am Subject: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala Hi everyone, Just a few questions on: Restraint of the Sense Faculties verse 64: (p.38) The Discourse on the Fruits of Reclusehip "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves restraint over the faculty of the eye." and so on and so forth, for ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. 'guard the doors of his sense faculties' - How does one continuously do this? The thing I have noticed about these 'doors' is that they may - (but I don't perceive them to) - open in an orderly fashion one after another so one can deal with what attempts to enter.......... Right now, I can feel my fingers and wrists are on the keyboard, the chair under my thighs and clothes and jewellry on my body, my feet in my shoes on the floor, my eyes are looking at the cursor and printing appearing on the screen - but also can see with my peripheral vision the book shelves above the computer, and the curtains and carpet, whiteboard on the wall - I can hear the humming of the computer, the crickets and frogs outside the windows, smell the wet, earthy scent of garden, grass and eucalypt leaves after rain, and the fragrance of tea in the cup on the side-table, the taste of the last mouthful in my mouth. And there are probably a lot of things that aren't registering, because I'm not that sensitised or practised yet.... To 'not grasp at the sign or details' would surely require that the object be identified and screened in some way for 'wholesomeness' in the first place? How does one survive in the everyday world - fulfil whatever duties are necessary - and not be swamped by incoming sense impressions? Awareness would still require sweeping over the other sense faculties to check out what was happening, or, perhaps, choosing only one sense faculty to concentrate on more fully?...block out some of the others?.......The mind often does that of its own accord anyway, daydreaming and not noticing anything else for some time. Wouldn't it be easier to sit, close the eyes, and watch the breath. Reduces the number of visual objects at least, and fosters/forces concentration..........But that can't be done while going about my daily business, either. "Unwholesome" I can understand, but doesn't it seem a little harsh to say grief is "evil"? Evil in the usual sense of 'wicked, heinous, or sinful' would seem to imply a 'deliberate intention' - no-one would *intend* or *desire* to feel grief.......(maybe cause someone else grief, but not to themselves). Such a small verse, such voluminous questions, I begin to understand how the commentaries grew exponentially. metta, Christine 9331 From: Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:51am Subject: Re: hello all! Dear Kelvin, The Buddha and Jesus were very alike in that they both had insight into the nature of reality. The Buddha, whose footsteps I am not worthy to walk in, said : Thus I say, beings are heirs of their kammas. Jesus, of like status, said: You will reap as you sow. The nature of reality is one's intention toward it. This is reality on Mars and Alaska. Temples, churches, rites, rituals, statues and crucifixes, chanting, mantras, bowing, deacons, bhikkus, nuns, priests etc etc if ever these things become things in themselves, and are not axes and blowtorches at the roots of delusional thinking that say "here am I, I will be ", then they are nutrients to the selfsame. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "kelvin liew peng chuan" wrote: > > Dear All, > > May you all be well, happy & peaceful! i was requested by an e- friend to > give a short write up to introduce Buddhism in a Christian website. can you > all help me? > > sorry for being silent all this while, i see the pace of discussion's very > fast & deep! it's enlightening to read the discussions, though.i hope > someone can help me. > > thanks in advance, saddhu ! saddhu! saddhu! > > ~ sampuna 9332 From: Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 7:50am Subject: Re: Commentaries Dear Chritstine (and Sarah) How are you? You wrote: "'For explanations of the training rules observed by the bhikkhu, the commentator refers to the exegesis of the sections on moral discipline included in the commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta. Some of these remarks have been incorporated into the English renderings themselves. For further amplification, see The All-Embracing Net of Views, pp. 118-25)' ....... ............................Perhaps there is another interpretation, as many esteemed Bhikkus are medically trained and practice..." The commentary to the Brahmajala Suttam merely explains the names and cures of the diseases and complaints. It does not say why the practice of medicine is the wrong livelihood for the monks. However, the Tiikaa (subcommentary) touched upon the matter briefly as we find the following in Section 27, Brahmajaala Suttam Tiikaa, Siilakkandha Vagga Tiikaa. "Sabbaani cetaani aajiivahetukaaniyeva idhaadhippetaani "micchaajiivena jiivikaam kappentii"ti vuttattaa." "And, here, all those (categories) are meant (should be understood) only as those done for the sake of livelihood because they (certain some monks) are said to make a living by means of wrong livelihood." According to Tiikaa, we could infer that there should not be any problem if a Buddhist monk practised medicine as a hobby or for the sake of science in his spare time. Similarly, the Buddhist monks, without breaking Vinaya rules, could practise any worthwhile hobby such as martial arts, computer science, and the like as long as they do not undertake those hobbies at the expense of the Noble Eightfold Path. I belive that Sarah also wrote the following along the lines of the above Tiikaa: "... as I understand it, the practice of Medicine and Surgery is wrong livelihood for a bhikkhu and this would come under the rules and precepts that the bhikkhu follows. ...This doesn't mean a bhikkhu could not help someone in need, such as applying a bandage to a bleeding wound if someone collapsed in front of him." (Message 9325) With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > Dear All, > > Slowly going through the Moral Discipline sections - > > Samannaphala Sutta 'The Small Section on Moral Discipline' > p.31 of The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship - Bhikkhu Bodhi > verse 45 > 'He abstains from accepting uncooked grain, raw meat,women and girls, > male and female slaves, goats and sheep, fowl and swine, elephants, > cattle, horses and mares.' > Hmmmm....a little uncomfortable at coming behind the uncooked grain > and raw meat - but at least women were listed ahead of the fowl and > swine. :-) > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged buddhism?) > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find > themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? > > verse 62 > 'Whereas some recluses and brahmins, while living on the food offered > by the faithful, earn their living by a wrong means of livelihood, by > such debased arts as: promising gifts to deities in return for > favours; fulfilling such promises; demonology; reciting spells after > entering an earthen house; inducing virility and impotence; preparing > and consecrating sites for a house; giving ceremonial mouthwashes and > ceremonial bathing; offering sacrificial fires;' > > I'm O.K. up to here, - but the next sentences seem to include the > practice of Medicine and Surgery in 'wrong means of livelihood'....Is > there any other explanation? > > 'administering emetics, purgatives, expectorants and phlegmagogues; > administering ear-medicine, eye-medicine nose-medicine, collyrium, > and counter-ointments; 'curing cataracts, practising surgery, > practising as a children's doctor; administering medicines to cure > bodily diseases and balms to counter their after-effects - he > abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased > arts. This too pertains to his moral discipline.' > > The Commentary merely says: > 45-62 The Sections on Moral Discipline > "For explanations of the training rules observed by the bhikkhu, the > commentator refers to the exegesis of the sections on moral > discipline included in the commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta. Some > of these remarks have been incorporated into the English renderings > themselves. For further amplification, see The All-Embracing Net of > Views, pp. 118-25)" > Which isn't helpful when one doesn't own a copy.... Does anyone? > Perhaps there is another interpretation, as many esteemed Bhikkus are > medically trained and practice....... > > Metta, > Christine 9333 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 7:52am Subject: Re: Somewhat O/T: New York (was: Re: [dsg] Tai Chi - Howard) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > I'm a prof in the computer science dept teaching courses in the theory > of computation and computational complexity. (I'm a theory person, because > all my training is in mathematics.) > ------------------------------------------------------------------- neat. think we can set up a program to predict the likelihood of total annihilation of all experience in parinibbana? Perhaps we'll say hello to you next time we're in > > town! > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That would be great. Please e-mail me if you ever plan to come in. > ------------------------------------------------------- Well, I definitely will. We'd love to meet you! These guys keep meeting in Thailand and India. Well, we can have a New York contingent. "Anatta day, anatta dollar". > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yo! If ya got anicca, ya gotta scratch it!! ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------------- oh my God. You notice that no one has dared to respond to these puns. Too painful. Regards, Robert Ep. 9334 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 8:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] discernment or realities- yoga/tai chi Dear Sarah, I don't think you were too blunt, Sarah. In a sense, I think it means that you just enjoy the yoga in its own right, as something to 'do' and experience, and that is actually a much more 'enlightened' state, I would say, than doing it with striving and expectation. The strain that we often have on our involvements to somehow elevate us above the flow of life, simply creates more stress and disappointment. But to do something so consistently, because it is something you have a predilection for, can't really be argued against. However, I take it that you perhaps have some 'aversion' to the potential for Hindu philosophy to enter into the scene. I'm sure in 20 years, you've been confronted with some Hindu beliefs accompanying your yoga friends' practice. I have also known several other Buddhists in my Iyengar career and they seemed to be quite accepted and got along nicely with both the system and the people in New York and elsewhere. Correct me if I'm wrong about the above, but I think it might be an interesting issue [or not], how we react to philosophies that are different than our own? I spent many years trying to figure out what the right 'view' is, even now I struggle between aspects of Theravada and Mahayana. But those conflicts have somewhat taken a back burner to the attempt to discern the reality that is present for awareness. And that is kind of a relief. A former associate of mine had an 'enlightening' experience when he was attempting to reconcile different instructions from different strains of Buddhism. One meditation method proposed that you cut all thoughts off at the root. Another method proposed that you allow thoughts to flow and simply observe them as thoughts. He got to a point where he was very upset trying to choose which method was right and which one to use, when he suddenly realized that the conflict he was engaging with was also a thought. In that moment he observed the present thought and the whole conflict just popped like a bubble. Anyway, I'll stop rambling, but I'll be interested to see what you think of this theme. As for the yoga itself, I would tend to think that the attention to breathing and posture that yoga promotes, the fine use of awareness and concentration, could or should lead to a greater ability to discern the present reality. Do you see that as a possibility? Best, Robert Ep. ====================== --- Sarah wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Are there any types of classes you don't take, Sarah?? > > Actually, mostly I just do my yoga or Tai Chi on my own;-) > > we > > have a > > lot in common. I studied Yang Style T'ai Chi, long form for a couple of > > years, > > then short form ..... > > I'm quite a newbie at Tai chi (same forms), but like you, have been doing > Iyengar yoga for well over 20yrs. > > > I don't know if it's right for the list, > > but > > if you want to have a thread on how discernment of realities relates to yoga > > and > > t'ai chi practices, that might be fun. Or maybe you don't see them as > > related. I > > would certainly be interested. > > You'll see I've changed the heading. I gave Howard my brief comments. Perhaps > because I became so interested in Dhamma at a fairly young age, this has always > given me my 'perspective' or understanding of realities. > > I've never felt any conflict, but I think the reason I've followed Iyengar yoga > for so long is because of the emphasis on the physical activity and action and > detail of the asanas rather than the Hindu philosophy which has never made > sense to me. We have quite a few good us teachers passing through here. > Recently Ramanand Patel came. I went to all the classes I could except the > 'philosophy session' ;-) > > Maybe one reason, I've stuck at it for so long is because i don't have any > expectations of the yoga or the teachers as anything in the slightest > 'enlightening' and hence, unlike others, I'm never disappointed about it in > this regard. Does that make any sense? > > Num likes to play tennis and Herman and Nina like to play music....just > different accumulations and interests, but ultimately still just visible > objects, sounds, attachments and thinking about concepts. > > I'm sure you and Howard will have different ideas and are bound to 'gang up';-) > hope I haven't been too blunt... (I don't put it so bluntly to my yoga > friends..) > > I'm trying to sign off for the busy weekend, > > Sarah 9335 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 10:25am Subject: Cambodia ch9, no 2 A. Sujin's Lectures in Cambodia, Ch 9, no. 2. The purpose of listening to the Dhamma should not merely be theoretical understanding of realities, but it should be the practice, that is the development of paññå according to the method of the Suttanta, of the Abhidhamma and of the Vinaya, the Book of Discipline for the monks. Jaran: In which way is the practice according to those three methods different? Sujin: These are different methods of teaching. The Vinaya deals with conduct through body and speech. When we study the Vinaya we know that wholesome conduct through body and speech is developed by kusala citta. An example of this is the case of a monk who entered a house and sat down without having been invited by the owner of the house. When the Buddha heard of this he laid down a rule that only when the owner of a place had invited the monk he could sit down. Thus, when the monk goes to someone¹s house, but the owner has not yet invited him, should he sit down? Even small matters, matters that concern etiquette and manners, such as while one is eating, are all explained in the Vinaya, and everybody can apply these. We do not need to sit down and consider how many more sílas in addition to the five precepts we shall observe. Síla concerns our conduct through body and speech. As to the method of the Suttanta, this is very subtle and detailed, such as the teaching of dukkha-dukkha (intrinsic dukkha, bodily pain and unhappy feeling), vipariùåma-dukkha (dukkha because of change) and saòkhåra-dukkha (dukkha inherent in all conditioned realities) 1. We should study the Suttanta so that we acquire a more detailed understanding of confidence, saddhå, moral shame, hiri, and fear of blame, ottappa 2 . When we listen to the Dhamma there is confidence, sati, hiri and ottappa. We do not realize that there are hiri and ottappa, even though they are there in reality. Whenever kusala citta arises it is accompanied by hiri and ottappa, without the need to think that we are ashamed of akusala. We do not need to think first of moral shame in order that it arises and that we shall listen to the Dhamma. Whenever the reality of moral shame arises there is kusala citta at that moment. Thus, we should have more understanding of realities in detail. With regard to the Abhidhamma method of teaching, this elucidates the true nature of all paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities. One should not merely know the concepts nåma and rúpa, but the characteristics of nåma and rúpa that are appearing should be realized. When satipaììhåna arises there is awareness and understanding of the characteristics of realities, one at a time. When anger arises, is there anybody who does not know this, even if he does not study the Abhidhamma? When jealousy or stinginess arises, is it necessary to study the Abhidhamma so that one knows it? People know it without study, but they take these realities for self, and they do not know that these are only different dhammas. Through the Abhidhamma method one can come to understand that all realities are non-self. When attachment, aversion or conceit arise, or when we enjoy ourselves, there is no person, no self. When there is the firm remembrance of the truth of anattå, a person will not have misunderstandings about it and believe that he can do whatever he likes because everything is anattå anyway. Then he uses anattå as a trick to excuse his behaviour and he gives his own interpretation of this term. As regards the truth of anattå, does paññå grasp already its meaning? Or do we just repeat that everything is anattå? There is a considerable difference in the understanding of someone who merely studies the theory of the Dhamma and of someone who develops pañña and knows the characteristics of realities as they are. We should understand this correctly: if we know only terms and names of dhammas, we shall remain only at that level, and we shall continue to know only terms. We should develop pañña so that the truth of anattå can be realized, in accordance with the teaching that all dhammas are anattå. Otherwise, to use a simile, we are like the ladle that serves the curry but does not know the taste of it 3. If we study but we do not realize the true nature of realities, how many lives shall we be only at that level, and this means that we study and then forget what we learnt. If we know that we study with the purpose of understanding realities at this very moment, then our understanding will be in accordance with our ability. We can understand, for example, what årammaùa, object, is. It is impossible that citta does not experience an object. Citta is the reality that experiences and thus there must be something that is experienced. That which is experienced can be anything, it can be citta, cetasika, rúpa or nibbåna. A concept, paññatti , is the object of citta that thinks. We can know when the citta knows a concept and when an ultimate reality, paramattha dhamma. Every paramattha dhamma that is the object of citta, has a characteristic, and that characteristic is impermanence; it arises and falls away. When the object is not a paramattha dhamma with its true characteristic, the object is a concept. If we understand this, sati can be aware of the characteristics of paramattha dhammas, because satipaììhåna must know paramattha dhammas. The study can support correct understanding of the way of development of paññå. Everything we learn from the beginning is accumulated as the khandha of formations, saòkhårakkhandha, and this is a condition for the growth of pañña. Question: Is it correct to say that paññå and ñåùa are the same in meaning, but that they are of different levels? Sujin: It depends on the context, on the way it is used. For example, the term is used that is: kusala citta ñåùa sampayutta, kusala citta that is accompanied by paññå cetasika. Question: If someone is at the beginning level of study, he learns terms and concepts. How can he go beyond this level and do without them? Sujin: At the beginning level we learn terms and names, but what do such names designate? As to the term citta, for example, what does it designate? It is a term for a dhamma that is reality, for the element that experiences, the reality that experiences. Therefore, we should not cling to the term citta, we can change the term citta into viññåùa (consciousness) or into mano (mind). But these terms refer to the nature that experiences something, to the reality that experiences. When citta arises it must experience something, it is impossible that it would not experience something. If our understanding is correct, it will become firmer and more established. While we are asleep, is there citta? There is. While we are asleep, does citta experience an object? The nature of citta cannot be altered; it is the reality that experiences and thus, also that citta must be like that. However, while we are asleep, the object of citta does not appear, because it is the object of the bhavanga-citta, life-continuum. The bhavanga-citta succeeds the rebirth-consciousness and experiences the same object, and the rebirth-consciousness has the same object as the cittas that arose shortly before dying in the previous life. All bhavanga-cittas throughout that life experience the same object. Therefore we should know that the bhavanga-citta is not a citta that is depending on the doorways of the eyes, the ears, the nose, the body or the mind. However, it knows an object, because citta is a reality that must experience something. If we understand the true characteristics of realities there is correct understanding. If we cling and in that way interfere with the understanding of realities it is evident that they cannot be seen as they are. Question: Does this mean that when I have understanding of the realities of citta and cetasika, I do not interfere with their functions? Sujin: At this moment realities perform their own functions already, but we do not know that they are citta and cetasika. However, when we study the Dhamma, we know that citta is the leader, it is the chief in knowing an object; it does not remember, it is not angry, it does not love, it does not hate. Its only function is being the leader in knowing an object. Citta is able to experience the characteristic of what appears at this moment. The rúpa that presents itself at this moment through the eyes appears to citta. When sound appears, there are actually many kinds of sounds, but citta is able to experience each kind of sound. Thus, citta is the chief, the leader in cognizing an object, it clearly knows the different characteristics of the objects that present themselves. However, citta is not paññå; paññå is correct understanding that knows realities as non-self. ******* Footnotes. 1. The suttas deal with the teaching and its application in daily life. The Buddha spoke, for example, about dukkha in daily life, about the loss of family and friends through death. He would speak about dukkha because of change, vipariùåma dukkha, when people were ready to understand this. If people had developed more understanding he would speak about the five khandhas that are impermanent and thus dukkha. The purpose of the study of the Suttanta is knowing the characteristics of realities appearing now, the khandhas, dhåtus (elements), åyatanas (sense-fields), thus nåma and rúpa. Also in the Suttanta Abhidhamma is taught. 2. The Buddha taught in the Suttanta the benefit of kusala and the disadvantage of akusala. When hiri, ottappa and saddhå arise, one sees the benefit of kusala and the disadvantage of akusala. 3. The ladle that serves the curry is time and again in contact with the curry, but does not know the taste. Evenso, all realities are anattå, but we do not realize this. ****** 9336 From: Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 7:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] discernment or realities- yoga/tai chi Hi, Robert (and Sarah) - In a message dated 11/16/01 11:07:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > A former associate of mine had an 'enlightening' experience when he was > attempting > to reconcile different instructions from different strains of Buddhism. > One > meditation method proposed that you cut all thoughts off at the root. > Another > method proposed that you allow thoughts to flow and simply observe them as > thoughts. He got to a point where he was very upset trying to choose which > method > was right and which one to use, when he suddenly realized that the conflict > he was > engaging with was also a thought. In that moment he observed the present > thought > and the whole conflict just popped like a bubble. > ============================= That's *great*!! In reading this I can almost "feel" the opening up of the mind in this experience of impersonality. Just wonderful! BTW, this scenario seems, itself, to actually integrate different approaches within Buddhism, with the realization of emptiness, the wisdom, arising as the result of mindfulness of thoughts, but energized by something much akin to "Great Doubt" of koan Zen!! 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) 9337 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 8:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] discernment or realities- yoga/tai chi --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Sarah) - > > In a message dated 11/16/01 11:07:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > A former associate of mine had an 'enlightening' experience when he was > > attempting > > to reconcile different instructions from different strains of Buddhism. > > One > > meditation method proposed that you cut all thoughts off at the root. > > Another > > method proposed that you allow thoughts to flow and simply observe them as > > thoughts. He got to a point where he was very upset trying to choose which > > method > > was right and which one to use, when he suddenly realized that the conflict > > he was > > engaging with was also a thought. In that moment he observed the present > > thought > > and the whole conflict just popped like a bubble. > > > ============================= > That's *great*!! In reading this I can almost "feel" the opening up of > the mind in this experience of impersonality. Just wonderful! Dear Howard, Yes, I also found a lot to look at and enjoy in this story. It seemed to summarize a lot of the striving we do to find the truth that is right under our nose. > BTW, this scenario seems, itself, to actually integrate different > approaches within Buddhism, with the realization of emptiness, the wisdom, > arising as the result of mindfulness of thoughts, but energized by something > much akin to "Great Doubt" of koan Zen!! Interesting metaphor in a way too, that all the conflicts between different 'views' or 'efforts' are resolved in seeing what is. Best, Robert Ep. 9338 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 10:39pm Subject: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi All I have read the useful post in Bhavanga cittas, I like to ask what are objects do Bhavanga citta have during sleep as all the sense door is closed at that momment. Second question, as they are the first three cittas during a thought process, what are their objects also? Kind regards Ken O 9339 From: Date: Fri Nov 16, 2001 10:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala --- Dear Christine, These questions are ones we all have asked and ask ourselves again and again. If the answers are found then we understand samatha and vipassana and sila and the differences. Comments interpersed: In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > Hi everyone, > Just a few questions on: > Restraint of the Sense Faculties verse 64: (p.38) The Discourse on > the Fruits of Reclusehip > > "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense > faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the > bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were > to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil > unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, > he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves > restraint over the faculty of the eye." and so on and so forth, for > ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. > > 'guard the doors of his sense faculties' - How does one > continuously do this? The thing I have noticed about these 'doors' > is that they may - (but I don't perceive them to) - open in an > orderly fashion one after another so one can deal with what attempts > to enter.......... Right now, I can feel my fingers and wrists are on > the keyboard, the chair under my thighs and clothes and jewellry on > my body, my feet in my shoes on the floor, my eyes are looking at the > cursor and printing appearing on the screen - but also can see with > my peripheral vision the book shelves above the computer, and the > curtains and carpet, whiteboard on the wall - I can hear the humming > of the computer, the crickets and frogs outside the windows, smell > the wet, earthy scent of garden, grass and eucalypt leaves after > rain, and the fragrance of tea in the cup on the side-table, the > taste of the last mouthful in my mouth. And there are probably a lot > of things that aren't registering, because I'm not that sensitised > or practised yet.... > To 'not grasp at the sign or details' would surely require that the > object be identified and screened in some way for 'wholesomeness' in > the first place? > How does one survive in the everyday world - fulfil whatever duties > are necessary - and not be swamped by incoming sense impressions? > Awareness would still require sweeping over the other sense faculties > to check out what was happening, or, perhaps, choosing only one sense > faculty to concentrate on more fully?...block out some of the > others?.......The mind often does that of its own accord anyway, > daydreaming and not noticing anything else for some time. Wouldn't > it be easier to sit, close the eyes, and watch the breath. Reduces > the number of visual objects at least, and fosters/forces > concentration..........But that can't be done while going about my > daily business, either. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The monks went about their daily business and yet they were encouraged to guard the sense doors at all times: whether walking, talking, eating or going to the toilet. If it were impossible the Buddha wouldn't have said so. It is true that normally whenever there are desirable objects contacting the sense doors that desire immediately follows. Wise ones of all ages knew this and so they turned away from the sense doors and developed samatha by concentrating on various objects. If they were skillful they could develop jhana during which no sense objects appear and thus they could be free of defilements during these times. This is one way of guarding the senses. Another way is that of the development of vipassana which understands that actual nature of the elements involved in the sense door process. This type of insight interrupts the usual running after concepts. There is not attention to the concepts but there is attention to the paramattha dhammas. +++++++ > > "Unwholesome" I can understand, but doesn't it seem a little harsh to > say grief is "evil"? Evil in the usual sense of 'wicked, heinous, or > sinful' would seem to imply a 'deliberate intention' - no-one would > *intend* or *desire* to feel grief.......(maybe cause someone else > grief, but not to themselves). ++++++++ In Buddhism ignorance is evil and very hard to uproot. robert 9340 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 1:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala Christine You have picked a very pertinent (and advanced) passage here. --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Hi everyone, > Just a few questions on: > Restraint of the Sense Faculties verse 64: (p.38) The Discourse on > the Fruits of Reclusehip > > "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense > faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the > bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were > to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil > unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, > he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves > restraint over the faculty of the eye." and so on and so forth, for > ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. > Your comments are in 3 parts. 1/ > 'guard the doors of his sense faculties' - How does one > continuously do this? The thing I have noticed about these 'doors' > is that they may - (but I don't perceive them to) - open in an > orderly fashion one after another so one can deal with what attempts > to enter.......... Right now, I can feel my fingers and wrists are on > the keyboard, the chair under my thighs and clothes and jewellry on > my body, my feet in my shoes on the floor, my eyes are looking at the > cursor and printing appearing on the screen - but also can see with > my peripheral vision the book shelves above the computer, and the > curtains and carpet, whiteboard on the wall - I can hear the humming > of the computer, the crickets and frogs outside the windows, smell > the wet, earthy scent of garden, grass and eucalypt leaves after > rain, and the fragrance of tea in the cup on the side-table, the > taste of the last mouthful in my mouth. And there are probably a lot > of things that aren't registering, because I'm not that sensitised > or practised yet.... Christine, I like your description of all the things that are ‘happening’ at the present moment. This is life as it is, so much going on at any one moment. You wonder how there could ever be ‘guarding’ of all this and presumably of the rest that is going on also but which is not apparent to us. Let me say at the outset, because I think this is very important, that no-one is asking us to change, or to try to change, any of what is happening now, naturally. In other words, the teaching is not about ‘slowing down’ the present moment, or contriving to reduce the speed, variety or strength of sense impressions. That would be trying to change the reality of the present moment in some manner, rather than simply understanding it more for what it is. You are interested to know how the sense doors could possibly be guarded continuously. The explanation of what is meant by the *guarding of the sense doors* is in the passage that follows this particular reference. To my understanding (as I will try to indicate below), it refers to momentary awareness (satipatthana) of the present reality. The *continuous* aspect occurs only for one in whom awareness has been highly developed over many lifetimes. For us lot this means that, on the one hand, *continuous* guarding is simply not an option and, on the other hand, nor should its absence be a matter of concern (ie. we are all off the hook here). 2/ > To 'not grasp at the sign or details' would surely require that the > object be identified and screened in some way for 'wholesomeness' in > the first place? > How does one survive in the everyday world - fulfil whatever duties > are necessary - and not be swamped by incoming sense impressions? > Awareness would still require sweeping over the other sense faculties > to check out what was happening, or, perhaps, choosing only one sense > faculty to concentrate on more fully?...block out some of the > others?.......The mind often does that of its own accord anyway, > daydreaming and not noticing anything else for some time. Wouldn't > it be easier to sit, close the eyes, and watch the breath. Reduces > the number of visual objects at least, and fosters/forces > concentration..........But that can't be done while going about my > daily business, either. You are right to point out the impracticability of ‘screening’ incoming sense impressions in some way. This also is not the teaching of the Buddha although, as you mention, if one had this idea one would perhaps be lead into somehow trying to restrict incoming sense impressions. The development of awareness (satipatthana), taught by the Buddha as the way to the development of understanding (vipassana) and eventual attainment of enlightenment, is to be understood as something that applies as much at this very moment as it does at any other. The guarding of the sense doors starts with an understanding that the world as it appears to us is in fact various realities (dhammas) any one of which can be the object of momentary awareness, if the right intellectual understanding, through study of the teachings, has been developed. This in brief is how I understand the passage you have cited. A more detailed discussion would include a close look at the terms ‘sign or details’ and what is meant by ‘grasping’ at these. This is advanced stuff but very interesting. There has been some recent mention of this on our list, which I will perhaps try to summarise in a separate message. 3/ > "Unwholesome" I can understand, but doesn't it seem a little harsh to > say grief is "evil"? Evil in the usual sense of 'wicked, heinous, or > sinful' would seem to imply a 'deliberate intention' - no-one would > *intend* or *desire* to feel grief.......(maybe cause someone else > grief, but not to themselves). > I am not sure what the Pali term would be that has been translated as ‘evil’. However, evil thoughts or intentions are accompanied by either attachment (lobha – covetousness) or aversion (dosa – grief), so I would be inclined to read it in this sense. > Such a small verse, such voluminous questions, I begin to understand > how the commentaries grew exponentially. > metta, > Christine Christine, your questions and comments are very much to the point, and useful for us all to reflect on. Thanks for the chance to discuss. Jon 9341 From: m. nease Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 3:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] hello all! Hi Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Later I talked > about what makes Buddhism > distinct from other religions and in particular > anatta, no being, no God and so > on. No God, really? What about Brahma Sahampatti(sp)? who beseeched the Buddha to teach? Lots of gods, I think--just in different roles from that of the Christian variety. A matter of perspective, perhaps? mike 9342 From: m. nease Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 3:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah and Ranil, I left something out of my rant:: --- Sarah wrote: > As I understand the nature of metta, it can never be > directed towards one's > 'own self'. All the brahma viharas must be directed > to others, such as now > when we're considering and showing friendliness or > assistance to each other. As I understand it, the brahma viharas aren't 'directed' towards 'oneself' or 'others'. The pre-eminent characteristic of all of them is that they are directed to absolutely all beings without exception in every direction and to the entire cosmos, rather than being directed at someone in particular. For what it's worth, mike 9343 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi All > > I have read the useful post in Bhavanga cittas, I like to ask what are > objects do Bhavanga citta have during sleep as all the sense door is > closed at that momment. Second question, as they are the first three > cittas during a thought process, what are their objects also? > >+++++++++++++++ Dear Ken, very useful to learn the theory about bhavanga cittas. They are occurring all the time and yet we are usually totaly unaware of these dhammas. Nina van Gorkom writes:""Every citta must have an object and thus the bhavanga-citta too has an object. Seeing has what is visible as object; hearing has sound as object, but the bhavanga-citta has an object which is different from the objects presenting themselves through the senses and through the mind-door. The bhavang-acitta which is the same type of citta as the patisandhi-citta also experiences the same object as the patisandhi-citta. As we have seen (Ch. 10) the patisandhi-citta experiences the same object as the akusala cittas or kusala cittas arising shortly before the cuti-citta of the previous life. If akusala kamma is going to produce the patisandhi-citta, akusala cittas arise shortly before the cuti-citta and they experience an unpleasant object. If kusala kamma is going to produce the patisandhi-citta, kusala cittas arise shortly before the cuti-citta and they experience a pleasant object. Whatever the object is, the patisandhi-citta of the next life experiences the same object. The patisandhi-citta is succeeded by the first bhavanga-citta of that life and this citta experiences the same object as the patisandhi- citta. Moreover, all bhavanga-cittas of that life experience that object. The 'Visuddhimagga' (XIV, 114) states with regard to the bhavanga- citta: When the patisandhi-citta has ceased, then, following on whatever kind of rebirth-consciousness it may be, the same kinds, being the result of the same kamma whatever it may be, occur as bhavanga-cittas with that same object; and again those same kinds. And as long as there is no other kind of arising of consciousness to interrupt the continuity they also go on occurring endlessly in periods of dreamless sleep, etc., like the current of a river. The bhavanga-cittas are like the current of a river and this is interrupted when there is an object presenting itself through one of the senses or through the mind-door. When the cittas of the sense- door process or the mind-door process have fallen away, there is again the current of bhavanga-cittas.""endquote http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-12.htm robert 9344 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 8:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Robert K Much thanks. "As we have seen (Ch. 10) the patisandhi-citta experiences the same > object as the akusala cittas or kusala cittas arising shortly before > the cuti-citta of the previous life. If akusala kamma is going to > produce the patisandhi-citta, akusala cittas arise shortly before the > cuti-citta and they experience an unpleasant object. If kusala kamma > is going to produce the patisandhi-citta, kusala cittas arise shortly > before the cuti-citta and they experience a pleasant object. Whatever > the object is, the patisandhi-citta of the next life experiences the > same object" k: Let say if before we sleep we have kusala cittas, would that mean that the bhavanga cittas also have such wholesome objects. "The patisandhi-citta is succeeded by the first bhavanga-citta of that > life and this citta experiences the same object as the patisandhi- > citta. Moreover, all bhavanga-cittas of that life experience that > object" k: Does this sentence imply that bhavanga citta object does not change at all in one life time. With thanks Ken O 9345 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:55am Subject: Cambodia Ch 10, no 1 A. Sujin, Lectures in Cambodia. Chapter 10. no. 1 Dhamma Discussions in Hotel Sofitel (Part II) Question: Someone said that he thought of hardness, but this is a term. You said that this kind of thinking is better than thinking of other things. Sujin: Thinking of citta, cetasika and rúpa is better than thinking of other things. Question: That resembles clinging to samådhi, concentration, fixing our attention on one object. Sujin: Nobody can prevent himself from thinking. There are conditions for thinking and thus we think time and again. However, before we listened to the Dhamma we used to think of this or that person, this or that thing. After we have listened to the Dhamma, we think of citta, of cetasika, but we should know that this is only thinking, not awareness and understanding of the characteristics of realities. Therefore, paññå should grow and understand realities more deeply. Question: When we cling, we may keep on concentrating on realities, is that not so? Sujin: Therefore, paññå should develop. We should know that at such moments there is no understanding of the characteristics of realities. People may merely think about realities when they experience the characteristic of hardness through touch. At such moments they are inclined to think, this is hardness, or, hardness is rúpa. They think of names, of words. From now on one should understand that when one knows at such moments just words, it is not satipaììhåna. Realities must have characteristics that appear. Hardness is a characteristic of dhamma that is real; hardness arises and falls away, but this can be known by paññå. When paññå does not arise it seems that a reality is present already all the time, but one does not realize the truth. A reality arises so that it can be experienced through contact; thus, it can appear, and then it falls away immediately. If people have listened to the Dhamma, the right cause can bring its appropriate result. When they have realized the truth they know that it must be in the way I just explained. Krayadib: Before I practised, it seemed that I was clinging to the word bhåvanå, mental development. But gradually this inclination disappeared when I asked myself what kind of habit I was accumulating. Now I study the Dhamma and I have refrained already for a long time from clinging in that way. Now I am used to often think about concepts designating realities. I know that this is a dhamma that thinks. Acharn explained this, so that we know that it is a reality that thinks. I worry about it that I seem to merely repeat these words, and I wonder how this will gradually disappear. Jonothan: Acharn says that hardness is a reality that arises and falls away all the time. Sujin: Hardness arises and then it appears; if it does not arise it cannot appear. Is this true or not? Paññå should know the truth of everything. Jonothan: Knowing the characteristic of hardness when it appears and knowing its arising and falling away is not the same. Is that correct? Sujin: There must be different levels of pannå that realizes these matters. The paññå of the beginning level does not penetrate the arising and falling away of realities. In the beginning people have only theoretical knowledge of the elements of nåma and the rúpa, stemming from listening to the Dhamma, but they do not realize the characteristics of nåma and rúpa; they do not realize them as elements, dhåtus. At this moment there are nåma and rúpa, but their characteristics do not appear, they do not appear as elements. There are several levels of insight knowledege, and insight has to be developed stage by stage. It is impossible to realize the arising and falling away of realities immediately, before the preceding stages have been reached. We can know, when someone tries to ³watch² nåma and rúpa in order to realize their arising and falling away, and pretends that he has realized this, that he is on the wrong way. Phannipa: Do some people believe that this is the right development of satipaììhåna? In reality this is wrong understanding. Sujin: Generally people use the term sati, but they do not know the characteristic of sati. They use the word paññå without knowing what paññå is. They say that they want to control paññå, but where is paññå? Phannipa: People who study by themselves erroneously believe that satipaììhåna has arisen already, but that is wrong understanding, different from right understanding based on listening. Sujin: Therefore, people should listen to the Dhamma and consider carefully what they heard so that they will understand it. For example, sati is not samådhi, concentration, but people follow the wrong way because they take samådhi for sati. Samådhi is the reality that concentrates on one object, but sati is not samådhi. Sati is a sobhana sådhåraùa (meaning general, common) cetasika, it accompanies only sobhana cittas, and it accompanies each sobhana citta. Sati accompanies each level of kusala, be it of the level of dåna, síla, samatha or vipassanå. There is satipaììhåna when someone is aware of the characteristics of realities as they are naturally appearing at this moment. This kind of understanding stems from listening to the Dhamma. Before one listened to the Dhamma one could not be aware of the characteristics of realities. When someone has listened and understood what he heard, he can be aware of the characteristics of realities. Gradually he can begin to understand the characteristics of realities which are of two different kinds: nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma. There is, for example, seeing at this moment. Seeing is the reality that experiences, seeing does not have any shape or form; seeing sees what is appearing through the eyes. Seeing is nåma dhamma that is able to see something, this is the function of that kind of element. It is an element that has no shape or form. Paññå can gradually develop and penetrate the nature of nåma dhamma and that is satipaììhåna. When a reality appears, sati can arise and be aware of that reality, and then paññå can begin to gradually develop so that there will be correct understanding of its characteristic. If others say that it is not satipaììhåna at the moment when understanding of what is real and what appears gradually develops, is that true?. Satipaììhåna does not depend on someone else¹s words; it is reality, and at such moments there are dhammas appearing. We are usually forgetful of realities, but when sati arises and is aware, there is gradually more understanding of the characteristics that are real, the characteristics that are appearing. This is satipaììhåna. We have theoretical knowledge of the four applications of mindfulness of body, feeling, citta and dhammas, but we should understand that these are real at this moment. Hardness, for example is a reality that is appearing. When sati arises and is aware just for a few moments, the understanding cannot not be clear yet, but this is like the knife handle that wears away each moment someone holds it. Therefore, each time paññå arises there is a condition for its growth and accomplishment. One must have the firm conviction that paññå can know only the reality that is appearing. Paññå is not able to know something that does not appear, something that has fallen away or that has not yet arisen. Paññå can know what is true at this moment, and in this way we can understand the dependent origination of phenomena, the paticca samuppåda: not knowing the truth is the first link of the dependent origination, which is ignorance, avijjå 1 . Avijjå, ignorance, accompanies citta, it cannot arise with rúpa. Whenever we do not understand the truth of realities there is avijjå. If we study the Dhamma more in detail we shall know when there is akusala citta and when vipåkacitta, citta that is result of kamma. Avijjå cetasika is not conascent with vipåkacitta, but there is the latent tendency of avijjå, avijjånusaya, in each citta so long as avijjå has not been eradicated. More understanding of the details of the Dhamma is a condition for beginning to develop the paññå that realizes the truth, and then there will not be clinging to mere words and concepts. However, we should know that reading, listening and studying a great deal is beneficial, because this is a condition for the growth of understanding. We should study and consider the Dhamma with right understanding and we should see the benefit of this. It is necessary to have patience with regard to the development of paññå, it is bound to take a long time. In the Tipiìaka the expression of ³círa kåla bhåvana² is used, meaning, development that takes a long time. When we study the life stories of those who could attain enlightenment after they had developed paññå for an endlessly long time, we should not worry about it how long we have developed paññå already and how much longer we should develop it. At this moment we can evaluate the paññå we have developed because we can verify whether paññå can understand the paramattha dhamma that appears now. It is not a concept or idea; at each moment there is paramattha dhamma. 9346 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cambodia, theory and practice op 16-11-2001 11:45 schreef Kenneth Ong op ashkenn@y...: > > Thanks for sharing > > I think the whether we know when is theoretical understanding is helpful > or when it suppose to be not, is a difficult line to draw. It is a > difficult decision as we need theoretical basis for practising the dhamma, > and from pratising dhamma understand theoreticial basis. It is like a > cycle. > > Dear Keneth, I do understand your dilemma. But if you read on things may become clearer. A. Sujin speaks a great deal about the purpose of the study in the following chapters I shall post. As you say from the practice the theory will be clearer. It is as A. Sujin explained: as panna grpws through vipassana what you learnt by the texts becomes clearer. Theory and practice are in agreement with each other. Nina. 9347 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 4:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah, Ranil, Mike and All, Regarding not directing metta towards oneself..............Let me say up-front that I know I have a warped perspective on the world from daily working with the suffering, angry, excluded and unloved in my area. (Sometimes, it is difficult not to want to throw it all in and become an Interior Decorator or Plant Retailer - carpets, curtains and plants don't do reprehensible things to each other.) However, having said that, it is better to know the truth rather than just what is comforting. And I am sorry to come in very late on this topic......... One way I am using for not becoming emotionally bankrupt (burnt out) is the practice of the Brahma Viharas, in particular Loving Kindness........"I will abide pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with lovingkiness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; So above and below, around and everywhere and to all as to myself. I will abide pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with lovingkindness...abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill-will."(and the same for compassion, gladness, and equanimity.) Found in the lovely English chant of the Brahma Viharas at www.vipassana.com/audio_files/bvra.html I have always felt the essential foundation for being able to offer genuine love to others is that we truly love ourselves. I have read the 'Useful files' on this topic and found them educational but...... Does the Buddha in the Metta Sutta include sotto voce "but not including oneself" after 'all beings' and after 'omitting none': "Wishing: In gladness and in safety, May all beings be at ease. Whatever living beings there may be; Whether they are weak or strong, omitting none, The great or the mighty, medium, short or small, The seen and the unseen, Those living near and far away, Those born and to-be-born, May all beings be at ease!" In the Visuddhi Magga X 40-43 the text seems to support the radiating of metta "to all as to myself" without discrimination. "Then he should break down the barriers by practising lovingkindness over and over again, accomplishing mental impartiality towards the four persons, that is to say, himself, the dear person, the neutral person and the hosile person." Any comments would be most welcome, but I will understand if there is 'subject fatique'. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah and Ranil, > > I left something out of my rant:: > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > As I understand the nature of metta, it can never be > > directed towards one's > > 'own self'. All the brahma viharas must be directed > > to others, such as now > > when we're considering and showing friendliness or > > assistance to each other. > > As I understand it, the brahma viharas aren't > 'directed' towards 'oneself' or 'others'. The > pre-eminent characteristic of all of them is that they > are directed to absolutely all beings without > exception in every direction and to the entire cosmos, > rather than being directed at someone in particular. > > For what it's worth, > > mike > 9348 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 5:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas ---Dear Ken, Comments below: In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K > > Much thanks. > > "As we have seen (Ch. 10) the patisandhi-citta experiences the same > > object as the akusala cittas or kusala cittas arising shortly before > > the cuti-citta of the previous life. If akusala kamma is going to > > produce the patisandhi-citta, akusala cittas arise shortly before the > > cuti-citta and they experience an unpleasant object. If kusala kamma > > is going to produce the patisandhi-citta, kusala cittas arise shortly > > before the cuti-citta and they experience a pleasant object. Whatever > > the object is, the patisandhi-citta of the next life experiences the > > same object" > > k: Let say if before we sleep we have kusala cittas, would that mean that > the bhavanga cittas also have such wholesome objects. ++++++++++++++ The bhavanga cittas always take the same object - that which appeared shortly before death. In the case of humans this object is always a pleasant one (conditioned by good kamma done in the previous life or in some other past life). We can't know what it is, though. ++++++++ > > > "The patisandhi-citta is succeeded by the first bhavanga-citta of that > > life and this citta experiences the same object as the patisandhi- > > citta. Moreover, all bhavanga-cittas of that life experience that > > object" > > k: Does this sentence imply that bhavanga citta object does not change at > all in one life time. > > +++++++++++++++++++++ That is right. The same object is taken again and again . best wishes robert > > > With thanks > Ken O > 9349 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 6:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > Dear Sarah, Ranil, Mike and All, > > Regarding not directing metta towards oneself..............Let me say > up-front that I know I have a warped perspective on the world from > daily working with the suffering, angry, excluded and unloved in my > area. (Sometimes, it is difficult not to want to throw it all in and > become an Interior Decorator or Plant Retailer - carpets, curtains > and plants don't do reprehensible things to each other.) > However, having said that, it is better to know the truth rather than > just what is comforting. And I am sorry to come in very late on this > topic......... > One way I am using for not becoming emotionally bankrupt (burnt out) > is the practice of the Brahma Viharas, in particular Loving > Kindness........"I will abide pervading one quarter with a mind > imbued with lovingkiness, likewise the second, likewise the third, > likewise the fourth; So above and below, around and everywhere and > to all as to myself. I will abide pervading the all-encompassing > world with a mind imbued with lovingkindness...abundant, exalted, > immeasurable, without hostility and without ill-will."(and the same > for compassion, gladness, and equanimity.) Found in the lovely > English chant of the Brahma Viharas at > www.vipassana.com/audio_files/bvra.html > I have always felt the essential foundation for being able to offer > genuine love to others is that we truly love ourselves. I have read > the 'Useful files' on this topic and found them educational but...... > Does the Buddha in the Metta Sutta include sotto voce "but not > including oneself" after 'all beings' and after 'omitting none': > "Wishing: In gladness and in safety, > May all beings be at ease. > Whatever living beings there may be; > Whether they are weak or strong, omitting none, > The great or the mighty, medium, short or small, > The seen and the unseen, > Those living near and far away, > Those born and to-be-born, > May all beings be at ease!" > > In the Visuddhi Magga X 40-43 the text seems to support the > radiating of metta "to all as to myself" without discrimination. > "Then he should break down the barriers by practising lovingkindness > over and over again, accomplishing mental impartiality towards the > four persons, that is to say, himself, the dear person, the neutral > person and the hosile person." > Any comments would be most welcome, but I will understand if there > is 'subject fatique'. > metta, > Christine > ++++++++++++++++++ Dear Christine, Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? I think if we examine carefully almost everything we do is done out of love for ourself.The quote from the visuddhimagga shows that we should think of others with as much consideration and care as our GREATLY loved self. And do we really feel that to our friends and the people we meet, or are they a tad less important than our own feelings? The visuddhimagga IX10 notes that one should develop it towards ourself by considering that "just as I want to live and dread pain etc. so do other beings" making himself the example then desire for other beings welfare and happiness arise". It is true that if we are very unhappy then metta is hard to arise. However, at those times it may be that other ways of samatha such as Buddhanusati are more appropriate as these cause the arising of pleasant thoughts. In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love for others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". robert 9350 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 6:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Dear Robert, You wrote to Ken re the object of Bhavanga Citta "We can't know what it is, though." I wonder how there could be awareness of a citta with an unknowable object. All the best Herman 9351 From: manji Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 6:54pm Subject: RE: [dsg] meththa meditation Christine, Please be understanding "there is suffering", first noble truth. Maybe sometimes memories arise and difficulty arises, maybe sometimes "self" concept arises along with moments of aversion or clinging and difficulty arises. Maybe what can help is understanding first noble truth, there is suffering. Really make a sincere effort to see "right now". Mindfulness arises and seeing suffering. Then maybe, compassion arises towards others. Understanding "there is suffering". So even metta is conditioned. Arising and falling. So maybe right now there is conditioning metta. :) So sometimes I am thinking that right now seeing dhamma... Mindfulness... Etc. These are most powerful antidotes to conventional realities of self-hate and low-self esteem etc. Understanding right now dhamma with mindfulness, also understanding that these dhamma are not "self". So even great moments of suffering, not self :) So maybe cultivating a real and living metta, through wisdom and the very process... The path. :) -manji- -----Original Message----- From: Christine Forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 7:44 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah, Ranil, Mike and All, Regarding not directing metta towards oneself..............Let me say up-front that I know I have a warped perspective on the world from daily working with the suffering, angry, excluded and unloved in my area. (Sometimes, it is difficult not to want to throw it all in and become an Interior Decorator or Plant Retailer - carpets, curtains and plants don't do reprehensible things to each other.) However, having said that, it is better to know the truth rather than just what is comforting. And I am sorry to come in very late on this topic......... One way I am using for not becoming emotionally bankrupt (burnt out) is the practice of the Brahma Viharas, in particular Loving Kindness........"I will abide pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with lovingkiness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; So above and below, around and everywhere and to all as to myself. I will abide pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with lovingkindness...abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill-will."(and the same for compassion, gladness, and equanimity.) Found in the lovely English chant of the Brahma Viharas at www.vipassana.com/audio_files/bvra.html I have always felt the essential foundation for being able to offer genuine love to others is that we truly love ourselves. I have read the 'Useful files' on this topic and found them educational but...... Does the Buddha in the Metta Sutta include sotto voce "but not including oneself" after 'all beings' and after 'omitting none': "Wishing: In gladness and in safety, May all beings be at ease. Whatever living beings there may be; Whether they are weak or strong, omitting none, The great or the mighty, medium, short or small, The seen and the unseen, Those living near and far away, Those born and to-be-born, May all beings be at ease!" In the Visuddhi Magga X 40-43 the text seems to support the radiating of metta "to all as to myself" without discrimination. "Then he should break down the barriers by practising lovingkindness over and over again, accomplishing mental impartiality towards the four persons, that is to say, himself, the dear person, the neutral person and the hosile person." Any comments would be most welcome, but I will understand if there is 'subject fatique'. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah and Ranil, > > I left something out of my rant:: > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > As I understand the nature of metta, it can never be directed > > towards one's 'own self'. All the brahma viharas must be directed > > to others, such as now > > when we're considering and showing friendliness or > > assistance to each other. > > As I understand it, the brahma viharas aren't > 'directed' towards 'oneself' or 'others'. The > pre-eminent characteristic of all of them is that they > are directed to absolutely all beings without > exception in every direction and to the entire cosmos, > rather than being directed at someone in particular. > > For what it's worth, > > mike > 9352 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 7:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- Dear Herman, Good question. There is a post about this: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6585 I wrote: Paramattha dhammas arise and fall > according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in > processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas > (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep > sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between > processes. > I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that only > the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really know > bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight now > can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was > saying is that otherwise it would seem like seeing and hearing, > for example, blended into each other (because there is no gap > between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not so. > Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the > difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor > processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters but > it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand." best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > You wrote to Ken re the object of Bhavanga Citta > > "We can't know what it is, though." > > I wonder how there could be awareness of a citta with an unknowable > object. > > All the best > > Herman 9353 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 7:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Dear Robert, Thank you for that. I have read the entire post you referred to, and I wonder if the following statement is a correct paraphrase. The bhavanga citta has an unknowable object but a knowable associated feeling with it. So when there is some sort of feeling and no object of awaraness, you're dealing with bhavanga citta Thanks in advance Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Herman, > Good question. There is a post about this: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6585 > I wrote: Paramattha dhammas arise and fall > > according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in > > processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas > > (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep > > sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between > > processes. > > I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that only > > the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really know > > bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight now > > can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was > > saying is that otherwise it would seem like seeing and hearing, > > for example, blended into each other (because there is no gap > > between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not so. > > Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the > > difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor > > processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters but > > it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand." > > best wishes > robert > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > You wrote to Ken re the object of Bhavanga Citta > > > > "We can't know what it is, though." > > > > I wonder how there could be awareness of a citta with an unknowable > > object. > > > > All the best > > > > Herman 9354 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 7:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thank you for that. > > I have read the entire post you referred to, and I wonder if the > following statement is a correct paraphrase. > > The bhavanga citta has an unknowable object but a knowable associated > feeling with it. So when there is some sort of feeling and no object > of awaraness, you're dealing with bhavanga citta > > Thanks in advance > > > Herman ++++++++++++++ Thanks for considering this difficult topic Herman. Sati and panna can know bhavanga citta and - as you say they can know the feeling associated with it - and when they do know either of these then they are the objects of awareness. Only panna can really know whether there was genuine awareness, or whether it is just thinking about these matters. Sometimes it seems like we know directly and then we find out that thinking had slipped in. I think it is like you say - bhavanga is known because it doesn't appear to have any object (that can be known) unlike the sense door and minddoor processes. best wishes robert > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- > > Dear Herman, > > Good question. There is a post about this: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6585 > > I wrote: Paramattha dhammas arise and fall > > > according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in > > > processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas > > > (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep > > > sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between > > > processes. > > > I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that only > > > the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really know > > > bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight now > > > can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was > > > saying is that otherwise it would seem like seeing and hearing, > > > for example, blended into each other (because there is no gap > > > between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not so. > > > Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the > > > difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor > > > processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters but > > > it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand." > > > > best wishes > > robert > > > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > > > Dear Robert, > > > > > > You wrote to Ken re the object of Bhavanga Citta > > > > > > "We can't know what it is, though." > > > > > > I wonder how there could be awareness of a citta with an > unknowable > > > object. > > > > > > All the best > > > > > > Herman 9355 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Dear Robert, Thanks again. On a slightly different topic, you may be able to help me with an issue that has occupied me for some time. I will write in the conventional format, without trying to keep notions of self out of it. When I sit, something that I do as a little warm-up is to rotate attention to all the senses. When I intend to attend to hearing, there is hearing. When I intend to attend to seeing, there is seeing. When I intend to attend to thinking there is thinking. Now, when there is attention to seeing, there is seeing but it appears that there is no hearing, and when attention is diverted to hearing, there is hearing and there appears to be no seeing. The cittavithi way of looking at things says there is only ever one citta arising at any time. I am tempted to think that there are cittas arising at all the sense doors and mind door all the time, and that attention determines what one is aware of, and that intention is the determining factor in what attention will be paid to at any given time. I think there is a vast ocean of unknown things within "experience" by virtue of the limits of attention. The intention to be aware of certain things will illuminate those things further, but always at the cost of becoming unaware of everything attention is not being paid to. I would be very happy to receive your comments, Robert (any one else's as well, of course) All the very best Herman 9356 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Robert K, Thanks for the explanation. A bit out of the Buddhism, this sounds like our genetic codes :). With thanks again Ken O --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > ---Dear Ken, > Comments below: > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Robert K > > > > Much thanks. > > > > "As we have seen (Ch. 10) the patisandhi-citta experiences the same > > > object as the akusala cittas or kusala cittas arising shortly > before > > > the cuti-citta of the previous life. If akusala kamma is going to > > > produce the patisandhi-citta, akusala cittas arise shortly before > the > > > cuti-citta and they experience an unpleasant object. If kusala > kamma > > > is going to produce the patisandhi-citta, kusala cittas arise > shortly > > > before the cuti-citta and they experience a pleasant object. > Whatever > > > the object is, the patisandhi-citta of the next life experiences > the > > > same object" > > > > k: Let say if before we sleep we have kusala cittas, would that > mean that > > the bhavanga cittas also have such wholesome objects. > ++++++++++++++ > > The bhavanga cittas always take the same object - that which appeared > shortly before death. In the case of humans this object is always a > pleasant one (conditioned by good kamma done in the previous life or > in some other past life). We can't know what it is, though. > ++++++++ > > > > > > > "The patisandhi-citta is succeeded by the first bhavanga-citta of > that > > > life and this citta experiences the same object as the patisandhi- > > > citta. Moreover, all bhavanga-cittas of that life experience that > > > object" > > > > k: Does this sentence imply that bhavanga citta object does not > change at > > all in one life time. > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > That is right. The same object is taken again and again . > best wishes > robert > > > > > > > With thanks > > Ken O > 9357 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas -- Dear Herman, I think this type of investigation and consideration is most appropriate. If we can do it without trying to get a result but rather to compare it with what we have heard from the Dhamma then it can certainly show us much. As you noted if there is attention to any of the senses then, sure enough, we find that something is happening at whatever sense that may be. You suggest that it could be that this is because there are cittas arising simultaneously at the different doors but that attention can only "take in" one door at a time. This goes against the abhidhamma theory that says only one citta arises at a time in a series. As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of cittas. So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. It happens so fast that it seems to blur together. I think the only way to be absolutely sure is to develop enough wisdom to see which theory is right. I believe that this can be done. best wishes robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thanks again. On a slightly different topic, you may be able to help > me with an issue that has occupied me for some time. > > I will write in the conventional format, without trying to keep > notions of self out of it. > > When I sit, something that I do as a little warm-up is to rotate > attention to all the senses. When I intend to attend to hearing, > there is hearing. When I intend to attend to seeing, there is seeing. > When I intend to attend to thinking there is thinking. > > Now, when there is attention to seeing, there is seeing but it > appears that there is no hearing, and when attention is diverted to > hearing, there is hearing and there appears to be no seeing. > > The cittavithi way of looking at things says there is only ever one > citta arising at any time. > > I am tempted to think that there are cittas arising at all the sense > doors and mind door all the time, and that attention determines what > one is aware of, and that intention is the determining factor in what > attention will be paid to at any given time. > > I think there is a vast ocean of unknown things within "experience" > by virtue of the limits of attention. The intention to be aware of > certain things will illuminate those things further, but always at > the cost of becoming unaware of everything attention is not being > paid to. > > I would be very happy to receive your comments, Robert (any one > else's as well, of course) > > All the very best > > > Herman 9358 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala Hi Christine, My inclinations it that since when one goes forth to lead the holy life, one's goal is to liberate oneself first and foremost. Hence practises like medicine could distract one holy life goal. To me if one practise medicine, one need a lot of concentration esp surgery. This to me is not the right practise for one that has gone forth to lead the holy life. The above could sound bias but if one leave the layman life, why involved again. Helping others in medicines, or material is only temporary assisting the other, helping others through imparting dhamma and they liberated themselves is a very worthwhile effort. Thus personally my view is that monks objective is to liberate themselves, leave the layman stuff to layman and then along their path of liberation, help others by imparting the dhamma. A second way to look at it, why Buddha exhort effort in liberating oneself before all else for those who lead the holy life. Kind regards Ken O --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Hi everyone, > Just a few questions on: > Restraint of the Sense Faculties verse 64: (p.38) The Discourse on > the Fruits of Reclusehip > > "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense > faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the > bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were > to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil > unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, > he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves > restraint over the faculty of the eye." and so on and so forth, for > ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. > > 'guard the doors of his sense faculties' - How does one > continuously do this? The thing I have noticed about these 'doors' > is that they may - (but I don't perceive them to) - open in an > orderly fashion one after another so one can deal with what attempts > to enter.......... Right now, I can feel my fingers and wrists are on > the keyboard, the chair under my thighs and clothes and jewellry on > my body, my feet in my shoes on the floor, my eyes are looking at the > cursor and printing appearing on the screen - but also can see with > my peripheral vision the book shelves above the computer, and the > curtains and carpet, whiteboard on the wall - I can hear the humming > of the computer, the crickets and frogs outside the windows, smell > the wet, earthy scent of garden, grass and eucalypt leaves after > rain, and the fragrance of tea in the cup on the side-table, the > taste of the last mouthful in my mouth. And there are probably a lot > of things that aren't registering, because I'm not that sensitised > or practised yet.... > To 'not grasp at the sign or details' would surely require that the > object be identified and screened in some way for 'wholesomeness' in > the first place? > How does one survive in the everyday world - fulfil whatever duties > are necessary - and not be swamped by incoming sense impressions? > Awareness would still require sweeping over the other sense faculties > to check out what was happening, or, perhaps, choosing only one sense > faculty to concentrate on more fully?...block out some of the > others?.......The mind often does that of its own accord anyway, > daydreaming and not noticing anything else for some time. Wouldn't > it be easier to sit, close the eyes, and watch the breath. Reduces > the number of visual objects at least, and fosters/forces > concentration..........But that can't be done while going about my > daily business, either. > > "Unwholesome" I can understand, but doesn't it seem a little harsh to > say grief is "evil"? Evil in the usual sense of 'wicked, heinous, or > sinful' would seem to imply a 'deliberate intention' - no-one would > *intend* or *desire* to feel grief.......(maybe cause someone else > grief, but not to themselves). > > Such a small verse, such voluminous questions, I begin to understand > how the commentaries grew exponentially. > metta, > Christine 9359 From: m. nease Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 11:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Hi Christine, My time on line is really limited, but I just wanted to say that I think your post is excellent. Personally I'm very cautious with the word/concept 'love' and have never liked' 'loving kindness' for mettaa. Still I agree with the principles you've outlined here, with the exception of 'loving others--loving ourselves'--in this regard I much prefer the 'it is better to know the truth rather than just what is comforting'--fortunately I don't think there's anything so comforting than the truth--aka the Dhamma. Thank you, Ma'am, mike --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, Ranil, Mike and All, > > Regarding not directing metta towards > oneself..............Let me say > up-front that I know I have a warped perspective on > the world from > daily working with the suffering, angry, excluded > and unloved in my > area. (Sometimes, it is difficult not to want to > throw it all in and > become an Interior Decorator or Plant Retailer - > carpets, curtains > and plants don't do reprehensible things to each > other.) > However, having said that, it is better to know the > truth rather than > just what is comforting. And I am sorry to come in > very late on this > topic......... > One way I am using for not becoming emotionally > bankrupt (burnt out) > is the practice of the Brahma Viharas, in particular > Loving > Kindness........"I will abide pervading one quarter > with a mind > imbued with lovingkiness, likewise the second, > likewise the third, > likewise the fourth; So above and below, around and > everywhere and > to all as to myself. I will abide pervading the > all-encompassing > world with a mind imbued with > lovingkindness...abundant, exalted, > immeasurable, without hostility and without > ill-will."(and the same > for compassion, gladness, and equanimity.) Found in > the lovely > English chant of the Brahma Viharas at > www.vipassana.com/audio_files/bvra.html > I have always felt the essential foundation for > being able to offer > genuine love to others is that we truly love > ourselves. I have read > the 'Useful files' on this topic and found them > educational but...... > Does the Buddha in the Metta Sutta include sotto > voce "but not > including oneself" after 'all beings' and after > 'omitting none': > "Wishing: In gladness and in safety, > May all beings be at ease. > Whatever living beings there may be; > Whether they are weak or strong, omitting none, > The great or the mighty, medium, short or small, > The seen and the unseen, > Those living near and far away, > Those born and to-be-born, > May all beings be at ease!" > > In the Visuddhi Magga X 40-43 the text seems to > support the > radiating of metta "to all as to myself" without > discrimination. > "Then he should break down the barriers by > practising lovingkindness > over and over again, accomplishing mental > impartiality towards the > four persons, that is to say, himself, the dear > person, the neutral > person and the hosile person." > Any comments would be most welcome, but I will > understand if there > is 'subject fatique'. > metta, > Christine > 9360 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Christine, > Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? Im not sure, do many of us really love ourselves?.....Is selfishness, self-centredness, which is in all of us to some extent, love? I think that might be the problem...Perhaps lack of common definitions get in the way....What is love? I don't know if it is a common universal value/ideal. Love has numerous meanings in most languages and cultures. Eros, philia, agape, metta........ Don't you think love is, by its very nature, unity? and, if you have feelings of self-loathing, wouldn't those feelings of self-loathing inevitably become part of your relationship with the loved one/s, and therefore contaminate what you radiate during metta practice? Christine > quote from the visuddhimagga shows that we should think of others > with as much consideration and care as our GREATLY loved self. And do > we really feel that to our friends and the people we meet, or are > they a tad less important than our own feelings? The visuddhimagga > IX10 notes that one should develop it towards ourself by considering > that "just as I want to live and dread pain etc. so do other beings" > making himself the example then desire for other beings welfare and > happiness arise". > It is true that if we are very unhappy then metta is hard to arise. > However, at those times it may be that other ways of samatha such as > Buddhanusati are more appropriate as these cause the arising of > pleasant thoughts. > In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it > says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love for > others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". > robert 9361 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 0:38am Subject: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala/KenO Dear Ken, That's an interesting point. Makes sense to me. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Christine, > > My inclinations it that since when one goes forth to lead the holy life, > one's goal is to liberate oneself first and foremost. Hence practises > like medicine could distract one holy life goal. To me if one practise > medicine, one need a lot of concentration esp surgery. This to me is not > the right practise for one that has gone forth to lead the holy life. The > above could sound bias but if one leave the layman life, why involved > again. Helping others in medicines, or material is only temporary > assisting the other, helping others through imparting dhamma and they > liberated themselves is a very worthwhile effort. Thus personally my view > is that monks objective is to liberate themselves, leave the layman stuff > to layman and then along their path of liberation, help others by > imparting the dhamma. > > A second way to look at it, why Buddha exhort effort in liberating oneself > before all else for those who lead the holy life. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O 9362 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation I agree, Christine. I would think that to love yourself and others would be very different from the kind of self-involvement, self-promotion, etc., that refers only to the ego and its insecurities. That is not love. Love would mean to honor and appreciate one's 'being' or 'awareness', not the temporary entity, but the spiritual quality that is one's real nature. This is the same in self and other, as it is impersonal, and by loving it in ourselves, we recognize it and love it in others. When Jesus said, 'Love your neighbor as yourself', it pointed in the same direction. It means that you see all people as being the recipient of metta, and oneself is included too -- almost as if you were someone other than yourself. Robert Ep. ============================== --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Robert, > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? > > Im not sure, do many of us really love ourselves?.....Is selfishness, > self-centredness, which is in all of us to some extent, love? I think > that might be the problem...Perhaps lack of common definitions get in > the way....What is love? I don't know if it is a common universal > value/ideal. Love has numerous meanings in most languages and > cultures. Eros, philia, agape, metta........ > Don't you think love is, by its very nature, unity? and, if you have > feelings of self-loathing, wouldn't those feelings of self-loathing > inevitably become part of your relationship with the loved one/s, and > therefore contaminate what you radiate during metta practice? > > Christine > > > quote from the visuddhimagga shows that we should think of others > > with as much consideration and care as our GREATLY loved self. And > do > > we really feel that to our friends and the people we meet, or are > > they a tad less important than our own feelings? The visuddhimagga > > IX10 notes that one should develop it towards ourself by > considering > > that "just as I want to live and dread pain etc. so do other > beings" > > making himself the example then desire for other beings welfare and > > happiness arise". > > It is true that if we are very unhappy then metta is hard to arise. > > However, at those times it may be that other ways of samatha such > as > > Buddhanusati are more appropriate as these cause the arising of > > pleasant thoughts. > > In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it > > says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love for > > others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". > > robert 9363 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 0:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala/KenO Hi, Christine and Ken. I prefer to think that different lifestyles are appropriate for different people in different stages. For some becoming a monk or recluse and focussing totally on discernment is the right thing at a particular point. For someone else, this would just be an affectation or a form of increased suffering. To be discerning in the midst of family life or surgery, is ultimately the same thing as leading the 'holy life'. What's more important is that it serves the individual's capacity and predilection so that they are most free to practice mindfulness. Best, Robert Ep. --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Ken, > > That's an interesting point. Makes sense to me. > > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > > > My inclinations it that since when one goes forth to lead the holy > life, > > one's goal is to liberate oneself first and foremost. Hence > practises > > like medicine could distract one holy life goal. To me if one > practise > > medicine, one need a lot of concentration esp surgery. This to me > is not > > the right practise for one that has gone forth to lead the holy > life. The > > above could sound bias but if one leave the layman life, why > involved > > again. Helping others in medicines, or material is only temporary > > assisting the other, helping others through imparting dhamma and > they > > liberated themselves is a very worthwhile effort. Thus personally > my view > > is that monks objective is to liberate themselves, leave the layman > stuff > > to layman and then along their path of liberation, help others by > > imparting the dhamma. > > > > A second way to look at it, why Buddha exhort effort in liberating > oneself > > before all else for those who lead the holy life. > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > Ken O 9364 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala Dear Ken O, Christine & Suan, I tend to agree with the sentiments in Ken O’s post (at the end). Yeterday I was looking for a particular reference at the back of my mind on this topic of the Bhikkhu’s way of life (which I didn’t find), but came across the following interesting story and reference: This is all taken from Book of Discipline, Part 4, MahavaggaV111 <300>, transl by Miss Horner. The Buddha and Ananda visited some monks and whilst visiting their ‘lodgings’ came across a monk, suffering from dysentery and ‘lying fallen in his own excrements’. The Buddha asks why the other monks don’t ‘tend’ him and he replies that he’s ‘no use to them’. The Buddha tells Ananda to get water and bathe him and then together they put him on a couch. Afterwards the Buddha addresses the monks and says: ‘Monks, you have not a mother, you have not a father who might tend you. If you, monks, do not tend one another, then who is there who will tend you? Whoever, monks, would tend me, he should tend the sick....If he has neither a preceptor nor a teacher nor one who shares a dwelling-place nor a pupil nor a fellow-preceptor nor a fellow-teacher, he should be tended by the Order. If it should not tend him, there is an offence of wrong-doing.’ This is followed by an interesting passage (and reminders for us all) as to what makes a good patient and a difficult patient which I’ll quote separately if anyone wishes. More relevant, however, is the next quote as to when it is appropriate to tend the sick (as told to these monks) which follows a passage of when it is not appropriate: “Endowed with five qualities, monks, is one who tends the sick fit to tend the sick: he comes to be competent to provide the medicine; he knows what is beneficial and what is not beneficial; he takes away what is not beneficial, he brings forward what is beneficial; he tends the sick (from) amity of mind , not in the hope of gain , he does not become one who loathes to remove excrement or urine or sweat or vomit; he comes to be competent to gladden..delight the sick from time to time with dhamma-talk. Endowed with these five qualities, monks, is one who tends the sick fit to tend the sick.” I think the point about ‘not in the hope of gain’ is important, especially for the monk. I’m also not at all sure that it would be ‘appropriate’ for a monk to follow areas of interest outside the Teachings as hobbies but I’m really not versed enough in the Vinaya to say more. Some of the other reminders such as tending the sick with metta and dhamma talk (and without dosa to the ‘messes’) are useful for us all;-) Best regards, Sarah --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Christine, > > My inclinations it that since when one goes forth to lead the holy life, > one's goal is to liberate oneself first and foremost. Hence practises > like medicine could distract one holy life goal. To me if one practise > medicine, one need a lot of concentration esp surgery. This to me is not > the right practise for one that has gone forth to lead the holy life. The > above could sound bias but if one leave the layman life, why involved > again. Helping others in medicines, or material is only temporary > assisting the other, helping others through imparting dhamma and they > liberated themselves is a very worthwhile effort. Thus personally my view > is that monks objective is to liberate themselves, leave the layman stuff > to layman and then along their path of liberation, help others by > imparting the dhamma. > > A second way to look at it, why Buddha exhort effort in liberating oneself > before all else for those who lead the holy life. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O 9365 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Robert, Can't get any straighter than that. I sincerely appreciate your reply. Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > -- > > Dear Herman, > I think this type of investigation and consideration is most > appropriate. > If we can do it without trying to get a result but rather to compare > it with what we have heard from the Dhamma then it can certainly show > us much. > > As you noted if there is attention to any of the senses then, sure > enough, we find that something is happening at whatever sense that > may be. You suggest that it could be that this is because there are > cittas arising simultaneously at the different doors but that > attention can only "take in" one door at a time. This goes against > the abhidhamma theory that says only one citta arises at a time in a > series. > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of cittas. > So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. It > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > I think the only way to be absolutely sure is to develop enough > wisdom to see which theory is right. I believe that this can be done. > best wishes > robert > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > Thanks again. On a slightly different topic, you may be able to > help > > me with an issue that has occupied me for some time. > > > > I will write in the conventional format, without trying to keep > > notions of self out of it. > > > > When I sit, something that I do as a little warm-up is to rotate > > attention to all the senses. When I intend to attend to hearing, > > there is hearing. When I intend to attend to seeing, there is > seeing. > > When I intend to attend to thinking there is thinking. > > > > Now, when there is attention to seeing, there is seeing but it > > appears that there is no hearing, and when attention is diverted to > > hearing, there is hearing and there appears to be no seeing. > > > > The cittavithi way of looking at things says there is only ever one > > citta arising at any time. > > > > I am tempted to think that there are cittas arising at all the > sense > > doors and mind door all the time, and that attention determines > what > > one is aware of, and that intention is the determining factor in > what > > attention will be paid to at any given time. > > > > I think there is a vast ocean of unknown things within "experience" > > by virtue of the limits of attention. The intention to be aware of > > certain things will illuminate those things further, but always at > > the cost of becoming unaware of everything attention is not being > > paid to. > > > > I would be very happy to receive your comments, Robert (any one > > else's as well, of course) > > > > All the very best > > > > > > Herman 9366 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Dear Ken O, I was rather confused by your last comments on seeing, but I think Num has helped with this, so I'll leave it for now. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah Sarah: > "As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or Buddha ‘sees’, there > cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas." .................... Ken O: > As each successive cittas conditioned the next, there is still the ability > to cognize even when one is Buddha just the Buddha could cognize it with > perfect clarity and with reality. >I tend to believe that panna is there > just that our panna is not strong to be manifested unlike Buddha. Without > such panna accompanying, Buddha would not known what is vipaka cittas and > how it works and its speed etc.... ................... I fully agree that no comparison can be made between any beginnings of panna that we experience and the omniscient panna of the Buddha which understood all realities precisely, including vipaka and so on. Still, to be very precise (as he explained in the Abhidhamma), panna can still only arise with certain cittas and does not last even for the Buddha. To get very precise, there are either 89 or 121 kinds of consciousness (depending on jhana cittas). Wisdom can accompany only 47 or 89 of these kinds. To quote from the Abhidhamattha Sangaha, compendium of Mental Factors, 15: 'Wisdom goes into combination with 47 types of consciousness - namely, the twelve types of sense-sphere consciousness associated with knowledge, and all the 35 sublime and supramundane types of consciousness 912 +35 =47)' ,end quote> There are 18 types of consciousness which don't have root (hetu) and of these 15 are vipaka cittas, including seeing consciousnes x2, hearing consciousness x2 and so on. These ahetuka (non root) cittas are never accompanied by wisdom (or any other 'beautiful' cetasikas), not even for the Buddha. I can make it even more detailed if you like. Others, sorry to sound so mathematical;-) (actually, Howard, the abhidhamma should suit you very well in this regard;-) Let me know if this still isn't clear, Sarah 9367 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation --- Good points, Christine. I think this shows that we need to know what the characteristic of real metta is. Surely self-centeredness is not metta. To me it seems easier to undestand metta when it is present towards neutral people. And when I think how much I wish others to like me then I can feel the same to them. On the question of self-loathing and self-hatred: I've always wondered what this means when people talk about them. I know very well feelings of remorse and shame - but these still seem tied up with self love because I wanted the self to be better. I would like to hear more about this. Many defilements interfere with metta. If one has strong conceit then this will hinder metta, or strong attachment, or stinginess. When dosa arises toward someone this is another time when metta has the opportunity to arise. It can arise because the unpleasant feeling reminds one that dosa is present and that it is ugly, then one can adjust ones thinking so that metta arises instead. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > Dear Robert, > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? > > Im not sure, do many of us really love ourselves?.....Is selfishness, > self-centredness, which is in all of us to some extent, love? I think > that might be the problem...Perhaps lack of common definitions get in > the way....What is love? I don't know if it is a common universal > value/ideal. Love has numerous meanings in most languages and > cultures. Eros, philia, agape, metta........ > Don't you think love is, by its very nature, unity? and, if you have > feelings of self-loathing, wouldn't those feelings of self-loathing > inevitably become part of your relationship with the loved one/s, and > therefore contaminate what you radiate during metta practice? > > Christine > > > quote from the visuddhimagga shows that we should think of others > > with as much consideration and care as our GREATLY loved self. And > do > > we really feel that to our friends and the people we meet, or are > > they a tad less important than our own feelings? The visuddhimagga > > IX10 notes that one should develop it towards ourself by > considering > > that "just as I want to live and dread pain etc. so do other > beings" > > making himself the example then desire for other beings welfare and > > happiness arise". > > It is true that if we are very unhappy then metta is hard to arise. > > However, at those times it may be that other ways of samatha such > as > > Buddhanusati are more appropriate as these cause the arising of > > pleasant thoughts. > > In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it > > says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love for > > others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". > > robert 9368 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 2:04am Subject: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi all, Just a quick question thrown in here. Ken O says each citta conditions the next one. Does this mean that a vipaka citta is again creating kamma ? (please say no, I couldn't bear the endless hall of mirrors that would otherwise follow :-) No problems with Maths ( I am surprised a girl could be any good at it :-) ) All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > I was rather confused by your last comments on seeing, but I think Num has > helped with this, so I'll leave it for now. > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > Sarah: > "As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or Buddha `sees', there > > cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas." > > .................... > > Ken O: > As each successive cittas conditioned the next, there is still the > ability > > to cognize even when one is Buddha just the Buddha could cognize it with > > perfect clarity and with reality. > > >I tend to believe that panna is there > > just that our panna is not strong to be manifested unlike Buddha. Without > > such panna accompanying, Buddha would not known what is vipaka cittas and > > how it works and its speed etc.... > ................... > > I fully agree that no comparison can be made between any beginnings of panna > that we experience and the omniscient panna of the Buddha which understood all > realities precisely, including vipaka and so on. Still, to be very precise (as > he explained in the Abhidhamma), panna can still only arise with certain cittas > and does not last even for the Buddha. > > To get very precise, there are either 89 or 121 kinds of consciousness > (depending on jhana cittas). Wisdom can accompany only 47 or 89 of these > kinds. > To quote from the Abhidhamattha Sangaha, compendium of Mental Factors, 15: > > 'Wisdom goes into combination with 47 types of consciousness - namely, the > twelve types of sense-sphere consciousness associated with knowledge, and all > the 35 sublime and supramundane types of consciousness 912 +35 =47)' ,end > quote> > > There are 18 types of consciousness which don't have root (hetu) and of these > 15 are vipaka cittas, including seeing consciousnes x2, hearing consciousness > x2 and so on. These ahetuka (non root) cittas are never accompanied by wisdom > (or any other 'beautiful' cetasikas), not even for the Buddha. I can make it > even more detailed if you like. > > Others, sorry to sound so mathematical;-) (actually, Howard, the abhidhamma > should suit you very well in this regard;-) > > Let me know if this still isn't clear, > Sarah 9369 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Robert - I would like to address myself to one point you make, a point I have seen before and which continues to perplex me. In a message dated 11/18/01 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of cittas. > So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. It > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > =========================== It seems to blur together to *whom* or to *what*? In Abhidhamma, that which is doing the knowing are the individual cittas. Each citta knows its object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to me that this notion is based on our conventional observation of things such as our observing of a torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a circle of fire, or our looking at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of a sequence of frames. But at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each individual citta is seeing a single object, and there IS NO overarching something to be seeing a "blur". Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be a conflation going on here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just doesn't seem to adequately explain actual experience. And when the theory also posits cittas (the bhavanga cittas), which all have the very same object, but it is an object of awareness not possible to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware moments of awareness ;-), the theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained one. 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) 9370 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 2:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing --- Dear Herman , This question relates to the three rounds of vipaka, kilesa and kamma. There are some posts in the files about this For example: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5336 best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a quick question thrown in here. > > Ken O says each citta conditions the next one. > > Does this mean that a vipaka citta is again creating kamma ? (please > say no, I couldn't bear the endless hall of mirrors that would > otherwise follow :-) > > No problems with Maths ( I am surprised a girl could be any good at > it :-) ) > > All the best > > Herman > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Dear Ken O, > > > > I was rather confused by your last comments on seeing, but I think > Num has > > helped with this, so I'll leave it for now. > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > > > Sarah: > "As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or > Buddha `sees', there > > > cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas." > > > > .................... > > > > Ken O: > As each successive cittas conditioned the next, there is > still the > > ability > > > to cognize even when one is Buddha just the Buddha could cognize > it with > > > perfect clarity and with reality. > > > > >I tend to believe that panna is there > > > just that our panna is not strong to be manifested unlike > Buddha. Without > > > such panna accompanying, Buddha would not known what is vipaka > cittas and > > > how it works and its speed etc.... > > ................... > > > > I fully agree that no comparison can be made between any beginnings > of panna > > that we experience and the omniscient panna of the Buddha which > understood all > > realities precisely, including vipaka and so on. Still, to be very > precise (as > > he explained in the Abhidhamma), panna can still only arise with > certain cittas > > and does not last even for the Buddha. > > > > To get very precise, there are either 89 or 121 kinds of > consciousness > > (depending on jhana cittas). Wisdom can accompany only 47 or 89 > of these > > kinds. > > To quote from the Abhidhamattha Sangaha, compendium of Mental > Factors, 15: > > > > 'Wisdom goes into combination with 47 types of consciousness - > namely, the > > twelve types of sense-sphere consciousness associated with > knowledge, and all > > the 35 sublime and supramundane types of consciousness 912 +35 > =47)' ,end > > quote> > > > > There are 18 types of consciousness which don't have root (hetu) > and of these > > 15 are vipaka cittas, including seeing consciousnes x2, hearing > consciousness > > x2 and so on. These ahetuka (non root) cittas are never accompanied > by wisdom > > (or any other 'beautiful' cetasikas), not even for the Buddha. I > can make it > > even more detailed if you like. > > > > Others, sorry to sound so mathematical;-) (actually, Howard, the > abhidhamma > > should suit you very well in this regard;-) > > > > Let me know if this still isn't clear, > > Sarah 9371 From: Date: Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi, Herman - In a message dated 11/18/01 5:05:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@d... writes: > Hi all, > > Just a quick question thrown in here. > > Ken O says each citta conditions the next one. > > Does this mean that a vipaka citta is again creating kamma ? (please > say no, I couldn't bear the endless hall of mirrors that would > otherwise follow :-) > > No problems with Maths ( I am surprised a girl could be any good at > it :-) ) > > All the best > > Herman > ============================ As you may be well aware of, I have considerable reservations about some basic abhidhammic concepts. But I think I can reply to this question (not necessarily correctly, of course ;-) without at the same time "buying into" anything. There *is*, I believe, a valid distinction to be made between conditioning, in general, and kammic conditioning. One mental state/function can be a condition for the arising of and/or the features of a subsequent one, without the first state being an active state of volition, and without the conditioning being kammic in nature. If at one moment, for example, I see a blinding light (which, itself, could well be the fruition of kamma), that will certainly affect the nature of the immediately succeeding act of seeing, but the conditioning involved, the relationship between the two visual events, would, I suspect, not be a matter of *kammic* conditioning. 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) 9372 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Herman My understanding is that this conditioning is abt latent tendecies. If vipaka citta conditions the next citta then it should be the latent tendecies that are operative. Vipaka is a resultant cittas so that is no conditioning for the next kammic actions, but that does not mean that they cannot condition the next citta because of latent tendecies. The latent tendecies are hence carried to the next one. This is what I have understand so far from reading the Abidhammic texts, but maybe I wrong. Others could give you a better answers. Kind regards Ken O --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a quick question thrown in here. > > Ken O says each citta conditions the next one. > > Does this mean that a vipaka citta is again creating kamma ? (please > say no, I couldn't bear the endless hall of mirrors that would > otherwise follow :-) > > No problems with Maths ( I am surprised a girl could be any good at > it :-) ) > > All the best > > Herman > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Dear Ken O, > > > > I was rather confused by your last comments on seeing, but I think > Num has > > helped with this, so I'll leave it for now. > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > > > Sarah: > "As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or > Buddha `sees', there > > > cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas." > > > > .................... > > > > Ken O: > As each successive cittas conditioned the next, there is > still the > > ability > > > to cognize even when one is Buddha just the Buddha could cognize > it with > > > perfect clarity and with reality. > > > > >I tend to believe that panna is there > > > just that our panna is not strong to be manifested unlike > Buddha. Without > > > such panna accompanying, Buddha would not known what is vipaka > cittas and > > > how it works and its speed etc.... > > ................... > > > > I fully agree that no comparison can be made between any beginnings > of panna > > that we experience and the omniscient panna of the Buddha which > understood all > > realities precisely, including vipaka and so on. Still, to be very > precise (as > > he explained in the Abhidhamma), panna can still only arise with > certain cittas > > and does not last even for the Buddha. > > > > To get very precise, there are either 89 or 121 kinds of > consciousness > > (depending on jhana cittas). Wisdom can accompany only 47 or 89 > of these > > kinds. > > To quote from the Abhidhamattha Sangaha, compendium of Mental > Factors, 15: > > > > 'Wisdom goes into combination with 47 types of consciousness - > namely, the > > twelve types of sense-sphere consciousness associated with > knowledge, and all > > the 35 sublime and supramundane types of consciousness 912 +35 > =47)' ,end > > quote> > > > > There are 18 types of consciousness which don't have root (hetu) > and of these > > 15 are vipaka cittas, including seeing consciousnes x2, hearing > consciousness > > x2 and so on. These ahetuka (non root) cittas are never accompanied > by wisdom > > (or any other 'beautiful' cetasikas), not even for the Buddha. I > can make it > > even more detailed if you like. > > > > Others, sorry to sound so mathematical;-) (actually, Howard, the > abhidhamma > > should suit you very well in this regard;-) > > > > Let me know if this still isn't clear, > > Sarah 9373 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 3:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala/KenO Hi Robert Ep, Definitely everyone could lead the holy life, maybe I should be clearer, I talking abt monks. To me this sutta is geared more towards abt the being a monk rather than a layman perspective. Kind Regards Ken O --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi, Christine and Ken. > I prefer to think that different lifestyles are appropriate for > different people > in different stages. For some becoming a monk or recluse and focussing > totally on > discernment is the right thing at a particular point. For someone else, > this > would just be an affectation or a form of increased suffering. To be > discerning > in the midst of family life or surgery, is ultimately the same thing as > leading > the 'holy life'. What's more important is that it serves the > individual's > capacity and predilection so that they are most free to practice > mindfulness. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > > --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > > Dear Ken, > > > > That's an interesting point. Makes sense to me. > > > > metta, > > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > Hi Christine, > > > > > > My inclinations it that since when one goes forth to lead the holy > > life, > > > one's goal is to liberate oneself first and foremost. Hence > > practises > > > like medicine could distract one holy life goal. To me if one > > practise > > > medicine, one need a lot of concentration esp surgery. This to me > > is not > > > the right practise for one that has gone forth to lead the holy > > life. The > > > above could sound bias but if one leave the layman life, why > > involved > > > again. Helping others in medicines, or material is only temporary > > > assisting the other, helping others through imparting dhamma and > > they > > > liberated themselves is a very worthwhile effort. Thus personally > > my view > > > is that monks objective is to liberate themselves, leave the layman > > stuff > > > to layman and then along their path of liberation, help others by > > > imparting the dhamma. > > > > > > A second way to look at it, why Buddha exhort effort in liberating > > oneself > > > before all else for those who lead the holy life. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > > Ken O 9374 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 3:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > I would like to address myself to one point you make, a point I have > seen before and which continues to perplex me. In a message dated 11/18/01 > 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the > > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the > > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of cittas. > > So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of > > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. It > > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > > > =========================== > It seems to blur together to *whom* or to *what*? In Abhidhamma, that > which is doing the knowing are the individual cittas. Each citta knows its > object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to me that this notion is > based on our conventional observation of things such as our observing of a > torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a circle of fire, or our looking > at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of a sequence of frames. But > at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each individual citta is seeing a > single object, and there IS NO overarching something to be seeing a "blur". > Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be a conflation going on > here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just doesn't seem to adequately > explain actual experience. > And when the theory also posits cittas (the bhavanga cittas), which > all have the very same object, but it is an object of awareness not possible > to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware moments of awareness ;- ), the > theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained one. > > With metta, > Howard >++++++++++++++ Dear Howard, Well my reply is that I think the theory explains the actual experience very well. The example of the movie screen is a reasonable analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a whole. Remember the individual moments don't come into existence out of nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one and hence there is continuity. The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a mystery it is because of ignorance, a most powerful force and conditioning factor that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. It is only because we hear about these matters that curiosity arises and so there is the beginning of investigation (dhamma-vicaya) into the actual nature of this process. I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction between cittas is as clear as the lines on my hand. Why? Because of developed wisdom. best wishes robert 9375 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Sarah, Let us quote from Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII "Anusaya-kilesa is a very fine kilesa. When kilesa has not been eradicated, the anusaya-kilesa would settle like sediment in the cittas that arise and fall away in continuation, like a seed, a paccaya for pariyutthana-kilesa to arise. All kilesa would be completely eradicated, never to arise again, when the lokuttara-magga-citta clearly realizes the ariya-sacca-dhamma by experiencing the characteristics of nibbana according to the levels of the magga-citta, which completely eradicates kilesa according to the levels of the specific magga-citta." I was basing my argument on the function of latent tendecies in kilesa. To me panna accumulation is due to this function of latent tendecies. As one reach enlightment, such latent tendicies become Panna as all kilesa element will have been eradicated. That is how a Buddha could study each cittas with perfect clarity. Hence even though citta falls and rise instanteously, there is still latent tendecies of Panna. Since there is kilesa in each rise and fall citta of those who are not enlighted, why can't there be a latent tendecies of Panna that rise and fall, once one is enlighted. Kind regards Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > I was rather confused by your last comments on seeing, but I think Num > has > helped with this, so I'll leave it for now. > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > Sarah: > "As I mentioned recently, even when the arahat or Buddha > ‘sees’, there > > cannot be panna accompanying these vipaka cittas." > > .................... > > Ken O: > As each successive cittas conditioned the next, there is still > the ability to cognize even when one is Buddha just the Buddha could cognize it with perfect clarity and with reality. > > >I tend to believe that panna is there just that our panna is not strong to be manifested unlike Buddha. Without such panna accompanying, Buddha would not known what is vipaka cittas and how it works and its speed etc.... > ................... > > I fully agree that no comparison can be made between any beginnings of > panna that we experience and the omniscient panna of the Buddha which > understood all realities precisely, including vipaka and so on. Still, to be very precise (as he explained in the Abhidhamma), panna can still only arise with certain cittas and does not last even for the Buddha. > > To get very precise, there are either 89 or 121 kinds of consciousness > (depending on jhana cittas). Wisdom can accompany only 47 or 89 of > these > kinds. > To quote from the Abhidhamattha Sangaha, compendium of Mental Factors, > 15: > > 'Wisdom goes into combination with 47 types of consciousness - namely, > the > twelve types of sense-sphere consciousness associated with knowledge, > and all > the 35 sublime and supramundane types of consciousness 912 +35 =47)' > ,end > quote> > > There are 18 types of consciousness which don't have root (hetu) and of > these > 15 are vipaka cittas, including seeing consciousnes x2, hearing > consciousness > x2 and so on. These ahetuka (non root) cittas are never accompanied by > wisdom > (or any other 'beautiful' cetasikas), not even for the Buddha. I can > make it > even more detailed if you like. > > Others, sorry to sound so mathematical;-) (actually, Howard, the > abhidhamma > should suit you very well in this regard;-) > > Let me know if this still isn't clear, > Sarah 9376 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Rob (and Howard) Rob, thanks for this very pertinent quote, and my apologies for the delay in responding. I intersperse below, for comparison, the corresponding passage from the P. Masefield translation (PTS 2000). --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > Dear Howard and Jon, > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > thus have I heard: > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > with the groups of existence still remainin > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > groups of existence still remaining. PM "On this one's part, it is the destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion that is spoken of as that nibbana-element that is with substrate-remnant." > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > remaining. endquote PM "On this one's part, all that is sensed right here, not being rejoiced in, will become cold; it is this that is spoken of as that nibbana-element that is without substrate-remnant." I am not sure if there is anything new here. I simply observe that what is being discussed is the 'nibbana-element', rather than, say, the citta that experiences that element, although obviously is a reference to one and the same moment. The first kind of nibbana-element is equated with the *destruction of lust, hatred and delusion*, the second with the *becoming cold of all that is sensed* after that destruction has occurred. There is a further passage in the PM translation, which I think is of a verse summarising the prose text of the sutta. This reads as follows-- "These two nibbana elements .. ; -- one element -- that with substrate-remnant, in which becoming's lead is totally destroyed -- pertains to these seen conditions here; -- that without substrate-remnant, wherein becomings entirely cease, pertains to the hereafter. Those whose hearts are liberated .. , being those for whom becoming's lead is totally destroyed, delight .. in destruction -- these constant ones abandon all becomings." Howard, I read the passage from Rob's post as confirming what you suggest in your reply to that post, namely the cessation of all sense-door functions and associated mind-door states. It is possible that is is also intended to include other mind-door moments; presumably the commentary would make this clear. The emphasis in the verse passage seems to be on the end of 'becoming' (ie. birth?). I take this to mean that the moment of death (cuti citta) is not followed by a moment of birth (patisandhi citta). As far as I know, the Pali texts take the matter no further than this, but I intend to keep an eye out for further relevant material. Jon 9377 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:43am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Ken O --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > 4/ & 5/ > > I am not sure I see your point here, Ken. The Buddha is affirming the > > existence of suffering/a path but pointing out the non-existence of > any > > person who suffers/travels the path. You are then saying, if there is > > no person how can there be any suffering/path in the first place? > This > > seems to be a semantic argument rather than a substantive one. > Doesn't > it go against your own experience in life? > > > > I'm not sure if I have understood your points. Please let me know. > > > > Jon > > > k: When the verse imply that is no sufferer - to me it would imply that > we have understand reality. Then where is suffering to be found. On > one > hand we are talking abt anatta (no sufferer), on the other we are not > viewing suffering as anatta (suffering exist). To me this is an > incorrect > perspective. Both are anatta. When we say "there is pain but there is no-one who experiences pain", or "there is seeing but no-one who sees", we are saying that-- -- "painful feeling" and "seeing" are realities, they each have a characteristic that distinguishes one from the other (and that can be experienced by awareness/understanding) -- "person", however, is not a reality, it is a concept, and so cannot experience the pain or see; the reality that in fact experiences the pain or that sees is something other than what we take for "person". I am wondering which of these 2 statements you would not agree with, Ken. Jon 9378 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:45am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > I suppose there are many reasons for having an interest in developing > the > > path. But a view as to a specific final goal of the spiritual path is > not > > essential to seeing the disadvantage in living forever in ignorance > and > > suffering. Indeed, if our interest in the dhamma is based on, for > > example, a desire for a happy rebirth, or a goal of attaining nibbana > as > > we conceive it to be, then I am inclined to think that understanding > the > > right path could be a very difficult task. > > Dear Jon, > Well we can agree on this for sure. And it is very hard to let go of > one's view > of what the path and nibbana consist of, no matter what our view may be. > I am > sure I am clinging pretty hard to mine. > > Best, > Robert Ep. Yes, we all cling to those concepts. Even one who does not consciously think of nibbana in terms of a goal would have such concepts and clinging. The job we face is to see those unwholesome realities for what they are, a job not helped by the fact that they remain latent for most of the time (even perhaps for an entire lifetime for some). Awareness of the presently appearing reality and the ensuing understanding has the function of gradually eroding even the most latent of akusala dhammas (unwholesome inherent tendencies). Only at moments of such awareness is this function being performed. Jon 9379 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha (was, Concepts) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Thanks, Jon. I did enjoy those entries. > I would say, from reading those, that the word 'dukkha' is meant to > include all > experiences that have a quality of suffering or a tendency to create or > lead to > suffering in the present or future. So to follow your observation along, Rob, what experiences would you see falling within/outside that criterion? (If you get the feeling this is a test, you could just be right!) Jon > > From Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ at > > http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_d.htm > > > > ‘DUKKHA’ > > (1) 'pain', painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental (s. > vedaná). > > (2) 'Suffering', 'ill'. > > As the first of the Four Noble Truths and the second of the three > > characteristics of existence, the term dukkha is not limited to > painful > > experience as under (1), but refers to the unsatisfactory nature and > the > > general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena which, on account of > their > > impermanence, are all liable to suffering, and this includes also > > pleasurable experience. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to > > suffering' would be more adequate renderings, if not for stylistic > > reasons. > > Hence the first truth does not deny the existence of pleasurable > > experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. > > This is illustrated by the following texts: > > "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. > That > > satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed > in > > the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in > the > > world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. > In > > so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by > wisdom. > > Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. > That > > escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world > > existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" -- (A. 111, 101). > > "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings > would > > not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found > in > > the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there > were no > > escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" -- (A. 111, > > 102). > > > > > > ‘DUKKHATA’ > > (abstr. noun fr. dukkha): 'the state of suffering', painfulness, > > unpleasantness, the unsatisfactoriness of existence. > > "There are three kinds of suffering: > > (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatá), > > (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhára-dukkhatá), > > (3) the suffering in change (viparináma-dukkhatá)" > > -- (S. XLV, 165; D. 33). > > > > (1) is the bodily or mental feeling of pain as actual]y felt. > > (2) refers to the oppressive nature of all formations of existence > (i.e. > > all conditioned phenomena), due to their continual arising and passing > > away; this includes also experiences associated with neutral feeling. > > (3) refers to bodily and mental pleasant feelings, "because they are > the > > cause for the arising of pain when they change" -- (Vis.M. XIV, 34f). > > > > 9380 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard/Rob Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Thank you Jon. > That gives a concrete [nama v. rupa] hook for beginning to discern > cittas. > Very useful. > > This can be employed as a very good device whether one believes in the > 'single > unit citta' theory or not. Even with a continuous consciounsess, one > can look at > the characteristic of the mental or physical object. > > Best, > Robert Ep. According to my understanding, the characteristic of the mentality or materiality reality (nama-dhamma or rupa-dhamma) is indeed there to be experienced, but is hidden because of our accumulated ignorance and wrong view. It can be experienced only, if at all, by a moment of consciousness that is accompanied by awareness (sati) of the level of satipatthana. However, again as I understand it, an intention/wish/motivation to experience that characteristic is not a determining factor in the equation. Only repeated listening to the teachings that explain the basis for such awareness, and much reflection on the meaning of those teachings, can condition the arising of that awareness. I agree with your observation, Rob, that one is not required to accept the teaching on 'single unit citta' in order to develop the conditions for the arising of such awareness, although a holding a definite view to the contrary would no doubt be a considerable obstacle to that development. Jon 9381 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention) is controllable? (was kusa Rob Ep (and Howard) Rob, I enjoyed your discussion below. Just one comment, if I may, on your remarks about the person who has an understanding of anicca, anatta and dukkha vs. the person who doesn't. I doubt that we can say that a purely theoretical understanding of anicca, anatta and dukkha could make any difference to the *quality* of a person's kusala mind-states. That person will still retain the idea of a person or thing as having those characteristics, in other words, the same innate views as before hearing about this aspect of the teachings, despite any conscious thought to the contrary, since only the development of satipatthana can expose and erode those views in any meaningful sense. On the other hand, if you are talking about a real level of understanding of those characteristics, this could only have been acquired by a developed understanding of realities as they are, and from seeing those characteristics as an attribute of these realities. This would be, as I understand it, an advanced level of vipassana (although I am aware that many schools of practice these days would consider it to be easily attainable). Jon --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Howard and Jon, > This is the portion of Jon's good talk that also interested me quite a > bit. > > I would say that there is a difference between one who attempts to > cultivate > kusala states without the benefit of Buddhist understandings, and > someone who > attempts to realize the steps of the Eightfold Path with an > understanding of > anatta, anicca and dukkha. > > It is the clarity of these distinctions that gives the context for > Buddhist > cultivation. This in itself, I don't think, necessitates a view of the > 'real' > 8-fold path as supramundane, although it doesn't speak against that > possibility > either. > > I tend to think that all beings are striving in their own way for > liberation. > Everyone has a subconscious drive to end delusion and suffering, and > reach a place > of freedom. And at some point in their journey, they will find the > higher > principles that will allow them to actually achieve liberation. Is > there an > inherent difference between Buddhists and non-Buddhists? As 'beings', I > would say > there isn't. We're all in the same boat. But Buddhism allows one to go > beyond > the final illusions of a separate or permenant self or entity. > > Just because all spiritual people are trying to cultivate kusala, to me > neither > dictates that Buddhists and non-Buddhists are inherently different, or > inherently > the same. > > To me, the question remains as to whether there is volition in the path, > or > whether the Eight-Fold path is a set of factors that occur only in > Enlightenment. > It seems sensible to me to think that the various mundane cultivations > that > non-enlightened Buddhists do in order to increase their awareness and > see into > realities are the necessary steps that lead to reaping the benefits of > higher > stages, even if these higher stages include a different level of the > Eightfold > factors, and even if the earlier efforts are not in fact volitional but > only seem > that way. > > I apologize for this circuitous discussion that doesn't really reach any > conclusion. I also apologize for airing a few half-baked thoughts here > which may > not be very clear. For me, I would still like to know how the Arahats > who wrote > the commentaries derived their definition of the Noble Eightfold Path's > path-factors at the moment of enlightenment from the Suttas, but it > looks like I > will have to read the commentaries myself at some point and see for > myself, since > the connection seems to be implied rather than explicit. > > Does anyone know how to reach Bikkhu Bodhi? Perhaps I should ask him > what he > thinks about this. I'm just kidding. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9382 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 5:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > As I understand it, for an > > > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" > in > > > the > > > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any > > > longer > > > to be observed. > > > > I'm not sure what this refers to, Howard. Would you mind giving a > > reference/explanation? Thanks. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I am thinking here in terms of an arahant's direct apprehension > of > patticasamupada as the "middle way". See, for example, the Kaccayangotta Sutta. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- I'm afraid I could not locate a reference to this sutta. The concept of dhammas that have been seen as anicca, dukkha and anatta as being dhammas that have 'ceased' is a new one for me. If you care to follow it further, I would be interested to hear more. > Howard: > The *speculation* as to whether "an arahant *choosing*, based on > compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some > realm or > realms of experience" is a possibility is not, in itself, productive. > But the > *knowledge* of whether or not that is a possibility would be very > useful. For > example, some Mahayanists have expressed the notion that vowing, prior > to > being an arahant, to maintain such an association is necessary, and that > > without having already established, quite strongly, such an intention, > it is > too late to do so once one is an arahant. As regards myself, just on the > off > chance ;-)) that, beyond parinibbana, keeping some sort of connection > with a > samsaric realm is still possible, I have personally vowed (in my own > mind) to > make such a connection. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- I seem to recall that in the case of the true Bodhisatta vow, this can only be successfully made by one who would have attained enlightenment in that same lifetime, had the vow not been made. In other words, only a person who has developed understanding to the very brink of enlightenment can have any real concept of what it means to forego enlightenment for a higher goal. Would this have any relevance, I wonder, to the kind of vow that I believe the Mahayanist practitioner is encouraged to make? Jon 9383 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 6:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard/Rob --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I agree with your observation, Rob, that one is not required to accept the > teaching on 'single unit citta' in order to develop the conditions for the > arising of such awareness, although a holding a definite view to the > contrary would no doubt be a considerable obstacle to that development. > > Jon Perhaps the holding fast to any view would equally impede progress, since the reality itself is bound to be experienced differently than any prior view. Best, Robert Ep. 9384 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 7:03am Subject: Cambodia Ch 10, no 2 A. Sujin's Lectures in Cambodia. Question: Sati is a sobhana cetasika, it arises with kusala citta. Is it correct to say that sati can be aware of dosa, aversion, or another kind of akusala? Sujin: What is reality is true in every respect. Akusala is reality, but sati cannot be conascent with akusala citta; sati can arise afterwards and be aware of its characteristic. Akusala has arisen, if it had not arisen it could not appear. Akusala arises and falls away, but in a following process there can be kusala cittas accompanied by sati which is aware of the characteristic of that akusala dhamma that arises and falls away very rapidly; processes of kusala cittas accompanied by sati can arise in alternation with processes with akusala cittas. This can go on for several rounds. Question: At this moment I pay attention to it that this is dosa and that lobha. Sujin: This is thinking, and when you know this, thinking will stop. Also when we do not think there are realities. The rúpa that is hardness is present without the need to think of it. Instead of thinking we can begin to be aware of characteristics of realities. We do not have to think of them or name them, but gradually we can pay attention to and understand what is real and appears. It is the same as when we see an orange and know that it is an orange without having to think that there is an orange. Question: A friend of mine wishes to ask something. He used to sit and concentrate on something and afterwards he acquired knowledge such as we have now from the study of Dhamma, but he continues to cling and concentrate on something. When he is troubled by a problem, he sits down in order to concentrate on something and then he feels more confortable. I explained to him that that is clinging, that it is lobha. He likes to concentrate because it makes him feel contented. I said that he may not feel happy each time because this is anattå, and that sometimes he may not succeed in becoming contented. He said that most of the time when he sits down to concentrate he feels more contented and therefore he likes to continue doing this. Would you please help me to give him an answer? Sujin: There are many kinds of Buddhists, some of them do not study the Dhamma, they do not listen and do not understand the Dhamma. Others again study just a little, and what they study is sometimes wrong, sometimes correct. The Dhamma is very difficult, profound and subtle. People should study it carefully and thoroughly. They should know to what purpose they study it, this is most important. Most people go to the temple because it makes them feel contented. When they enter a temple they feel happy already and they find this sufficient. Or when they listen to the Dhamma they feel contented and this is enough for them. They do not think of paññå, they do not consider what the Buddha realized through his enlightenment. The Buddha¹s compassion that motivated him to teach the Dhamma he realized through his enlightenment is immeasurably great. The Dhamma is the truth that is profound and that can eradicate defilements completely. People who just think of being contented do not think of the eradication of defilements, they do not think of understanding. Therefore, they are Buddhists who are just of the level of wanting the means that make them contented. Jonothan: We have different methods of suppressing dosa that arises. People may listen to tapes about the Dhamma or they may sit in order to concentrate. By these ways dosa will decrease, but they cannot prevent dosa from arising again, and it is the same with the other kinds of akusala cittas. Sujin: Therefore, we do not have to think of what other people want to have, no matter they want contentedness or something else. We who are born into this world, have the opportunity to hear the Dhamma, but listening to the Dhamma is not easy, it is most difficult. We can notice this when we look at people in Thailand or all over the world. When we have the opportunity to develop understanding of the truth we should do so. We should use the word truth, because we do not need something that deceives, that is temporary, because that is of no use; it is not the teaching of the Sammåsambuddha. If people only wish to be contented, they do not need to pay respect to the Buddha; they can read any text that conforts them. It is most difficult to know what the truth is at this moment. If a person is not the Sammåsambuddha he cannot teach the truth of the reality of this moment. Therefore, we should study so that we understand the truth. Paññå is saòkhårakkhandha, the khandha of formations, that is accumulated and in that way there can be conditions for its development. Is there anybody at this moment who says that he wants to realize nibbåna or that he wishes to go to nibbåna? At this moment we do not know yet what nibbåna is. Although people do not understand yet the reality at this moment, they think that nibbåna is a place and they hope to go there. They wish to go to nibbåna without knowing what nibbåna is. How will they attain nibbana? When paññå knows and understands the truth of realities, paññå will tend towards nibbåna, and then there is no idea of self who is forcing himself to do so. When one knows and understands the truth it will be a condition to gradually incline to nibbåna. Whether this is a slow or a rapid process depends on the power of defilements and on the power of paññå. There is no self who can force his inclinations he has accumulated for an endlessly long time, hundred thousands of aeons or more. However, the paññå that has been developed will know the truth of dhammas that are non-self, but realities which have been accumulated and arise at this moment. There are conditions that a person is such or such, and therefore nobody can establish any rules with regard to what one should do. People are not identical, each person is unique, and thus each person has his own accumulated inclinations. Therefore nobody can establish any rule that would cause the arising of paññå. The only conditions for paññå to gradually develop are listening to the Dhamma, studying it, investigating the Dhamma and taking part of Dhamma discussions. Some people believe, when they come to listen to the Dhamma, that they have to dress in white, but this is not the right condition for the development of paññå, for correct understanding. ******* Footnote 1. Ignorance is the first link of the Dependent Origination. So long as there is ignorance we continue being in the cycle of birth and death. For the arahat who has eradicated ignorance, there will not be rebirth, for him there is the end to the cycle of birth and death. ****** 9385 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 7:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] metta meditation op 17-11-2001 12:46 schreef m. nease op mlnease@y...: > Dear Sarah and Ranil, > > > As I understand it, the brahma viharas aren't > 'directed' towards 'oneself' or 'others'. The > pre-eminent characteristic of all of them is that they > are directed to absolutely all beings without > exception in every direction and to the entire cosmos, > rather than being directed at someone in particular. > Dear Mike, I hope you are happy and well in Bgk, getting on with the Thai. A. Sujin explained that only when jhana has been attained one can direct the brahma viharas to all beings.Thus, for those who do not develop jhana it is different, we have to develop them in daily life as the case demands. If we sit and meditate about them, they are just very nice abstract thoughts, it is easy to love mankind but difficult when someone near you is unreasonable and yells at you. This happens in daily life, and where are the patience and metta or compassion at such momnets? I have to remind myself of this also. As to no exception, yes, metta should not only be directed towards nice people but also to disagreeable people. >Best wishes, Nina. > > 9386 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 7:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Music op 15-11-2001 11:40 schreef hhofman@d... op hhofman@d...: > > After high school I was apprenticed to a pipe organ builder, working > both in Australia and the Netherlands. I did learn to play the organ > then, was church organist for some time, as well as teaching a number > of pupils. > > Some of my boys are very musical. This may sound like pride, but I > understand full well that they are what they are, not much to do with > me. The younger one of mine got his first guitar less than two years > ago. The band he is in with my older son and some friends just won > the NSW Battle of the Bands. It is all conditions, and wise attention. > > My wife's oldest boy recently received a ranking of 95% in his final > exams. His middle brother is a farm hand who loves being with the > animals all day. The youngest one watches the Simpsons all day and > all night. Everyone is different, and each must find their own way. > > We differ on a number of issues, Nina, including (I quote from > NanaVira) Cittavíthi, 'mental process, cognitive series'. > Visuddhimagga, Ch. XIV etc. It is, perhaps, not superfluous to remark > that this doctrine, of which so much use is made in the Visuddhimagga > (and see also the Abhidhammatthasangaha), is a pure scholastic > invention and has nothing at all to do with the Buddha's Teaching > (or, indeed, with anything else). (I unquote) Dear Hermann, I was delighted with your letter, and fascinated to hear about your life, your musical background, the different accumulations of your boys. How it is all conditioned! We have a lot in common in this respect, I also used to play the organ. Now Vis Ch XIV and the mental process. Yes, I understand what you mean, Hermann. A. Sujin said that each person is unique and therefore there are no rules about what someone should do, develop or study. Everybody is very free as to what he wants to study. And Ch XIV is complex, such a lot of material in one chapter. Not only in the Vis. but also in the scriptures the processes have been dealt with: the "Path of Discrimination"(Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XVII, Behaviour, cariya) and the "Conditional Relations" (patthana, feeling Triplet, Investigation Ch, under Proximity and Repetition). But I understand it if you do not want to take up these works. Now, Hermann, what about our own life just now. In this way we can find out more. We see something pleasant and like it. The seeing is something we undergo, it is passive, it is result, vipaka. Then follow our reactions, we like what we see. Javana cittas which are kusala cittas or akusala cittas, in this case with clinging, thus akusala cittas. We hear a harsh sound. Hearing is another chapter of our life. Hearing we undergo, we cannot choose it. Our reactions: usually dislike. Then quite another chapter, smelling: we smell an unpleasant odour: smelling and then our reactions. Thus we go on from one sequence to another sequence of cittas that experience objects through six doors. From birth to death, we are in the cycle of birth and death. We have to be born, we have to see, hear, undergo all the sense impressions, whether we like it or not. Seeing is conditioned by visible object and eyesense, hearing by earsense and sound. Entirely different experiences arisen because of different conditions. Thus, part of the sequence of cittas we are able to experience. The Buddha who knew all taught the sequence of cittas in detail, but we should not try to count cittas, to catch them. We cannot choose what type of citta arises, we are not the owner of cittas. We can learn more about cittas as right understanding is developed. I am always amazed at the consistency of Buddhaghosa, he wrote such an enormous amount of commentaries, and never a contradiction. When there are differences in classifications it is usually a matter of what is stressed, of explaining certain aspects. He keeps on stressing vipassana, the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha, anatta, developing understanding of the khandhas, elements, ayatanas. I collect such texts for Robert K. who likes this so much. But I stop raving about Buddhaghosa now, I am not at the right address here, I feel :) . As to chitchat, yes, I am personally inclined "to say it with music" (today Loeillet and Handel with the nephews, Veracini for Pa and Oscar). Now, we can talk with different types of cittas, we can also speak with real concern for someone, with metta, with generosity, with sympathetic joy, thus with kusala cittas. The same goes for writing E mails, this is a good reminder for me. I used to think that talking about flowers etc is akusala, but A. Sujin taught me differently. We can learn that there are different moments when we talk. I should remind myself again and again that when we do not develop dana, observe sila, develop samatha or satipatthana, we act, speak and think with akusala cittas. Yes, I shall write more about conceit, it is always around the corner, even when we laugh. I appreciate Jon's additional reminder of conceit. I have read so many posts of you and then it is nice to hear about your personal life. With best wishes, Nina. 9387 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 7:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi Jon --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > 4/ & 5/ > > > I am not sure I see your point here, Ken. The Buddha is affirming > the existence of suffering/a path but pointing out the non-existence of > > any person who suffers/travels the path. You are then saying, if there > is no person how can there be any suffering/path in the first place? > > This> seems to be a semantic argument rather than a substantive one. > > Doesn't it go against your own experience in life? > > > > > > I'm not sure if I have understood your points. Please let me know. > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > k: When the verse imply that is no sufferer - to me it would imply > that we have understand reality. Then where is suffering to be found. On one hand we are talking abt anatta (no sufferer), on the other we are not viewing suffering as anatta (suffering exist). To me this is an > > incorrect perspective. Both are anatta. > > When we say "there is pain but there is no-one who experiences pain", or > "there is seeing but no-one who sees", we are saying that-- > -- "painful feeling" and "seeing" are realities, they each have a > characteristic that distinguishes one from the other (and that can be > experienced by awareness/understanding) > -- "person", however, is not a reality, it is a concept, and so cannot > experience the pain or see; the reality that in fact experiences the > pain > or that sees is something other than what we take for "person". > > I am wondering which of these 2 statements you would not agree with, > Ken. > > Jon > k: Seeing is not an utlimate reality. Seeing is dependent of the combination of four elements that produce an object and the eye sense thought process that enable us to see. Feeling is an ultimate reality though bc of the function of vedana. Furthermore, isn't suffering is also a concept. Suffering is the resultant of our akusala tendecies. It is not an ultimate reality. k: I more incline to think, Buddha was speaking conventionally. Kind regards Ken O 9388 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 7:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard/Rob Hi JOn > I agree with your observation, Rob, that one is not required to accept > the teaching on 'single unit citta' in order to develop the conditions for the arising of such awareness, although a holding a definite view to the contrary would no doubt be a considerable obstacle to that development. > > Jon > k: I do not think Ven Hui Heng study a single unit citta in order to be enlighted. Furthermore, he does not emphasis on this single unit of citta for developement. Instead he urge to study anatta and anicca. His panna could be explain by Abidhamma reasoning, but if I have not forgetten he does not expound Abidhamma teachings. In fact in the history of Chinese Sangha, he is the only person who has a sutta based on his teachings and he has the greatest number of enlighted disciples. There is no doubt that Abidhamma teachings help us to understand reality but that does not meant without understanding them, that is a considerable obstacle to development of satipathana. No where in the sutta if we read conventionally indicates there is a need to study Abidhammic concepts. We could infer Abidhamma concepts into the sutta for clearer understanding of the sutta. But it is still the sutta that urges us to be in sati. We could argue on the basis that we are slow learners but that does not mean that developing satipatthana must be based purely on Abidhamma for understand reality. The last few paragraphs is of great signficance, the sutta says some take 7 years(that indicate slow learners) some take just seven day (that indicate fast learners like Ven Sariputa). Kind regards Ken O 9389 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 7:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Hi Jon This abt vows and PariNibbana is very divergent between Mahayana and Thervada. So a comparision is extremely difficult to make. Sorry I do not wish to make any comparision here as it is not fruitful at all in this list discussion. Kind regards Ken O --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > As I understand it, for an > > > > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have > "ceased" > > in > > > > the > > > > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are > any > > > > longer > > > > to be observed. > > > > > > I'm not sure what this refers to, Howard. Would you mind giving a > > > reference/explanation? Thanks. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I am thinking here in terms of an arahant's direct apprehension > > of > > patticasamupada as the "middle way". See, for example, the > Kaccayangotta > Sutta. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm afraid I could not locate a reference to this sutta. The concept of > dhammas that have been seen as anicca, dukkha and anatta as being > dhammas > that have 'ceased' is a new one for me. If you care to follow it > further, > I would be interested to hear more. > > > Howard: > > The *speculation* as to whether "an arahant *choosing*, based > on > > compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some > > realm or > > realms of experience" is a possibility is not, in itself, productive. > > But the > > *knowledge* of whether or not that is a possibility would be very > > useful. For > > example, some Mahayanists have expressed the notion that vowing, prior > > to > > being an arahant, to maintain such an association is necessary, and > that > > > > without having already established, quite strongly, such an intention, > > it is > > too late to do so once one is an arahant. As regards myself, just on > the > > off > > chance ;-)) that, beyond parinibbana, keeping some sort of connection > > with a > > samsaric realm is still possible, I have personally vowed (in my own > > mind) to > > make such a connection. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > I seem to recall that in the case of the true Bodhisatta vow, this can > only be successfully made by one who would have attained enlightenment > in > that same lifetime, had the vow not been made. In other words, only a > person who has developed understanding to the very brink of > enlightenment > can have any real concept of what it means to forego enlightenment for a > higher goal. > > Would this have any relevance, I wonder, to the kind of vow that I > believe > the Mahayanist practitioner is encouraged to make? > > Jon > 9390 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 8:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Howard, > And when the theory also posits cittas (the bhavanga cittas), > which all have the very same object, but it is an object of awareness not possible to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware moments of awareness ;-), the theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained one. k: If I have not forgotten what those Abidhammic books that I have read, Buddha and enlighted disciples like Ven Sariputta is able to be aware of this object in the bhavanga citta. Why it is not explain what kind of objects in those Abidhammic books that I have read, that is I really do not know. Actually I hope someone will explain why this object is not described in detail. Kind regards Ken O --- upasaka@a?.. wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > I would like to address myself to one point you make, a point I > have > seen before and which continues to perplex me. In a message dated > 11/18/01 > 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... > writes: > > > > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the > > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the > > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of cittas. > > So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of > > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. It > > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > > > =========================== > It seems to blur together to *whom* or to *what*? In Abhidhamma, > that > which is doing the knowing are the individual cittas. Each citta knows > its > object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to me that this notion > is > based on our conventional observation of things such as our observing of > a > torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a circle of fire, or our > looking > at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of a sequence of frames. > But > at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each individual citta is seeing a > single object, and there IS NO overarching something to be seeing a > "blur". > Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be a conflation going on > here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just doesn't seem to adequately > explain actual experience. > And when the theory also posits cittas (the bhavanga cittas), > which > all have the very same object, but it is an object of awareness not > possible > to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware moments of awareness ;-), > the > theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained one. > > 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) 9391 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Robert - I still find a problem here which I will address in context. In a message dated 11/18/01 6:15:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard, Well my reply is that I think the theory explains the actual > > experience very well. The example of the movie screen is a reasonable > analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a whole. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think it is. The frames pass by on the screen, and the watcher, standing back, produces a continuous image as a result of watching them. But when the cittas *are* the frames, they are also the "watchers" - there is no overseer, standing back, confronting those cittas. They, with and without their wisdom and other concomitants, are *it*. ----------------------------------------------------- > Remember the individual moments don't come into existence out of > nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one and hence there > is continuity. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Continuity seen by *what*"? Each citta sees what it sees (in a moment - does that have duration?), and then ceases. BTW, did the citta, now *gone*, really exist as a separate paramattha dhamma? Was it a separate thing with sabhava, somehow conditioned by other, earlier separate, self-existing things (as in the collision of billiard balls, or particles in pre-quantum physics), and now annihilated? This seems to me to be, at the very same time, a form of substantialism and annihilationism. -------------------------------------------------- > The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a mystery it is > because of ignorance, a most powerful force and conditioning factor > that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: So - avijja is some sort of "super-dhamma" which not only exists, but exists beyond the moment? This makes pa~n~na sound like an eternalistic Christ, and avijja an eternalistic Antichrist! ------------------------------------------------ > It is only because we hear about these matters that curiosity arises > and so there is the beginning of investigation (dhamma-vicaya) into > the actual nature of this process. > I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction between cittas > is as clear as the lines on my hand. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Wouldn't you think, then, that in at least one sutta the Buddha (or Sariputta or another chief disciple) would have talked in Abhidhammic terms about the notion of "cittas", about individual mindstates each of which exists for a moment (as the entirety of experience), has essence, and then being utterly annihilated is followed by a separate, successor mindstate? ---------------------------------------------------- Why? Because of developed wisdom.> > best wishes > robert > =========================== 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) 9392 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Jon (and Rob) - In a message dated 11/18/01 7:40:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Rob (and Howard) > > Rob, thanks for this very pertinent quote, and my apologies for the delay > in responding. > > I intersperse below, for comparison, the corresponding passage from the P. > Masefield translation (PTS 2000). > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > > thus have I heard: > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > > groups of existence still remaining. > > PM "On this one's part, it is the destruction of lust, the destruction of > hatred, the destruction of delusion that is spoken of as that > nibbana-element that is with substrate-remnant." > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > > remaining. endquote > > PM "On this one's part, all that is sensed right here, not being rejoiced > in, will become cold; it is this that is spoken of as that nibbana-element > that is without substrate-remnant." > > I am not sure if there is anything new here. I simply observe that what > is being discussed is the 'nibbana-element', rather than, say, the citta > that experiences that element, although obviously is a reference to one > and the same moment. > > The first kind of nibbana-element is equated with the *destruction of > lust, hatred and delusion*, the second with the *becoming cold of all that > is sensed* after that destruction has occurred. > > There is a further passage in the PM translation, which I think is of a > verse summarising the prose text of the sutta. This reads as follows-- > > "These two nibbana elements .. ; > -- one element -- that with substrate-remnant, in which becoming's lead > is totally destroyed -- pertains to these seen conditions here; > -- that without substrate-remnant, wherein becomings entirely cease, > pertains to the hereafter. > Those whose hearts are liberated .. , being those for whom becoming's lead > is totally destroyed, delight .. in destruction -- these constant ones > abandon all becomings." > > Howard, I read the passage from Rob's post as confirming what you suggest > in your reply to that post, namely the cessation of all sense-door > functions and associated mind-door states. It is possible that is is also > intended to include other mind-door moments; presumably the commentary > would make this clear. > > The emphasis in the verse passage seems to be on the end of 'becoming' > (ie. birth?). I take this to mean that the moment of death (cuti citta) > is not followed by a moment of birth (patisandhi citta). > > As far as I know, the Pali texts take the matter no further than this, but > I intend to keep an eye out for further relevant material. > > Jon > > ======================== Thank you for this kind post. With regard to "The emphasis in the verse passage seems to be on the end of 'becoming' (ie. birth?). I take this to mean that the moment of death (cuti citta) is not followed by a moment of birth (patisandhi citta).", I tend to agree with Buddhadasa Bhikkhu on the point that what is important with regard to birth and death is the birth and death of (the sense of) self. [This is not to deny any other senses of birth and death.] 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) 9393 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention) is controllable... Hi, Jon (and Rob) - In a message dated 11/18/01 7:57:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Rob Ep (and Howard) > > Rob, I enjoyed your discussion below. Just one comment, if I may, on your > remarks about the person who has an understanding of anicca, anatta and > dukkha vs. the person who doesn't. > > I doubt that we can say that a purely theoretical understanding of anicca, > anatta and dukkha could make any difference to the *quality* of a person's > kusala mind-states. That person will still retain the idea of a person or > thing as having those characteristics, in other words, the same innate > views as before hearing about this aspect of the teachings, despite any > conscious thought to the contrary, since only the development of > satipatthana can expose and erode those views in any meaningful sense. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I agree completely, and I think your statement here is one which can't be repeated often enough. ------------------------------------------------------ > > On the other hand, if you are talking about a real level of understanding > of those characteristics, this could only have been acquired by a > developed understanding of realities as they are, and from seeing those > characteristics as an attribute of these realities. This would be, as I > understand it, an advanced level of vipassana (although I am aware that > many schools of practice these days would consider it to be easily > attainable). ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I was always pretty good in school. But I always fail schools such as these you refer to! ;-)) [My prejudicial view is that anyone who thinks that advanced levels (or even moderate levels) of insight are easily attainable is deluded.] --------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 9394 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 5:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/18/01 8:01:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > As I understand it, for an > > > > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" > > in > > > > the > > > > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any > > > > longer > > > > to be observed. > > > > > > I'm not sure what this refers to, Howard. Would you mind giving a > > > reference/explanation? Thanks. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I am thinking here in terms of an arahant's direct apprehension > > of > > patticasamupada as the "middle way". See, for example, the Kaccayangotta > Sutta. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm afraid I could not locate a reference to this sutta. The concept of > dhammas that have been seen as anicca, dukkha and anatta as being dhammas > that have 'ceased' is a new one for me. If you care to follow it further, > I would be interested to hear more. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Here is a reference, Jon: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-015.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > The *speculation* as to whether "an arahant *choosing*, based on > > compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some > > realm or > > realms of experience" is a possibility is not, in itself, productive. > > But the > > *knowledge* of whether or not that is a possibility would be very > > useful. For > > example, some Mahayanists have expressed the notion that vowing, prior > > to > > being an arahant, to maintain such an association is necessary, and that > > > > without having already established, quite strongly, such an intention, > > it is > > too late to do so once one is an arahant. As regards myself, just on the > > off > > chance ;-)) that, beyond parinibbana, keeping some sort of connection > > with a > > samsaric realm is still possible, I have personally vowed (in my own > > mind) to > > make such a connection. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > I seem to recall that in the case of the true Bodhisatta vow, this can > only be successfully made by one who would have attained enlightenment in > that same lifetime, had the vow not been made. In other words, only a > person who has developed understanding to the very brink of enlightenment > can have any real concept of what it means to forego enlightenment for a > higher goal. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: If what you are saying here is that one must be at the brink of enlightenment to usefully make that vow, then I'm a tad premature!! ;-)) However, taking the vow now, and then again many times in the future, might constitute some helpful seed-planting to guarantee that I do take the vow in that lifetime, a millenium of millenia from now, in which the vow *will* be efficacious. ------------------------------------------------------ > > Would this have any relevance, I wonder, to the kind of vow that I believe > the Mahayanist practitioner is encouraged to make? > > 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) 9395 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 5:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/18/01 10:18:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > k: Seeing is not an utlimate reality. Seeing is dependent of the > combination of four elements that produce an object and the eye sense > thought process that enable us to see. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with you. To me, the term 'ultimate reality' is misleading when applied to conditioned dhammas. --------------------------------------------------------- Feeling is an ultimate reality> > though bc of the function of vedana. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I disagree with you here. Feeling is dependent upon contact. ---------------------------------------------------------- Furthermore, isn't suffering is also> > a concept. Suffering is the resultant of our akusala tendecies. It is > not an ultimate reality. > > ============================== Just one cautionary note. Abidhammikas don't use the term 'ultimate reality' in a sense that precludes it from being conditioned. I find that use of the term a bit odd, but so long as it has a consistent meaning in that context, there is no problem. In Abhidhamma, I believe that a paramattha dhamma is any dhamma that is directly observable through a sense door as opposed to being (the referent of a) mere concept. We're headed for misunderstanding when we conflate the Abhidhammic defintion with another. 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) 9396 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 6:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Dear Robert and Howard, May I add the the 'blur' is conceptual, a construction by avijja (and other conditions) from a very great many moments of consciousness. In other words each moment is quite clear (even if akusala and deluded)--the confusion occurs in the retrospective pa×~n~natti/papa~n~ca. That's the way I see it anyway.. mike .--- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > I would like to address myself to one point > you make, a > point I have > > seen before and which continues to perplex me. In > a message dated > 11/18/01 > > 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a > stickler for the > > > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe > the reason for the > > > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising > and passing of > cittas. > > > So that, in a split second there could have been > thousands of > > > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, > touching, tasting, etc. > It > > > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > > > > > =========================== > > It seems to blur together to *whom* or to > *what*? In > Abhidhamma, that > > which is doing the knowing are the individual > cittas. Each citta > knows its > > object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to > me that this > notion is > > based on our conventional observation of things > such as our > observing of a > > torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a > circle of fire, or > our looking > > at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of > a sequence of > frames. But > > at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each > individual citta is > seeing a > > single object, and there IS NO overarching > something to be seeing > a "blur". > > Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be > a conflation > going on > > here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just > doesn't seem to > adequately > > explain actual experience. > > And when the theory also posits cittas (the > bhavanga > cittas), which > > all have the very same object, but it is an object > of awareness not > possible > > to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware > moments of awareness ;- > ), the > > theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained > one. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > >++++++++++++++ > > Dear Howard, > Well my reply is that I think the theory explains > the actual > experience very well. The example of the movie > screen is a reasonable > analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a > whole. > Remember the individual moments don't come into > existence out of > nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one > and hence there > is continuity. > The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a > mystery it is > because of ignorance, a most powerful force and > conditioning factor > that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the > blur"? Well avijja > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, > beings, self) and > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is > very real and is in > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > It is only because we hear about these matters that > curiosity arises > and so there is the beginning of investigation > (dhamma-vicaya) into > the actual nature of this process. > I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction > between cittas > is as clear as the lines on my hand. Why? Because of > developed wisdom. > best wishes > robert 9397 From: Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Mike - (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status now? Are you still callable as "Mike"?) In a message dated 11/18/01 9:38:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > > Dear Robert and Howard, > > May I add the the 'blur' is conceptual, a construction > by avijja (and other conditions) from a very great > many moments of consciousness. In other words each > moment is quite clear (even if akusala and > deluded)--the confusion occurs in the retrospective > pa×~n~natti/papa~n~ca. That's the way I see it > anyway.. > > mike > ========================== So at each moment there is no blur, but then, as a kind of conceptual summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that my mind is becoming a total blur at such thoughts! ;-)) Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you all the very best!!! 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) 9398 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 8:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Dear Robert, You seem to be positing avijja as a citta, one that is clouded and apprehends other citta through its ignorant view. I am sure you do not mean that, and I am still wondering how you are positing 'ignorance' as a force which can 'see things' in an imperfect or blurred way. Is ignorance not a state or condition in which deluded cittas arise and condition one another? Or do you mean to say that it is a kind of thing in itself that actually 'darts around' confusing different objects with each other? Best, Robert Ep. ========== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > I would like to address myself to one point you make, a > point I have > > seen before and which continues to perplex me. In a message dated > 11/18/01 > > 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the > > > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the > > > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of > cittas. > > > So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of > > > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. > It > > > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > > > > > =========================== > > It seems to blur together to *whom* or to *what*? In > Abhidhamma, that > > which is doing the knowing are the individual cittas. Each citta > knows its > > object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to me that this > notion is > > based on our conventional observation of things such as our > observing of a > > torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a circle of fire, or > our looking > > at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of a sequence of > frames. But > > at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each individual citta is > seeing a > > single object, and there IS NO overarching something to be seeing > a "blur". > > Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be a conflation > going on > > here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just doesn't seem to > adequately > > explain actual experience. > > And when the theory also posits cittas (the bhavanga > cittas), which > > all have the very same object, but it is an object of awareness not > possible > > to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware moments of awareness ;- > ), the > > theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained one. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > >++++++++++++++ > > Dear Howard, > Well my reply is that I think the theory explains the actual > experience very well. The example of the movie screen is a reasonable > analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a whole. > Remember the individual moments don't come into existence out of > nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one and hence there > is continuity. > The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a mystery it is > because of ignorance, a most powerful force and conditioning factor > that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > It is only because we hear about these matters that curiosity arises > and so there is the beginning of investigation (dhamma-vicaya) into > the actual nature of this process. > I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction between cittas > is as clear as the lines on my hand. Why? Because of developed wisdom. > best wishes > robert 9399 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha (was, Concepts) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Thanks, Jon. I did > enjoy those entries. > > I would say, from reading those, that the word 'dukkha' is meant to > > include all > > experiences that have a quality of suffering or a tendency to create or > > lead to > > suffering in the present or future. > > So to follow your observation along, Rob, what experiences would you see > falling within/outside that criterion? (If you get the feeling this is a > test, you could just be right!) > > Jon Well, Jon, if you want me to be 'smart' about it, I could just say the following: (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatá), > > (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhára-dukkhatá), > > (3) the suffering in change (viparináma-dukkhatá)" But I think the idea is for me to answer in my own words? So here goes: I would say that under this definition, suffering includes any experience that does not include the arising of wisdom [panna]. The reason for this is that the commentary makes clear that *all* life-experiences in the normal course of events either contains or leads to the experience of suffering. Because phenomonal experience is constantly arising and falling away, it is inherently unstable, confusing and dissatisfying. The very nature of experience is extremely insecure and ungraspable and leads to the state we find ourselves in, in which everyone is nearly always in a somewhat bad mood! The only stable force in this wayward universe is the state in which panna arises. From the standpoint of discernment one can account for and see the flow of impermanent events as nothing but what it is, neither grasping it nor trying to get away from it. In this state, the experience of life is accepted and no longer unbalances consciousness. Anyway, that's a stab at it. Did I pass? Robert Ep. 9400 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 8:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention) is controllable... --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > I was always pretty good in school. But I always fail schools such as > these you refer to! ;-)) [My prejudicial view is that anyone who thinks that > advanced levels (or even moderate levels) of insight are easily attainable is > deluded.] > --------------------------------------------------- Boy do I think you're right about this. It's more like: when you get tired of banging your head against the wall, then it's time to move on and bang your head against the next wall. Robert Ep. 9401 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 9:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert and Howard, > > May I add the the 'blur' is conceptual, a construction > by avijja (and other conditions) from a very great > many moments of consciousness. In other words each > moment is quite clear (even if akusala and > deluded)--the confusion occurs in the retrospective > pax~n~natti/papa~n~ca. That's the way I see it > anyway.. > > mike But what type of citta is it that apprehends this confused retrospective view, and how does it coordinate with the ongoing stream of present cittas? Best, Robert > .--- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > I would like to address myself to one point > > you make, a > > point I have > > > seen before and which continues to perplex me. In > > a message dated > > 11/18/01 > > > 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a > > stickler for the > > > > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe > > the reason for the > > > > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising > > and passing of > > cittas. > > > > So that, in a split second there could have been > > thousands of > > > > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, > > touching, tasting, etc. > > It > > > > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > > > > > > > =========================== > > > It seems to blur together to *whom* or to > > *what*? In > > Abhidhamma, that > > > which is doing the knowing are the individual > > cittas. Each citta > > knows its > > > object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to > > me that this > > notion is > > > based on our conventional observation of things > > such as our > > observing of a > > > torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a > > circle of fire, or > > our looking > > > at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of > > a sequence of > > frames. But > > > at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each > > individual citta is > > seeing a > > > single object, and there IS NO overarching > > something to be seeing > > a "blur". > > > Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be > > a conflation > > going on > > > here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just > > doesn't seem to > > adequately > > > explain actual experience. > > > And when the theory also posits cittas (the > > bhavanga > > cittas), which > > > all have the very same object, but it is an object > > of awareness not > > possible > > > to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware > > moments of awareness ;- > > ), the > > > theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained > > one. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > >++++++++++++++ > > > > Dear Howard, > > Well my reply is that I think the theory explains > > the actual > > experience very well. The example of the movie > > screen is a reasonable > > analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a > > whole. > > Remember the individual moments don't come into > > existence out of > > nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one > > and hence there > > is continuity. > > The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a > > mystery it is > > because of ignorance, a most powerful force and > > conditioning factor > > that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the > > blur"? Well avijja > > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, > > beings, self) and > > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is > > very real and is in > > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > > It is only because we hear about these matters that > > curiosity arises > > and so there is the beginning of investigation > > (dhamma-vicaya) into > > the actual nature of this process. > > I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction > > between cittas > > is as clear as the lines on my hand. Why? Because of > > developed wisdom. > > best wishes > > robert 9402 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 18, 2001 11:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Christine, Rob K, Ranil, Mike, Nina, Rob Ep & All, I’ve been finding it very helpful to reflect on all your posts about metta. Many thanks. robertkirkpatrick wrote: > --- >..... Surely self-centeredness is not > metta. t and earlier he wrote: > > > Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? I appreciated these and other reminders. When we feel down or depressed it may seem right to hear about ‘loving oneself’ or ‘being kind to oneself’. Like Christine, in my work I’ve always ‘given out’ a lot to others and have often got tired or stressed. Friends have then told me with kindness to take more care of myself, be kinder to myself and so on. However, I think the problem when we get depressed or stressed (and isn’t it just a lot of dosa at those times?) has nothing to do with moments of genuine concern and care for others which are ‘light’ and bring no harm at all. The problem stems from the strong attachment to ourselves. We cling so much to our pleasant feelings and have so much attachment most the day. When the pleasant feelings don’t last or life doesn’t work out how we’d wish, we feel depressed and sad. Once at a funeral, K.Sujin reminded me that the tears were not for the deceased, but for ourselves and the loss of our own pleasant feelings. Isn’t this so true? Don’t we cry or feel sad because of the loss or pleasant experiences? Christine:> > Don't you think love is, by its very nature, unity? and, if you > have > > feelings of self-loathing, wouldn't those feelings of self-loathing > > inevitably become part of your relationship with the loved one/s, > and > > therefore contaminate what you radiate during metta practice? If we have thoughts of self-loathing, doesn’t it again show the importance we pay to ourselves? We may need to get conventional help (counselling or medicine) at these times but the dhamma can help a lot if we’re brave and honest enough to consider and develop awareness. Aren’t we comparing ourselves with others with conceit and dwelling on ‘my’ defects and ‘my’ problems at these times? Don’t we really take a self to exist in actuality? As you suggest, at these times of ‘self’-concern’ there isn’t any concern for others at all and therefore there cannot be metta, which as some of us have suggested, should have other beings as object. Of course, as we know, the near enemy of metta is attachment too. So most of what we take for being kindness, metta or love for our ‘loved ones’ is usually attachment in one guise or other, I find. Metta is the quality of kindness and friendship to another being that we meet or see or speak to, regardless of who he or she is, such as when we tend the sick as in the example from the Vinaya I gave yesterday. So as Rob said, ‘do we really need to love ourselves anymore?’ After King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that indeed there was no one dearer than themselves, the Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5-1, ‘Dear’ (Masefield trans): ‘Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to others - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.’ The commentary adds: ‘.....One would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place (n’ev’ajjhagaapiyataram attanaa kvaci): whatever man, seeking out with every endeavour someone else (more) excessively dear than the self, would neither attain nor behold (such) in any place, anywhere in the (ten) quarters.Thus is the self dear separately to others (evam piyo puthu attaa paresa.m): thus is the self alone dear separately, severally, to this and that being, by way of the non-discovery of anyone dearer than the self. Therefore one desiring self should not harm another (tasmaa na hi.mse param attakaama): since each being holds the self dear in that way, is one desiring happiness for that self, one for whom dukkha is repulsive, therefore one desiring self, in wanting well-being and happiness for that self, should not harm, should not kill, should not even antagonise with the hand....and so on, another being, upwards from and including even a mere ant or (other) samll insect. for when dukkha is caused by oneself to some other, that (dukkha) is, after an interval of time, observed in one’s (own) self, as though it were passing over therefrom. for this is the law of karma.’ I think I may have quoted these lines before, but thank you for all for giving me the well-needed opportunity to reflect and type them out again This particular udana has always been very meaningful to me. Thanks Rob, for this useful quote too (amongst others): > > > In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it > > > says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love > for > > > others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". > > > robert May we all learn to see the danger of self-love . Sarah 9403 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 0:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Robert, > You seem to be positing avijja as a citta, one that is clouded and apprehends > other citta through its ignorant view. I am sure you do not mean that, and I am > still wondering how you are positing 'ignorance' as a force which can 'see things' > in an imperfect or blurred way. Is ignorance not a state or condition in which > deluded cittas arise and condition one another? Or do you mean to say that it is > a kind of thing in itself that actually 'darts around' confusing different objects > with each other? > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ========== Dear Robert E. Ignorance is a cetasika and it is part of the paticasamupada (dependent origination) It is a key link, along with lobha (craving, attachment) that obsures vision and keeps the wheel of birth and death spinning. It is a power of immense proportions indeed. It arises in assocaition with all akusala cittas , but is also a conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as conascence paccaya). Visuddhimagga XVII 43: " it (avijja) prevents knowing the meaning of collection in the aggregates(khandas), the meaning of actuating in the bases(ayatanas)…..the meaning of reality in the truths…Also it prevents knowing the meaning of dukkha described in the four ways as `oppression etc'..Furthermore it is ignorance because it conceals the physical bases and objects of eyeconsciousness etc and the dependent origination."endquote We see how its function is to conceal what should be known. In brief we can say it is an ignorance of the true nature of paramattha dhammas and the intricate ways they condition each other. The commentary to the UDANA (excellent translation by Peter Masefield from PTS)defines it(p71,vol1, enlightenement chapter) "it is ignorance since it causes beings to dart among becomings and so on within samsara.., it is ignorance since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (i.e.men, women) and since it does not dart among those things that do exist "(i.e.it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas). best wishes robert > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > I would like to address myself to one point you make, a > > point I have > > > seen before and which continues to perplex me. In a message dated > > 11/18/01 > > > 12:40:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > As you know I am a bit of (actually, a lot of) a stickler for the > > > > reliability of the Theravada texts. I believe the reason for the > > > > phenomena you note is the speed of the arising and passing of > > cittas. > > > > So that, in a split second there could have been thousands of > > > > processes of seeing, hearing, thinking, touching, tasting, etc. > > It > > > > happens so fast that it seems to blur together. > > > > > > > =========================== > > > It seems to blur together to *whom* or to *what*? In > > Abhidhamma, that > > > which is doing the knowing are the individual cittas. Each citta > > knows its > > > object. WHAT can be seeing the "blur". It seems to me that this > > notion is > > > based on our conventional observation of things such as our > > observing of a > > > torch being moved in a circle, and "we" see a circle of fire, or > > our looking > > > at a movie screen and seeing continuity instead of a sequence of > > frames. But > > > at the level of "abhidhammic reality" each individual citta is > > seeing a > > > single object, and there IS NO overarching something to be seeing > > a "blur". > > > Do you follow my problem here? (There seems to be a conflation > > going on > > > here.) The individual dhamma/citta view just doesn't seem to > > adequately > > > explain actual experience. > > > And when the theory also posits cittas (the bhavanga > > cittas), which > > > all have the very same object, but it is an object of awareness not > > possible > > > to be aware of (!), so that we have unaware moments of awareness ;- > > ), the > > > theory becomes all the more an ad hoc, strained one. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > >++++++++++++++ > > > > Dear Howard, > > Well my reply is that I think the theory explains the actual > > experience very well. The example of the movie screen is a reasonable > > analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a whole. > > Remember the individual moments don't come into existence out of > > nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one and hence there > > is continuity. > > The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a mystery it is > > because of ignorance, a most powerful force and conditioning factor > > that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja > > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and > > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in > > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > > It is only because we hear about these matters that curiosity arises > > and so there is the beginning of investigation (dhamma-vicaya) into > > the actual nature of this process. > > I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction between cittas > > is as clear as the lines on my hand. Why? Because of developed wisdom. > > best wishes > > robert 9404 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah, Thanks for this which all makes a lot of sense to me. I was wondering if you'd like to tackle a passage in the Vissuddhimagga which is harder to understand: ix8 Metta should first of all "be developed only to oneself, doing it repeastedly thus: may I be happy..." The next sections notes that someone may question this because it is not in the Tipitaka and that in the patisambhidimagga and vibhanga no mention is made of developing metta to oneself. The answer is that for jhana this can't succeed by way of taking oneself as an object. And later ix9 it makes it clear that developing to oneself means "just as I want to be happy and dread pain so do others..." Thus making oneself as an example. I think the meaning is basically that we considr how we like to be treated and thought of and so we should think of others in the same way. I can also see how a not so careful reading of the text could lead to the conclusion that one should be trying to love oneself more. I'd like you to read over ix8-10 and see what you think. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, Rob K, Ranil, Mike, Nina, Rob Ep & All, > > I've been finding it very helpful to reflect on all your posts about metta. > Many thanks. > > robertkirkpatrick wrote: > --- > > >..... Surely self-centeredness is not > > metta. t > > and earlier he wrote: > > > > > Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? > > I appreciated these and other reminders. When we feel down or depressed it may > seem right to hear about `loving oneself' or `being kind to oneself'. Like > Christine, in my work I've always `given out' a lot to others and have often > got tired or stressed. Friends have then told me with kindness to take more > care of myself, be kinder to myself and so on. > > However, I think the problem when we get depressed or stressed (and isn't it > just a lot of dosa at those times?) has nothing to do with moments of genuine > concern and care for others which are `light' and bring no harm at all. The > problem stems from the strong attachment to ourselves. We cling so much to our > pleasant feelings and have so much attachment most the day. When the pleasant > feelings don't last or life doesn't work out how we'd wish, we feel depressed > and sad. > > Once at a funeral, K.Sujin reminded me that the tears were not for the > deceased, but for ourselves and the loss of our own pleasant feelings. Isn't > this so true? Don't we cry or feel sad because of the loss or pleasant > experiences? > > Christine:> > Don't you think love is, by its very nature, unity? and, if you > > have > > > feelings of self-loathing, wouldn't those feelings of self- loathing > > > inevitably become part of your relationship with the loved one/s, > > and > > > therefore contaminate what you radiate during metta practice? > > If we have thoughts of self-loathing, doesn't it again show the importance we > pay to ourselves? We may need to get conventional help (counselling or > medicine) at these times but the dhamma can help a lot if we're brave and > honest enough to consider and develop awareness. Aren't we comparing ourselves > with others with conceit and dwelling on `my' defects and `my' problems at > these times? Don't we really take a self to exist in actuality? As you suggest, > at these times of `self'-concern' there isn't any concern for others at all and > therefore there cannot be metta, which as some of us have suggested, should > have other beings as object. > > Of course, as we know, the near enemy of metta is attachment too. So most of > what we take for being kindness, metta or love for our `loved ones' is usually > attachment in one guise or other, I find. Metta is the quality of kindness and > friendship to another being that we meet or see or speak to, regardless of who > he or she is, such as when we tend the sick as in the example from the Vinaya I > gave yesterday. > > So as Rob said, `do we really need to love ourselves anymore?' > > After King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that indeed there was no one > dearer than themselves, the Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5- 1, `Dear' > (Masefield trans): > > `Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain that > dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to others > - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.' > > The commentary adds: > > `.....One would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place > (n'ev'ajjhagaapiyataram attanaa kvaci): whatever man, seeking out with every > endeavour someone else (more) excessively dear than the self, would neither > attain nor behold (such) in any place, anywhere in the (ten) quarters.Thus is > the self dear separately to others (evam piyo puthu attaa paresa.m): thus is > the self alone dear separately, severally, to this and that being, by way of > the non-discovery of anyone dearer than the self. Therefore one desiring self > should not harm another (tasmaa na hi.mse param attakaama): since each being > holds the self dear in that way, is one desiring happiness for that self, one > for whom dukkha is repulsive, therefore one desiring self, in wanting > well-being and happiness for that self, should not harm, should not kill, > should not even antagonise with the hand....and so on, another being, upwards > from and including even a mere ant or (other) samll insect. for when dukkha is > caused by oneself to some other, that (dukkha) is, after an interval of time, > observed in one's (own) self, as though it were passing over therefrom. for > this is the law of karma.' > > I think I may have quoted these lines before, but thank you for all for giving > me the well-needed opportunity to reflect and type them out again This > particular udana has always been very meaningful to me. > > Thanks Rob, for this useful quote too (amongst others): > > > > > In the Cariya-pitaka- athakatha (see bodhi net of views p323) it > > > > says "The destruction of self-love and the development of love > > for > > > > others are the means for the accomplishing of the paramis". > > > > robert > > May we all learn to see the danger of self-love . > > Sarah > > > 9405 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 2:09am Subject: [dsg] Anusaya-kilesa Hi Robert K " It arises in assocaition with all akusala cittas , but is also a > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > conascence paccaya)." This sound very interesting, could you elaborate on "this conditioning factor for many kusala cittas". Is this the same as Anusaya-kilesa. Some pple interpret it as latent tendecies, is it correct. Does kusala cittas has anusaya Kilesa as it has define like a sediment in the citta in the Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII . With thanks Ken O > > Dear Robert E. > Ignorance is a cetasika and it is part of the paticasamupada > (dependent origination) It is a key link, along with lobha (craving, > attachment) that obsures vision and keeps the wheel of birth and > death spinning. It is a power of immense proportions indeed. > It arises in assocaition with all akusala cittas , but is also a > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > conascence paccaya). > > Visuddhimagga > XVII 43: " it (avijja) prevents knowing the meaning of > collection in the aggregates(khandas), the meaning of actuating in the > bases(ayatanas)…..the meaning of reality in the truths…Also it prevents knowing the meaning of dukkha described in the four ways as `oppression > etc'..Furthermore it is ignorance because it conceals the physical bases and objects of eyeconsciousness etc and the dependent origination."endquote > We see how its function is to conceal what should be known. > > In brief we can say it is an ignorance of the true nature of > paramattha dhammas and the intricate ways they condition each other. > The commentary to the UDANA (excellent translation by Peter Masefield > from PTS)defines it(p71,vol1, enlightenement chapter) "it is > ignorance since it causes beings to dart among becomings and so on > within samsara.., it is ignorance since it > darts among those things which do not actually exist (i.e.men, > women) and since it does not dart among those things that do > exist "(i.e.it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas). > best wishes > robert > 9406 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 2:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Music Dear Nina, I'm going to have to point it out to you, it's Herman, not Hermann :-) I hope you don't mind. I do appreciate the time you take to answer my posts. I would like to find a way of expressing my appreciation of Buddhaghosa, without distorting the reality of the situation. Marcel Dupre, in his youth, played a concert series of the entire organ works of Bach, from memory, over ten consecutive nights. This feat is utterly incredible, and is worthy of the highest praise. Matched by none in his day, or the days to come. Yet he played the works of Bach, not Dupre. Thomas Aquinas was perhaps the greatest medieval mind. He wrote countless books based on a few biblical books, and what was written after them. Yet I would never recommend anyone to read Thomas Aquinas, simply because it is Thomas Aquinas' rendition of Jesus, as in Dupre's version of Bach. The words of Jesus are so pure, so simple and so few. And a thousand have come since, and added their praise, their appreciation, and their version of Jesus. Can one expand on the perfect, the sublime? And so it is with Buddhaghosa (for me). A great, incomparable mind, yet, only an interpretor, allbeit a great one. The actual words of Jesus would fill less than twenty pages. Happily there are hundreds and hundreds of pages of the unquestioned words of the Buddha. Why hang on the lips of those who also revere him, when what he spoke is known to us? I would love to sit quietly in your house as your fingers glide over the keyboard. I did once play the continuo part of a Haendel flute sonata in church. Much effort, no skill i'm afraid. I look forward to your notes re conceit Thank you Herman(n) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 15-11-2001 11:40 schreef hhofman@d... op > hhofman@d...: > > > > > After high school I was apprenticed to a pipe organ builder, working > > both in Australia and the Netherlands. I did learn to play the organ > > then, was church organist for some time, as well as teaching a number > > of pupils. > > > > Some of my boys are very musical. This may sound like pride, but I > > understand full well that they are what they are, not much to do with > > me. The younger one of mine got his first guitar less than two years > > ago. The band he is in with my older son and some friends just won > > the NSW Battle of the Bands. It is all conditions, and wise attention. > > > > My wife's oldest boy recently received a ranking of 95% in his final > > exams. His middle brother is a farm hand who loves being with the > > animals all day. The youngest one watches the Simpsons all day and > > all night. Everyone is different, and each must find their own way. > > > > We differ on a number of issues, Nina, including (I quote from > > NanaVira) Cittavíthi, 'mental process, cognitive series'. > > Visuddhimagga, Ch. XIV etc. It is, perhaps, not superfluous to remark > > that this doctrine, of which so much use is made in the Visuddhimagga > > (and see also the Abhidhammatthasangaha), is a pure scholastic > > invention and has nothing at all to do with the Buddha's Teaching > > (or, indeed, with anything else). (I unquote) > > Dear Hermann, I was delighted with your letter, and fascinated to hear about > your life, your musical background, the different accumulations of your > boys. How it is all conditioned! We have a lot in common in this respect, I > also used to play the organ. > Now Vis Ch XIV and the mental process. Yes, I understand what you mean, > Hermann. A. Sujin said that each person is unique and therefore there are no > rules about what someone should do, develop or study. Everybody is very free > as to what he wants to study. And Ch XIV is complex, such a lot of material > in one chapter. Not only in the Vis. but also in the scriptures the > processes have been dealt with: the "Path of Discrimination"(Treatise on > Knowledge, Ch XVII, Behaviour, cariya) and the "Conditional Relations" > (patthana, feeling Triplet, Investigation Ch, under Proximity and > Repetition). But I understand it if you do not want to take up these works. > Now, Hermann, what about our own life just now. In this way we can find out > more. > We see something pleasant and like it. The seeing is something we undergo, > it is passive, it is result, vipaka. Then follow our reactions, we like what > we see. Javana cittas which are kusala cittas or akusala cittas, in this > case with clinging, thus akusala cittas. We hear a harsh sound. Hearing is > another chapter of our life. Hearing we undergo, we cannot choose it. Our > reactions: usually dislike. Then quite another chapter, smelling: we smell > an unpleasant odour: smelling and then our reactions. Thus we go on from one > sequence to another sequence of cittas that experience objects through six > doors. From birth to death, we are in the cycle of birth and death. We have > to be born, we have to see, hear, undergo all the sense impressions, whether > we like it or not. Seeing is conditioned by visible object and eyesense, > hearing by earsense and sound. Entirely different experiences arisen because > of different conditions. Thus, part of the sequence of cittas we are able to > experience. The Buddha who knew all taught the sequence of cittas in detail, > but we should not try to count cittas, to catch them. We cannot choose what > type of citta arises, we are not the owner of cittas. We can learn more > about cittas as right understanding is developed. > I am always amazed at the consistency of Buddhaghosa, he wrote such an > enormous amount of commentaries, and never a contradiction. When there are > differences in classifications it is usually a matter of what is stressed, > of explaining certain aspects. He keeps on stressing vipassana, the three > characteristics of impermanence, dukkha, anatta, developing understanding of > the khandhas, elements, ayatanas. I collect such texts for Robert K. who > likes this so much. But I stop raving about Buddhaghosa now, I am not at the > right address here, I feel :) . > As to chitchat, yes, I am personally inclined "to say it with music" (today > Loeillet and Handel with the nephews, Veracini for Pa and Oscar). Now, we > can talk with different types of cittas, we can also speak with real concern > for someone, with metta, with generosity, with sympathetic joy, thus with > kusala cittas. The same goes for writing E mails, this is a good reminder > for me. I used to think that talking about flowers etc is akusala, but A. > Sujin taught me differently. We can learn that there are different moments > when we talk. I should remind myself again and again that when we do not > develop dana, observe sila, develop samatha or satipatthana, we act, speak > and think with akusala cittas. > Yes, I shall write more about conceit, it is always around the corner, even > when we laugh. I appreciate Jon's additional reminder of conceit. > I have read so many posts of you and then it is nice to hear about your > personal life. With best wishes, Nina. 9407 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 4:27am Subject: [dsg] Ultimate Reality Hi Howard: >To me, the term 'ultimate reality' is misleading when applied to conditioned dhammas. k: From what I have read, Abhidhamma classify them as conditioned dhammas. Hmm but it seems to me that ultimate reality may not be a good translation for what it suppose to mean. To me they are just classifying dhammas into until a stage where it could not be break down anymore. Ultimate tends to bring some kind of "Supreme" meaning. I would say a bit of negativity there. Maybe someone could think of a better word to use. >> Feeling is an ultimate reality> > > though bc of the function of vedana. > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I disagree with you here. Feeling is dependent upon contact. k: Oh, I just using their Abidhamma terms here, they classify vedana as ultimate reality. In Abidhamma, these cetasikas rise together and in a sense function together instanteously and I interpret that contact don't comes before feeling (maybe I wrong here) in one citta. So if dependent origination say that contact arise before vedana, then Abidhamma says they rise simultaneous, for this part I am confuse. Hope someone here could clarify this. Kind regards Ken O --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken - > > In a message dated 11/18/01 10:18:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ashkenn@y... writes: > > > > k: Seeing is not an utlimate reality. Seeing is dependent of the > > combination of four elements that produce an object and the eye sense > > thought process that enable us to see. > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree with you. To me, the term 'ultimate reality' is > misleading > when applied to conditioned dhammas. > --------------------------------------------------------- > Feeling is an ultimate reality> > > though bc of the function of vedana. > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I disagree with you here. Feeling is dependent upon contact. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Furthermore, isn't suffering is also> > > a concept. Suffering is the resultant of our akusala tendecies. It > is > > not an ultimate reality. > > > > > ============================== > Just one cautionary note. Abidhammikas don't use the term > 'ultimate > reality' in a sense that precludes it from being conditioned. I find > that use > of the term a bit odd, but so long as it has a consistent meaning in > that > context, there is no problem. In Abhidhamma, I believe that a paramattha > > dhamma is any dhamma that is directly observable through a sense door as > > opposed to being (the referent of a) mere concept. We're headed for > misunderstanding when we conflate the Abhidhammic defintion with > another. > > 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) 9408 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 4:31am Subject: Re: meththa meditation Dear Mick, Sarah, Christine, Robert, Manji and all. What is meththa? To me simply "friendliness". Meththa towards yourself… Accept yourself as you are, Be friendly with yourself… Its OK for you to go wrong, Forgive yourself unconditionally. Its OK for yourself not to perform well as others Be happy with yourself (now to handle the situation here we need wisdom) See the things in reality… Accept reality… Do what you have to do… (now back to metha) Accept yourself as you are (Confidence) Have confidence in yourself Don’t be afraid of what others would say… (now wisdom and metha towards others) See them in reality… Why they are in that way… Accept them and their actions in friendliness (now meththa towards others) Feel the liking towards them within you growing and overflowing towards them Forgive them and accept them (now back to yourself) Feel the friendliness you yourself have given yourself Feel the calmness within you by accepting yourself as you are…… Feel the calmness within you by accepting others as they are……………. Now my question session; If you cannot accept yourself, forgive yourself how can you do it for others? If you don’t have meththa towards yourself: Scenario: This person wants to see "Right view". He reads the samma ditti suththa in majima nikaya. Out of the 16 ways Sariyuth Thero has given he contemplates on the 2nd that is Ahara or Food. He sees food is a conditional item for life and he sees how difficult it is to get food, what and what (not) is being done to get food. And he sees all this is to keep the "body" alive and as he does not have meththa towards himself…… (so he...) his body is gone so does his life…. Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? Dear Robert; yes we do…if we forget ourselves and try to meththa others… we may be going in a false path. Ofcourse the feeling of Karuna - not standing others dukka – can arise without we being in the center. Some previous question: Attachment to the "suka vedana" in meditation. Isnt it Akusala? Yes attachement is Akusala. But isnt it a very small akusala. Very small comparing the times we don’t do meditation. Also we should not confuse "Channda" – the "want" to do some thing with loba. Manji; a small note on self as we are talking a lot about ourself. Sila purifies self Samadi sees through self Prangna (wisdom) understands that there is no self. Previously Mike told that samadhi may do more akusala… However I am confused over this… mike; hope you will unconfuse me ;-) But the way I think is… When you try to meditate you will remember the kusala and akusala things you have done more clearly. This (mostly akusala) is an obstacle to our meditation. Therefore to take care of this only we have to do the 4 gardian meditations at the start and metha being one to forgive and accept yourself and to have the unconditional friendship with yourself. The word love: Mike; My addition to Christine's comment. As I have heard the word love is having attachment in it. Or love is with attachment. When you remove the attachment part you get meththa… Robert wrote: I would think that to love yourself and others would be very different from the kind of self-involvement, self-promotion, etc., that refers only to the ego and its insecurities. That is not love. Accepted sir… In these little days I have learnt much and much and would like to thank all my Dhamma friends here. Thank you Sarah for the encouragement you give… and mike… you were talking about satipattana in one of your previous emails. Would like to know how to apply satipattana in every moment… ~much meththa to all Ranil 9409 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Howard ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Continuity seen by *what*"? Each citta sees what it sees (in a moment - does that have duration?), and then ceases. BTW, did the citta, now *gone*, really exist as a separate paramattha dhamma? Was it a separate thing with sabhava, somehow conditioned by other, earlier separate, self-existing things (as in the collision of billiard balls, or particles in pre-quantum physics), and now annihilated? This seems to me to be, at the very same time, a form of substantialism and annihilationism. -------------------------------------------------- k: Our conscious is passed from one form to another when one cease from this form. Then I think, if we think from this light, there shouldn't be any substanlism and annihilationism. Because each citta condition the next in Abhidhamma. Similarily the conscious of the present form condition the next form and this present conscious also condition the next conscious. Robert K: You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja > > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and > > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in > > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. k: To me Robert K explaination could be confusing as he is mixing convention with absolute. On his first part he say abt concepts (pple, beings, self) and on the second part he say abt absolute (paramattha dhammas). He is not wrong though. However, i would not say that Avijja is in a sense "overarching something", cittas can never overarch because one cittas needs to cease before the next one citta arise. To me this "overarching something" is due to concepts (ppe, beings, self) that we use to think for so many countless lifes and these concepts have their root cause in Avijja (maybe that is what Robert K is saying). > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > So - avijja is some sort of "super-dhamma" which not only exists, > but exists beyond the moment? This makes pa~n~na sound like an eternalistic Christ, and avijja an eternalistic Antichrist! > ------------------------------------------------ k: I don't think he is implying that ignorance is a "super-dhamma". To me ignorance is a conditioned dhamma. Ignorance conditions our present conscious and our present conscious condition ignorance which in future conditions our next conscious as said in the Dependent Origination, assuming we have not eradicate ignorance in this life. Similarly to panna that also conditions in such a way. No cetasikas could be super dhamma because they are all conditioned, which implies that they are not permanent, hence I think it should not be view as eternalistic. > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Wouldn't you think, then, that in at least one sutta the Buddha > (or Sariputta or another chief disciple) would have talked in Abhidhammic terms about the notion of "cittas", about individual mindstates each of which exists for a moment (as the entirety of experience), has essence, and then being utterly annihilated is followed by a separate, successor mindstate? > ---------------------------------------------------- k: This is a difficult part, why it is not state clearly in the sutta and this is hard to accept. Similarly it is hard for the Thervadans to accept Mahayana point of view in certain Buddhist concepts eg PureLand. Personally, as long as it helps to understand the dhamma better, it is good enough. I think we have to put faith and accept that Buddha teachings that are imparted comes in many different ways or form, even though it is extremely hard to substantiate or to believe at times. Kind regards Ken O --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > I still find a problem here which I will address in context. In a > > message dated 11/18/01 6:15:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > Dear Howard, > > Well my reply is that I think the theory explains the actual > > > experience very well. The example of the movie screen is a reasonable > > analogy to explain how the moments are taken as a whole. > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't think it is. The frames pass by on the screen, and the > watcher, standing back, produces a continuous image as a result of > watching > them. But when the cittas *are* the frames, they are also the "watchers" > - > there is no overseer, standing back, confronting those cittas. They, > with and > without their wisdom and other concomitants, are *it*. > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > Remember the individual moments don't come into existence out of > > nothing. Each one is conditioned by the previous one and hence there > > is continuity. > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Continuity seen by *what*"? Each citta sees what it sees (in a > moment > - does that have duration?), and then ceases. BTW, did the citta, now > *gone*, > really exist as a separate paramattha dhamma? Was it a separate thing > with > sabhava, somehow conditioned by other, earlier separate, self-existing > things > (as in the collision of billiard balls, or particles in pre-quantum > physics), > and now annihilated? This seems to me to be, at the very same time, a > form of > substantialism and annihilationism. > -------------------------------------------------- > > > The reason we can't see all this clearly is not a mystery it is > > because of ignorance, a most powerful force and conditioning factor > > that clouds vision.You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja > > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and > > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in > > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > So - avijja is some sort of "super-dhamma" which not only exists, > but > exists beyond the moment? This makes pa~n~na sound like an eternalistic > Christ, and avijja an eternalistic Antichrist! > ------------------------------------------------ > > > It is only because we hear about these matters that curiosity arises > > and so there is the beginning of investigation (dhamma-vicaya) into > > the actual nature of this process. > > I would guess for one like Sariputta the distinction between cittas > > is as clear as the lines on my hand. > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Wouldn't you think, then, that in at least one sutta the Buddha > (or > Sariputta or another chief disciple) would have talked in Abhidhammic > terms > about the notion of "cittas", about individual mindstates each of which > exists for a moment (as the entirety of experience), has essence, and > then > being utterly annihilated is followed by a separate, successor > mindstate? > ---------------------------------------------------- > Why? Because of developed wisdom.> > > best wishes > > robert > > > =========================== > 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) 9410 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anusaya-kilesa --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K > > " It arises in association with all akusala cittas , but is also a > > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > > conascence paccaya)." > > > This sound very interesting, could you elaborate on "this conditioning > factor for many kusala cittas". Is this the same as Anusaya- kilesa. Some > pple interpret it as latent tendecies, is it correct. Does kusala cittas > has anusaya Kilesa as it has define like a sediment in the citta in the > Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII . > _____________________ Dear Ken O, Yes I think that's right, and good question. However, I wasn't thinking of that aspect. I was thinking of the way ignorance can condition good deeds in various ways. Visuddhimagga XVii63 "his non- abandonment of that ignorance about the 4 noble truths in particular prevents him from recognising as suffering the kind of suffering called the fruit of merit...he embarks upon the formation of merit .." Also xvii64 "not knowing bhikkus, in ignorance he forms the formation of merit...as soon as a bhikkhus ignorance is abandoned and clear vision arises ..he does not even form formations of merit" This, of course is not implying that merit is wrong, just that it can often be conditioned by ignorance. best wishes robert > > > > > > > Dear Robert E. > > Ignorance is a cetasika and it is part of the paticasamupada > > (dependent origination) It is a key link, along with lobha (craving, > > attachment) that obsures vision and keeps the wheel of birth and > > death spinning. It is a power of immense proportions indeed. > > It arises in assocaition with all akusala cittas , but is also a > > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > > conascence paccaya). > > > > Visuddhimagga > > XVII 43: " it (avijja) prevents knowing the meaning of > > collection in the aggregates(khandas), the meaning of actuating in the > > bases(ayatanas)…..the meaning of reality in the truths…Also it prevents > knowing the meaning of dukkha described in the four ways as `oppression > > etc'..Furthermore it is ignorance because it conceals the physical bases > and objects of eyeconsciousness etc and the dependent > origination."endquote > > We see how its function is to conceal what should be known. > > > > In brief we can say it is an ignorance of the true nature of > > paramattha dhammas and the intricate ways they condition each other. > > The commentary to the UDANA (excellent translation by Peter Masefield > > from PTS)defines it(p71,vol1, enlightenement chapter) "it is > > ignorance since it causes beings to dart among becomings and so on > > within samsara.., it is ignorance since it > > darts among those things which do not actually exist (i.e.men, > > women) and since it does not dart among those things that do > > exist "(i.e.it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas). > > best wishes > > robert > > > > 9411 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:48am Subject: Re: Nibbana -- Dear Jon and Howard, Jim Anderson very kindly researched the commentary and translated it for us. Here is the relevant part: Itv-a I 167> siitibhavissantii ti accantavuupasamena sa"nkhaaradarathapa.tippassaddhiyaa siitalii bhavissanti, appa.tisandhika-nirodhena nirujjhissantii ti attho. na kevala.m vedayitaani yeva sabbepi pana khii.naasava-santaane pa~ncakkhandhaa nirujjhissanti. vedayitasiisena desanaa kataa. [both PTS and CSCD versions agree, I didn't check the Budsir version] Roughly translated: "will become cool" -- will become cool with absolute calm, with the tranquillization of the anxiety of the formations, the meaning is: 'will cease with the non-rebirth-linking-cessation'. Not just the sensed alone but all the five aggregates in the continuum of a canker-waned one will cease also. A teaching with the 'sensed' as head is made."end translation. best wishes robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob (and Howard) > > Rob, thanks for this very pertinent quote, and my apologies for the delay > in responding. > > I intersperse below, for comparison, the corresponding passage from the P. > Masefield translation (PTS 2000). > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > > thus have I heard: > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > > groups of existence still remaining. > > PM "On this one's part, it is the destruction of lust, the destruction of > hatred, the destruction of delusion that is spoken of as that > nibbana-element that is with substrate-remnant." > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > > remaining. endquote > > PM "On this one's part, all that is sensed right here, not being rejoiced > in, will become cold; it is this that is spoken of as that nibbana- element > that is without substrate-remnant." > > I am not sure if there is anything new here. I simply observe that what > is being discussed is the 'nibbana-element', rather than, say, the citta > that experiences that element, although obviously is a reference to one > and the same moment. > > The first kind of nibbana-element is equated with the *destruction of > lust, hatred and delusion*, the second with the *becoming cold of all that > is sensed* after that destruction has occurred. > > There is a further passage in the PM translation, which I think is of a > verse summarising the prose text of the sutta. This reads as follows-- > > "These two nibbana elements .. ; > -- one element -- that with substrate-remnant, in which becoming's lead > is totally destroyed -- pertains to these seen conditions here; > -- that without substrate-remnant, wherein becomings entirely cease, > pertains to the hereafter. > Those whose hearts are liberated .. , being those for whom becoming's lead > is totally destroyed, delight .. in destruction -- these constant ones > abandon all becomings." > > Howard, I read the passage from Rob's post as confirming what you suggest > in your reply to that post, namely the cessation of all sense-door > functions and associated mind-door states. It is possible that is is also > intended to include other mind-door moments; presumably the commentary > would make this clear. > > The emphasis in the verse passage seems to be on the end of 'becoming' > (ie. birth?). I take this to mean that the moment of death (cuti citta) > is not followed by a moment of birth (patisandhi citta). > > As far as I know, the Pali texts take the matter no further than this, but > I intend to keep an eye out for further relevant material. > > Jon 9412 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 3:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/19/01 3:01:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Robert E. > Ignorance is a cetasika and it is part of the paticasamupada > (dependent origination) It is a key link, along with lobha (craving, > attachment) that obsures vision and keeps the wheel of birth and > death spinning. It is a power of immense proportions indeed. > It arises in assocaition with all akusala cittas , but is also a > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > conascence paccaya). > > Visuddhimagga > XVII 43: " it (avijja) prevents knowing the meaning of > collection in the > aggregates(khandas), the meaning of actuating in the > bases(ayatanas)…..the > meaning of reality in the truths…Also it prevents knowing the > meaning of > dukkha described in the four ways as `oppression > etc'..Furthermore it is > ignorance because it conceals the physical bases and objects of > eyeconsciousness etc and the dependent origination."endquote > We see how its function is to conceal what should be known. > > In brief we can say it is an ignorance of the true nature of > paramattha dhammas and the intricate ways they condition each other. > The commentary to the UDANA (excellent translation by Peter Masefield > from PTS)defines it(p71,vol1, enlightenement chapter) "it is > ignorance since it causes beings to dart among becomings and so on > within samsara.., it is ignorance since it > darts among those things which do not actually exist (i.e.men, > women) and since it does not dart among those things that do > exist "(i.e.it cannot > understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas). > best wishes > robert > ============================ If I may chime in: This makes me "feel much better" about aspects of the matter (while, as you might expect from one as incorrigible as I, not fully satisfied ;-). I tend to think of avijja not as a simple thing, but as multi-layered and multi-constructed, being in part a mere absence of wisdom, but also consisting in part of active misunderstandings of many sorts, and also being in part - and this *may* be closest to the avijja cetasika sense - a general dimming of clarity and increase in confusion. In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic theory of conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when I see problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as bringing up the business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without wisdom, an entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back from the screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which are then annihilated, both such notions pointing away from no-self/emptiness. 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) 9413 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 4:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/19/01 9:14:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Continuity seen by *what*"? Each citta sees what it sees (in a > moment - does that have duration?), and then ceases. BTW, did the citta, > now *gone*, really exist as a separate paramattha dhamma? Was it a > separate thing with sabhava, somehow conditioned by other, earlier > separate, self-existing things (as in the collision of billiard balls, or > particles in pre-quantum physics), and now annihilated? This seems to me > to be, at the very same time, a form of substantialism and > annihilationism. > -------------------------------------------------- > > k: Our conscious is passed from one form to another when one cease from > this form. Then I think, if we think from this light, there shouldn't be > any substanlism and annihilationism. Because each citta condition the > next in Abhidhamma. Similarily the conscious of the present form > condition the next form and this present conscious also condition the next > conscious. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I understand that features of subsequent cittas are conditioned by the features of the current citta. If that were not so, there would be complete randomness. But the arising and destruction of separate, self-existing units constituting the entirety of experience while each exists is reminiscent of the old action-at-distance of Neutonian mechanics, and it has the flavor of an atta-view. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Robert K: You ask "what can be seeing the blur"? Well avijja > > > (ignorance) darts among what is unreal (people, beings, self) and > > > does not dart among paramattha dhammas. Avijja is very real and is in > > > a sense the 'overaching something' you ask about. > > k: To me Robert K explaination could be confusing as he is mixing > convention with absolute. On his first part he say abt concepts (pple, > beings, self) and on the second part he say abt absolute (paramattha > dhammas). He is not wrong though. However, i would not say that Avijja > is in a sense "overarching something", cittas can never overarch because > one cittas needs to cease before the next one citta arise. To me this > "overarching something" is due to concepts (ppe, beings, self) that we use > to think for so many countless lifes and these concepts have their root > cause in Avijja (maybe that is what Robert K is saying). > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > So - avijja is some sort of "super-dhamma" which not only exists, > > but exists beyond the moment? This makes pa~n~na sound like an > eternalistic Christ, and avijja an eternalistic Antichrist! > > ------------------------------------------------ > > k: I don't think he is implying that ignorance is a "super-dhamma". To > me ignorance is a conditioned dhamma. Ignorance conditions our present > conscious and our present conscious condition ignorance which in future > conditions our next conscious as said in the Dependent Origination, > assuming we have not eradicate ignorance in this life. Similarly to panna > that also conditions in such a way. No cetasikas could be super dhamma > because they are all conditioned, which implies that they are not > permanent, hence I think it should not be view as eternalistic. > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Wouldn't you think, then, that in at least one sutta the Buddha > > (or Sariputta or another chief disciple) would have talked in > Abhidhammic terms about the notion of "cittas", about individual > mindstates each of which exists for a moment (as the entirety of > experience), has essence, and then being utterly annihilated is followed > by a separate, successor mindstate? > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > k: This is a difficult part, why it is not state clearly in the sutta and > this is hard to accept. Similarly it is hard for the Thervadans to accept > Mahayana point of view in certain Buddhist concepts eg PureLand. > Personally, as long as it helps to understand the dhamma better, it is > good enough. I think we have to put faith and accept that Buddha teachings > that are imparted comes in many different ways or form, even though it is > extremely hard to substantiate or to believe at times. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > =============================== 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) 9414 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 5:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate Reality Hi Kenneth, I agree, I've never really liked that translation either. In any event, the important meaning as I understand it is something like the fundamental components of a moment of experience--ultimate only in the sense of (theoretically) irreducible. This is not science or philosophy, it is, in my opinion, just a conceptual structure for trying to understand, intellectually, the nature of experience (not to be mistaken for or substitued for direct, profound understanding). Anyone can pick it (spoken abhidhamma theory) to pieces. It isn't meant to stand up in a court of law, or a debate (though it sometimes can), or a laboratory--just to assist in the understanding of the present moment of experience, IMHO. mike --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Howard: > > >To me, the term 'ultimate reality' is misleading > when applied to > conditioned dhammas. > > k: From what I have read, Abhidhamma classify them > as conditioned > dhammas. Hmm but it seems to me that ultimate > reality may not be a good > translation for what it suppose to mean. To me they > are just classifying > dhammas into until a stage where it could not be > break down anymore. > Ultimate tends to bring some kind of "Supreme" > meaning. I would say a bit > of negativity there. Maybe someone could think of a > better word to use. > > > > >> Feeling is an ultimate reality> > > > though bc of the function of vedana. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I disagree with you here. Feeling is > dependent upon contact. > > k: Oh, I just using their Abidhamma terms here, they > classify vedana as > ultimate reality. In Abidhamma, these cetasikas > rise together and in a > sense function together instanteously and I > interpret that contact don't > comes before feeling (maybe I wrong here) in one > citta. So if dependent > origination say that contact arise before vedana, > then Abidhamma says they > rise simultaneous, for this part I am confuse. Hope > someone here could > clarify this. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken - > > > > In a message dated 11/18/01 10:18:48 AM Eastern > Standard Time, > > ashkenn@y... writes: > > > > > > > k: Seeing is not an utlimate reality. Seeing > is dependent of the > > > combination of four elements that produce an > object and the eye sense > > > thought process that enable us to see. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I agree with you. To me, the term 'ultimate > reality' is > > misleading > > when applied to conditioned dhammas. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Feeling is an ultimate reality> > > > though bc of the function of vedana. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I disagree with you here. Feeling is > dependent upon contact. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Furthermore, isn't suffering is also> > > > a concept. Suffering is the resultant of our > akusala tendecies. It > > is > > > not an ultimate reality. > > > > > > > > ============================== > > Just one cautionary note. Abidhammikas > don't use the term > > 'ultimate > > reality' in a sense that precludes it from being > conditioned. I find > > that use > > of the term a bit odd, but so long as it has a > consistent meaning in > > that > > context, there is no problem. In Abhidhamma, I > believe that a paramattha > > > > dhamma is any dhamma that is directly observable > through a sense door as > > > > opposed to being (the referent of a) mere concept. > We're headed for > > misunderstanding when we conflate the Abhidhammic > defintion with > > another. > > > > 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) 9415 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 5:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate Reality Hi Mike Could you assist in explaining my confusion as stated below. I am still hoping either you or anyone in the list could explain it. Kind regards Ken O > > Howard: > > I disagree with you here. Feeling is > dependent upon contact. > > k: Oh, I just using their Abidhamma terms here, they > classify vedana as ultimate reality. In Abidhamma, these cetasikas > rise together and in a sense function together instanteously and I > interpret that contact don't comes before feeling (maybe I wrong here) in one citta. So if dependent origination say that contact arise before vedana, then Abidhamma says they rise simultaneous, for this part I am confuse. Hope someone here could clarify this. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O 9416 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 5:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meththa meditation Hi Again Ranil, Can you choose what you like and dislike? Liking and disliking are both akusala, regardless of the object. Pa~n~naa can recognize these when they arise (or very soon thereafter) conditioning detachment from them. This is good to know. Of course friendliness is good--easy to confuse with liking, though. Pa~n~naa can know the difference. Well, enough from me already. mike --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Dear Mick, Sarah, Christine, Robert, Manji and all. > > What is meththa? > To me simply "friendliness". > > Meththa towards yourself… > > Accept yourself as you are, > Be friendly with yourself… > Its OK for you to go wrong, > Forgive yourself unconditionally. > > Its OK for yourself not to perform well as others > Be happy with yourself > (now to handle the situation here we need wisdom) > See the things in reality… > Accept reality… > Do what you have to do… > (now back to metha) > Accept yourself as you are > (Confidence) > Have confidence in yourself > Don’t be afraid of what others would say… > (now wisdom and metha towards others) > See them in reality… > Why they are in that way… > Accept them and their actions in friendliness > (now meththa towards others) > Feel the liking towards them within you growing and > overflowing towards them > Forgive them and accept them > (now back to yourself) > Feel the friendliness you yourself have given > yourself > Feel the calmness within you by accepting yourself > as you are…… > Feel the calmness within you by accepting others as > they are……………. > > Now my question session; > If you cannot accept yourself, forgive yourself how > can you do it for > others? > > If you don’t have meththa towards yourself: > Scenario: This person wants to see "Right view". He > reads the samma ditti > suththa in majima nikaya. Out of the 16 ways > Sariyuth Thero has given he > contemplates on the 2nd that is Ahara or Food. He > sees food is a conditional > item for life and he sees how difficult it is to get > food, what and what > (not) is being done to get food. And he sees all > this is to keep the "body" > alive and as he does not have meththa towards > himself…… (so he...) his body > is gone so does his life…. > > Do we really need to love ourselves anymore? > Dear Robert; yes we do…if we forget ourselves and > try to meththa others… we > may be going in a false path. Ofcourse the feeling > of Karuna - not standing > others dukka – can arise without we being in the > center. > > Some previous question: > Attachment to the "suka vedana" in meditation. Isnt > it Akusala? > Yes attachement is Akusala. But isnt it a very small > akusala. Very small > comparing the times we don’t do meditation. Also we > should not confuse > "Channda" – the "want" to do some thing with loba. > > Manji; a small note on self as we are talking a lot > about ourself. > > Sila purifies self > Samadi sees through self > Prangna (wisdom) understands that there is no self. > > Previously Mike told that samadhi may do more > akusala… > However I am confused over this… mike; hope you will > unconfuse me ;-) > But the way I think is… > When you try to meditate you will remember the > kusala and akusala things you > have done more clearly. This (mostly akusala) is an > obstacle to our > meditation. Therefore to take care of this only we > have to do the 4 gardian > meditations at the start and metha being one to > forgive and accept yourself > and to have the unconditional friendship with > yourself. > > > The word love: > Mike; My addition to Christine's comment. As I have > heard the word love is > having attachment in it. Or love is with attachment. > When you remove the > attachment part you get meththa… > > Robert wrote: > I would think that to love yourself and others would > be very different from > the kind of self-involvement, self-promotion, etc., > that refers only to the > ego and its insecurities. That is not love. > > Accepted sir… > > > In these little days I have learnt much and much and > would like to thank all > my Dhamma friends here. Thank you Sarah for the > encouragement you give… and > mike… you were talking about satipattana in one of > your previous emails. > Would like to know how to apply satipattana in every > moment… > > ~much meththa to all > Ranil 9417 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 5:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anusaya-kilesa Hi Robert K, hmm I still not very clear, could you explain more on anusaya kilesa and ignorance. What is their relationship, if any? Second question. Does kusala cittas has anusaya kilesa (in its citta component) as it has define like a sediment in the citta in the Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII . Kind regards and thanks Ken O --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Robert K > > > > " It arises in association with all akusala cittas , but is also a > > > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > > > conascence paccaya)." > > > > > > This sound very interesting, could you elaborate on "this > conditioning > > factor for many kusala cittas". Is this the same as Anusaya- > kilesa. Some > > pple interpret it as latent tendecies, is it correct. Does kusala > cittas > > has anusaya Kilesa as it has define like a sediment in the citta in > the > > Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII . > > _____________________ > > > Dear Ken O, > Yes I think that's right, and good question. However, I wasn't > thinking of that aspect. I was thinking of the way ignorance can > condition good deeds in various ways. Visuddhimagga XVii63 "his non- > abandonment of that ignorance about the 4 noble truths in particular > prevents him from recognising as suffering the kind of suffering > called the fruit of merit...he embarks upon the formation of merit .." > Also xvii64 "not knowing bhikkus, in ignorance he forms the formation > of merit...as soon as a bhikkhus ignorance is abandoned and clear > vision arises ..he does not even form formations of merit" > > This, of course is not implying that merit is wrong, just that it can > often be conditioned by ignorance. > best wishes > robert 9418 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 5:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate Reality Hi Kenneth, I understand your point. Contact and feeling are both mental factors which arise with every moment of every kind of consciousness, as I understand it. Conditioned origination is to not to be understood as one thing leading sequentially to another in time as I understand it--just that each 'link' is dependent on the one 'listed' before it--not necessarily preceding it in time. Not certain about this (I'm no expert on paticcasamuppaada--maybe someone else can do better)--hope this helps. mike --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Mike > > Could you assist in explaining my confusion as > stated below. I am still > hoping either you or anyone in the list could > explain it. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > > > > Howard: > > > I disagree with you here. Feeling is > > dependent upon contact. > > > > k: Oh, I just using their Abidhamma terms here, > they > > classify vedana as ultimate reality. In > Abidhamma, these cetasikas > > rise together and in a sense function together > instanteously and I > > interpret that contact don't comes before feeling > (maybe I wrong here) > in one citta. So if dependent origination say that > contact arise before > vedana, then Abidhamma says they rise simultaneous, > for this part I am > confuse. Hope someone here could clarify this. > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > Ken O 9419 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Howard > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, I understand that features of subsequent cittas are > conditioned by the features of the current citta. If that were not so, there would be complete randomness. But the arising and destruction of separate, self-existing units constituting the entirety of experience while each exists is reminiscent of the old action-at-distance of Neutonian mechanics, and it has the flavor of an atta-view. > ---------------------------------------------------------- k: I am confuse. I thought conscious as explained in Dependent Orgination, is pass from one form to another and some old action is passed as condition to the next action in the next form, does that consitute an atta-view? I sorry, maybe I do not get what you are trying to say. ------------------------------------------- Your post to Robert K, In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic theory > of conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when I see problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as bringing > up the business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without wisdom, an entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back from the screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which are then annihilated, both such notions pointing away from no->self/emptiness. ------------------------------------------- k: Would you kindly explain what is your understanding or your views on no self and how does such "citta being "real things" which are then annihilated", point away from no self/emptiness. Secondly its relation to the rebirth cycle. Kind Regards Ken O 9420 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nibbana Rob K and Jim Many thanks for going to the trouble to chase this one down. Just for a change, the commentary is pretty much as I would have expected! Much appreciated. Jon --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > -- > Dear Jon and Howard, > Jim Anderson very kindly researched the commentary and translated it > for us. Here is the relevant part: > > Itv-a I 167> siitibhavissantii ti accantavuupasamena > sa"nkhaaradarathapa.tippassaddhiyaa siitalii bhavissanti, > appa.tisandhika-nirodhena nirujjhissantii ti attho. na kevala.m > vedayitaani > yeva sabbepi pana khii.naasava-santaane pa~ncakkhandhaa > nirujjhissanti. > vedayitasiisena desanaa kataa. [both PTS and CSCD versions agree, I > didn't > check the Budsir version] > > Roughly translated: > "will become cool" -- will become cool with absolute calm, with the > tranquillization of the anxiety of the formations, the meaning > is: 'will > cease with the non-rebirth-linking-cessation'. Not just the sensed > alone but > all the five aggregates in the continuum of a canker-waned one will > cease > also. A teaching with the 'sensed' as head is made."end translation. > best wishes > robert > > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Rob (and Howard) > > > > Rob, thanks for this very pertinent quote, and my apologies for the > delay > > in responding. > > > > I intersperse below, for comparison, the corresponding passage from > the P. > > Masefield translation (PTS 2000). > > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > > > thus have I heard: > > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > > > groups of existence still remaining. > > > > PM "On this one's part, it is the destruction of lust, the > destruction of > > hatred, the destruction of delusion that is spoken of as that > > nibbana-element that is with substrate-remnant." > > > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > > > remaining. endquote > > > > PM "On this one's part, all that is sensed right here, not being > rejoiced > > in, will become cold; it is this that is spoken of as that nibbana- > element > > that is without substrate-remnant." > > > > I am not sure if there is anything new here. I simply observe that > what > > is being discussed is the 'nibbana-element', rather than, say, the > citta > > that experiences that element, although obviously is a reference to > one > > and the same moment. > > > > The first kind of nibbana-element is equated with the *destruction > of > > lust, hatred and delusion*, the second with the *becoming cold of > all that > > is sensed* after that destruction has occurred. > > > > There is a further passage in the PM translation, which I think is > of a > > verse summarising the prose text of the sutta. This reads as > follows-- > > > > "These two nibbana elements .. ; > > -- one element -- that with substrate-remnant, in which becoming's > lead > > is totally destroyed -- pertains to these seen conditions here; > > -- that without substrate-remnant, wherein becomings entirely > cease, > > pertains to the hereafter. > > Those whose hearts are liberated .. , being those for whom > becoming's lead > > is totally destroyed, delight .. in destruction -- these constant > ones > > abandon all becomings." > > > > Howard, I read the passage from Rob's post as confirming what you > suggest > > in your reply to that post, namely the cessation of all sense-door > > functions and associated mind-door states. It is possible that is > is also > > intended to include other mind-door moments; presumably the > commentary > > would make this clear. > > > > The emphasis in the verse passage seems to be on the end > of 'becoming' > > (ie. birth?). I take this to mean that the moment of death (cuti > citta) > > is not followed by a moment of birth (patisandhi citta). > > > > As far as I know, the Pali texts take the matter no further than > this, but > > I intend to keep an eye out for further relevant material. > > > > Jon 9421 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Mike - > > (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status now? Are you still callable as > "Mike"?) Yep, still plain old layman mike. Ordination still might happen but there are un foreseen obstacles, legal etc. We'll see... > So at each moment there is no blur, but then, as a kind of conceptual > summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that my mind is becoming a total > blur at such thoughts! ;-)) Well, I borrowed this blur--I think I should return it to Robert, my apologies if it's a little soiled, Rob. If I may fall back and regroup my aggregates, I guess I'll have to play the 'movie' card again. Not a blur, but a conceptual assemblage of a whole lot of moments of consciousness and their attendant factors (whether 'atomistic' or not) which can seem very clear. (As I'm sure you know, the mental factor 'vitakka' can take concept as an object. By the way, I do think Robert's comments re. avijja as a 'positive' and extremely potent force are very pertinent). I do take your point, Howard, about this kind of 'particular' reference to cittas. In my opinion it doesn't really matter whether they each have a discrete, separate 'existence' or not--as I tried to communicate to Kenneth, I think all this theoretical structure is just a way of trying to get a verbal/conceptual frame of reference for the ever-moving moment of experience, so that we can think about it and discuss it on an intellectual level. Since I habitually reason from the general to the specific, I don't really have a problem when I run into a detail that seems logically problematic-I just take a step back and see if that point, accepted for argument's sake with whatever reservations, seems to fit into the 'big picture' as I understand it so far. If you'll forgive my playing the 'arrow' card in the same hand, "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him. Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html Of course to me this means (among other things) that to reject the Dhamma according to the Theravada on the grounds of (what I see as) minute points of intellecutal detail is to throw the baby out with the bath (if I may also play the baby and bath cards). Does it really matter if the moments in a continuum of experience are discrete or not? Does it matter whether sunlight hits us in waves or particles? Or experience of it is the same either way I think. I know I shouldn't argue with you, Howard. We both know you're a smarter man than I am and know the Dhamma better, including the Theravada I think. I just hope you aren't too smart for your own good. > Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you all the very best!!! Ditto and back at you, Howard--if you figure out a better approach to getting that arrow out I hope you'll let me know. Whether you do or not, keep in touch, eh? Your Friend, mike 9422 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anusaya, pariyutthana, vitikkama Dear Ken O, Moha (ignorance) can be anusaya-moha and pariyutthana-moha. Anusaya means inherent tendency or latent tendency. Pariyutthana means rising up. The ignorance that arises together with the akusala consciousness is called pariyutthana moha. Even at the moment of performing good deeds or wholesome actions anusaya moha is present, it is latent, waiting to arise. When it goes beyond the stage of pariyutthana it is called vitikkama and then unwholesome deeds are performed Nina van Gorkom writes: -http://www.dhammastudy.com/listening6.html Akusala cittas can be coarse, medium or subtle. The coarse defilements, vitikkama kilesa, are the unwholesome actions through body, speech or mind, such as killing, stealing or lying. The medium defilements, pariyutthana kilesa, are the akusala cetasikas which arise with the citta but which do not have the intensity to motivate unwholesome deeds at that moment. Akusala cittas can be classified according to their roots, hetus ,in three groups: lobha-mula-cittas, which are rooted in moha, ignorance, and in attachment, lobha; dosa-mula-cittas, which are rooted in moha and dosa, aversion; moha-mula-cittas which have moha as their only root. Besides the roots there are other akusala cetasikas which arise with these akusala cittas. The subtle defilements, anusaya, do not arise with akusala citta, but they are latent tendencies; they lie dormant, they are like microbes investing the body. We do not notice them, but they are there, accumulated in the citta; they are pertinacious and they condition the arising of defilements again and again. The inherent or latent tendencies have been accumulated from life to life. The first javana cittas of every living being who is born are lobha-mulacittas, cittas rooted in attachment. These are conditioned by the latent tendencies accumulated in the past. End quote robert dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K, > > hmm I still not very clear, could you explain more on anusaya kilesa and > ignorance. What is their relationship, if any? > > > Second question. Does kusala cittas has anusaya kilesa (in its citta > component) as it has define like a sediment in the citta in the Summary > of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII . > > > > Kind regards and thanks > Ken O > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In > dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > Hi Robert K > > > > > > " It arises in association with all akusala cittas , but is also a > > > > conditioning factor for many kusala cittas (although not as > > > > conascence paccaya)." > > > > > > > > > This sound very interesting, could you elaborate on "this > > conditioning > > > factor for many kusala cittas". Is this the same as Anusaya- > > kilesa. Some > > > pple interpret it as latent tendecies, is it correct. Does kusala > > cittas > > > has anusaya Kilesa as it has define like a sediment in the citta in > > the > > > Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII . > > > _____________________ > > > > > > Dear Ken O, > > Yes I think that's right, and good question. However, I wasn't > > thinking of that aspect. I was thinking of the way ignorance can > > condition good deeds in various ways. Visuddhimagga XVii63 "his non- > > abandonment of that ignorance about the 4 noble truths in particular > > prevents him from recognising as suffering the kind of suffering > > called the fruit of merit...he embarks upon the formation of merit .." > > Also xvii64 "not knowing bhikkus, in ignorance he forms the formation > > of merit...as soon as a bhikkhus ignorance is abandoned and clear > > vision arises ..he does not even form formations of merit" > > > > This, of course is not implying that merit is wrong, just that it can > > often be conditioned by ignorance. > > best wishes > > robert > > 9423 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas ---Dear Howard, Comments interspersed: In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > ============================ > If I may chime in: This makes me "feel much better" about aspects of > the matter (while, as you might expect from one as incorrigible as I, not > fully satisfied ;-). I tend to think of avijja not as a simple thing, but as > multi-layered and multi-constructed, being in part a mere absence of wisdom, > but also consisting in part of active misunderstandings of many sorts, and > also being in part - and this *may* be closest to the avijja cetasika sense - > a general dimming of clarity and increase in confusion. ++++++ Moha (ignorance ) is always a root of all kilesa. So it is associated with all types of ditthi(wrong view). The heart of all these wrong views is that ignorance obscures the true nature of reality. +++++++ > In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic theory of > conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when I see > problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as bringing up the > business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without wisdom, an > entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back from the > screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which are then > annihilated, both such notions pointing away from no-self/emptiness. > > +++++++++++++++++++++ Remember what Suan wrote recently: "The fact that paramattha dhammas are sunnyata (empty of self and self-belongings) does not negate their existence or their truth status." the Buddha says: SnXXII 94 Rupa that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it EXISTS. Feeling...perception..volitional formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change..I too say that it exists." Paramattha dhammas exist but not in the way we usually imagine things to exist. They are so ephemeral that time itself can only be properly understood in relation to the arising and passing. So many different conditions must coincide for even one moment of seeing, for example, to arise - yet we take seeing for granted; and we think it lasts, think we can control it. best wishes robert 9424 From: Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/19/01 11:55:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > ---Dear Howard, > Comments interspersed: > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > ============================ > > If I may chime in: This makes me "feel much better" about > aspects of > > the matter (while, as you might expect from one as incorrigible as > I, not > > fully satisfied ;-). I tend to think of avijja not as a simple > thing, but as > > multi-layered and multi-constructed, being in part a mere absence > of wisdom, > > but also consisting in part of active misunderstandings of many > sorts, and > > also being in part - and this *may* be closest to the avijja > cetasika sense - > > a general dimming of clarity and increase in confusion. > ++++++ > Moha (ignorance ) is always a root of all kilesa. So it is associated > with all types of ditthi(wrong view). The heart of all these wrong > views is that ignorance obscures the true nature of reality. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. But what *is* ignorance? Just an absence? If not, what is it the presence of? It isn't some sort of substance. Is it a function? A process? What is it? (In some ways, the term 'avijja' seems to be a conventional one expressing a conventional concept.) --------------------------------------------------------------- > +++++++ > > In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic > theory of > > conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when > I see > > problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as > bringing up the > > business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without > wisdom, an > > entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back from > the > > screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which > are then > > annihilated, both such notions pointing away from no-self/emptiness. > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > Remember what Suan wrote recently: > "The fact that paramattha dhammas are sunnyata (empty of self and > self-belongings) does not negate their existence or their truth > status." > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I agree with that. Dhammas exist, but not inherently with essence or own-being. They are neither nothing at all nor are they self-existent entities. They are things-in-relation. ------------------------------------------------------ > > the Buddha says: > SnXXII 94 > Rupa that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > EXISTS. Feeling...perception..volitional > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change..I too say that it exists." > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Did the Buddha, himself, capitalize the first 'exists'? ;-)) Yes, I agree that these things exist. That is, they are not nothing. But they ARE (my caps ;-) nothing IN-AND-OF-THEMSELVES. Their existence is, as you say so well below, not as we imagine it to be. Their existence as separate entities is merely conventional and ultimately false. ------------------------------------------------------- > > Paramattha dhammas exist but not in the way we usually imagine things > to exist. They are so ephemeral that time itself can only be properly > understood in relation to the arising and passing. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. And it is not only their ephemeral nature that makes them different from the way they seem, but also their dependent nature, and that dependency being a dependency on similarly ephemeral and dependent things makes these "things" quite empty. They are sunya - swollen, hollow. ---------------------------------------------------------- So many different > > conditions must coincide for even one moment of seeing, for example, > to arise - yet we take seeing for granted; and we think it lasts, > think we can control it. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. I've been coming to see more and more clearly the uncontrollability of things. The notion that we are or can be in any sort of ultimate control of things is a kind of sad joke. And when we buy into that joke the humor turns to tragedy. Impersonality is what there is, with little real ability to control anything, and no *controller* to be found anywhere in any case. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > best wishes > robert > =============================== 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) 9425 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] discernment or realities- yoga/tai chi Dear Rob Ep (& Howard), --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > I don't think you were too blunt, Sarah. In a sense, I think it means that > you > just enjoy the yoga in its own right, as something to 'do' and experience, > and > that is actually a much more 'enlightened' state, I would say, than doing it > with > striving and expectation. The strain that we often have on our involvements > to > somehow elevate us above the flow of life, simply creates more stress and > disappointment. But to do something so consistently, because it is something > you > have a predilection for, can't really be argued against. .................... Sarah: I’m not sure about the ‘enlightened’ part, but yes, I think these kinds of activity are something we have a predilection for just as Nina and Herman do for playing/listening to Bach. .................... > However, I take it that you perhaps have some 'aversion' to the potential for > Hindu philosophy to enter into the scene. I'm sure in 20 years, you've been > confronted with some Hindu beliefs accompanying your yoga friends' practice. > Correct me if I'm wrong about the above, but I think it might be an > interesting > issue [or not], how we react to philosophies that are different than our own? .................... Sarah: I think it’s interesting too and your tolerant and ‘positive’ attitude is a great example for us all, Rob. Actually, I think there are 2 issues here: Firstly is the question of aversion and any other unwholesome tendencies with regard to other teachings/philosophies. Of course this is never helpful and I’m glad to be reminded about it. Secondly, though, is a question of what we find most useful and so on with limited time. For example, without wishing to avoid facing up to any unwholesome tendencies, I question whether it’s helpful to try and develop knowledge or expertise in other philosophies which don’t help us develop more detachment from the idea of self, unless they are either relevant to our work or are objects of attachment (and aren’t there plenty enough of them?). Simply, like Frank once mentioned, I’d rather be reading a sutta or posts here on a Saturday evening than listening to a talk on another philosophy. If I need a break I’ll do some yoga or watch something on TV. This doesn’t mean that it always works out as planned at all. In fact it seldom does and as we know, anytime is a good time for wholesome mental states and awareness to arise;-) .................... > I > spent many years trying to figure out what the right 'view' is, even now I > struggle between aspects of Theravada and Mahayana. But those conflicts have > somewhat taken a back burner to the attempt to discern the reality that is > present > for awareness. And that is kind of a relief. .................... Sarah: I actually feel very fortunate that I’ve never had this kind of struggle. I don’t think it helps to get hung up on the labels either, but more valuable to learn more about discerning the realities as you suggest.... .................... > A former associate of mine had an 'enlightening' experience when he was > attempting > to reconcile different instructions from different strains of Buddhism. One > meditation method proposed that you cut all thoughts off at the root. > Another > method proposed that you allow thoughts to flow and simply observe them as > thoughts. He got to a point where he was very upset trying to choose which > method > was right and which one to use, when he suddenly realized that the conflict > he was > engaging with was also a thought. In that moment he observed the present > thought > and the whole conflict just popped like a bubble. .................... Sarah; Yes, exactly the point. All the choosing and idea of choices is done with the idea of self that needs to ‘do’ as we’ve discussed so much, without any awareness. A moment of awareness of thinking or doubt or wondring or confusion is far more valuable than any ‘choice’ or ‘working it out’. Good story, Rob. .................... > Anyway, I'll stop rambling, but I'll be interested to see what you think of > this > theme. ..................... Sarah; I think anytime we get lost in the concepts and stories , we can see there’s no awareness or understanding at all. It reminds me a little of the discussion I had with Christine who was wondering about sitting meditation versus study and then what kind of study in what order. Really, what we do or what is done will depend on conditions anyway. We may plan to read a sutta and then fall asleep. Or we may plan to read the messages here and then fail to get a connection. In the end it isn’t whether we turn right or left that will make the difference, but the understanding that is developed at this very moment. How does that sound? Actually, you rather remind me of my 3 brothers with your gentle prodding and probing;-)) ..................... >As for the yoga itself, I would tend to think that the attention to breathing > and > posture that yoga promotes, the fine use of awareness and concentration, > could or > should lead to a greater ability to discern the present reality. Do you see > that > as a possibility? .................... Sarah: I think this is very similar to Herman and Nina’s Bach discussion. Are yogis or Bach lovers more able to discern present realities and if so is it a result of the awareness and concentration developed in their ‘practise’? Personally, I don’t think so at all. The conditions the Buddha taught for developing the ‘right’ factors of the 8fold or 5fold path were hearing, considering and applying the Teachings. If someone has never heard or considered the truth of anatta or the nature of different realities, the so-called awareness and concentration developed in these activities will not be the samma-ones discussed by the Buddha so much. As we know, concentration can be with attachment and wrong view of self. A burglar, for example, also finetunes his concentration while robbing houses! However, with more understanding and appreciation of wholesome states and by consideration and discussion as we’re doing here, certainly whatever interests or pursuits we follow, are more likely to be followed with more skilful states, don’t you think? Sorry, if I’m not quite agreeing.....hope you keep up your yoga and Tai chi nonetheless...they are wonderful antidotes to too much computer sitting;-) Sarah > ====================== 9426 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Ken O, I think we need to distinguish between latent tendencies and mental factors arising. Just as we don't say there is anger at every moment for us now, even though the latent tendency has not been eradicated, so we don't say for the arahats or the Buddha that there is panna (wisdom) at every moment, even though all defilements have been eradicated. Also I'd like to suggest that the conditional relations between one citta and the next and between the accumulation of panna is far more complicated than just considering latent tendencies. If we're considering the characteristics of seeing, visible object and eye-base and how they are known, I'm not sure it's useful to talk about the latent tendency of panna at these moments. Sarah Hope your boss is in a good mood when you ask him about your trip to Bkk btw;-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > Let us quote from > > Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII > > "Anusaya-kilesa is a very fine kilesa. When kilesa has not been > eradicated, the anusaya-kilesa would settle like sediment in the cittas > that arise and fall away in continuation, like a seed, a paccaya for > pariyutthana-kilesa to arise. All kilesa would be completely eradicated, > never to arise again, when the lokuttara-magga-citta clearly realizes the > ariya-sacca-dhamma by experiencing the characteristics of nibbana > according to the levels of the magga-citta, which completely eradicates > kilesa according to the levels of the specific magga-citta." > > I was basing my argument on the function of latent tendecies in kilesa. > To me panna accumulation is due to this function of latent tendecies. As > one reach enlightment, such latent tendicies become Panna as all kilesa > element will have been eradicated. That is how a Buddha could study each > cittas with perfect clarity. Hence even though citta falls and rise > instanteously, there is still latent tendecies of Panna. Since there is > kilesa in each rise and fall citta of those who are not enlighted, why > can't there be a latent tendecies of Panna that rise and fall, once one is > enlighted. 9427 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Herman. --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a quick question thrown in here. > > Ken O says each citta conditions the next one. Not just Ken O either;-) Could ther be thinkng about what has just been seen if there wasn't seeing a moment ago? > > Does this mean that a vipaka citta is again creating kamma ? (please > say no, I couldn't bear the endless hall of mirrors that would > otherwise follow :-) NO.....happy? (I think others have come in with more details, but let me know if it's still unclear...) > > No problems with Maths ( I am surprised a girl could be any good at > it :-) ) Well, Herman, I'm beginning to realise that your new bride must have a lot of patience to put up with you;-)) > > All the best Likewise....am enjoying your musical discussions with Nina too;-) Sarah 9428 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anusaya, pariyutthana, vitikkama Hi Robert --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Ken O, > Moha (ignorance) can be anusaya-moha and pariyutthana-moha. Anusaya > means inherent tendency or latent tendency. Pariyutthana means > rising up. The ignorance that arises together with the akusala > consciousness is called pariyutthana moha. > Even at the moment of performing good deeds or wholesome actions > anusaya moha is present, it is latent, waiting to arise. > > When it goes beyond the stage of pariyutthana it is called vitikkama > and then unwholesome deeds are performed > Nina van Gorkom writes: > -http://www.dhammastudy.com/listening6.html > Akusala cittas can be coarse, medium or subtle. The coarse > defilements, vitikkama kilesa, are the unwholesome actions through > body, speech or mind, such as killing, stealing or lying. The medium > defilements, pariyutthana kilesa, are the akusala cetasikas which > arise with the citta but which do not have the intensity to motivate > unwholesome deeds at that moment. Akusala cittas > can be classified according to their roots, hetus ,in three groups: > lobha-mula-cittas, which are rooted in moha, ignorance, and in > attachment, lobha; dosa-mula-cittas, which are rooted in moha and > dosa, aversion; moha-mula-cittas which have moha as their only root. > Besides the roots there are other akusala cetasikas which arise with > these akusala cittas. > > The subtle defilements, anusaya, do not arise with akusala citta, > but they are latent tendencies; they lie dormant, they are like > microbes investing the body. We do not notice them, but they are > there, accumulated in the citta; they are pertinacious and they > condition the arising of defilements again and again. The inherent or > latent tendencies have been accumulated from life to life. The first > javana cittas of every living being who is born are lobha-mulacittas, > cittas rooted in attachment. These are conditioned by the latent > tendencies accumulated in the past. End quote > robert k: thanks for the clearer explaination, so does that implies that kusala citta also have this latent tendecies. Just like to be sure so that i do not interpret wrongly. with thanks Ken O 9429 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala/KenO Hi Rob Ep, just butting in here in brief;-) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi, Christine and Ken. > I prefer to think that different lifestyles are appropriate for different > people > in different stages. For some becoming a monk or recluse and focussing > totally on > discernment is the right thing at a particular point. For someone else, this > would just be an affectation or a form of increased suffering. To be > discerning > in the midst of family life or surgery, is ultimately the same thing as > leading > the 'holy life'. What's more important is that it serves the individual's > capacity and predilection so that they are most free to practice mindfulness. I fully agree with your comments and sentiments.....it's more a question of what is appropriate for us all and the lifestyle that comes naturally. Awareness or discernment can arise in any walk of life, depending on understanding and conditions. No reason at all why one could be a surgeon or concert pianist with just as much awareness as a forest-dweller or monk. That's why there are so many references to the holy life referring to the development of wholesome states, especially the development of satipatthana, rather than a particular situation. As I said before, I also agreed with Ken O's comments about the appropriate lifestyle for the monk. Sarah 9430 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:48pm Subject: RE: [dsg] meththa meditation Manji, I inadvertently left your name out from my post yesterday when I thanked everyone for their helpful comments on metta. Sorry for that;-) I really appreciated your reminders to develop awareness here and to develop more understanding of all rea;ities as not self. As you say, when there is awareness, there isn't any self-hate or any other aversion or unwholesome state at those moments. Thanks again, Sarah --- manji wrote: > Christine, > > Please be understanding "there is suffering", first noble truth. > Maybe sometimes memories arise and difficulty arises, maybe sometimes > "self" concept arises along with moments of aversion or clinging and > difficulty arises. > > Maybe what can help is understanding first noble truth, there is > suffering. Really make a sincere effort to see "right now". Mindfulness > arises and seeing suffering. > > Then maybe, compassion arises towards others. Understanding "there > is suffering". > > So even metta is conditioned. Arising and falling. So maybe right > now there is conditioning metta. :) So sometimes I am thinking that > right now seeing dhamma... Mindfulness... Etc. These are most powerful > antidotes to conventional realities of self-hate and low-self esteem > etc. > > Understanding right now dhamma with mindfulness, also understanding > that these dhamma are not "self". So even great moments of suffering, > not self :) > > So maybe cultivating a real and living metta, through wisdom and the > very process... The path. :) > 9431 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:52pm Subject: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi Sarah Is there a latent tendency for panna then, since there is latent tendecies for defilement, is there a latent tendecies for wisdom? I do not believe that Buddha's panna is not present in every cittas. I more incline it is in every citta or not he will not be able to explain all the citta in such detail and esp to the workings of paccaya. Kind regards Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Ken O, > > I think we need to distinguish between latent tendencies and mental > factors > arising. Just as we don't say there is anger at every moment for us now, > even > though the latent tendency has not been eradicated, so we don't say for > the > arahats or the Buddha that there is panna (wisdom) at every moment, even > though > all defilements have been eradicated. > > Also I'd like to suggest that the conditional relations between one > citta and > the next and between the accumulation of panna is far more complicated > than > just considering latent tendencies. If we're considering the > characteristics of > seeing, visible object and eye-base and how they are known, I'm not sure > it's > useful to talk about the latent tendency of panna at these moments. > > Sarah > > Hope your boss is in a good mood when you ask him about your trip to Bkk > btw;-) > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > > > > Let us quote from > > > > Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part VIII > > > > "Anusaya-kilesa is a very fine kilesa. When kilesa has not been > > eradicated, the anusaya-kilesa would settle like sediment in the > cittas > > that arise and fall away in continuation, like a seed, a paccaya for > > pariyutthana-kilesa to arise. All kilesa would be completely > eradicated, > > never to arise again, when the lokuttara-magga-citta clearly realizes > the > > ariya-sacca-dhamma by experiencing the characteristics of nibbana > > according to the levels of the magga-citta, which completely > eradicates > > kilesa according to the levels of the specific magga-citta." > > > > I was basing my argument on the function of latent tendecies in > kilesa. > > To me panna accumulation is due to this function of latent tendecies. > As > > one reach enlightment, such latent tendicies become Panna as all > kilesa > > element will have been eradicated. That is how a Buddha could study > each > > cittas with perfect clarity. Hence even though citta falls and rise > > instanteously, there is still latent tendecies of Panna. Since there > is > > kilesa in each rise and fall citta of those who are not enlighted, why > > can't there be a latent tendecies of Panna that rise and fall, once > one is > > enlighted. 9432 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] hello all! Hi Mike, Glad to see you getting on well in the internet cafe and hoping you're still finding the 'live' discussions and talks uplifting. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > Later I talked > > about what makes Buddhism > > distinct from other religions and in particular > > anatta, no being, no God and so > > on. > > No God, really? What about Brahma Sahampatti(sp)? who > beseeched the Buddha to teach? Lots of gods, I > think--just in different roles from that of the > Christian variety. A matter of perspective, perhaps? OK, Ok, good point! Many gods in the texts.... perhaps I should have said, no omniscient God and as we understand there is no self, we also understand there are no other beings or gods in actuality...merely conventional terms..... Does that pass? Thanks, pls feel free to 'pick' any holes anytime;-) Sarah p.s. I think your comment to me on metta has been answered by Nina and my later post to all..let me know if we still don't quite agree;-) 9433 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Mike I did not know that there is a legal consideration before one could be a monk. Would you like share me what kind of legality issues are there if you do not mind? With thanks Ken O P.S. - I got no problem with cittas as discrete units :). In fact all of us are a combination of discrete units :). 9434 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities Howard (and Ken, Mike and others (including Erik)) --- upasaka@a... wrote > Just one cautionary note. Abidhammikas don't use the term > 'ultimate > reality' in a sense that precludes it from being conditioned. I find > that use > of the term a bit odd, but so long as it has a consistent meaning in > that > context, there is no problem. In Abhidhamma, I believe that a paramattha > > dhamma is any dhamma that is directly observable through a sense door as > > opposed to being (the referent of a) mere concept. We're headed for > misunderstanding when we conflate the Abhidhammic defintion with > another. I suspect most people find the term ‘ultimate’ (a translation of the Pali ‘paramattha’) used in conjunction with ‘reality’ (Pali: ‘dhamma’) a strange pairing, initially. The term ‘paramattha’ is, I believe, more often found in conjunction with ‘truth’ (‘sacca’), where its import is easier to see. I just checked Nyanatiloka’s Buddhist Dictionary, and thought that some might find the discussion there useful (although not, of course, authoritative). I have pasted it below. Of particular interest to one or two of our members (are you there, Erik?) will be the comment at the end about the importance given in the Madhyamika school of Mahayana to the distinction between ultimate truths and conventional truths Jon From Nyanatiloka, ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_p2.htm “paramattha (-sacca, -vacana, -desaná): 'truth (or term, exposition) that is true in the highest (or ultimate) sense', as contrasted with the 'conventional truth' (vohára-sacca), which is also called 'commonly accepted truth' (sammuti-sacca; in Skr: samvrti-satya). The Buddha, in explaining his doctrine, sometimes used conventional language and sometimes the philosophical mode of expression which is in accordance whith undeluded insight into reality. In that ultimate sense, existence is a mere process of physical and mental phenomena within which, or beyond which, no real ego-entity nor any abiding substance can ever be found. Thus, whenever the suttas speak of man, woman or person, or of the rebirth of a being, this must not be taken as being valid in the ultimate sense, but as a mere conventional mode of speech (vohára-vacana). It is one of the main characteristics of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, in distinction from most of the Sutta Pitaka, that it does not employ conventional language, but deals only with ultimates, or realities in the highest sense (paramattha-dhammá). But also in the Sutta Pitaka there are many expositions in terms of ultimate language (paramattha-desaná), namely, wherever these texts deal with the groups (khandha), elements (dhátu) or sense-bases (áyatana), and their components; and wherever the 3 characteristics (ti-lakkhana, q.v.) are applied. The majority of Sutta texts, however, use the conventional language, as appropriate in a practical or ethical context, because it "would not be right to say that 'the groups' (khandha) feel shame, etc." It should be noted, however, that also statements of the Buddha couched in conventional language, are called 'truth' (vohára-sacca), being correct on their own level, which does not contradict the fact that such statements ultimately refer to impermanent and impersonal processes. The two truths - ultimate and conventional - appear in that form only in the commentaries, but are implied in a sutta-distinction of 'explicit (or direct) meaning' (nítattha, q.v.) and 'implicit meaning (to be inferred)' (neyyattha). Further, the Buddha repeatedly mentioned his reservations when using conventional speech, e.g. in D. 9: "These are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world, which the Perfect Qne (Tathágata) uses without misapprehending them." See also S. I. 25. The term paramattha, in the sense here used, occurs in the first para. of the Kathávatthu, a work of the Abhidhamma Pitaka (s. Guide, p. 62). (App: vohára). The commentarial discussions on these truths (Com. to D. 9 and M. 5) have not yet been translated in full. On these see K N. Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (London, 1963), pp. 361ff. In Maháyana, the Mádhyamika school has given a prominent place to the teaching of the two truths.” [ends] 9435 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala Christine --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Hi everyone, > Just a few questions on: > Restraint of the Sense Faculties verse 64: (p.38) The Discourse on > the Fruits of Reclusehip > > "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense > faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the > bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were > to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil > unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, > he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves > restraint over the faculty of the eye." and so on and so forth, for > ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. Here is the earlier discussion on 'sign and details' ('nimitta and anubyancanna') that I referred to in my recent reply. As i mentioned, it is not easy to understand, so don't feel daunted if at first it doesn't make sense! Jon In message # 8949, I said: This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours ago, but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and anupayancanna -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') appearing through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through the various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, and it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding that we are urged to develop. In message # 9019, Sarah said: Would you kindly elaborate on the nimitta and anupayancanna as mentioned above and the distinction between them in this context. In message # 9070, I said: I would be very happy to, but I’m afraid I don’t know much about this area, except that it’s an important aspect of both sila and satipatthana. As I understand it, when impressions are received through the sense-doors there will inevitably be paying attention with kilesa to the ‘sign’ (shape-and-form/nimitta) and ‘particulars’ (details/anubya~njana) of those sense-impressions. It seems to mean the absence of the guarding of the sense-doors. I don’t know any more than this. Further study required, for sure. I am hoping Nina will have something to say about it in her writings on the trip, since it came up for discussion and Nalanda and again at Patna. In the meantime, here are some references to get started with— Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’: 1/ ‘Nimitta’ is defined as ‘mark, sign; image; target, object; cause, condition’, with the comment that, ‘These meanings are used in, and adapted to, many contexts’. Several doctrinal usages are discussed, of which #3 is— <<'Outward appearance': of one who has sense-control it is said- that "he does not seize upon the general appearance” of an object (na nimittaggáhí; M. 38, D. 2; …).>> 2/ There is further discussion under the 4 kinds of morality consisting of purification (catupárisuddhi-síla), as follows: <<(2) Restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara-síla). "Whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, an object with the mind, *he neither adheres to the appearance [J: nimitta?] as a whole, nor to its parts [J: anubyancana?]*. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses" (M 38).>> Visudhimagga I, 42, 54 At I, 42, a discussion of ‘Virtue as restraint of sense faculties’: <<‘On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends *neither the signs nor the particulars* through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, he undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. … [and so on for the other sense doors] …’ (M.i, 180) [This] is virtue of restraint of the sense faculties.>> At I, 54, an explanation of the 2 terms: <<”Apprehends neither the signs”: he does not apprehend the sign of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. “Nor the particulars”: he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot , smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name ‘particular (anubya~njana)’ because of its particularising ( anu anu bya~njanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there.>> Hope this is helpful. 9436 From: m. nease Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities Jon, I think this gap is so important to bridge and I do it so badly--I'm keeping a copy of this on my 'desktop' for future reference. Thanks-- mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard (and Ken, Mike and others (including Erik)) > > --- upasaka@a... wrote > > > Just one cautionary note. Abidhammikas > don't use the term > > 'ultimate > > reality' in a sense that precludes it from being > conditioned. I find > > that use > > of the term a bit odd, but so long as it has a > consistent meaning in > > that > > context, there is no problem. In Abhidhamma, I > believe that a paramattha > > > > dhamma is any dhamma that is directly observable > through a sense door as > > > > opposed to being (the referent of a) mere concept. > We're headed for > > misunderstanding when we conflate the Abhidhammic > defintion with > > another. > > I suspect most people find the term ‘ultimate’ (a > translation of the Pali > ‘paramattha’) used in conjunction with ‘reality’ > (Pali: ‘dhamma’) a > strange pairing, initially. The term ‘paramattha’ > is, I believe, more > often found in conjunction with ‘truth’ (‘sacca’), > where its import is > easier to see. > > I just checked Nyanatiloka’s Buddhist Dictionary, > and thought that some > might find the discussion there useful (although > not, of course, > authoritative). I have pasted it below. > > Of particular interest to one or two of our members > (are you there, Erik?) > will be the comment at the end about the importance > given in the > Madhyamika school of Mahayana to the distinction > between ultimate truths > and conventional truths > > Jon > > From Nyanatiloka, ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ > http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_p2.htm > > “paramattha (-sacca, -vacana, -desaná): > > 'truth (or term, exposition) that is true in the > highest (or ultimate) > sense', as contrasted with the 'conventional truth' > (vohára-sacca), which > is also called 'commonly accepted truth' > (sammuti-sacca; in Skr: > samvrti-satya). > > The Buddha, in explaining his doctrine, sometimes > used conventional > language and sometimes the philosophical mode of > expression which is in > accordance whith undeluded insight into reality. In > that ultimate sense, > existence is a mere process of physical and mental > phenomena within which, > or beyond which, no real ego-entity nor any abiding > substance can ever be > found. Thus, whenever the suttas speak of man, > woman or person, or of the > rebirth of a being, this must not be taken as being > valid in the ultimate > sense, but as a mere conventional mode of speech > (vohára-vacana). > > It is one of the main characteristics of the > Abhidhamma Pitaka, in > distinction from most of the Sutta Pitaka, that it > does not employ > conventional language, but deals only with > ultimates, or realities in the > highest sense (paramattha-dhammá). But also in the > Sutta Pitaka there are > many expositions in terms of ultimate language > (paramattha-desaná), > namely, wherever these texts deal with the groups > (khandha), elements > (dhátu) or sense-bases (áyatana), and their > components; and wherever the 3 > characteristics (ti-lakkhana, q.v.) are applied. The > majority of Sutta > texts, however, use the conventional language, as > appropriate in a > practical or ethical context, because it "would not > be right to say that > 'the groups' (khandha) feel shame, etc." > > It should be noted, however, that also statements of > the Buddha couched in > conventional language, are called 'truth' > (vohára-sacca), being correct on > their own level, which does not contradict the fact > that such statements > ultimately refer to impermanent and impersonal > processes. > > The two truths - ultimate and conventional - appear > in that form only in > the commentaries, but are implied in a > sutta-distinction of 'explicit (or > direct) meaning' (nítattha, q.v.) and 'implicit > meaning (to be inferred)' > (neyyattha). Further, the Buddha repeatedly > mentioned his reservations > when using conventional speech, e.g. in D. 9: "These > are merely names, > expressions, turns of speech, designations in common > use in the world, > which the Perfect Qne (Tathágata) uses without > misapprehending them." See > also S. I. 25. > The term paramattha, in the sense here used, occurs > in the first para. of > the Kathávatthu, a work of the Abhidhamma Pitaka (s. > Guide, p. 62). (App: > vohára). > > The commentarial discussions on these truths (Com. > to D. 9 and M. 5) have > not yet been translated in full. On these see K N. > Jayatilleke, Early > Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (London, 1963), pp. > 361ff. > > In Maháyana, the Mádhyamika school has given a > prominent place to the > teaching of the two truths.” > [ends] 9437 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:01am Subject: Moha wasBhavanga Cittas In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > ++++++ > > Moha (ignorance ) is always a root of all kilesa. So it is associated > > with all types of ditthi(wrong view). The heart of all these wrong > > views is that ignorance obscures the true nature of reality. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay. But what *is* ignorance? Just an absence? If not, what is it the > presence of? It isn't some sort of substance. Is it a function? A process? > What is it? (In some ways, the term 'avijja' seems to be a conventional one > expressing a conventional concept.) > --------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard, This is a hard question. Whatever there is, is only citta, cetasika and rupa(leaving aside nibbana). Anything else is simply concept. I guess we all have no problem grasping that lobha (desire) is a dhamma - it is so obvious whenever we crave something, get hungry etc. Moha, too, is a dhamma but it is so unobvious! But it is there. It has functions, characteristics. It is present but subordinate at times when there is craving because the craving is more obvious. At times when we are not sure of the nature of this moment it is more obvious. We tend to think "I" am confused, I don't know, but it is just moha performing its function of obscuring reality. It is, of course, considerably more complex than I make it sound here. Sankhara-khanda comprises all cetasikas and each moment different, conditioned conglomerates of many different cetasikas arise that make up sankhara khanda. Even each cetasika is not exactly the same as the previous ones. Especially, Moha, that arises with all akusala moments, and is intricately conditioned by the other cetasikas that arise concurrently with it, is hard to know. It is, as you have often pointed out, not really right if we think of cetasikas as some sort of indivisible atom floating around. Final comment at the bottom: > > +++++++ > > > In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic > > theory of > > > conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when > > I see > > > problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as > > bringing up the > > > business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without > > wisdom, an > > > entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back from > > the > > > screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which > > are then > > > annihilated, both such notions pointing away from no- self/emptiness. > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > Remember what Suan wrote recently: > > "The fact that paramattha dhammas are sunnyata (empty of self and > > self-belongings) does not negate their existence or their truth > > status." > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I agree with that. Dhammas exist, but not inherently with essence or > own-being. They are neither nothing at all nor are they self- existent > entities. They are things-in-relation. > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > the Buddha says: > > SnXXII 94 > > Rupa that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this > > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > > EXISTS. Feeling...perception..volitional > > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > > subject to change..I too say that it exists." > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Did the Buddha, himself, capitalize the first 'exists'? ;-)) > Yes, I agree that these things exist. That is, they are not nothing. > But they ARE (my caps ;-) nothing IN-AND-OF-THEMSELVES. Their existence is, > as you say so well below, not as we imagine it to be. Their existence as > separate entities is merely conventional and ultimately false. > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Paramattha dhammas exist but not in the way we usually imagine things > > to exist. They are so ephemeral that time itself can only be properly > > understood in relation to the arising and passing. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes. And it is not only their ephemeral nature that makes them > different from the way they seem, but also their dependent nature, and that > dependency being a dependency on similarly ephemeral and dependent things > makes these "things" quite empty. They are sunya - swollen, hollow. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > So many different > > > conditions must coincide for even one moment of seeing, for example, > > to arise - yet we take seeing for granted; and we think it lasts, > > think we can control it. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yes. I've been coming to see more and more clearly the > uncontrollability of things. The notion that we are or can be in any sort of > ultimate control of things is a kind of sad joke. And when we buy into that > joke the humor turns to tragedy. Impersonality is what there is, with little > real ability to control anything, and no *controller* to be found anywhere in > any case. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Well said! best wishes robert 9438 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: Moha wasBhavanga Cittas Sorry , I should have said "sankhara khanda comprises all cetasikas EXCEPT vedana and sanna...."--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > ++++++ > > > Moha (ignorance ) is always a root of all kilesa. So it is > associated > > > with all types of ditthi(wrong view). The heart of all these > wrong > > > views is that ignorance obscures the true nature of reality. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Okay. But what *is* ignorance? Just an absence? If not, what > is it the > > presence of? It isn't some sort of substance. Is it a function? A > process? > > What is it? (In some ways, the term 'avijja' seems to be a > conventional one > > expressing a conventional concept.) > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Dear Howard, > This is a hard question. Whatever there is, is only citta, cetasika > and rupa(leaving aside nibbana). Anything else is simply concept. > I guess we all have no problem grasping that lobha (desire) is a > dhamma - it is so obvious whenever we crave something, get hungry > etc. Moha, too, is a dhamma but it is so unobvious! But it is there. > It has functions, characteristics. It is present but subordinate at > times when there is craving because the craving is more obvious. At > times when we are not sure of the nature of this moment it is more > obvious. We tend to think "I" am confused, I don't know, but it is > just moha performing its function of obscuring reality. > It is, of course, considerably more complex than I make it sound > here. Sankhara-khanda comprises all cetasikas and each moment > different, conditioned conglomerates of many different cetasikas > arise that make up sankhara khanda. Even each cetasika is not exactly > the same as the previous ones. Especially, Moha, that arises with all > akusala moments, and is intricately conditioned by the other > cetasikas that arise concurrently with it, is hard to know. > It is, as you have often pointed out, not really right if we think of > cetasikas as some sort of indivisible atom floating around. > Final comment at the bottom: > > > > +++++++ > > > > In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic > > > theory of > > > > conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is > when > > > I see > > > > problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as > > > bringing up the > > > > business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without > > > wisdom, an > > > > entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back > from > > > the > > > > screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" > which > > > are then > > > > annihilated, both such notions pointing away from no- > self/emptiness. > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > Remember what Suan wrote recently: > > > "The fact that paramattha dhammas are sunnyata (empty of self > and > > > self-belongings) does not negate their existence or their truth > > > status." > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I agree with that. Dhammas exist, but not inherently with > essence or > > own-being. They are neither nothing at all nor are they self- > existent > > entities. They are things-in-relation. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > the Buddha says: > > > SnXXII 94 > > > Rupa that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this > > > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > > > EXISTS. Feeling...perception..volitional > > > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > > > subject to change..I too say that it exists." > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Did the Buddha, himself, capitalize the first 'exists'? ;- )) > > Yes, I agree that these things exist. That is, they are not > nothing. > > But they ARE (my caps ;-) nothing IN-AND-OF-THEMSELVES. Their > existence is, > > as you say so well below, not as we imagine it to be. Their > existence as > > separate entities is merely conventional and ultimately false. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Paramattha dhammas exist but not in the way we usually imagine > things > > > to exist. They are so ephemeral that time itself can only be > properly > > > understood in relation to the arising and passing. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes. And it is not only their ephemeral nature that makes > them > > different from the way they seem, but also their dependent nature, > and that > > dependency being a dependency on similarly ephemeral and dependent > things > > makes these "things" quite empty. They are sunya - swollen, hollow. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > So many different > > > > conditions must coincide for even one moment of seeing, for > example, > > > to arise - yet we take seeing for granted; and we think it lasts, > > > think we can control it. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Yes. I've been coming to see more and more clearly the > > uncontrollability of things. The notion that we are or can be in > any sort of > > ultimate control of things is a kind of sad joke. And when we buy > into that > > joke the humor turns to tragedy. Impersonality is what there is, > with little > > real ability to control anything, and no *controller* to be found > anywhere in > > any case. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Well said! > best wishes > robert 9439 From: m. nease Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] hello all! Hi Sarah (and Nina), --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Glad to see you getting on well in the internet cafe > and hoping you're still > finding the 'live' discussions and talks uplifting. Actually I'm getting a little more time on-line at the Foundation and still finding the live discussions quite edifying--if only they had them every day... At the moment I'm typing from Sukin's shop--hello from Sukin... > perhaps I should have said, no omniscient God and as > we understand there is no > self, we also understand there are no other beings > or gods in > actuality...merely conventional terms..... > > Does that pass? Of course-- > Thanks, pls feel free to 'pick' any holes anytime;-) I really was just giving you a hard time. Still the presence of gods in the suttas made me feel a little less hostile towards religions... > Sarah > > p.s. I think your comment to me on metta has been > answered by Nina and my later > post to all..let me know if we still don't quite > agree;-) Yes, in fact I agree completely with you both--all my posts on the subject were pretty half-baked. Is it too late to chalk it up to jet lag? Thanks to you both for the corrections. mike 9440 From: m. nease Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Moha wasBhavanga Cittas Robert and Howard, --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Howard: > > Did the Buddha, himself, capitalize the > first 'exists'? ;-)) > > Yes, I agree that these things exist. That > is, they are not > nothing. > > But they ARE (my caps ;-) nothing > IN-AND-OF-THEMSELVES. Their > existence is, > > as you say so well below, not as we imagine it to > be. Their > existence as > > separate entities is merely conventional and > ultimately false. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Paramattha dhammas exist but not in the way we > usually imagine > things > > > to exist. They are so ephemeral that time itself > can only be > properly > > > understood in relation to the arising and > passing. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes. And it is not only their ephemeral > nature that makes > them > > different from the way they seem, but also their > dependent nature, > and that > > dependency being a dependency on similarly > ephemeral and dependent > things > > makes these "things" quite empty. They are sunya - > swollen, hollow. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > So many different > > > > conditions must coincide for even one moment of > seeing, for > example, > > > to arise - yet we take seeing for granted; and > we think it lasts, > > > think we can control it. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Yes. I've been coming to see more and more > clearly the > > uncontrollability of things. The notion that we > are or can be in > any sort of > > ultimate control of things is a kind of sad joke. > And when we buy > into that > > joke the humor turns to tragedy. Impersonality is > what there is, > with little > > real ability to control anything, and no > *controller* to be found > anywhere in > > any case. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Well said! Very well said, both--thanks. mike 9441 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities Hi Jon and Mike I got no problem of its use just suggesting maybe could we find and explore other better word. Ken O --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > I think this gap is so important to bridge and I do it > so badly--I'm keeping a copy of this on my 'desktop' > for future reference. Thanks-- > > mike > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Howard (and Ken, Mike and others (including Erik)) > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote > > > > > Just one cautionary note. Abidhammikas > > don't use the term > > > 'ultimate > > > reality' in a sense that precludes it from being > > conditioned. I find > > > that use > > > of the term a bit odd, but so long as it has a > > consistent meaning in > > > that > > > context, there is no problem. In Abhidhamma, I > > believe that a paramattha > > > > > > dhamma is any dhamma that is directly observable > > through a sense door as > > > > > > opposed to being (the referent of a) mere concept. > > We're headed for > > > misunderstanding when we conflate the Abhidhammic > > defintion with > > > another. > > > > I suspect most people find the term ‘ultimate’ (a > > translation of the Pali > > ‘paramattha’) used in conjunction with ‘reality’ > > (Pali: ‘dhamma’) a > > strange pairing, initially. The term ‘paramattha’ > > is, I believe, more > > often found in conjunction with ‘truth’ (‘sacca’), > > where its import is > > easier to see. > > > > I just checked Nyanatiloka’s Buddhist Dictionary, > > and thought that some > > might find the discussion there useful (although > > not, of course, > > authoritative). I have pasted it below. > > > > Of particular interest to one or two of our members > > (are you there, Erik?) > > will be the comment at the end about the importance > > given in the > > Madhyamika school of Mahayana to the distinction > > between ultimate truths > > and conventional truths > > > > Jon > > > > From Nyanatiloka, ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ > > http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_p2.htm > > > > “paramattha (-sacca, -vacana, -desaná): > > > > 'truth (or term, exposition) that is true in the > > highest (or ultimate) > > sense', as contrasted with the 'conventional truth' > > (vohára-sacca), which > > is also called 'commonly accepted truth' > > (sammuti-sacca; in Skr: > > samvrti-satya). > > > > The Buddha, in explaining his doctrine, sometimes > > used conventional > > language and sometimes the philosophical mode of > > expression which is in > > accordance whith undeluded insight into reality. In > > that ultimate sense, > > existence is a mere process of physical and mental > > phenomena within which, > > or beyond which, no real ego-entity nor any abiding > > substance can ever be > > found. Thus, whenever the suttas speak of man, > > woman or person, or of the > > rebirth of a being, this must not be taken as being > > valid in the ultimate > > sense, but as a mere conventional mode of speech > > (vohára-vacana). > > > > It is one of the main characteristics of the > > Abhidhamma Pitaka, in > > distinction from most of the Sutta Pitaka, that it > > does not employ > > conventional language, but deals only with > > ultimates, or realities in the > > highest sense (paramattha-dhammá). But also in the > > Sutta Pitaka there are > > many expositions in terms of ultimate language > > (paramattha-desaná), > > namely, wherever these texts deal with the groups > > (khandha), elements > > (dhátu) or sense-bases (áyatana), and their > > components; and wherever the 3 > > characteristics (ti-lakkhana, q.v.) are applied. The > > majority of Sutta > > texts, however, use the conventional language, as > > appropriate in a > > practical or ethical context, because it "would not > > be right to say that > > 'the groups' (khandha) feel shame, etc." > > > > It should be noted, however, that also statements of > > the Buddha couched in > > conventional language, are called 'truth' > > (vohára-sacca), being correct on > > their own level, which does not contradict the fact > > that such statements > > ultimately refer to impermanent and impersonal > > processes. > > > > The two truths - ultimate and conventional - appear > > in that form only in > > the commentaries, but are implied in a > > sutta-distinction of 'explicit (or > > direct) meaning' (nítattha, q.v.) and 'implicit > > meaning (to be inferred)' > > (neyyattha). Further, the Buddha repeatedly > > mentioned his reservations > > when using conventional speech, e.g. in D. 9: "These > > are merely names, > > expressions, turns of speech, designations in common > > use in the world, > > which the Perfect Qne (Tathágata) uses without > > misapprehending them." See > > also S. I. 25. > > The term paramattha, in the sense here used, occurs > > in the first para. of > > the Kathávatthu, a work of the Abhidhamma Pitaka (s. > > Guide, p. 62). (App: > > vohára). > > > > The commentarial discussions on these truths (Com. > > to D. 9 and M. 5) have > > not yet been translated in full. On these see K N. > > Jayatilleke, Early > > Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (London, 1963), pp. > > 361ff. > > > > In Maháyana, the Mádhyamika school has given a > > prominent place to the > > teaching of the two truths.” > > [ends] 9442 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Hi, Tadao --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Sarah: > I am busy during the summer 2002, but I will think about going to > Thailand the summer 2003. I am qurioius about knowing the general > atmousphere of the Thai Sangha. tadao From what I can gather, there has been a definite change for the worse since the time you were in Bangkok. Certainly there has been a high 'scandal rate' of late. But one should be careful not to impute the same lack of good vinaya to all monks. As I recall, however, even in your days it was not easy to find a place where proper observance of the vinaya was encouraged. Jon 9443 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/19/01 9:09:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes, I understand that features of subsequent cittas are > > conditioned by the features of the current citta. If that were not so, > there would be complete randomness. But the arising and destruction of > separate, self-existing units constituting the entirety of experience > while each exists is reminiscent of the old action-at-distance of > Neutonian mechanics, and it has the flavor of an atta-view. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > k: I am confuse. I thought conscious as explained in Dependent > Orgination, is pass from one form to another and some old action is passed > as condition to the next action in the next form, does that consitute an > atta-view? I sorry, maybe I do not get what you are trying to say. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly the nature of subsequent events are conditioned by events that precede them. But nothing is "passed along". But this is not my point. The dhamma/citta theory of discrete mind-moments each arising out of nothing, but because of previous such mind-moments, being a real entity while existing, and then being annihilated is a *theory*, and one which was propounded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka but not in the Sutta Pitaka. These mind moments, being separate, real entities with essence have "core", and are not "hollow". That aspect of the theory, at least under its more extreme interpretations, is a form of substantialism from my perspective. And the idea of the destruction of such inherent existents constitutes a form of annihilationism. I understand that your background is Mahayanist. In that case, if you would read some of Nagarjuna, you will get what I am talking about. ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ------------------------------------------- > Your post to Robert K, > In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic theory > > of conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when I > see problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as > bringing > > up the business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without > wisdom, an entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back > from the screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which > are then annihilated, both such notions pointing away from > no->self/emptiness. > ------------------------------------------- > > k: Would you kindly explain what is your understanding or your views on > no self and how does such "citta being "real things" which are then > annihilated", point away from no self/emptiness. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Please see my earlier comments. -------------------------------------------- Secondly its relation > to the rebirth cycle. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: What do you want to discuss about the rebirth cycle? ---------------------------------------------- > > > > Kind Regards > Ken O > > ============================ 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) 9444 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 6:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could still > end > up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), and > that > practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could > eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, be a > paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser approximation > of that). I personally don't think anyone can stumble onto the Buddha's path. But I was really following a slightly different point. If a person who has never heard the dhamma develops, for example, samatha, is that person developing the path factor of right concentration, would you say? (... and if not, what is the difference between that person developing samatha and someone who has heard the dhamma developing samatha?) Likewise for the other factors of the path that you understand are to be developed separately (except, of course, samma ditthi). Jon 9445 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 6:08am Subject: Bhavanga Cittas [Howard] Hi Howard, Interesting comments you make, but I still have a question or two. _________________________ Howard: > But this is not my point. The dhamma/citta theory of discrete > mind-moments each arising out of nothing, but because of previous such > mind-moments, being a real entity while existing, and then being annihilated > is a *theory*, and one which was propounded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka but not > in the Sutta Pitaka. Dan: This is propounded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka? Are you sure? ___________________________________ Howard: > These mind moments, being separate, real entities with > essence have "core", and are not "hollow". That aspect of the theory, at > least under its more extreme interpretations, is a form of substantialism > from my perspective. And the idea of the destruction of such inherent > existents constitutes a form of annihilationism. Dan: I don't think you need to go so far as to say "under its more extreme interpretations." It is prima facie a form a substantialism--one that was recognized very early in Theravada tradition and explicitly argued against. For example, see Kattavatthu. > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > Your post to Robert K, > > In any case, my primary difficulty is with the atomistic theory > > > of conciousness in general and its explanatory capability. It is when I > > see problems in that area arising that I raise questions, such as > > bringing > > > up the business of an overarching something that grasps, with/without > > wisdom, an entire process of cittas, like a "self"/observer standing back > > from the screen, and also with regard to cittas being "real things" which > > are then annihilated, both such notions pointing away from > > no->self/emptiness. > > ------------------------------------------- > > > > k: Would you kindly explain what is your understanding or your views on > > no self and how does such "citta being "real things" which are then > > annihilated", point away from no self/emptiness. > > > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Please see my earlier comments. > -------------------------------------------- > Secondly its relation > to the rebirth cycle. > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > What do you want to discuss about the rebirth cycle? > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > Ken O > > > > > ============================ > 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) 9446 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittasn Hi, Mike - In a message dated 11/19/01 9:58:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Mike - > > > > (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status now? Are you still > callable as > > "Mike"?) > > Yep, still plain old layman mike. Ordination still might happen but there > are un foreseen obstacles, legal etc. We'll see... > > > So at each moment there is no blur, but then, as a kind of > conceptual > > summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that my mind is becoming a > total > > blur at such thoughts! ;-)) > > Well, I borrowed this blur--I think I should return it to Robert, my > apologies > if it's a little soiled, Rob. If I may fall back and regroup my > aggregates, I > guess I'll have to play the 'movie' card again. Not a blur, but a > conceptual assemblage of a whole lot of moments of consciousness and > their attendant factors (whether 'atomistic' or not) which can seem very > clear. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: My question was *where* this "assembling" takes place. There is no something which stands back and looks at the flow of cittas, because it is only each citta that constitutes an act of knowing! It sounds like we're discussing what Nagelcalled a "view from nowhere"! ----------------------------------------------------------- (As I'm sure you know, the mental factor 'vitakka' can take concept > > as an object. By the way, I do think Robert's comments re. avijja as > a 'positive' and extremely potent force are very pertinent). I do take > your > point, Howard, about this kind of 'particular' reference to cittas. In my > opinion it doesn't really matter whether they each have a discrete, > separate 'existence' or not--as I tried to communicate to Kenneth, I think > all this theoretical structure is just a way of trying to get a > verbal/conceptual frame of reference for the ever-moving moment of > experience, so that we can think about it and discuss it on an intellectual > > level. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I also feel more comfortable about these notions when I don't look too carefully at them! ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- Since I habitually reason from the general to the specific, I don't > > really have a problem when I run into a detail that seems logically > problematic-I just take a step back and see if that point, accepted for > argument's sake with whatever reservations, seems to fit into the 'big > picture' as I understand it so far. If you'll forgive my playing the > 'arrow' > card in the same hand, > > "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with > poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him > with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed > until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a > priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow > removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who > wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I > > know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know > his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which > I > was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the > bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, > hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded > was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft > with > which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, > or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded > was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a > monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know > whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, > a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man > would die and those things would still remain unknown to him. > > Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, hmm! Not to get bogged down in theorizing. a vert good idea! (Actually, that is a major part of my emphasis. I think that it is very easy to over-theorize, and my comments are directed only to question some of the elaborate theoretical scaffoldingthat has been erected, not to erect any of my own. I prefer to follow a simple Buddhist practice of observing the precepts, calming and focusing the mind, and examining dhammas. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Of course to me this means (among other things) that to reject the > Dhamma according to the Theravada on the grounds of (what I see as) > minute points of intellecutal detail is to throw the baby out with the bath > (if I > may also play the baby and bath cards). Does it really matter if the > moments in a continuum of experience are discrete or not? Does it matter > whether sunlight hits us in waves or particles? Or experience of it is the > > same either way I think. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I am a Buddhist, not a Theravadin or a Mahayanist, though I'm closer to Theravada. Nagarjuna over-theorizes in my estimation as well! The thing is - there are loads of "good Theravadins", including many, many brilliant and consistently practicing Theravadin monks who have grave reservations about Abhidhamma. Theravadins, however, they do remain, drinking of, washing in, and swimming in that bath water. ----------------------------------------------------- > > I know I shouldn't argue with you, Howard. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Hey! We're not arguing! We're talking. :-) ----------------------------------------------------- We both know you're a > smarter man than I am and know the Dhamma better, > including the > Theravada I think. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Nonsense! Neither one of us knows all that much about how "smart" the other is, and my formal knowledge of the Dhamma is very limited. Also, as far as "smart" is concerned, I wouldn't give you all that much for "smart". There are worlds full of "smart" dummies who don't have a clue about "the way things are", being so caught up in their minds that they are totally out of touch. I'll take one serious practitioner with a good heart in trade for 10,000 such intellectuals. -------------------------------------------------- I just hope you aren't too smart for your own good. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Hmmm. An odd thing for you to say, Mike. I find it a bit surprising, and not very pleasant. (Perhaps I misunderstand.) ------------------------------------------------- > Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you all the very best!!!> > > Ditto and back at you, Howard--if you figure out a better approach to > getting that arrow out I hope you'll let me know. Whether you do or not, > keep in touch, eh? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. ------------------------------------------------- > > Your Friend, > > mike > ========================= 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) 9447 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/20/01 3:32:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > I suspect most people find the term ‘ultimate’ (a translation of the Pali > ‘paramattha’) used in conjunction with ‘reality’ (Pali: ‘dhamma’) a > strange pairing, initially. The term ‘paramattha’ is, I believe, more > often found in conjunction with ‘truth’ (‘sacca’), where its import is > easier to see. > =========================== Yes. I, for one, am far more comfortable with the the idea of "ultimate truth" than that of "ultimate dhamma". 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) 9448 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Moha wasBhavanga Cittas Hi, Mike (and Robert) - After quoting Robert and me, you write: "Very well said, both--thanks." ========================== Thanks. Yes, I found this back & forth with Robert extremely pleasant and rewarding! With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/20/01 5:18:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > Robert and Howard, > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > Howard: > > > Did the Buddha, himself, capitalize the > > first 'exists'? ;-)) > > > Yes, I agree that these things exist. That > > is, they are not > > nothing. > > > But they ARE (my caps ;-) nothing > > IN-AND-OF-THEMSELVES. Their > > existence is, > > > as you say so well below, not as we imagine it to > > be. Their > > existence as > > > separate entities is merely conventional and > > ultimately false. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Paramattha dhammas exist but not in the way we > > usually imagine > > things > > > > to exist. They are so ephemeral that time itself > > can only be > > properly > > > > understood in relation to the arising and > > passing. > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > Yes. And it is not only their ephemeral > > nature that makes > > them > > > different from the way they seem, but also their > > dependent nature, > > and that > > > dependency being a dependency on similarly > > ephemeral and dependent > > things > > > makes these "things" quite empty. They are sunya - > > swollen, hollow. > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > So many different > > > > > conditions must coincide for even one moment of > > seeing, for > > example, > > > > to arise - yet we take seeing for granted; and > > we think it lasts, > > > > think we can control it. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > Yes. I've been coming to see more and more > > clearly the > > > uncontrollability of things. The notion that we > > are or can be in > > any sort of > > > ultimate control of things is a kind of sad joke. > > And when we buy > > into that > > > joke the humor turns to tragedy. Impersonality is > > what there is, > > with little > > > real ability to control anything, and no > > *controller* to be found > > anywhere in > > > any case. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Well said! > > Very well said, both--thanks. > > mike > > /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) 9449 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 6:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Howard > Howard: > Certainly the nature of subsequent events are conditioned by > events that precede them. But nothing is "passed along". k: I thought something was passed between each cittas that conditions the other. To me at least, accumulations of panna as well as moha is also passed (unless someone tell me i am wrong in my interpretation). >Howard: But this is not my point. The dhamma/citta theory of discrete > mind-moments each arising out of nothing, but because of previous such > mind-moments, being a real entity while existing, and then being > annihilated is a *theory*, and one which was propounded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka but not in the Sutta Pitaka. k: I dont think that they think each arise out of nothing, their stand is that each arise due to the conditioning of the previous citta. Their chief factor in conditioning is Moha. Moha is a conditioning factor which I think is very logical because it does rhymes with Dependent Orignation where moha is the chief. Even for Mahayana, ignorance is also the chief cause of conditioning in samasara. Howard: These mind moments, being separate, real entities with essence have "core", and are not "hollow". That aspect of the theory, at least under its more extreme interpretations, is a form of substantialism > from my perspective. And the idea of the destruction of such inherent > existents constitutes a form of annihilationism. I understand that your > background is Mahayanist. In that case, if you would read some of > Nagarjuna, you will get what I am talking about. > ------------------------------------------------------- k: I don't think the Abhidhammic theory supports a core, in my view, they think such cittas are also a condition dhamma. To them whatever is condition is not a core and definitely without any real existence or you have said hollow. Hence whatever is condition, will cease. Citta goes to nowhere when it cease, similar to Mahayana, no one knows where does feelings goes when it has pass away or it ceases to exist from the moment. Abhidhammic also acknowlegde that feeling is condition likewise for Mahayana. k: Would you like to share with me what Nagarjuna says about conscious. Any good link to recommend or books to buy so that I could better understand. I always like to explore other systems of Buddhism and I feel each systems or school of thoughts assist one another to understand Buddhism. Kind regards Ken O 9450 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 0:40pm Subject: Samannaphala verse 65 Dear All, It occurs to me I could be sinking into the quicksand of too much detail in this commentary......however, a few rambling questions: Verse 65 The Samannaphala Sutta commentary Bhikkhu Bodhi. "And how, great king, is the bhikkhu endowed with mindfulness and clear comprehension? Herein, great king, in going forward and returning, the bhikkhu acts with clear comprehension. In looking ahead and looking aside, he acts with clear comprehension. In bending and stretching the limbs, he acts with clear comprehension. In wearing his robes and cloak and using his almsbowl, he acts with clear comprehension. In eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting, he acts with clear comprehension. In defecating and urinating, he acts with clear comprehension. In going, standing, sitting, lying down, waking up, speaking, and remaining silent, he acts with clear comprehension. In this way, great king, the bhikkhu is endowed with mindfulness and clear comprehension." Commentary on this verse pp.96- 134 The commentary states that clear comprehension is fourfold: clear comprehension of purposefulness, clear comprehension of suitability, clear comprehension of the resort, and clear comprehension of non- delusion. Within clear comprehension of purposefulness.....p.98 'One arouses rapture having the Buddha as object....one arouses rapture having the Sangha as object.......' I'm assuming this doesn't mean the everyday use of 'rapture' as in 'The Prime Minister was given a rapturous welcome by Party members'. What is 'rapture' in the Buddhist sense, and 'how' does one arouse it, and 'why' would one wish to? Is 'rapture' the same as 'jhana'? What is meant by the 'Sangha' in this verse.?....it seems to mean different things to different people. For example, many people refer only to ordained Bhikkhus, others refer to every Buddhist who has ever lived (as per the Communion of Saints in the Christian sense), and still others refer to just their meditation group, or buddhist email group as their sangha. Which version, if any, would be defined as 'object'? Any reason why the third jewel the Dhamma isn't used as an object? - doesn't seem the way of a commentator to leave out something they could talk about for a page and a half.. (:-)) Sorry - this part got a bit tedious.....38 pages on one verse...) I have always practiced meditation by watching the breath (rising and falling of the abdomen).........having the Buddha as object, is this recollecting his wonderful qualities,....I think RobertK recently mentioned Buddhanusati (in the context of using this rather than metta towards oneself) - but I found this a little artificial to do.....no 'pleasant' feelings... Jon said in a recent post, "Let me say at the outset, because I think this is very important, that no-one is asking us to change, or to try to change, any of what is happening now, naturally. In other words, the teaching is not about 'slowing down' the present moment, or contriving to reduce the speed, variety or strength of sense impressions. That would be trying to change the reality of the present moment in some manner, rather than simply understanding it more for what it is." In 'Clear comprehension of non-delusion' - I understand (theoretically) that it is not 'a self who goes forward, the action of going forward is not produced by a self' , but the commentary goes into such long descriptions of 'raising the foot', 'bringing it forward' 'shifting it away', 'dropping the foot', 'bringing the new foot forward' - it seems very much to be encouraging just that 'slowing down' and examining of the action commonly taught in Walking Meditation in Retreats, but is this what is discouraged, in Jon's paragraph above? metta, Christine 9451 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 9:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/20/01 9:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could still > > end > > up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), and > > that > > practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could > > eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, be a > > paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser approximation > > of that). > > I personally don't think anyone can stumble onto the Buddha's path. But I > was really following a slightly different point. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: So the only paccekabuddhas would be folks who in some previous lifetime had heard the Dhamma? Is this notion expressed somewhere in the tipitaka or commentaries? ------------------------------------------------------- > > If a person who has never heard the dhamma develops, for example, samatha, > is that person developing the path factor of right concentration, would > you say? (... and if not, what is the difference between that person > developing samatha and someone who has heard the dhamma developing > samatha?) > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would think that anyone who has attained jhanas (or *perhaps* even neighborhood concentration) has developed right concentration to some extent, the extent being determined by the degree of mastery. (That, of course, does not imply the mastering of right mindfulness and other factors, or the attaining of wisdom.) ---------------------------------------------------- > > Likewise for the other factors of the path that you understand are to be > developed separately (except, of course, samma ditthi). ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Even samma ditthi could be developed as an outgrowth of the other factors. And, of course, even without hearing the "official" Dhamma, a number of its ideas such as impermanence and the sense of unreality to life can be found elsewhere (to "seed" the process): Consider Shakespeare, for example. If all this is impossible, then no "pure" paccekabuddhas could ever arise. ---------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 9452 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 9:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas [Howard] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 11/20/01 9:09:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, dhd5@c... writes: > Hi Howard, > Interesting comments you make, but I still have a question or two. > _________________________ > Howard: > > But this is not my point. The dhamma/citta theory of discrete > > mind-moments each arising out of nothing, but because of previous > such > > mind-moments, being a real entity while existing, and then being > annihilated > > is a *theory*, and one which was propounded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka > but not > > in the Sutta Pitaka. > > Dan: > This is propounded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka? Are you sure? ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, I'm not. It's my impression, but there is very little about anything that I am sure of! Kalupahana, for example, exonerates the Abhidhamma Pitaka, but not the commentaries. I'm sure no expert on this. But looking at Abhidhamma as expressed by Khun Sujin, Nina, et al, that is the impression I get. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > ___________________________________ > Howard: > > These mind moments, being separate, real > entities with > > essence have "core", and are not "hollow". That aspect of the > theory, at > > least under its more extreme interpretations, is a form of > substantialism > > from my perspective. And the idea of the destruction of such > inherent > > existents constitutes a form of annihilationism. > > Dan: > I don't think you need to go so far as to say "under its more extreme > interpretations." It is prima facie a form a substantialism--one that > was recognized very early in Theravada tradition and explicitly argued > against. For example, see Kattavatthu. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I am aware of the Kattavatthu attempting to correct substantialist interpretations. It simply seems to me that it is *far* easier to make such interpretations of the Abhidhamma Pitaka than the Sutta Pitaka. But were I to find that I am attempting to knock down a straw man, hardly anything could please me more. ========================== 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) 9453 From: Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 1:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/20/01 10:02:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > > Howard: > > Certainly the nature of subsequent events are conditioned by > > events that precede them. But nothing is "passed along". > > k: I thought something was passed between each cittas that conditions the > other. To me at least, accumulations of panna as well as moha is also > passed (unless someone tell me i am wrong in my interpretation). > > > >Howard: But this is not my point. The dhamma/citta theory of discrete > > mind-moments each arising out of nothing, but because of previous such > > mind-moments, being a real entity while existing, and then being > > annihilated is a *theory*, and one which was propounded in the > Abhidhamma Pitaka but not in the Sutta Pitaka. > > k: I dont think that they think each arise out of nothing, their stand is > that each arise due to the conditioning of the previous citta. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: You're correct, Ken. I didn't put that at all well. ---------------------------------------------------- Their > chief factor in conditioning is Moha. Moha is a conditioning > factor > which I think is very logical because it does rhymes with Dependent > Orignation where moha is the chief. Even for Mahayana, ignorance is also > the chief cause of conditioning in samasara. > > > Howard: These mind moments, being separate, real entities with essence > have "core", and are not "hollow". That aspect of the theory, at least > under its more extreme interpretations, is a form of substantialism > > from my perspective. And the idea of the destruction of such inherent > > existents constitutes a form of annihilationism. I understand that your > > background is Mahayanist. In that case, if you would read some of > > Nagarjuna, you will get what I am talking about. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > k: I don't think the Abhidhammic theory supports a core, in my view, > they think such cittas are also a condition dhamma. To them whatever is > condition is not a core and definitely without any real existence or you > have said hollow. Hence whatever is condition, will cease. Citta goes > to nowhere when it cease, similar to Mahayana, no one knows where does > feelings goes when it has pass away or it ceases to exist from the moment. > Abhidhammic also acknowlegde that feeling is condition likewise for > Mahayana. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Whatever ceases, going to nowhere, could not have substantial, inherent existence. It cannot be a "thing" in our usual sense of "thing". It must have merely conventional existence, being a separate "thing"only in a manner of speaking. -------------------------------------------------- > > > k: Would you like to share with me what Nagarjuna says about conscious. > Any good link to recommend or books to buy so that I could better > understand. I always like to explore other systems of Buddhism and I feel > each systems or school of thoughts assist one another to understand > Buddhism. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that getting into a discussion of Nagarjuna would be inappropriate for this list. I do highly recommend the following book: The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way, translated and commentary by Jay L. Garfield, Oxford University Press, 1995, ISBN 0-19-509336-4 (pbk). This gives a translation of and an excellent commentary (I think) on Nagarjuna's primary work, his Mulamadhyamakakarika. There is another translation from somewhat of a Theravadin viewpoint by Kalupahana which has some interesting features as well, but I prefer Garfield's text. ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > ============================= 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) 9454 From: m. nease Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 6:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittasn Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > I just hope you aren't too smart for your own > good. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Hmmm. An odd thing for you to say, Mike. I > find it a bit surprising, > and not very pleasant. (Perhaps I misunderstand.) > ------------------------------------------------- Sorry about that--no offense intended, I assure you. Well, I've said far too much already... Cheers, mike 9455 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Dear Mike, It may not surprise you to learn that I think the 'blur' phenomena is a bigger problem than mere bathwater. It may in fact affect the baby. I see Howard's question as an exceedingly important one: it doesn't just challenge the single unit citta theory. It implicitly posits a consiousness that is not dependent on the arising moment, but stands back from it and observes the accumulation of cittas. This consciousness, that can be confused about the nature of cittas, that either observes them in their singular functions, or else fails to keep up with them and 'blurs' them, what is it? It seems to me that it re-establishes the field of continuous consciousness that Abidhamma goes to a great lot of trouble to avoid. If the impression created by more than one moment cannot be accounted for by a simple passage of the qualities of one citta to the next or in another way, I think it brings an unacknowledged element of continuous consciousness needed to account for real human experience into play. That would seem to put Abhidhamma and Mahayana in much more of the same boat than it has previously seemed. Hope this doesn't sound hopelessly indecipherable. I can't seem to talk any other way about this topic right now. Best, Robert ========================== --- mlnease@y... wrote: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Mike - > > > > (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status now? Are you still callable as > > "Mike"?) > > Yep, still plain old layman mike. Ordination still might happen but there > are un foreseen obstacles, legal etc. We'll see... > > > So at each moment there is no blur, but then, as a kind of > conceptual > > summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that my mind is becoming a > total > > blur at such thoughts! ;-)) > > Well, I borrowed this blur--I think I should return it to Robert, my apologies > if it's a little soiled, Rob. If I may fall back and regroup my aggregates, I > guess I'll have to play the 'movie' card again. Not a blur, but a > conceptual assemblage of a whole lot of moments of consciousness and > their attendant factors (whether 'atomistic' or not) which can seem very > clear. (As I'm sure you know, the mental factor 'vitakka' can take concept > as an object. By the way, I do think Robert's comments re. avijja as > a 'positive' and extremely potent force are very pertinent). I do take your > point, Howard, about this kind of 'particular' reference to cittas. In my > opinion it doesn't really matter whether they each have a discrete, > separate 'existence' or not--as I tried to communicate to Kenneth, I think > all this theoretical structure is just a way of trying to get a > verbal/conceptual frame of reference for the ever-moving moment of > experience, so that we can think about it and discuss it on an intellectual > level. Since I habitually reason from the general to the specific, I don't > really have a problem when I run into a detail that seems logically > problematic-I just take a step back and see if that point, accepted for > argument's sake with whatever reservations, seems to fit into the 'big > picture' as I understand it so far. If you'll forgive my playing the 'arrow' > card in the same hand, > > "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with > poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him > with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed > until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a > priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow > removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who > wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I > know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know > his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I > was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the > bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, > hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded > was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with > which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, > or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded > was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a > monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know > whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, > a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man > would die and those things would still remain unknown to him. > > Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > Of course to me this means (among other things) that to reject the > Dhamma according to the Theravada on the grounds of (what I see as) > minute points of intellecutal detail is to throw the baby out with the bath (if > I > may also play the baby and bath cards). Does it really matter if the > moments in a continuum of experience are discrete or not? Does it matter > whether sunlight hits us in waves or particles? Or experience of it is the > same either way I think. > > I know I shouldn't argue with you, Howard. We both know you're a > smarter man than I am and know the Dhamma better, including the > Theravada I think. I just hope you aren't too smart for your own good. > > > Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you all the very best!!! > > Ditto and back at you, Howard--if you figure out a better approach to > getting that arrow out I hope you'll let me know. Whether you do or not, > keep in touch, eh? > > Your Friend, > > mike 9456 From: m. nease Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi RobEp, Well, you may both be right--how would I know. Better I should just drop it. Best Wishes, mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Mike, > It may not surprise you to learn that I think the > 'blur' phenomena is a bigger > problem than mere bathwater. It may in fact affect > the baby. > > I see Howard's question as an exceedingly important > one: it doesn't just > challenge the single unit citta theory. It > implicitly posits a consiousness that > is not dependent on the arising moment, but stands > back from it and observes the > accumulation of cittas. This consciousness, that > can be confused about the nature > of cittas, that either observes them in their > singular functions, or else fails to > keep up with them and 'blurs' them, what is it? > > It seems to me that it re-establishes the field of > continuous consciousness that > Abidhamma goes to a great lot of trouble to avoid. > If the impression created by > more than one moment cannot be accounted for by a > simple passage of the qualities > of one citta to the next or in another way, I think > it brings an unacknowledged > element of continuous consciousness needed to > account for real human experience > into play. That would seem to put Abhidhamma and > Mahayana in much more of the same > boat than it has previously seemed. > > Hope this doesn't sound hopelessly indecipherable. > I can't seem to talk any other > way about this topic right now. > > Best, > Robert > > ========================== > > --- mlnease@y... wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > > Hi, Mike - > > > > > > (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status > now? Are you still callable as > > > "Mike"?) > > > > Yep, still plain old layman mike. Ordination > still might happen but there > > are un foreseen obstacles, legal etc. We'll > see... > > > > > So at each moment there is no blur, but > then, as a kind of > > conceptual > > > summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that > my mind is becoming a > > total > > > blur at such thoughts! ;-)) > > > > Well, I borrowed this blur--I think I should > return it to Robert, my apologies > > if it's a little soiled, Rob. If I may fall back > and regroup my aggregates, I > > guess I'll have to play the 'movie' card again. > Not a blur, but a > > conceptual assemblage of a whole lot of moments of > consciousness and > > their attendant factors (whether 'atomistic' or > not) which can seem very > > clear. (As I'm sure you know, the mental factor > 'vitakka' can take concept > > as an object. By the way, I do think Robert's > comments re. avijja as > > a 'positive' and extremely potent force are very > pertinent). I do take your > > point, Howard, about this kind of 'particular' > reference to cittas. In my > > opinion it doesn't really matter whether they each > have a discrete, > > separate 'existence' or not--as I tried to > communicate to Kenneth, I think > > all this theoretical structure is just a way of > trying to get a > > verbal/conceptual frame of reference for the > ever-moving moment of > > experience, so that we can think about it and > discuss it on an intellectual > > level. Since I habitually reason from the general > to the specific, I don't > > really have a problem when I run into a detail > that seems logically > > problematic-I just take a step back and see if > that point, accepted for > > argument's sake with whatever reservations, seems > to fit into the 'big > > picture' as I understand it so far. If you'll > forgive my playing the 'arrow' > > card in the same hand, > > > > "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow > thickly smeared with > > poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & > relatives would provide him > > with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't > have this arrow removed > > until I know whether the man who wounded me was a > noble warrior, a > > priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I > won't have this arrow > > removed until I know the given name & clan name of > the man who > > wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, > medium, or short... until I > > know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or > golden-colored... until I know > > his home village, town, or city... until I know > whether the bow with which I > > was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until > I know whether the > > bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, > bamboo threads, sinew, > > hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft > with which I was wounded > > was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the > feathers of the shaft with > > which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a > stork, a hawk, a peacock, > > or another bird... until I know whether the shaft > with which I was wounded > > was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water > buffalo, a langur, or a > > monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow > removed until I know > > whether the shaft with which I was wounded was > that of a common arrow, > > a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an > oleander arrow.' The man > > would die and those things would still remain > unknown to him. > > > > Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > > > Of course to me this means (among other things) > that to reject the > > Dhamma according to the Theravada on the grounds > of (what I see as) > > minute points of intellecutal detail is to throw > the baby out with the bath (if > > I > > may also play the baby and bath cards). Does it > really matter if the > > moments in a continuum of experience are discrete > or not? Does it matter > > whether sunlight hits us in waves or particles? > Or experience of it is the > > same either way I think. > > > > I know I shouldn't argue with you, Howard. We > both know you're a > > smarter man than I am and know the Dhamma better, > including the > > Theravada I think. I just hope you aren't too > smart for your own good. > > > > > Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you > all the very best!!! > > > > Ditto and back at you, Howard--if you figure out a > better approach to > > getting that arrow out I hope you'll let me know. > Whether you do or not, > > keep in touch, eh? > > > > Your Friend, > > > > mike 9458 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 9:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mike in Bkk;-) Hi Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Actually I'm getting a little more time on-line at the > Foundation and still finding the live discussions > quite edifying--if only they had them every day... At > the moment I'm typing from Sukin's shop--hello from > Sukin... Glad to hear about the on-line time at the Foundation for your sake and our sakes;-) With regard to the discussions, they'll be action-packed when we arrive;-) Seriously, if you ever feel you'd like/it would be useful to have an extra quiet chat with Khun Sujin, she'll be happy to oblige, I know. Just mention it quietly to her or Khun Sujit (sp?), her kind sister. Meanwhile, I'm sure Sukin is also delighted to have you visit his shop and type and discuss dhamma with him. He's always very kind and considerate. Have you bumped into Erik there yet?? Hope to hear from both Sukin and Erik from time to time, just to know they're around too;-) > > I really was just giving you a hard time. Still the > presence of gods in the suttas made me feel a little > less hostile towards religions... Yes, it was a good point, well-taken. pls give me a hard time, anytime! > > p.s. I think your comment to me on metta has been > > answered by Nina and my later > > post to all..let me know if we still don't quite > > agree;-) > > Yes, in fact I agree completely with you both--all my > posts on the subject were pretty half-baked. Is it > too late to chalk it up to jet lag? Thanks to you > both for the corrections. Actually you've been making some excellent comments in your posts to Ranil, far better than I could manage in major jet-lag mode. I'm sure it must still all be a little (or lot) 'overwhelming' at times...such a really big lifestyle change in every sense of the word, except perhaps the paramatha dhamma sense of the word.....different concepts and papanca, but still just seeing, hearing, feeling and all the usual 'garbage' (read kilesa) that follow us around;-) Very best wishes, Sarah 9459 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 9:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Dear Howard, In a way I think it comes down to how unique we believe the Buddha's teaching to be. Some of us will probably look at the Buddha's principles as naturally occurring in the world, and that one who is enlightened would naturally understand these principles of anatta, anicca and dukha. Others may look at the teaching of these principles, along with the eightfold path and the four noble truths and see these as absolutely unique to the Buddha, and only arising as a possibility because of his appearance in the world. This latter view would be partly formed by logic, partly by practice and experience, and partly it would be an article of religious faith. Believing in the Buddha's principles and path are something different than believing in the Buddha's personal omniscience and complete perfection of every action. I personally would not lose my faith in the principles if I were to find out that the Buddha had human qualities and made mistakes on a 'human' level. This would not bother me at all. My belief in Buddhism is not based on the Buddha's perfection. Maybe that is why it is easier for me to doubt certain things in the teachings if they don't make sense to me. Those who believe absolutely in the Buddha's words will tell me that I don't understand the complete meaning of what I am reading, and they're probably right. But it's never been my nature to swallow a teaching whole, or to believe that every word that is reported to have been said by Buddha, must, by divine ordination, necessarily be his actual teaching. That leaves me in the sorry position of having more doubt than those who have absolute faith. It also makes it harder for me to follow the path completely. I have more uncertainty about this or that point. In some ways I'm jealous of those who feel certain of where the steps lie and exactly what is required to walk them. At this point in my life I wish I had that certainty. Somewhere in the teachings the Buddha says that every person has to eventually sit down and examine their own mind and clear up their own doubts so that they can progress on the path. I don't remember if this is Mahayana or Theravada, but it makes a lot of sense to me. I do believe that the Buddha's appearance in the world and his decades of teaching the way out of delusion and suffering, is indeed unique and more comprehensive than any other single teaching. Moses' recorded preaching took place in a period of days. Hindu teachings are an eclectic assortment of various teachers' words. Lao Tzu is said to have scrawled the Tao Te Ching on a pice of parchment in exchange for being allowed to leave China by the gatekeeper. But the Buddha engaged with people of his time for decades and taught from the beginning of his enlightenment to his parinibbana. In that sense it is an absolutely unique teaching, filled with enormous detail, by perhaps the most discerning of the world teachers. Anyway, once again I'll stop rambling. I just wanted to establish that some of what we believe is by direct observation and insight, but much of it is carried by belief and faith. And this is unavoidable. I just think we may want to be clear about where our faith comes into it, to fill in the gaps in our discernment. Is it possible to come upon the principles of Buddhism through one's own personal discernment, without hearing the Dhamma, or hearing of the Buddha? I tend to think that it is possible, along with you, Howard, while others only believe that the intercession of the Buddha's words and presence make this possible. And I believe that is a matter of faith and belief, depending on where you stand in Buddhism. Best, Robert Ep. =============================== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 11/20/01 9:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, > jonoabb@y... writes: > > > > Howard > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > > > I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could still > > > end > > > up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), and > > > that > > > practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could > > > eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, be a > > > paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser approximation > > > of that). > > > > I personally don't think anyone can stumble onto the Buddha's path. But I > > was really following a slightly different point. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > So the only paccekabuddhas would be folks who in some previous > lifetime had heard the Dhamma? Is this notion expressed somewhere in the > tipitaka or commentaries? > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > If a person who has never heard the dhamma develops, for example, samatha, > > is that person developing the path factor of right concentration, would > > you say? (... and if not, what is the difference between that person > > developing samatha and someone who has heard the dhamma developing > > samatha?) > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I would think that anyone who has attained jhanas (or *perhaps* even > neighborhood concentration) has developed right concentration to some extent, > the extent being determined by the degree of mastery. (That, of course, does > not imply the mastering of right mindfulness and other factors, or the > attaining of wisdom.) > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > Likewise for the other factors of the path that you understand are to be > > developed separately (except, of course, samma ditthi). > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Even samma ditthi could be developed as an outgrowth of the other > factors. And, of course, even without hearing the "official" Dhamma, a number > of its ideas such as impermanence and the sense of unreality to life can be > found elsewhere (to "seed" the process): Consider Shakespeare, for example. > If all this is impossible, then no "pure" paccekabuddhas could ever arise. > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 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) 9460 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 20, 2001 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Aw, Mike, I didn't mean to imply that *I* know anything. I just wanted to argue about it! Regards, Robert Ep. =============================== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi RobEp, > > Well, you may both be right--how would I know. Better > I should just drop it. > > Best Wishes, > > mike > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Mike, > > It may not surprise you to learn that I think the > > 'blur' phenomena is a bigger > > problem than mere bathwater. It may in fact affect > > the baby. > > > > I see Howard's question as an exceedingly important > > one: it doesn't just > > challenge the single unit citta theory. It > > implicitly posits a consiousness that > > is not dependent on the arising moment, but stands > > back from it and observes the > > accumulation of cittas. This consciousness, that > > can be confused about the nature > > of cittas, that either observes them in their > > singular functions, or else fails to > > keep up with them and 'blurs' them, what is it? > > > > It seems to me that it re-establishes the field of > > continuous consciousness that > > Abidhamma goes to a great lot of trouble to avoid. > > If the impression created by > > more than one moment cannot be accounted for by a > > simple passage of the qualities > > of one citta to the next or in another way, I think > > it brings an unacknowledged > > element of continuous consciousness needed to > > account for real human experience > > into play. That would seem to put Abhidhamma and > > Mahayana in much more of the same > > boat than it has previously seemed. > > > > Hope this doesn't sound hopelessly indecipherable. > > I can't seem to talk any other > > way about this topic right now. > > > > Best, > > Robert > > > > ========================== > > > > --- mlnease@y... wrote: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, Mike - > > > > > > > > (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status > > now? Are you still callable as > > > > "Mike"?) > > > > > > Yep, still plain old layman mike. Ordination > > still might happen but there > > > are un foreseen obstacles, legal etc. We'll > > see... > > > > > > > So at each moment there is no blur, but > > then, as a kind of > > > conceptual > > > > summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that > > my mind is becoming a > > > total > > > > blur at such thoughts! ;-)) > > > > > > Well, I borrowed this blur--I think I should > > return it to Robert, my apologies > > > if it's a little soiled, Rob. If I may fall back > > and regroup my aggregates, I > > > guess I'll have to play the 'movie' card again. > > Not a blur, but a > > > conceptual assemblage of a whole lot of moments of > > consciousness and > > > their attendant factors (whether 'atomistic' or > > not) which can seem very > > > clear. (As I'm sure you know, the mental factor > > 'vitakka' can take concept > > > as an object. By the way, I do think Robert's > > comments re. avijja as > > > a 'positive' and extremely potent force are very > > pertinent). I do take your > > > point, Howard, about this kind of 'particular' > > reference to cittas. In my > > > opinion it doesn't really matter whether they each > > have a discrete, > > > separate 'existence' or not--as I tried to > > communicate to Kenneth, I think > > > all this theoretical structure is just a way of > > trying to get a > > > verbal/conceptual frame of reference for the > > ever-moving moment of > > > experience, so that we can think about it and > > discuss it on an intellectual > > > level. Since I habitually reason from the general > > to the specific, I don't > > > really have a problem when I run into a detail > > that seems logically > > > problematic-I just take a step back and see if > > that point, accepted for > > > argument's sake with whatever reservations, seems > > to fit into the 'big > > > picture' as I understand it so far. If you'll > > forgive my playing the 'arrow' > > > card in the same hand, > > > > > > "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow > > thickly smeared with > > > poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & > > relatives would provide him > > > with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't > > have this arrow removed > > > until I know whether the man who wounded me was a > > noble warrior, a > > > priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I > > won't have this arrow > > > removed until I know the given name & clan name of > > the man who > > > wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, > > medium, or short... until I > > > know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or > > golden-colored... until I know > > > his home village, town, or city... until I know > > whether the bow with which I > > > was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until > > I know whether the > > > bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, > > bamboo threads, sinew, > > > hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft > > with which I was wounded > > > was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the > > feathers of the shaft with > > > which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a > > stork, a hawk, a peacock, > > > or another bird... until I know whether the shaft > > with which I was wounded > > > was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water > > buffalo, a langur, or a > > > monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow > > removed until I know > > > whether the shaft with which I was wounded was > > that of a common arrow, > > > a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an > > oleander arrow.' The man > > > would die and those things would still remain > > unknown to him. > > > > > > Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta > > > > > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > > > > > Of course to me this means (among other things) > > that to reject the > > > Dhamma according to the Theravada on the grounds > > of (what I see as) > > > minute points of intellecutal detail is to throw > > the baby out with the bath (if > > > I > > > may also play the baby and bath cards). Does it > > really matter if the > > > moments in a continuum of experience are discrete > > or not? Does it matter > > > whether sunlight hits us in waves or particles? > > Or experience of it is the > > > same either way I think. > > > > > > I know I shouldn't argue with you, Howard. We > > both know you're a > > > smarter man than I am and know the Dhamma better, > > including the > > > Theravada I think. I just hope you aren't too > > smart for your own good. > > > > > > > Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you > > all the very best!!! > > > > > > Ditto and back at you, Howard--if you figure out a > > better approach to > > > getting that arrow out I hope you'll let me know. > > Whether you do or not, > > > keep in touch, eh? > > > > > > Your Friend, > > > > > > mike 9461 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 0:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Rob K, I’ve been appreciating all your posts recently;-) I’ve been quite busy, so only got a chance to have another look at the Vis. passages you mentioned as I was getting ready to go to bed last night..As a result, I had lots of useful reflection on metta as I was falling asleep:-) I’m not sure I’ll be able to add anything much to your comments here, but I’m happy to have another chance to consider further. --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for this which all makes a lot of sense to me. > I was wondering if you'd like to tackle a passage in the > Vissuddhimagga which is harder to understand: ix8 Metta should first > of all "be developed only to oneself, doing it repeastedly thus: may > I be happy..." The next sections notes that someone may question > this because it is not in the Tipitaka and that in the > patisambhidimagga and vibhanga no mention is made of developing metta > to oneself. The answer is that for jhana this can't succeed by way of > taking oneself as an object. And later ix9 it makes it clear that > developing to oneself means "just as I want to be happy and dread > pain so do others..." Thus making oneself as an example. > > I think the meaning is basically that we considr how we like to be > treated and thought of and so we should think of others in the same > way. I can also see how a not so careful reading of the text could > lead to the conclusion that one should be trying to love oneself > more. I'd like you to read over ix8-10 and see what you think. I think we understand the lines in a similar way. If we reflect on what we appreciate when we’re with others, don’t we appreciate kind words and gestures, consideration, friendliness, assistance, humility and so on. Isn’t it so true that we really find ourselves so very dear. And so, others find themselves just as dear and would also like to hear kind words, experience consideration, friendliness and so on. Hence by reflecting on the qualities we appreciate with kusala cittas, it can be a condition for metta and the other brahma viharas to be developed towards others. If we’re giving something to another, for example, there is concern for the other’s benefit and there is bound to be some metta even if we don’t ‘name’ it. However, for metta or other wholesome states to develop, there has to be the understanding of which moments are wholesome and which are unwholesome (as you, of course, know so well). If we’re just thinking of ourselves and hoping we’ll be happy, is the citta really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only awareness can be aware of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise reflection on the quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it can be wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and attachment again. It just depends. I think as it says in the text, by reflecting on what makes us happy, by using ‘ourselves’ as examples, it can be a way to condition metta for other beings. It’s not a matter of wishing ourselves to be happy, which is bound (I think) to be with attachment. However, if we reflect thus: ‘...Just as I want to be happy and dread pain, as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too.’, making himself the example, then desire for other beings’ welfare and happiness arises in him’. I’d forgotten that these lines are then followed by the same verse from the Udana I quoted the other day. And so, I think the first line you quote that metta should first of all ‘..be developed only to oneself’ is explained by the following ones that ‘it does not conflict’ with the other texts which clearly show metta is never towards oneself because here it ‘refers to (making oneself) an example.’ Later (1X, 92) we read: ‘As to the characteristic, etc., lovingkindness is characterized here as promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer welfare. It is manifested as the removal of annoyance. Its proximate cause is seeing lovableness in beings. it succeeds when it makes ill will subside, and it fails when it produces (selfish) affection’ Thanks Rob, I find all these reminders very helpful. Sarah 9462 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi Ken O, Sometimes you ask what seems like a simple question and yet the answer may not be so simple for me;-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > > Is there a latent tendency for panna then, since there is latent > tendecies for defilement, is there a latent tendecies for wisdom? As far as I know, ‘latent tendencies’ are usually a translation of ‘anusaya’ which refer to the unwholesome roots and tendencies. However, 3 of the sobhana (‘beautiful) cetasikas (mental factors) are also roots, i.e alobha (non-attachment), adosa (non-aversion) and amoha (panna or wisdom). So as long as there is this root (not for every being), then I think we could talk about a latent tendency of wisdom perhaps. All sobhana cittas are accompanied by adosa and amoha, but not necessarily by panna. > > I do not believe that Buddha's panna is not present in every cittas. I > more incline it is in every citta or not he will not be able to explain > all the citta in such detail and esp to the workings of paccaya. Firstly, for arahats that have eradicated defilements, they have maha-kiriya cittas (inoperative cittas, i.e not producing kamma) instead of kusala citta which perform the function of javana. These are not necessarily all accompanied by wisdom. In the Buddha’s case, they may all be accompanied by wisdom, I don’t know. However, both the other arahats and the Buddha also have cittas which are not accompanied by sobhana cetasikas as I mentioned before, because these cittas are ahetuka (without root). So, your question is, if panna does not accompany every citta, how could he explain all the details and know all realities? The answer is because of the extraordinary wisdom of the Buddha. First, though, we have to understand that now, wisdom does not and cannot accompany the actual moments of seeing, hearing and other ‘non-root’ cittas as discussed. However the same characteristic of seeing ‘appears’ or is ‘known’ by panna accompanying the javana cittas in the mind door process which follows so rapidly. For all intents and purposes we say that panna knows ‘seeing’ which arises at this moment and it’s really irrelevant that, to be very precise, there is an infintesimally small time difference between when seeing sees the visible object and when its characteristic appears to panna. When understanding begins to develop, this becomes clearer, I think and find. In the same way, the Buddha’s extraordinary wisdom knows all realities. Some people find it hard to accept that the characteristic appearing through the mind-door process can be the same as the reality that just arose in the sense-door process, for example. Jonothan mentioned the discussion in India about the analogy of the water dripping through paper. I was thinking of a perfect photocopy. The copy is not the original, but if it is a perfect copy, for all intents and purposes it is the same. (though lawyers don’t always agree;-) ...<.and how are you going on this, these days, Howard, or shouldn't I ask?> I’ve got a bit carried away from your questions, Ken...The reason I think it’s helpful here to give these details is because otherwise people (like yourself) have the idea of constant wisdom or attaining a state with wisdom at every moment. Thanks for the challenge;-) Sarah p.s You’re just a ‘natural’ abhidhammist by accumulations, I’d say;-) 9463 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Mike Good for you Mike, I also try not to argue with Robert Ep. . I am extremely glad that sometimes he let me off. Have you meet anything interesting so far in your stay there. Please kindly share some with me. I always like your discussions and sharing here. Do not forget to say thank to Sukin for me for his books that he has send to me. By the way do you have any details that I could send some money for donations to the foundation that have kindly printed these books (off list). Kind regards Ken O --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Aw, Mike, > I didn't mean to imply that *I* know anything. > I just wanted to argue about it! > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > > =============================== > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Hi RobEp, > > > > Well, you may both be right--how would I know. Better > > I should just drop it. > > > > Best Wishes, > > > > mike > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Mike, > > > It may not surprise you to learn that I think the > > > 'blur' phenomena is a bigger > > > problem than mere bathwater. It may in fact affect > > > the baby. > > > > > > I see Howard's question as an exceedingly important > > > one: it doesn't just > > > challenge the single unit citta theory. It > > > implicitly posits a consiousness that > > > is not dependent on the arising moment, but stands > > > back from it and observes the > > > accumulation of cittas. This consciousness, that > > > can be confused about the nature > > > of cittas, that either observes them in their > > > singular functions, or else fails to > > > keep up with them and 'blurs' them, what is it? > > > > > > It seems to me that it re-establishes the field of > > > continuous consciousness that > > > Abidhamma goes to a great lot of trouble to avoid. > > > If the impression created by > > > more than one moment cannot be accounted for by a > > > simple passage of the qualities > > > of one citta to the next or in another way, I think > > > it brings an unacknowledged > > > element of continuous consciousness needed to > > > account for real human experience > > > into play. That would seem to put Abhidhamma and > > > Mahayana in much more of the same > > > boat than it has previously seemed. > > > > > > Hope this doesn't sound hopelessly indecipherable. > > > I can't seem to talk any other > > > way about this topic right now. > > > > > > Best, > > > Robert > > > > > > ========================== > > > > > > --- mlnease@y... wrote: > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, Mike - > > > > > > > > > > (Uh, wait a minute. What is your status > > > now? Are you still callable as > > > > > "Mike"?) > > > > > > > > Yep, still plain old layman mike. Ordination > > > still might happen but there > > > > are un foreseen obstacles, legal etc. We'll > > > see... > > > > > > > > > So at each moment there is no blur, but > > > then, as a kind of > > > > conceptual > > > > > summing up there is a blur? (I seem to find that > > > my mind is becoming a > > > > total > > > > > blur at such thoughts! ;-)) > > > > > > > > Well, I borrowed this blur--I think I should > > > return it to Robert, my apologies > > > > if it's a little soiled, Rob. If I may fall back > > > and regroup my aggregates, I > > > > guess I'll have to play the 'movie' card again. > > > Not a blur, but a > > > > conceptual assemblage of a whole lot of moments of > > > consciousness and > > > > their attendant factors (whether 'atomistic' or > > > not) which can seem very > > > > clear. (As I'm sure you know, the mental factor > > > 'vitakka' can take concept > > > > as an object. By the way, I do think Robert's > > > comments re. avijja as > > > > a 'positive' and extremely potent force are very > > > pertinent). I do take your > > > > point, Howard, about this kind of 'particular' > > > reference to cittas. In my > > > > opinion it doesn't really matter whether they each > > > have a discrete, > > > > separate 'existence' or not--as I tried to > > > communicate to Kenneth, I think > > > > all this theoretical structure is just a way of > > > trying to get a > > > > verbal/conceptual frame of reference for the > > > ever-moving moment of > > > > experience, so that we can think about it and > > > discuss it on an intellectual > > > > level. Since I habitually reason from the general > > > to the specific, I don't > > > > really have a problem when I run into a detail > > > that seems logically > > > > problematic-I just take a step back and see if > > > that point, accepted for > > > > argument's sake with whatever reservations, seems > > > to fit into the 'big > > > > picture' as I understand it so far. If you'll > > > forgive my playing the 'arrow' > > > > card in the same hand, > > > > > > > > "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow > > > thickly smeared with > > > > poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & > > > relatives would provide him > > > > with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't > > > have this arrow removed > > > > until I know whether the man who wounded me was a > > > noble warrior, a > > > > priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I > > > won't have this arrow > > > > removed until I know the given name & clan name of > > > the man who > > > > wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, > > > medium, or short... until I > > > > know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or > > > golden-colored... until I know > > > > his home village, town, or city... until I know > > > whether the bow with which I > > > > was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until > > > I know whether the > > > > bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, > > > bamboo threads, sinew, > > > > hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft > > > with which I was wounded > > > > was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the > > > feathers of the shaft with > > > > which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a > > > stork, a hawk, a peacock, > > > > or another bird... until I know whether the shaft > > > with which I was wounded > > > > was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water > > > buffalo, a langur, or a > > > > monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow > > > removed until I know > > > > whether the shaft with which I was wounded was > > > that of a common arrow, > > > > a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an > > > oleander arrow.' The man > > > > would die and those things would still remain > > > unknown to him. > > > > > > > > Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > > > > > > > Of course to me this means (among other things) > > > that to reject the > > > > Dhamma according to the Theravada on the grounds > > > of (what I see as) > > > > minute points of intellecutal detail is to throw > > > the baby out with the bath (if > > > > I > > > > may also play the baby and bath cards). Does it > > > really matter if the > > > > moments in a continuum of experience are discrete > > > or not? Does it matter > > > > whether sunlight hits us in waves or particles? > > > Or experience of it is the > > > > same either way I think. > > > > > > > > I know I shouldn't argue with you, Howard. We > > > both know you're a > > > > smarter man than I am and know the Dhamma better, > > > including the > > > > Theravada I think. I just hope you aren't too > > > smart for your own good. > > > > > > > > > Great to hear from you, Mike! I wish you > > > all the very best!!! > > > > > > > > Ditto and back at you, Howard--if you figure out a > > > better approach to > > > > getting that arrow out I hope you'll let me know. > > > Whether you do or not, > > > > keep in touch, eh? > > > > > > > > Your Friend, > > > > > > > > mike 9464 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 1:38am Subject: Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Dear All, From time to time questions are raised about the authenticity of the Buddha’s word in the Abhidhamma and ancient Commentaries. When I was pulling out dusty Vinaya texts the other day, I pulled out a copy of ‘the Inception of Discipline (or the Historical Introduction) and The Vinaya Nidaana’, Jayawickrama’s translation of the Baahiranidaana of Buddhaghosa’s Samantapaasaadikaa, the Vinaya commentary. As I’m really very ignorant about the historical details, I’d like to quote occasional passages (in no particular order) when I have time, because I think they may be of interest to some. Of course anyone’s free to question or disagree as usual;-) If anyone has other relevant quotes and passages from other texts, please feel very free to add these too. The first chapter discusses the ‘First Great Convocation’, in other words the First Council of arahats who rehearsed the ‘Dhamma and the Vinaya’.Just to clarify, Dhamma and Vinaya, includes the Abhidhamma texts: “Thus this Word of the Buddha which is uniform in sentiment...was rehearsed together.and not only this, but other divers distinctions in compilation to be met with in the Three pitakas...have been determined when it was thus rehearsed together in seven months” (Smp.33) Jayawickrama, in his introduction says ‘Ultimately Buddhaghosa traces the vinaya, as well as the rest of the sayings of the Buddha in their present form, to the first Great convocation and explains the meanings of the words, “by whom was it said, when and for what reason?” (Smp.34) In dealing with the significance of the words, “by whom this was retained in mind, handed down by whom and established in whom” he traces the history of the Vinaya from the Tathagata (Smp.35) in successive stages, to each of the 3 Convocations and finally to the Vinaya Recital of Maha-Arittha in Ceylon under the presidentshop of Mahinda (Smp.106) His primary aim is to establish that it is the Vinaya in its pristine purity that he is commenting upon. Therefore it is imperative that the stages by which it has reached him should be traced. The succession of Teachers from Upali brought it down to the time of the 2nd convocation and the Theras “again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the Vinaya..even in the same manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa” (Smp.38) Back to the text itself and the ‘First Great Convocation’: ‘....For it has been said, “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa adressed the monks...........Subsequently he said, “Let us, friends, rehearse the Dhamma and the Vinaya......” The monks rejoined, “If that be so, Sir, may the Elder select the monks (for the Convocation).” The Elder rejected many hundreds and thousands of monks in the categories of wordling, Stream-Entrant, Once-Returner, Non-Returner, and Dry Visioned Arahant and canker-waned Arahant, all of whom were versed in the Teachings consisting of the entire ninefold Dispen?ation of the Teacher and chose 499 canker-waned monks who alone were proficient with regard to the learning in all aspects of the Teachings in the entire Three Baskets, had attained mastery in analytical knowledge, were of no mean achievement, and for the greater part were classified by the Exalted One as an expert each in his field in the distinct spheres of the threefold knowledge. Regarding them it has been said, “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa selected five hundred Arahants less one.” There are plenty of very lengthy footnotes and I’m happy to add any or discuss any points.. Otherwise, as I said, I’ll just add parts which may be of interest, taking extracts here and there from the text, introduction and footnotes (or even the pali at the back if needbe;-) Sarah 9465 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 4:05am Subject: Re: meththa meditation Dear Mike and all friends Thank you very much for all your taking part. I learnt much from your contributions. And Nina, once replying I forgot to include your name... I appologize... And a small quote from another Dhamma friend... "we all have meththa within us... we have to grow it" "to a beginer (like me) its ok just to know whether you have meththa is present or not (at a particular moment)" ~meththa Ranil 9466 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 6:09am Subject: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Dear Robert Kirkpatrick, Howard, Robert Epstein, And Friends How are you? The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada Atthakathaa clearly tells us that there is no consciousness component in Parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation as possible - syntatically in particular - while making sure that the readers can read as natural English as possible. If you found any unclear points in the translation, please let me know. My present translation has been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa in Itivutta Atthakathaa. "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati attho." "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality like the lamp without fuel." Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is literally circle, cycle, or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely another name of pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken strongly by craving or attachment (tanhaa). As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa Nibbaana is emptied of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of an Arahant, the scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness component (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is no textual support for such a scenario. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 9467 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 2:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi, Mike (and Rob) - In a message dated 11/20/01 11:12:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > Hi RobEp, > > Well, you may both be right--how would I know. Better > I should just drop it. > > Best Wishes, > > mike > ============================ Or ALL of us could be WAY wrong, not really having a clue as to how things actually are at all, and, perhaps, as you tended to suggest, Mike, maybe we ought not to take all this theorizing so seriously, just accepting the basic facts of anicca, dukkha, and anatta, the importance of stay mindful, focussed, loving, and calm, and getting on with the practice, trusting that reality, with the Buddha's guidance, will show us the way home! 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) 9468 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 7:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi Sarah, >However, both the other arahats and the Buddha also have cittas which > are not accompanied by sobhana cetasikas as I mentioned before, because these cittas are ahetuka (without root). > What is the difference between amoha and panna? Why panna and not amoha? Why can't it accompanied by amoha rather than panna since amoha is a root just like moha? Citta is instanteous is for conditioned pple but may not be instanteous for those who are enlighted. Similar for those living in the celestial, their one day is about our fifty years. So time is realative. Abt citta not present in every cittas for those in Arahant. Commentaries please to support your case. What I believe what you have conclude are deducing from the workings of cittas. Could you kindly provide substantive argument from the commentaries. >Some people find it hard to accept that the characteristic appearing > through the mind-door process can be the same as the reality that just arose in the sense-door process, for example. Jonothan mentioned the discussion in India about the analogy of the water dripping through paper. I was thinking of a perfect photocopy. The copy is not the original, but >if it is a perfect copy, for all intents and purposes it is the same. k: I dont buy the idea, copying is having a constant meaning without change. Objects and its characteristics could be the same for the mind door and sense door process, but the process are always conditioned, hence one is able to choose kusala or akusala citta for that objects. So using copying is like the same problem like what you say below abt "constant wisdom". > I’ve got a bit carried away from your questions, Ken...The reason I > think it’s helpful here to give these details is because otherwise people (like yourself) have the idea of constant wisdom or attaining a state with wisdom at every moment. k: We know that anusaya is present in all akusala cittas, I have asked Robert K to reconfirm whether anusaya is also present in Kusala cittas, so far no reconfirm answer yet, could you kindly answer this question. As for Buddha wisdom, I have my reservation. Constant wisdom is not a good word to describe Buddha wisdom. I do not know how to describe it either in Abhidhammic way :). Kind regards Ken O 9469 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Hi, Robert - Thanks for this post. I'll just add here a comment or two about what I think is unique about the Buddha's teaching, but which, since it is reality-based, could be discovered independently by others (who then become paccekabuddhas or buddhas, themselves). I believe that intention-view of kamma, anatta/su~n~nata, paticcasamupada (sp?), and satipatthana are those aspects of the Dhamma which are most distinctive. The intention-view of kamma revolutionized realm of morality, as I see it, setting it on a proper footing. The teachings on no/not-self, emptiness, and dependent arising, all interrelated, form the core of the Dhamma in terms of theory, and they are unfathomably deep, and the four foundations of mindfulness (with the needed support of sila and samatha) forms the core of the practice, and these are not normally found in their fullness other than in the teaching of a buddha (or in the mind of a paccekabuddha). That's my perspective. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/21/01 12:27:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > Dear Howard, > In a way I think it comes down to how unique we believe the Buddha's > teaching to > be. Some of us will probably look at the Buddha's principles as naturally > occurring in the world, and that one who is enlightened would naturally > understand > these principles of anatta, anicca and dukha. Others may look at the > teaching of > these principles, along with the eightfold path and the four noble truths > and see > these as absolutely unique to the Buddha, and only arising as a possibility > because of his appearance in the world. This latter view would be partly > formed > by logic, partly by practice and experience, and partly it would be an > article of > religious faith. > > Believing in the Buddha's principles and path are something different than > believing in the Buddha's personal omniscience and complete perfection of > every > action. I personally would not lose my faith in the principles if I were > to find > out that the Buddha had human qualities and made mistakes on a 'human' > level. > This would not bother me at all. My belief in Buddhism is not based on the > Buddha's perfection. Maybe that is why it is easier for me to doubt > certain > things in the teachings if they don't make sense to me. Those who believe > absolutely in the Buddha's words will tell me that I don't understand the > complete > meaning of what I am reading, and they're probably right. But it's never > been my > nature to swallow a teaching whole, or to believe that every word that is > reported > to have been said by Buddha, must, by divine ordination, necessarily be his > actual > teaching. > > That leaves me in the sorry position of having more doubt than those who > have > absolute faith. It also makes it harder for me to follow the path > completely. I > have more uncertainty about this or that point. In some ways I'm jealous > of those > who feel certain of where the steps lie and exactly what is required to > walk them. > At this point in my life I wish I had that certainty. > > Somewhere in the teachings the Buddha says that every person has to > eventually sit > down and examine their own mind and clear up their own doubts so that they > can > progress on the path. I don't remember if this is Mahayana or Theravada, > but it > makes a lot of sense to me. > > I do believe that the Buddha's appearance in the world and his decades of > teaching > the way out of delusion and suffering, is indeed unique and more > comprehensive > than any other single teaching. Moses' recorded preaching took place in a > period > of days. Hindu teachings are an eclectic assortment of various teachers' > words. > Lao Tzu is said to have scrawled the Tao Te Ching on a pice of parchment in > exchange for being allowed to leave China by the gatekeeper. But the > Buddha > engaged with people of his time for decades and taught from the beginning > of his > enlightenment to his parinibbana. In that sense it is an absolutely unique > teaching, filled with enormous detail, by perhaps the most discerning of > the world > teachers. > > Anyway, once again I'll stop rambling. I just wanted to establish that > some of > what we believe is by direct observation and insight, but much of it is > carried by > belief and faith. And this is unavoidable. I just think we may want to be > clear > about where our faith comes into it, to fill in the gaps in our > discernment. > > Is it possible to come upon the principles of Buddhism through one's own > personal > discernment, without hearing the Dhamma, or hearing of the Buddha? I tend > to > think that it is possible, along with you, Howard, while others only > believe that > the intercession of the Buddha's words and presence make this possible. > And I > believe that is a matter of faith and belief, depending on where you stand > in > Buddhism. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > =============================== > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - > > > > In a message dated 11/20/01 9:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > jonoabb@y... writes: > > > > > > > Howard > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > > > > > I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could > still > > > > end > > > > up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), > and > > > > that > > > > practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could > > > > eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, > be a > > > > paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser > approximation > > > > of that). > > > > > > I personally don't think anyone can stumble onto the Buddha's path. > But I > > > was really following a slightly different point. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > So the only paccekabuddhas would be folks who in some previous > > lifetime had heard the Dhamma? Is this notion expressed somewhere in the > > tipitaka or commentaries? > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > If a person who has never heard the dhamma develops, for example, > samatha, > > > is that person developing the path factor of right concentration, would > > > you say? (... and if not, what is the difference between that person > > > developing samatha and someone who has heard the dhamma developing > > > samatha?) > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I would think that anyone who has attained jhanas (or *perhaps* > even > > neighborhood concentration) has developed right concentration to some > extent, > > the extent being determined by the degree of mastery. (That, of course, > does > > not imply the mastering of right mindfulness and other factors, or the > > attaining of wisdom.) > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Likewise for the other factors of the path that you understand are to > be > > > developed separately (except, of course, samma ditthi). > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Even samma ditthi could be developed as an outgrowth of the other > > factors. And, of course, even without hearing the "official" Dhamma, a > number > > of its ideas such as impermanence and the sense of unreality to life can > be > > found elsewhere (to "seed" the process): Consider Shakespeare, for > example. > > If all this is impossible, then no "pure" paccekabuddhas could ever > arise. > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > 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) 9470 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 3:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Hi, Suan - In a message dated 11/21/01 9:11:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, abhidhammika@y... writes: > Dear Robert Kirkpatrick, Howard, Robert Epstein, And Friends > > How are you? > > The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada Atthakathaa clearly > tells us that there is no consciousness component in Parinibbaana > after the death of an Arahant. > > I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation as possible - > syntatically in particular - while making sure that the readers can > read as natural English as possible. If you found any unclear points > in the translation, please let me know. My present translation has > been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa in Itivutta > Atthakathaa. > > "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa > khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa > khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi > parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati > attho." > > "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete > extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of > defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and > the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical > machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel." > > Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment > Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is literally circle, cycle, > or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) > Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery > Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality > > Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely another name of > pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken strongly by craving or > attachment (tanhaa). > > As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa Nibbaana is emptied > of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of an Arahant, the > scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness component > (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is no textual > support for such a scenario. > > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > =============================== Thank you for this. Certainly, taken at face value, this commentary suggests parinibbana as a kind of nullity. A couple matters remain: (1) The exact meaning of Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality, and the exact meaning of vi~n~nana, which I take as the dualistic operation of separating out an individualized object from the potential field of awareness, a special type of knowing/~nana. 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) 9471 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies --- Dear Ken, I'll just very briefly touch on some of your questions here: In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > >However, both the other arahats and the Buddha also have cittas which > > are not accompanied by sobhana cetasikas as I mentioned before, because > these cittas are ahetuka (without root). > > > > What is the difference between amoha and panna? Why panna and not amoha? > Why can't it accompanied by amoha rather than panna since amoha is a root > just like moha? > ++++++++++++++ Robert:Amoha and panna are synonyms for the same dhamma. Remember, though, this is a classification that is wide ranging and includes many degrees and types of wisdom(amoha, panna). ++++++++ > Citta is instanteous is for conditioned pple but may not be instanteous > for those who are enlighted. Similar for those living in the celestial, > their one day is about our fifty years. So time is realative. ++++++++++++++ Robert:Time is a concept but it can be understood only in relation to the rise and fall of namas including citta. Whether god, man or fly the speed of the arising and passing is infinitely rapid according to the texts. +++++++ Abt citta > not present in every cittas for those in Arahant. Commentaries please to > support your case. What I believe what you have conclude are deducing > from the workings of cittas. Could you kindly provide substantive > argument from the commentaries. > > > >Some people find it hard to accept that the characteristic appearing > > through the mind-door process can be the same as the reality that just > arose in the sense-door process, for example. Jonothan mentioned the > discussion in India about the analogy of the water dripping through paper. > I was thinking of a perfect photocopy. The copy is not the original, but > >if it is a perfect copy, for all intents and purposes it is the same. > > k: I dont buy the idea, copying is having a constant meaning without > change. Objects and its characteristics could be the same for the mind > door and sense door process, but the process are always conditioned, hence > one is able to choose kusala or akusala citta for that objects. So using > copying is like the same problem like what you say below abt "constant > wisdom". > > > > I've got a bit carried away from your questions, Ken...The reason I > > think it's helpful here to give these details is because otherwise > people (like yourself) have the idea of constant wisdom or attaining a > state with wisdom at every moment. > > k: We know that anusaya is present in all akusala cittas, I have asked > Robert K to reconfirm whether anusaya is also present in Kusala cittas, so > far no reconfirm answer yet, could you kindly answer this question. As > for Buddha wisdom, I have my reservation. Constant wisdom is not a good > word to describe Buddha wisdom. I do not know how to describe it either in > Abhidhammic way :). +++++++++ Robert: Things like the anusaya being present even when there is kusala citta we can infer as being so. And yet it is not necessarily helpful to think about it in this way. Nor is it present in the way that the wholesome roots are present in a kusala moment. I think it is already complex enough trying to understand the moment as it arises - is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or kiriya? This is what can be known by direct insight. The Abhidhamma, is explained not so that we can answer every thought that comes to mind or so that we can compare it with other philosophies or ways of thinking , but it is taught for the sole purpose of developing insight leading out of samsara. ========= best wishes robert 9472 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah [and Jon and Robert K. and Mike], I think this post of yours, Sarah, is very sweet and reflective and I found it helpful in considering the cultivation [not through effort of course] of kusala cittas and mettha. I enjoyed your response to Robert K in this interesting post. Please forgive me then if I take a ripe opportunity here to ask for advice on a few technical points. I will quote the relevant portion below, and then take off from there. I think they are interesting questions, some of which have arisen lately and have not been resolved. Your clear statement below gives me a good opportunity to frame them again, in what I think may be a more answerable form: >>> If we’re just thinking of ourselves and hoping we’ll be happy, is the citta > really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only awareness can be aware > of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise reflection on the > quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it can be > wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and attachment again. It > just depends. >>> My question is this, as I try to understand the nature of the cittas, and the relationship between cittas and accompanying cetasikas: If 'only awareness can be aware of what the nature of the citta really is', is awareness [sati?] the reflection of a mindful citta upon a previous citta? Or is the awareness a cetasika through which the citta is able to acknowledge its own property? I am just a little confused about how the mechanism of being aware of a citta's true quality would work. Since you know I am particularly keen on the subject of awareness, and interested to see how mindfulness arises and relates to the content of this or that citta's experience, it seems like a good opportunity to take another look at how this happens. Right now I have the idea that as a particular citta experiences something, there may be deluded cetasikas misinforming it as to what is really there, or there may be mindful, discerning cetasikas accomanying the citta, which would include sati or satipatthana, and give the citta a much greater grasp of what is really taking place in that moment. If you can confirm or clarify this, I would be very grateful. It also leads back to that other issue of how a particular citta or cetasika can take in the 'blur' of other cittas seeming to move by very fast, when in fact they are really coming quite discretely one at a time. I am still trying to understand whether this posits a sort of 'watcher' consciousness which stands apart from the individual cittas and which lasts for longer than the single cittas, or whether there is another way in which certain cittas or cetasikas attempt to 'take stock' of the general flow of cittas going by and assess them wrongly as a 'blurred continuous' event or rightly as a series of single events connected one to the next, like beads on a string. [Of course there would be no string, I guess, just beads]. One more issue along these lines that has come up lately is the nature of ignorance or delusion. Rob K. and Jon, I believe, if I remember correctly, have spoken of this as a positive state or object of some kind which directly interferes with discernment. Pardon me if I don't quite have that right. I would more tend to think that delusion would be a general way of indicating a particular citta or cetasika which contained untrue perception or mistaken material in its experience, rather than a separate force or object that exists independently of some particular arising. I wonder how you would explain this? I don't think that those who are speaking this way mean to establish delusion/ignorance as a 'real object', ie, an entity or permanent force or being of some kind, a kind of Mara-like figure that has its own intention of deluding. I would expect that it would be more of what I said, an ignorant quality to a given citta, or a particular kind of cetasika which just doesn't do the right job and comes up with the wrong information about reality. I could even imagine that a deluded consciousness or mental factor of this kind could be responsible for positing the kind of 'blur' that was spoken of as the mistaken way of apprehending the accumulation of individual citta-moments that arise. This mistaken consciousness would not actually be viewing multiple cittas as a 'blur' while standing apart from them. Rather it would be a kind of single thought of its own in which it 'imagined' such a blur existing in place of an actual perception, and thus substituted its own mistaken notion for a real moment of seeing. In other words, it would be a kind of mistake on top of a mistake. This citta might fancy itself a kind of intellectual citta. It would first ignore the sense-moment and mistake a mental moment for a real moment of perception. And it would then say about its own mistaken perceptual object, really a thought-form, 'these moments are all part of a continous movement' based on its own mis-perception. Thanks for anything you can say to these questions. Perhaps Nina has said something about these issues that I could be directed to, if that is also appropriate. I know she's the expert on these mechanics. Regards, Robert Ep. ===================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob K, > > I’ve been appreciating all your posts recently;-) > > I’ve been quite busy, so only got a chance to have another look at the Vis. > passages you mentioned as I was getting ready to go to bed last night..As a > result, I had lots of useful reflection on metta as I was falling asleep:-) I’m > not sure I’ll be able to add anything much to your comments here, but I’m happy > to have another chance to consider further. > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for this which all makes a lot of sense to me. > > I was wondering if you'd like to tackle a passage in the > > Vissuddhimagga which is harder to understand: ix8 Metta should first > > of all "be developed only to oneself, doing it repeastedly thus: may > > I be happy..." The next sections notes that someone may question > > this because it is not in the Tipitaka and that in the > > patisambhidimagga and vibhanga no mention is made of developing metta > > to oneself. The answer is that for jhana this can't succeed by way of > > taking oneself as an object. And later ix9 it makes it clear that > > developing to oneself means "just as I want to be happy and dread > > pain so do others..." Thus making oneself as an example. > > > > I think the meaning is basically that we considr how we like to be > > treated and thought of and so we should think of others in the same > > way. I can also see how a not so careful reading of the text could > > lead to the conclusion that one should be trying to love oneself > > more. I'd like you to read over ix8-10 and see what you think. > > I think we understand the lines in a similar way. If we reflect on what we > appreciate when we’re with others, don’t we appreciate kind words and gestures, > consideration, friendliness, assistance, humility and so on. Isn’t it so true > that we really find ourselves so very dear. And so, others find themselves just > as dear and would also like to hear kind words, experience consideration, > friendliness and so on. > > Hence by reflecting on the qualities we appreciate with kusala cittas, it can > be a condition for metta and the other brahma viharas to be developed towards > others. If we’re giving something to another, for example, there is concern for > the other’s benefit and there is bound to be some metta even if we don’t ‘name’ > it. However, for metta or other wholesome states to develop, there has to be > the understanding of which moments are wholesome and which are unwholesome (as > you, of course, know so well). > > If we’re just thinking of ourselves and hoping we’ll be happy, is the citta > really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only awareness can be aware > of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise reflection on the > quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it can be > wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and attachment again. It > just depends. > > I think as it says in the text, by reflecting on what makes us happy, by using > ‘ourselves’ as examples, it can be a way to condition metta for other beings. > It’s not a matter of wishing ourselves to be happy, which is bound (I think) to > be with attachment. > > However, if we reflect thus: ‘...Just as I want to be happy and dread > pain, as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too.’, making > himself the example, then desire for other beings’ welfare and happiness arises > in him’. > > I’d forgotten that these lines are then followed by the same verse from the > Udana I quoted the other day. > > And so, I think the first line you quote that metta should first of all ‘..be > developed only to oneself’ is explained by the following ones that ‘it does not > conflict’ with the other texts which clearly show metta is never towards > oneself because here it ‘refers to (making oneself) an example.’ > > Later (1X, 92) we read: > > ‘As to the characteristic, etc., lovingkindness is characterized here as > promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer welfare. It is > manifested as the removal of annoyance. Its proximate cause is seeing > lovableness in beings. it succeeds when it makes ill will subside, and it > fails when it produces (selfish) affection’ > > Thanks Rob, I find all these reminders very helpful. > > Sarah 9473 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi Robert K, > Robert: Things like the anusaya being present even when there is > kusala citta we can infer as being so. And yet it is not necessarily > helpful to think about it in this way. Nor is it present in the way > that the wholesome roots are present in a kusala moment. > I think it is already complex enough trying to understand the moment > as it arises - is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or kiriya? This is > what can be known by direct insight. The Abhidhamma, is explained > not so that we can answer every thought that comes to mind or so that > we can compare it with other philosophies or ways of thinking , but > it is taught for the sole purpose of developing insight leading out > of samsara. > > ========= > best wishes > robert k: Personally I asked these questions so that there is a thorough conceptual understanding. It is impt bc it helps to understand the dhamma better and to help us to develop insight when we are practising. Kind regards Ken O 9474 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 9:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies > Robert: Things like the anusaya being present even when there is > kusala citta we can infer as being so. And yet it is not necessarily > helpful to think about it in this way. Nor is it present in the way > that the wholesome roots are present in a kusala moment. > I think it is already complex enough trying to understand the moment > as it arises - is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or kiriya? This is > what can be known by direct insight. The Abhidhamma, is explained > not so that we can answer every thought that comes to mind or so that > we can compare it with other philosophies or ways of thinking , but > it is taught for the sole purpose of developing insight leading out > of samsara. Well put. It is good to enter this into the discussion. 9475 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 10:01am Subject: absolute realities Dear Jon, I have here the Co in Pali to M.N.5, No Blemishes, about paramatthadesana, I shall translate: Buddhassa Bhagavato duvidhaa desanaa: sammuttidesanaa, paramatthadesanaa caa ti. There is a twofold teaching of the Buddha, the Blessed One: the teaching in the conventional way and the teaching by way of ultimate realities. Tattha puggalo, satto, itthii, puriso, khattiyo, braama.no, devo, Maaro ti evaruupa sammutidesanaa. There is a human, a being, a woman, a man, a man of the warrior caste, a brahman, a god, and Mara. Such is the teaching in the conventional way. Anicca.m, dukkha.m, anattaa, khandhaa, dhaatuu, aayatanaani, satipa.t.thaanaa ti evaruupaa paramattha desanaa. Impermanence, dukkha, anattaa, the aggregates, elements, sensefields, satipa.t.thaana. Such is the teaching by way of ultimate realities. Tattha Bhagavaa, ye sammutivasena desana.m sutvaa attha.m pa.tivijjhitvaa moha.m pahaaya visesam adhigantu.m samatthaa, tesa.m sammuti desana.m deseti. Here the Blessed One taught to those in the conventional way who by means of it, after having heard the teaching , penetrated the meaning and abandoned ignorance, and were skilled to attain distinction. Ye pana paramatthavasena desana.m sutvaa attha.m pa.tivijjhitvaa moha.m pahaaya visesam adhigantu.m samatthaa, tesa.m paramatthadesana.m deseti. But who by means of ultimate realities after having heard the teaching , penetrated the meaning and abandoned ignorance, and were skilled to attain distinction, to those he taught by way of ultimate realities. You gave me some ideas for my India talks, very helpful. I shall write about nimitta. Ultimate realities: some people do not like this, but it is difficult to find the perfect translation. A. Sujin stressed that words are not so important, they are just the means to explain realities so that these can be directly understood without needing words, without having to think about them in words. More about that later on, I like your tips as to what to write about, Nina. 9476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 10:01am Subject: cankamma Dear Num, I am inclined not try to find too much behind the word cankamma. When sitting or lying down for a long time, one should change posture, we all do. The Buddha and the monks did some walking just to change posture. Nothing else, just walking naturally. Not walking slowly to induce sati, that is lobha and it hinders the development. Take care of yourself, do not play tennis, but maybe some cankamma instead? Best wishes for a speedy recovery, Nina. 9477 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Mike > > Good for you Mike, I also try not to argue with Robert Ep. . I am > extremely glad that sometimes he let me off. :] Robert Ep. 9478 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? This is extremely interesting, Sarah. Could you clarify for a confused worldling, exactly who is speaking in these quotes, and is it a part of the Abhidhamma commentaries, a part of the Vinaya itself, or is it all from the introduction to the Vinaya? Thanks, Robert Ep. ====================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear All, > > From time to time questions are raised about the authenticity of the Buddha’s > word in the Abhidhamma and ancient Commentaries. When I was pulling out dusty > Vinaya texts the other day, I pulled out a copy of ‘the Inception of Discipline > (or the Historical Introduction) and The Vinaya Nidaana’, Jayawickrama’s > translation of the Baahiranidaana of Buddhaghosa’s Samantapaasaadikaa, the > Vinaya commentary. > > As I’m really very ignorant about the historical details, I’d like to quote > occasional passages (in no particular order) when I have time, because I think > they may be of interest to some. Of course anyone’s free to question or > disagree as usual;-) If anyone has other relevant quotes and passages from > other texts, please feel very free to add these too. > > The first chapter discusses the ‘First Great Convocation’, in other words the > First Council of arahats who rehearsed the ‘Dhamma and the Vinaya’.Just to > clarify, Dhamma and Vinaya, includes the Abhidhamma texts: > > “Thus this Word of the Buddha which is uniform in sentiment...was > rehearsed together.and not only this, but other divers distinctions in > compilation to be met with in the Three pitakas...have been determined when it > was thus rehearsed together in seven months” (Smp.33) > > Jayawickrama, in his introduction says ‘Ultimately Buddhaghosa traces the > vinaya, as well as the rest of the sayings of the Buddha in > their present form, to the first Great convocation and explains the meanings of > the words, “by whom was it said, when and for what reason?” (Smp.34) In dealing > with the significance of the words, “by whom this was retained in mind, handed > down by whom and established in whom” he traces the history of the Vinaya from > the Tathagata (Smp.35) in successive stages, to each of the 3 Convocations and > finally to the Vinaya Recital of Maha-Arittha in Ceylon under the presidentshop > of Mahinda (Smp.106) His primary aim is to establish that it is the Vinaya in > its pristine purity that he is commenting upon. Therefore it is imperative that > the stages by which it has reached him should be traced. The succession of > Teachers from Upali brought it down to the time of the 2nd convocation and the > Theras “again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the Vinaya..even in the same > manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa” (Smp.38) > > Back to the text itself and the ‘First Great Convocation’: > > ‘....For it has been said, “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa > adressed the monks...........Subsequently he said, “Let us, friends, rehearse > the Dhamma and the Vinaya......” The monks rejoined, “If that be so, Sir, may > the Elder select the monks (for the Convocation).” > > The Elder rejected many hundreds and thousands of monks in the categories of > wordling, Stream-Entrant, Once-Returner, Non-Returner, and Dry Visioned Arahant > and canker-waned Arahant, all of whom were versed in the Teachings consisting > of the entire ninefold Dispensation of the Teacher and chose 499 canker-waned > monks who alone were proficient with regard to the learning in all aspects of > the Teachings in the entire Three Baskets, had attained mastery in analytical > knowledge, were of no mean achievement, and for the greater part were > classified by the Exalted One as an expert each in his field in the distinct > spheres of the threefold knowledge. Regarding them it has been said, > “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa selected five hundred Arahants less one.” > > > There are plenty of very lengthy footnotes and I’m happy to add any or discuss > any points.. Otherwise, as I said, I’ll just add parts which may be of > interest, taking extracts here and there from the text, introduction and > footnotes (or even the pali at the back if needbe;-) > > Sarah 9479 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Dear Suan, Thank you for this fascinating translation. I love hearing the literal meanings of the separate words. It is still possible to piece these words together, but it certainly gives a much better sense of the exact meaning intended. Oh, I feel like such a trouble-maker, but I still have a seed of doubt left over from this wonderful translation. It is not that I am hunting for one. In fact it is my suspicion that it is the Buddha who has supplied this seed in his own words. Let me tell you what concerns me here. It is the final statement. I can agree that there is no doubt that he is saying that the consciousness is cooled out and snuffed out according to this description. But why on earth does he then say that the final state of the Arahant in Parinibbana is not extinguishment, or void of all experiences, or anything like that. Instead he says: > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel. reaching the state of the undefined reality. reaching the state of the undefined reality. Well, I don't know about anyone else, but reaching the state of the undefined reality to me means that he has reached a state in which his reality is undefined by any remaining fragment of distinguishing consciousness, but that he is still in a state of existence in which his reality is undefined. This does not mean that there is no existent of any kind, only that all consciousness has been cooled and is no longer present. The idea of an underlying beingness or awareness that is however totally disengaged from any experience does not seem to me to be ruled out here. An undefined reality is awfully intruiging, don't you think? I would certainly know exactly what this statement of the Buddha's is pointing to. It would be the reality of the lamp when the flame has been snuffed out. But the lamp is still there, it is just no longer burning. Robert Ep. ============================== --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > > Dear Robert Kirkpatrick, Howard, Robert Epstein, And Friends > > How are you? > > The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada Atthakathaa clearly > tells us that there is no consciousness component in Parinibbaana > after the death of an Arahant. > > I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation as possible - > syntatically in particular - while making sure that the readers can > read as natural English as possible. If you found any unclear points > in the translation, please let me know. My present translation has > been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa in Itivutta > Atthakathaa. > > "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa > khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa > khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi > parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati > attho." > > "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete > extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of > defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and > the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical > machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel." > > Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment > Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is literally circle, cycle, > or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) > Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery > Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality > > Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely another name of > pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken strongly by craving or > attachment (tanhaa). > > As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa Nibbaana is emptied > of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of an Arahant, the > scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness component > (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is no textual > support for such a scenario. > > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org > 9480 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > Thanks for this post. I'll just add here a comment or two about what I > think is unique about the Buddha's teaching, but which, since it is > reality-based, could be discovered independently by others (who then become > paccekabuddhas or buddhas, themselves). I believe that intention-view of > kamma, anatta/su~n~nata, paticcasamupada (sp?), and satipatthana are those > aspects of the Dhamma which are most distinctive. The intention-view of kamma > revolutionized realm of morality, as I see it, setting it on a proper > footing. The teachings on no/not-self, emptiness, and dependent arising, all > interrelated, form the core of the Dhamma in terms of theory, and they are > unfathomably deep, and the four foundations of mindfulness (with the needed > support of sila and samatha) forms the core of the practice, and these are > not normally found in their fullness other than in the teaching of a buddha > (or in the mind of a paccekabuddha). That's my perspective. > > With metta, > Howard Howard, I think your description gives a good overview of the unique genius of the Buddha's spiritual teaching. My only point is to agree with you that since it is reality-based, as you say, it is possible for a rare individual to discover these principles himself. Whether or not this is true, it certainly helps most of us worldlings to have the Buddha's enormous, copious bounty of help. I think that it is important, however, to remember that the Buddha wanted us to follow the path, not worship him, and that he did not intend to be regarded as a God, which would also be an obstacle to awakening. Best, Robert Ep. ===================================== > In a message dated 11/21/01 12:27:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > In a way I think it comes down to how unique we believe the Buddha's > > teaching to > > be. Some of us will probably look at the Buddha's principles as naturally > > occurring in the world, and that one who is enlightened would naturally > > understand > > these principles of anatta, anicca and dukha. Others may look at the > > teaching of > > these principles, along with the eightfold path and the four noble truths > > and see > > these as absolutely unique to the Buddha, and only arising as a possibility > > because of his appearance in the world. This latter view would be partly > > formed > > by logic, partly by practice and experience, and partly it would be an > > article of > > religious faith. > > > > Believing in the Buddha's principles and path are something different than > > believing in the Buddha's personal omniscience and complete perfection of > > every > > action. I personally would not lose my faith in the principles if I were > > to find > > out that the Buddha had human qualities and made mistakes on a 'human' > > level. > > This would not bother me at all. My belief in Buddhism is not based on the > > Buddha's perfection. Maybe that is why it is easier for me to doubt > > certain > > things in the teachings if they don't make sense to me. Those who believe > > absolutely in the Buddha's words will tell me that I don't understand the > > complete > > meaning of what I am reading, and they're probably right. But it's never > > been my > > nature to swallow a teaching whole, or to believe that every word that is > > reported > > to have been said by Buddha, must, by divine ordination, necessarily be his > > actual > > teaching. > > > > That leaves me in the sorry position of having more doubt than those who > > have > > absolute faith. It also makes it harder for me to follow the path > > completely. I > > have more uncertainty about this or that point. In some ways I'm jealous > > of those > > who feel certain of where the steps lie and exactly what is required to > > walk them. > > At this point in my life I wish I had that certainty. > > > > Somewhere in the teachings the Buddha says that every person has to > > eventually sit > > down and examine their own mind and clear up their own doubts so that they > > can > > progress on the path. I don't remember if this is Mahayana or Theravada, > > but it > > makes a lot of sense to me. > > > > I do believe that the Buddha's appearance in the world and his decades of > > teaching > > the way out of delusion and suffering, is indeed unique and more > > comprehensive > > than any other single teaching. Moses' recorded preaching took place in a > > period > > of days. Hindu teachings are an eclectic assortment of various teachers' > > words. > > Lao Tzu is said to have scrawled the Tao Te Ching on a pice of parchment in > > exchange for being allowed to leave China by the gatekeeper. But the > > Buddha > > engaged with people of his time for decades and taught from the beginning > > of his > > enlightenment to his parinibbana. In that sense it is an absolutely unique > > teaching, filled with enormous detail, by perhaps the most discerning of > > the world > > teachers. > > > > Anyway, once again I'll stop rambling. I just wanted to establish that > > some of > > what we believe is by direct observation and insight, but much of it is > > carried by > > belief and faith. And this is unavoidable. I just think we may want to be > > clear > > about where our faith comes into it, to fill in the gaps in our > > discernment. > > > > Is it possible to come upon the principles of Buddhism through one's own > > personal > > discernment, without hearing the Dhamma, or hearing of the Buddha? I tend > > to > > think that it is possible, along with you, Howard, while others only > > believe that > > the intercession of the Buddha's words and presence make this possible. > > And I > > believe that is a matter of faith and belief, depending on where you stand > > in > > Buddhism. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > > =============================== > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Jon - > > > > > > In a message dated 11/20/01 9:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > jonoabb@y... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Howard > > > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > > > > > > > I think that one who has never heard a word of Dhamma could > > still > > > > > end > > > > > up practicing the Buddha's path (very unlikely but still possible), > > and > > > > > that > > > > > practice, if it in fact is the full practice, missing nothing, could > > > > > eventually lead to full enlightenment. Such a person would, indeed, > > be a > > > > > paccekabuddha (or, missing all the perfections, a lesser > > approximation > > > > > of that). > > > > > > > > I personally don't think anyone can stumble onto the Buddha's path. > > But I > > > > was really following a slightly different point. > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > So the only paccekabuddhas would be folks who in some previous > > > lifetime had heard the Dhamma? Is this notion expressed somewhere in the > > > tipitaka or commentaries? > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > If a person who has never heard the dhamma develops, for example, > > samatha, > > > > is that person developing the path factor of right concentration, would > > > > you say? (... and if not, what is the difference between that person > > > > developing samatha and someone who has heard the dhamma developing > > > > samatha?) > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > I would think that anyone who has attained jhanas (or *perhaps* > > even > > > neighborhood concentration) has developed right concentration to some > > extent, > > > the extent being determined by the degree of mastery. (That, of course, > > does > > > not imply the mastering of right mindfulness and other factors, or the > > > attaining of wisdom.) > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Likewise for the other factors of the path that you understand are to > > be > > > > developed separately (except, of course, samma ditthi). > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > Even samma ditthi could be developed as an outgrowth of the other > > > factors. And, of course, even without hearing the "official" Dhamma, a > > number > > > of its ideas such as impermanence and the sense of unreality to life can > > be > > > found elsewhere (to "seed" the process): Consider Shakespeare, for > > example. > > > If all this is impossible, then no "pure" paccekabuddhas could ever > > arise. > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > =========================== > > > \With metta, > > > Howard 9481 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Robert:Time is a concept but it can be understood only in relation to > the rise and fall of namas including citta. Whether god, man or fly > the speed of the arising and passing is infinitely rapid according to > the texts. > +++++++ Robert, I hate to be a stickler, but it is impossible for the passage of namas, including cittas to be 'infinitely rapid' except with reference to something that is slower, like an apprehending consciousness which is observing them go by and trying to grasp them as an experience. If there is only the passage of one citta to the next, one nama to the next with no additional consciousness observing them, then their speed of passage can only be neither fast nor slow. There is no speed without a point of reference. If according to the commentaries, the passage is extremely rapid, they are inherently positing an observer consciousness for whom it is seen as fast. Best, Robert Ep. 9482 From: m. nease Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 5:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga Cittas Hi Kenneth, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Have > you meet anything > interesting so far in your stay there. Just a few good friends and the usual defilements. > Please > kindly share some with me. Nothing worth hearing I'm afraid, Kenneth. > Do > not forget to say > thank to Sukin for me for his books that he has send > to me. Will do, Kenneth. > By the way do > you have any details that I could send some money > for donations to the > foundation that have kindly printed these books (off > list). Not sure--I think Sukin might be able to help and will cc. this reply to him. mike 9483 From: m. nease Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 5:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Interesting stuff, Sarah, Of course you'll never convince those who think that Budhhaghosa made it all up and that the dispensation consists of only two baskets (the Dvipitaka?). Oh, well... mike --- Sarah wrote: > Dear All, > > From time to time questions are raised about the > authenticity of the Buddha’s > word in the Abhidhamma and ancient Commentaries. > When I was pulling out dusty > Vinaya texts the other day, I pulled out a copy of > ‘the Inception of Discipline > (or the Historical Introduction) and The Vinaya > Nidaana’, Jayawickrama’s > translation of the Baahiranidaana of Buddhaghosa’s > Samantapaasaadikaa, the > Vinaya commentary. > > As I’m really very ignorant about the historical > details, I’d like to quote > occasional passages (in no particular order) when I > have time, because I think > they may be of interest to some. Of course anyone’s > free to question or > disagree as usual;-) If anyone has other relevant > quotes and passages from > other texts, please feel very free to add these too. > > The first chapter discusses the ‘First Great > Convocation’, in other words the > First Council of arahats who rehearsed the ‘Dhamma > and the Vinaya’.Just to > clarify, Dhamma and Vinaya, includes the Abhidhamma > texts: > > “Thus this Word of the Buddha which is > uniform in sentiment...was > rehearsed together.and not only this, but other > divers distinctions in > compilation to be met with in the Three > pitakas...have been determined when it > was thus rehearsed together in seven months” > (Smp.33) > > Jayawickrama, in his introduction says ‘Ultimately > Buddhaghosa traces the > vinaya, as well as the rest of the sayings of the > Buddha in > their present form, to the first Great convocation > and explains the meanings of > the words, “by whom was it said, when and for what > reason?” (Smp.34) In dealing > with the significance of the words, “by whom this > was retained in mind, handed > down by whom and established in whom” he traces the > history of the Vinaya from > the Tathagata (Smp.35) in successive stages, to each > of the 3 Convocations and > finally to the Vinaya Recital of Maha-Arittha in > Ceylon under the presidentshop > of Mahinda (Smp.106) His primary aim is to establish > that it is the Vinaya in > its pristine purity that he is commenting upon. > Therefore it is imperative that > the stages by which it has reached him should be > traced. The succession of > Teachers from Upali brought it down to the time of > the 2nd convocation and the > Theras “again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the > Vinaya..even in the same > manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa” > (Smp.38) > > Back to the text itself and the ‘First Great > Convocation’: > > ‘....For it has been said, “Thereupon the > venerable Mahakassapa > adressed the monks...........Subsequently he said, > “Let us, friends, rehearse > the Dhamma and the Vinaya......” The monks rejoined, > “If that be so, Sir, may > the Elder select the monks (for the Convocation).” > > The Elder rejected many hundreds and thousands of > monks in the categories of > wordling, Stream-Entrant, Once-Returner, > Non-Returner, and Dry Visioned Arahant > and canker-waned Arahant, all of whom were versed in > the Teachings consisting > of the entire ninefold Dispensation of the Teacher > and chose 499 canker-waned > monks who alone were proficient with regard to the > learning in all aspects of > the Teachings in the entire Three Baskets, had > attained mastery in analytical > knowledge, were of no mean achievement, and for the > greater part were > classified by the Exalted One as an expert each in > his field in the distinct > spheres of the threefold knowledge. Regarding them > it has been said, > “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa selected five > hundred Arahants less one.” > > > There are plenty of very lengthy footnotes and I’m > happy to add any or discuss > any points.. Otherwise, as I said, I’ll just add > parts which may be of > interest, taking extracts here and there from the > text, introduction and > footnotes (or even the pali at the back if needbe;-) > > Sarah 9484 From: m. nease Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 5:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Dear Suan, I appreciate your points and your translation, as always. Could you please explain your translation, 'machinery'? Thanks in advance, mike --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > > Dear Robert Kirkpatrick, Howard, Robert Epstein, And > Friends > > How are you? > > The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada > Atthakathaa clearly > tells us that there is no consciousness component in > Parinibbaana > after the death of an Arahant. > > I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation > as possible - > syntatically in particular - while making sure that > the readers can > read as natural English as possible. If you found > any unclear points > in the translation, please let me know. My present > translation has > been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa > in Itivutta > Atthakathaa. > > "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya > kilesavattassa > khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena > khandhavattassa > khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi > parinibbaanehi > parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo > apannattikabhaavaam gataati > attho." > > "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of > two-way complete > extinguishments, one with the existential residues > emptied of > defilement machinery ever since attainment of > Arahatta awakening, and > the other without the existential residues emptied > of psychophysical > machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying > consciousness). > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the > undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel." > > Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment > Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is > literally circle, cycle, > or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) > Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery > Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality > > Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely > another name of > pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken > strongly by craving or > attachment (tanhaa). > > As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa > Nibbaana is emptied > of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of > an Arahant, the > scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness > component > (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is > no textual > support for such a scenario. > > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org 9485 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 5:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi Robert K > ++++++++++++++ > > Robert:Time is a concept but it can be understood only in relation to > the rise and fall of namas including citta. Whether god, man or fly > the speed of the arising and passing is infinitely rapid according to > the texts. > +++++++ k: It is rapid for ordinary people but not so for enlighted person like Ven Sariputta. Remember I think once one is enlighted one able to see each citta with perfect clarity hence speed is a concept is relative here. It has becomes measurable for a person who is enlighted. If it is too fast, then how could Ven Sariputta or Buddha describe all these citta details in Abhidhamma and describe their speed. This is supported by what you said in your below comments, "is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or kiriya? This is what can be known by direct insight". > +++++++++ > > Robert: Things like the anusaya being present even when there is > kusala citta we can infer as being so. And yet it is not necessarily > helpful to think about it in this way. Nor is it present in the way > that the wholesome roots are present in a kusala moment. > I think it is already complex enough trying to understand the moment > as it arises - is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or kiriya? This is > what can be known by direct insight. k: Latent tendecies is impt because it is an impt factor for the path of cultivation. For a person who practise many lives, gross defilements are easily indentify and to be in sati, but the person who is not expose to latent tendecies, may not know that there is an underlying defilement. Hence one got to practise panna or sati as long as one is not an Arahant, underlying defilement will arise. Without understanding such latent tendecies then there is a in danger of such "unseen factors" in our path of cultivation. Kind regards Ken O 9486 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 6:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K > > > ++++++++++++++ > > > > Robert:Time is a concept but it can be understood only in relation to > > the rise and fall of namas including citta. Whether god, man or fly > > the speed of the arising and passing is infinitely rapid according to > > the texts. > > +++++++ > > k: It is rapid for ordinary people but not so for enlighted person like > Ven Sariputta. Remember I think once one is enlighted one able to see > each citta with perfect clarity hence speed is a concept is relative here. > It has becomes measurable for a person who is enlighted. If it is too > fast, then how could Ven Sariputta or Buddha describe all these citta > details in Abhidhamma and describe their speed. This is supported by what > you said in your below comments, "is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or > kiriya? This is what can be known by direct insight". > > > > +++++++++ Dear Ken O, This is sound reasoning but not, I believe, right. I think it is because we think there is subtle somthing that lasts , that can observe, that this idea occurs that the rate of rise and fall can be slowed down. Panna, amoha, if it is developed understands past, present or even future moments. There is no observer per se but panna arises just for an instant and performs its function of knowing and then another, different panna arises and performs its function. In a spit second, in the case of someone like Sariputta millions of moments of highly developed panna can arise and pass away and so much can be known. For us millions of moments of moha(ignorance ) arise and only occasionally do moments of rather weak panna arise and so it is all very unclear still. > > > > Robert: Things like the anusaya being present even when there is > > kusala citta we can infer as being so. And yet it is not necessarily > > helpful to think about it in this way. Nor is it present in the way > > that the wholesome roots are present in a kusala moment. > > I think it is already complex enough trying to understand the moment > > as it arises - is it kusala or akusala or vipaka or kiriya? This is > > what can be known by direct insight. > > > k: Latent tendecies is impt because it is an impt factor for the path of > cultivation. For a person who practise many lives, gross defilements are > easily indentify and to be in sati, but the person who is not expose to > latent tendecies, may not know that there is an underlying defilement. > Hence one got to practise panna or sati as long as one is not an Arahant, > underlying defilement will arise. Without understanding such latent > tendecies then there is a in danger of such "unseen factors" in our path > of cultivation. > > >+++++++++ Good point! best wishes robert 9487 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 1:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Yep!! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/21/01 2:29:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Howard, > I think your description gives a good overview of the unique genius of the > Buddha's spiritual teaching. My only point is to agree with you that since > it is > reality-based, as you say, it is possible for a rare individual to discover > these > principles himself. Whether or not this is true, it certainly helps most > of us > worldlings to have the Buddha's enormous, copious bounty of help. I think > that it > is important, however, to remember that the Buddha wanted us to follow the > path, > not worship him, and that he did not intend to be regarded as a God, which > would > also be an obstacle to awakening. > > Best, > Robert Ep /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) 9488 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 1:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi, "Roberts" ;-)) In a message dated 11/21/01 2:33:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Robert, > I hate to be a stickler, but it is impossible for the passage of namas, > including > cittas to be 'infinitely rapid' except with reference to something that is > slower, > like an apprehending consciousness which is observing them go by and trying > to > grasp them as an experience. > > If there is only the passage of one citta to the next, one nama to the next > with > no additional consciousness observing them, then their speed of passage can > only > be neither fast nor slow. There is no speed without a point of reference. > > If according to the commentaries, the passage is extremely rapid, they are > inherently positing an observer consciousness for whom it is seen as fast. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > ============================= YES, EXACTLY!!! You have hit it on the head!! 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) 9489 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:42am Subject: concept, reality and awareness (RobE) --- Dear Rob E. Hear are two posts , one from Kom and one from me that you might be interested in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1526 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1753 best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah [and Jon and Robert K. and Mike], > I think this post of yours, Sarah, is very sweet and reflective and I found it > helpful in considering the cultivation [not through effort of course] of kusala > cittas and mettha. I enjoyed your response to Robert K in this interesting post. > > Please forgive me then if I take a ripe opportunity here to ask for advice on a > few technical points. I will quote the relevant portion below, and then take off > from there. I think they are interesting questions, some of which have arisen > lately and have not been resolved. Your clear statement below gives me a good > opportunity to frame them again, in what I think may be a more answerable form: > > >>> If we're just thinking of ourselves and hoping we'll be happy, is the citta > > really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only awareness can be aware > > of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise reflection on the > > quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it can be > > wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and attachment again. It > > just depends. >>> > > My question is this, as I try to understand the nature of the cittas, and the > relationship between cittas and accompanying cetasikas: > > If 'only awareness can be aware of what the nature of the citta really is', is > awareness [sati?] the reflection of a mindful citta upon a previous citta? Or is > the awareness a cetasika through which the citta is able to acknowledge its own > property? I am just a little confused about how the mechanism of being aware of a > citta's true quality would work. > > Since you know I am particularly keen on the subject of awareness, and interested > to see how mindfulness arises and relates to the content of this or that citta's > experience, it seems like a good opportunity to take another look at how this > happens. > > Right now I have the idea that as a particular citta experiences something, there > may be deluded cetasikas misinforming it as to what is really there, or there may > be mindful, discerning cetasikas accomanying the citta, which would include sati > or satipatthana, and give the citta a much greater grasp of what is really taking > place in that moment. If you can confirm or clarify this, I would be very > grateful. > > It also leads back to that other issue of how a particular citta or cetasika can > take in the 'blur' of other cittas seeming to move by very fast, when in fact they > are really coming quite discretely one at a time. I am still trying to understand > whether this posits a sort of 'watcher' consciousness which stands apart from the > individual cittas and which lasts for longer than the single cittas, or whether > there is another way in which certain cittas or cetasikas attempt to 'take stock' > of the general flow of cittas going by and assess them wrongly as a 'blurred > continuous' event or rightly as a series of single events connected one to the > next, like beads on a string. [Of course there would be no string, I guess, just > beads]. > > One more issue along these lines that has come up lately is the nature of > ignorance or delusion. Rob K. and Jon, I believe, if I remember correctly, have > spoken of this as a positive state or object of some kind which directly > interferes with discernment. Pardon me if I don't quite have that right. I would > more tend to think that delusion would be a general way of indicating a particular > citta or cetasika which contained untrue perception or mistaken material in its > experience, rather than a separate force or object that exists independently of > some particular arising. I wonder how you would explain this? I don't think that > those who are speaking this way mean to establish delusion/ignorance as a 'real > object', ie, an entity or permanent force or being of some kind, a kind of > Mara-like figure that has its own intention of deluding. I would expect that it > would be more of what I said, an ignorant quality to a given citta, or a > particular kind of cetasika which just doesn't do the right job and comes up with > the wrong information about reality. > > I could even imagine that a deluded consciousness or mental factor of this kind > could be responsible for positing the kind of 'blur' that was spoken of as the > mistaken way of apprehending the accumulation of individual citta- moments that > arise. This mistaken consciousness would not actually be viewing multiple cittas > as a 'blur' while standing apart from them. Rather it would be a kind of single > thought of its own in which it 'imagined' such a blur existing in place of an > actual perception, and thus substituted its own mistaken notion for a real moment > of seeing. > > In other words, it would be a kind of mistake on top of a mistake. This citta > might fancy itself a kind of intellectual citta. It would first ignore the > sense-moment and mistake a mental moment for a real moment of perception. And it > would then say about its own mistaken perceptual object, really a thought-form, > 'these moments are all part of a continous movement' based on its own > mis-perception. > > Thanks for anything you can say to these questions. Perhaps Nina has said > something about these issues that I could be directed to, if that is also > appropriate. I know she's the expert on these mechanics. > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > > ===================== > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Rob K, > > > > I've been appreciating all your posts recently;-) > > > > I've been quite busy, so only got a chance to have another look at the Vis. > > passages you mentioned as I was getting ready to go to bed last night..As a > > result, I had lots of useful reflection on metta as I was falling asleep:-) I'm > > not sure I'll be able to add anything much to your comments here, but I'm happy > > to have another chance to consider further. > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > > Thanks for this which all makes a lot of sense to me. > > > I was wondering if you'd like to tackle a passage in the > > > Vissuddhimagga which is harder to understand: ix8 Metta should first > > > of all "be developed only to oneself, doing it repeastedly thus: may > > > I be happy..." The next sections notes that someone may question > > > this because it is not in the Tipitaka and that in the > > > patisambhidimagga and vibhanga no mention is made of developing metta > > > to oneself. The answer is that for jhana this can't succeed by way of > > > taking oneself as an object. And later ix9 it makes it clear that > > > developing to oneself means "just as I want to be happy and dread > > > pain so do others..." Thus making oneself as an example. > > > > > > I think the meaning is basically that we considr how we like to be > > > treated and thought of and so we should think of others in the same > > > way. I can also see how a not so careful reading of the text could > > > lead to the conclusion that one should be trying to love oneself > > > more. I'd like you to read over ix8-10 and see what you think. > > > > I think we understand the lines in a similar way. If we reflect on what we > > appreciate when we're with others, don't we appreciate kind words and gestures, > > consideration, friendliness, assistance, humility and so on. Isn't it so true > > that we really find ourselves so very dear. And so, others find themselves just > > as dear and would also like to hear kind words, experience consideration, > > friendliness and so on. > > > > Hence by reflecting on the qualities we appreciate with kusala cittas, it can > > be a condition for metta and the other brahma viharas to be developed towards > > others. If we're giving something to another, for example, there is concern for > > the other's benefit and there is bound to be some metta even if we don't `name' > > it. However, for metta or other wholesome states to develop, there has to be > > the understanding of which moments are wholesome and which are unwholesome (as > > you, of course, know so well). > > > > If we're just thinking of ourselves and hoping we'll be happy, is the citta > > really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only awareness can be aware > > of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise reflection on the > > quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it can be > > wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and attachment again. It > > just depends. > > > > I think as it says in the text, by reflecting on what makes us happy, by using > > `ourselves' as examples, it can be a way to condition metta for other beings. > > It's not a matter of wishing ourselves to be happy, which is bound (I think) to > > be with attachment. > > > > However, if we reflect thus: `...Just as I want to be happy and dread > > pain, as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too.', making > > himself the example, then desire for other beings' welfare and happiness arises > > in him'. > > > > I'd forgotten that these lines are then followed by the same verse from the > > Udana I quoted the other day. > > > > And so, I think the first line you quote that metta should first of all `..be > > developed only to oneself' is explained by the following ones that `it does not > > conflict' with the other texts which clearly show metta is never towards > > oneself because here it `refers to (making oneself) an example.' > > > > Later (1X, 92) we read: > > > > `As to the characteristic, etc., lovingkindness is characterized here as > > promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer welfare. It is > > manifested as the removal of annoyance. Its proximate cause is seeing > > lovableness in beings. it succeeds when it makes ill will subside, and it > > fails when it produces (selfish) affection' > > > > Thanks Rob, I find all these reminders very helpful. > > > > Sarah 9490 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies --- Dear Howard and Rob. E., Can I clarify your position a little. Do you agree that the Buddha taught that citta arises and passes away very very rapidly? Or do you think he didn't teach this but that people like Buddhaghosa dreamed it up to try to explain some things? robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, "Roberts" ;-)) > > In a message dated 11/21/01 2:33:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Robert, > > I hate to be a stickler, but it is impossible for the passage of namas, > > including > > cittas to be 'infinitely rapid' except with reference to something that is > > slower, > > like an apprehending consciousness which is observing them go by and trying > > to > > grasp them as an experience. > > > > If there is only the passage of one citta to the next, one nama to the next > > with > > no additional consciousness observing them, then their speed of passage can > > only > > be neither fast nor slow. There is no speed without a point of reference. > > > > If according to the commentaries, the passage is extremely rapid, they are > > inherently positing an observer consciousness for whom it is seen as fast. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > ============================= > YES, EXACTLY!!! You have hit it on the head!! > > With metta, > Howard > 9491 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] absolute realities Hi Nina You gave me some ideas for my India talks, very helpful. I shall write > about nimitta I also interested in Nimitta. After your talks, could I request your generous assitance in posting it in the Dhammastudy.com. I like to take this opportunity to praise the site for very good source of Abhidhamma teachings and their detail explanations. I hope one day, someone will post the whole commentary and the seven Abhidhamma books (just a dream :)). With thanks Ken O --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, I have here the Co in Pali to M.N.5, No Blemishes, about > paramatthadesana, I shall translate: > Buddhassa Bhagavato duvidhaa desanaa: sammuttidesanaa, paramatthadesanaa > caa > ti. > There is a twofold teaching of the Buddha, the Blessed One: the teaching > in > the conventional way and the teaching by way of ultimate realities. > Tattha puggalo, satto, itthii, puriso, khattiyo, braama.no, devo, Maaro > ti > evaruupa sammutidesanaa. > There is a human, a being, a woman, a man, a man of the warrior caste, a > brahman, a god, and Mara. Such is the teaching in the conventional way. > Anicca.m, dukkha.m, anattaa, khandhaa, dhaatuu, aayatanaani, > satipa.t.thaanaa ti evaruupaa paramattha desanaa. > Impermanence, dukkha, anattaa, the aggregates, elements, sensefields, > satipa.t.thaana. Such is the teaching by way of ultimate realities. > Tattha Bhagavaa, ye sammutivasena desana.m sutvaa attha.m > pa.tivijjhitvaa > moha.m pahaaya visesam adhigantu.m samatthaa, tesa.m sammuti desana.m > deseti. > Here the Blessed One taught to those in the conventional way who by > means of > it, after having heard the teaching , penetrated the meaning and > abandoned > ignorance, and were skilled to attain distinction. > Ye pana paramatthavasena desana.m sutvaa attha.m pa.tivijjhitvaa moha.m > pahaaya visesam adhigantu.m samatthaa, tesa.m paramatthadesana.m deseti. > But who by means of ultimate realities after having heard the teaching , > penetrated the meaning and abandoned ignorance, and were skilled to > attain > distinction, to those he taught by way of ultimate realities. > > You gave me some ideas for my India talks, very helpful. I shall write > about > nimitta. Ultimate realities: some people do not like this, but it is > difficult to find the perfect translation. A. Sujin stressed that words > are > not so important, they are just the means to explain realities so that > these > can be directly understood without needing words, without having to > think > about them in words. More about that later on, I like your tips as to > what > to write about, Nina. 9492 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 9:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies I add my hysterical laughter to this (whilst playing a very morose dirge on a pipe organ of WalMart proportions). See post 5328 Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, "Roberts" ;-)) > > In a message dated 11/21/01 2:33:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Robert, > > I hate to be a stickler, but it is impossible for the passage of namas, > > including > > cittas to be 'infinitely rapid' except with reference to something that is > > slower, > > like an apprehending consciousness which is observing them go by and trying > > to > > grasp them as an experience. > > > > If there is only the passage of one citta to the next, one nama to the next > > with > > no additional consciousness observing them, then their speed of passage can > > only > > be neither fast nor slow. There is no speed without a point of reference. > > > > If according to the commentaries, the passage is extremely rapid, they are > > inherently positing an observer consciousness for whom it is seen as fast. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > ============================= > YES, EXACTLY!!! You have hit it on the head!! > > 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) 9493 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 9:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Howard and Rob. E., > Can I clarify your position a little. Do you agree that the Buddha > taught that citta arises and passes away very very rapidly? Or do you > think he didn't teach this but that people like Buddhaghosa dreamed > it up to try to explain some things? Hi Robert, Perhaps it may be helpful to find where, specifically, in the Sutta Pitaka, the Buddha explicitly mentioned the speed at which cittas arise and pass away. I am not familiar with anything in the suttas where the Buddha mentioned anything about this sort of thing, but that doesn't mean much, since I have yet to read the entire Sutta Pitaka. Anywaay, as far as I'm concerned, I prefer to focus on things that have greater relevance in my day-to-day life, and the incredible rapidity of cittas posited in the Abhidhamma has been of no use to me in terms of helping me overcome my suffering. Color me a simpleton, but as I see it, the only question that matters to me is: how helpful is any teaching in terms of awakening here and now, to eradicating suffering at the root, once and for all? Until I can see a clear way to answer this one question everything else is moot. 9494 From: Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Thank you for this. Certainly, taken at face value, this commentary > suggests parinibbana as a kind of nullity. A couple matters remain: (1) The > exact meaning of Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality, and > the exact meaning of vi~n~nana, which I take as the dualistic operation of > separating out an individualized object from the potential field of > awareness, a special type of knowing/~nana. Howard, As per usual, you play the gadfly to the hilt, and ask the killer questions, always seeming to get to the heart of the matter, no matter how subtle or tricky. Just wanted to pass on my continued appreciation for your points. 9495 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? <1> Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > This is extremely interesting, Sarah. Could you clarify for a confused > worldling, > exactly who is speaking in these quotes, and is it a part of the Abhidhamma > commentaries, a part of the Vinaya itself, or is it all from the introduction > to > the Vinaya? Thanks for your positive feedback, Rob. Sorry for any confusion..let me try a little better.....;-) Firstly. let me explain some abbreviations: Smp. = Samantapaasaadikaa. This is the commentary to the Vinaya by Buddhaghosa, compiled in the 5th century I believe, in Sri Lanka. This tome has been followed by Theravada monks in all Theravada Buddhist countries, but as far as I know, there is no English translation as yet. Baahiranidaana, The Inception of Discipline & the Vinaya Nidaana = the introductory chapter to the Smp. It is primarily meant to explain the origin of the Vinaya. Buddhaghosa’s aim in it is to establish ‘the authenticity of the Vinaya before proceeding to compile its commentary’. This is the text, translated into English by N.A. Jayawickrama, Sacred Books, that I’m quoting from. In other words, generally I’m quoting Buddhaghosa, but from time to time I quote from Jayawickrama’s introduction or his quotes from Smp. as I tried to indicate. Let me quickly run through the text again, clarifying if I think it may not be clear. Pls let me know if you’re still confused and please comment anytime I should clarify further: Refs to Baahiranidaana: > > The first chapter discusses the ‘First Great Convocation’, in other words > the > > First Council of arahats who rehearsed the ‘Dhamma and the Vinaya’.Just to > > clarify, Dhamma and Vinaya, includes the Abhidhamma texts: > > Quotes from Smp. included in Jayawickrama’s intro: > > “Thus this Word of the Buddha which is uniform in sentiment...was > > rehearsed together.and not only this, but other divers distinctions in > > compilation to be met with in the Three pitakas...have been determined when > it > > was thus rehearsed together in seven months” (Smp.33) > > > > Jayawickrama, in his introduction says ‘Ultimately Buddhaghosa traces the > > vinaya, as well as the rest of the sayings of the Buddha > in > > their present form, to the first Great convocation and explains the > meanings of > > the words, “by whom was it said, when and for what reason?” (Smp.34) In > dealing > > with the significance of the words, “by whom this was retained in mind, > handed > > down by whom and established in whom” he traces the history of the Vinaya > from > > the Tathagata (Smp.35) in successive stages, to each of the 3 Convocations > and > > finally to the Vinaya Recital of Maha-Arittha in Ceylon under the > presidentshop > > of Mahinda (Smp.106) His primary aim is to establish that it is the Vinaya > in > > its pristine purity that he is commenting upon. Therefore it is imperative > that > > the stages by which it has reached him should be traced. The succession of > > Teachers from Upali brought it down to the time of the 2nd convocation and > the > > Theras “again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the Vinaya..even in the same > > manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa” (Smp.38) To clarify, this is the end of the quote of Jayawickrama including his quotes from Smp. Back to the text + Baahiranidaana: > > > > Back to the text itself and the ‘First Great Convocation’: > > > > ‘....For it has been said, “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa > > adressed the monks...........Subsequently he said, “Let us, friends, > rehearse > > the Dhamma and the Vinaya......” The monks rejoined, “If that be so, Sir, > may > > the Elder select the monks (for the Convocation).” > > > > The Elder rejected many hundreds and thousands of monks in the categories > of > > wordling, Stream-Entrant, Once-Returner, Non-Returner, and Dry Visioned > Arahant > > and canker-waned Arahant, all of whom were versed in the Teachings > consisting > > of the entire ninefold Dispensation of the Teacher and chose 499 > canker-waned > > monks who alone were proficient with regard to the learning in all aspects > of > > the Teachings in the entire Three Baskets, had attained mastery in > analytical > > knowledge, were of no mean achievement, and for the greater part were > > classified by the Exalted One as an expert each in his field in the > distinct > > spheres of the threefold knowledge. Regarding them it has been said, > > “Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa selected five hundred Arahants less > one.” > > Back to Sarah: > > > > There are plenty of very lengthy footnotes and I’m happy to add any or > discuss > > any points.. Otherwise, as I said, I’ll just add parts which may be of > > interest, taking extracts here and there from the text, introduction and > > footnotes (or even the pali at the back if needbe;-) > > > > Sarah ___________ 9496 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? <1> Hi Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Interesting stuff, Sarah, > > Of course you'll never convince those who think that > Budhhaghosa made it all up and that the dispensation > consists of only two baskets (the Dvipitaka?). Oh, > well... > > mike Thanks too, Mike. Actually, I'm writing it mostly for myself ;-) It's interesting for me and this is a way of reading/studying out loud which I like better than reading on my own... Like Christine with her really helpful commentary notes, it gives me a chance to question and clarify and let others join in.... I'm not really concerned about trying to convince anyone of anything, but it may be helpful for others (like myself) who would like to be more familiar with some of these historical 'facts'. No one has to 'accept' anything;-) S. 9497 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Dear Mike, I am in admiration of your venture (going forth). I am scared for myself because I am in admiration of your venture. Please don't read the following as a desire for an argument. For the last two thousand odd years the world has really had only a handful of pages of text that can be directly attributed to Jesus (then add the recent discovery of the Gospel of St Thomas). But look at the billions of people , divided over the thousands of denominations, clinging to the hundreds of interpretations of what Jesus said, and all call themselves the Christian Church. I doubt Jesus had this in mind. I am surer that Jesus sought the liberation of one and all. Institutional religion plays no part in this. In the end, institutional religion is an arrow pointing up it's own bottom. The Buddha appointed no successor! The Suttas start with , Thus have I heard, but I have never heard the Buddha saying , It is so because such and such said. St Paul and all the church fathers cannot add one single iota to the message of Jesus, but they can serve to confuse, as is apparent. What is the shortcoming of the Buddha, the self-realised one, that he needs Buddhaghosa to clarify his teaching? Thank you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Interesting stuff, Sarah, > > Of course you'll never convince those who think that > Budhhaghosa made it all up and that the dispensation > consists of only two baskets (the Dvipitaka?). Oh, > well... > > mike > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > From time to time questions are raised about the > > authenticity of the Buddha's > > word in the Abhidhamma and ancient Commentaries. > > When I was pulling out dusty > > Vinaya texts the other day, I pulled out a copy of > > `the Inception of Discipline > > (or the Historical Introduction) and The Vinaya > > Nidaana', Jayawickrama's > > translation of the Baahiranidaana of Buddhaghosa's > > Samantapaasaadikaa, the > > Vinaya commentary. > > > > As I'm really very ignorant about the historical > > details, I'd like to quote > > occasional passages (in no particular order) when I > > have time, because I think > > they may be of interest to some. Of course anyone's > > free to question or > > disagree as usual;-) If anyone has other relevant > > quotes and passages from > > other texts, please feel very free to add these too. > > > > The first chapter discusses the `First Great > > Convocation', in other words the > > First Council of arahats who rehearsed the `Dhamma > > and the Vinaya'.Just to > > clarify, Dhamma and Vinaya, includes the Abhidhamma > > texts: > > > > "Thus this Word of the Buddha which is > > uniform in sentiment...was > > rehearsed together.and not only this, but other > > divers distinctions in > > compilation to be met with in the Three > > pitakas...have been determined when it > > was thus rehearsed together in seven months" > > (Smp.33) > > > > Jayawickrama, in his introduction says `Ultimately > > Buddhaghosa traces the > > vinaya, as well as the rest of the sayings of the > > Buddha in > > their present form, to the first Great convocation > > and explains the meanings of > > the words, "by whom was it said, when and for what > > reason?" (Smp.34) In dealing > > with the significance of the words, "by whom this > > was retained in mind, handed > > down by whom and established in whom" he traces the > > history of the Vinaya from > > the Tathagata (Smp.35) in successive stages, to each > > of the 3 Convocations and > > finally to the Vinaya Recital of Maha-Arittha in > > Ceylon under the presidentshop > > of Mahinda (Smp.106) His primary aim is to establish > > that it is the Vinaya in > > its pristine purity that he is commenting upon. > > Therefore it is imperative that > > the stages by which it has reached him should be > > traced. The succession of > > Teachers from Upali brought it down to the time of > > the 2nd convocation and the > > Theras "again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the > > Vinaya..even in the same > > manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa" > > (Smp.38) > > > > Back to the text itself and the `First Great > > Convocation': > > > > `....For it has been said, "Thereupon the > > venerable Mahakassapa > > adressed the monks...........Subsequently he said, > > "Let us, friends, rehearse > > the Dhamma and the Vinaya......" The monks rejoined, > > "If that be so, Sir, may > > the Elder select the monks (for the Convocation)." > > > > The Elder rejected many hundreds and thousands of > > monks in the categories of > > wordling, Stream-Entrant, Once-Returner, > > Non-Returner, and Dry Visioned Arahant > > and canker-waned Arahant, all of whom were versed in > > the Teachings consisting > > of the entire ninefold Dispensation of the Teacher > > and chose 499 canker-waned > > monks who alone were proficient with regard to the > > learning in all aspects of > > the Teachings in the entire Three Baskets, had > > attained mastery in analytical > > knowledge, were of no mean achievement, and for the > > greater part were > > classified by the Exalted One as an expert each in > > his field in the distinct > > spheres of the threefold knowledge. Regarding them > > it has been said, > > "Thereupon the venerable Mahakassapa selected five > > hundred Arahants less one." > > > > > > There are plenty of very lengthy footnotes and I'm > > happy to add any or discuss > > any points.. Otherwise, as I said, I'll just add > > parts which may be of > > interest, taking extracts here and there from the > > text, introduction and > > footnotes (or even the pali at the back if needbe;-) > > > > Sarah 9498 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 5:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Hi Herman > The Buddha appointed no successor! k: That is true > > The Suttas start with , Thus have I heard, but I have never heard the > Buddha saying , It is so because such and such said. > > St Paul and all the church fathers cannot add one single iota to the > message of Jesus, but they can serve to confuse, as is apparent. > > What is the shortcoming of the Buddha, the self-realised one, that he > needs Buddhaghosa to clarify his teaching? k: Honestly speaking, we have to be fair that there are many good teachers after the Buddha that helps us understand the path better. For eg Nagarjuna and Hui Neng. It is still up to individual to decide for themselves. I rather find it insensitive to make such a statement bc Buddhaghosa is a widely respected venerable of the Thervadan Traditions. Kind regards Ken O 9499 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 0:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/21/01 10:49:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard and Rob. E., > Can I clarify your position a little. Do you agree that the Buddha > taught that citta arises and passes away very very rapidly? Or do you > think he didn't teach this but that people like Buddhaghosa dreamed > it up to try to explain some things? > robert > ========================== I don't think the Buddha discussed individual cittas per se in the suttas as they are discussed in the Abhidhamma. However, he certainly did discuss how quickly *thoughts* go by as compared to material objects. (And here, speaking of individual thoughts is using conventional language. Where one thought ends and another begins is at least in part a metter of convention.) Thoughts are mental objects, wheras sights, sounds, tactile objects etc are physical objects. I believe he was comparing the relative speeds of the flows of these different categories of object. None of this rules out such things as, for example, parallel processing of data of differing kinds, various functions operating in a continuous fashion instead of during point-instants in which no change/development occurs etc., none of which am inecessarily making any positive claims for. The discussion in the suttas was all quite empirical and conventional it seems to me. In any case, my point was not to take issue with the Buddha in his saying that mind changes more quickly than form, but rather with the idea that the citta theory could be compatible with that! I'm not proposing a psychological theory to account for the Buddha's observations, but simply expressing my problems in seeing the explanatory adequacy of an already existing theory. 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) 9500 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samannaphala verse 65 Hi Christine, To me there are two views abt slowing down meditations, One view is that slowing down meditations helps to practise concentrations. Another view is that this meditation tries to helps us to be mindful of the body. By slowing down, we try to be mindful, usually when we walk, we forget that we are walking. We forget abt mindfullness in the body. Through such a slowing down practise, then after much practise then next time when we take a leisure walk, we become more and more mindful of the body. To me what Jon says is not wrong, he talking in another perspective, i think he is talking abt Vipassana. When in the first place how to control a self that is not controllable or where is there a self to control in the first place :). But to me, such slowing down meditation is a good practise as it helps to practise mindfullness of the body :). Cheers Ken O > > Jon said in a recent post, "Let me say at the outset, because I > think this is very important, that no-one is asking us to change, or > to try to change, any of what is happening now, naturally. In other > words, the teaching is not about 'slowing down' the present moment, > or contriving to reduce the speed, variety or strength of sense > impressions. That would be trying to change the reality of the > present moment in some manner, rather than simply understanding it > more for what it is." In 'Clear comprehension of non-delusion' - I > understand (theoretically) that it is not 'a self who goes forward, > the action of going forward is not produced by a self' , but the > commentary goes into such long descriptions of 'raising the > foot', 'bringing it forward' 'shifting it away', 'dropping the > foot', 'bringing the new foot forward' - it seems very much to be > encouraging just that 'slowing down' and examining of the action > commonly taught in Walking Meditation in Retreats, but is this what > is discouraged, in Jon's paragraph above? > > metta, > Christine 9501 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi, Herman - In a message dated 11/22/01 12:02:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@d... writes: > > I add my hysterical laughter to this (whilst playing a very morose > dirge on a pipe organ of WalMart proportions). > =========================== ;-)) 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) 9502 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Hi, Erik - Thanks for the kind words. BTW, it's good to be seeing you posting!! How is everything? With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/22/01 12:09:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, rikpa21@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Thank you for this. Certainly, taken at face value, this > commentary > > suggests parinibbana as a kind of nullity. A couple matters remain: > (1) The > > exact meaning of Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined > reality, and > > the exact meaning of vi~n~nana, which I take as the dualistic > operation of > > separating out an individualized object from the potential field of > > awareness, a special type of knowing/~nana. > > Howard, > > As per usual, you play the gadfly to the hilt, and ask the killer > questions, always seeming to get to the heart of the matter, no > matter how subtle or tricky. Just wanted to pass on my continued > appreciation for your points. > > /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) 9503 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 6:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Hi Robert k > Dear Ken O, > This is sound reasoning but not, I believe, right. I think it is > because we think there is subtle somthing that lasts , that can > observe, that this idea occurs that the rate of rise and fall can be > slowed down. Panna, amoha, if it is developed understands past, > present or even future moments. There is no observer per se but panna > arises just for an instant and performs its function of knowing and > then another, different panna arises and performs its function. k: Maybe I am not clear, I am not saying abt an observer per se here. I am saying that seeing reality in each citta. Time and speed is realitive. Maybe to a enlighted person, each citta is seen as it is as it arise.(I not talking abt a constant wisdom here). There is no need for the next citta to observe the reminiscent of an earlier citta (due to sanna) that is usually the case for an unenlighted person. In a > spit second, in the case of someone like Sariputta millions of > moments of highly developed panna can arise and pass away and so much > can be known. For us millions of moments of moha(ignorance ) arise > and only occasionally do moments of rather weak panna arise and so it > is all very unclear still. > k: I feel that your reasoning is likely to lead to a misunderstanding that is a conscious of an observer per se and 'blur'. Let us take an example for the word "panna" that arise in our mind. To a enlighted person, one would know the arising of the mind door process of "p" before the arising mind door process of "a". To us it is just one momentary thought, but to an enlighted person they could see reality in each passing cittas of the millions of citta in the mind door process. Words could be remember in that millions of cittas because of sanna that link the letter together then recognise it. As we know that in each citta, there arise simataneously many cetasikas they work together and perform different functions simutaneously and the object of the citta could be the same. Kind regards Ken O 9504 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 6:56am Subject: Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana: To Howard, Bob E, Mike, Erik Dear Howard, Robert Epstein, Mike, And Erik How are you? Thank you for your profound questions. This post is merely to say that I have read your messages. The time I had a chance to read them has been very late in Canberra, and I am already sleepy. So I won't be able to post a considered reply now. But, as soon as possible, I will reply. I did know in advance, though, that the expression 'Apannattikabhaavam - the state of undefined reality' could pose some problems, and thought about writing further commentary on that expression. As I do not have Dhammapada Tiikaa (subcommentary) on my Chatthasangaayanaa CD-ROM, I would try to write a modern subcommentary on the expression - not in Paali -, but in English, of course. I have some insights on that expressions your questions did not address. So, even if my subcommentary may or may not answer your profound questions to your satisfaction, it could throw some light on your present puzzelment. Won't be long! With regards Suan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Previously on this list: The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada Atthakathaa clearly tells us that there is no consciousness component in Parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation as possible - syntatically in particular - while making sure that the readers can read as natural English as possible. If you found any unclear points in the translation, please let me know. My present translation has been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa in Itivutta Atthakathaa. "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati attho." "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality like the lamp without fuel." Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is literally circle, cycle, or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely another name of pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken strongly by craving or attachment (tanhaa). As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa Nibbaana is emptied of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of an Arahant, the scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness component (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is no textual support for such a scenario. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org Replies Author Date 9470 Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana upasaka@a... Wed 11/21/2001 9494 Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana rikpa21@y... Thu 11/22/2001 9479 Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Robert Epstein Wed 11/21/2001 9484 Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana m. nease Thu 11/22/2001 9505 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 7:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Hi All One interesting site titled "Nibbana and Anatta". http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban1.htm Kind regards Ken O --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > Dear Howard, Robert Epstein, Mike, And Erik > > How are you? > > Thank you for your profound questions. This post is merely to say > that I have read your messages. > > The time I had a chance to read them has been very late in Canberra, > and I am already sleepy. So I won't be able to post a considered > reply now. But, as soon as possible, I will reply. > > I did know in advance, though, that the expression > 'Apannattikabhaavam - the state of undefined reality' could pose some > problems, and thought about writing further commentary on that > expression. As I do not have Dhammapada Tiikaa (subcommentary) on my > Chatthasangaayanaa CD-ROM, I would try to write a modern > subcommentary on the expression - not in Paali -, but in English, of > course. > > I have some insights on that expressions your questions did not > address. So, even if my subcommentary may or may not answer your > profound questions to your satisfaction, it could throw some light on > your present puzzelment. > > Won't be long! > > With regards > > Suan > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Previously on this list: > > > The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada Atthakathaa clearly > tells us that there is no consciousness component in Parinibbaana > after the death of an Arahant. > > I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation as possible - > syntatically in particular - while making sure that the readers can > read as natural English as possible. If you found any unclear points > in the translation, please let me know. My present translation has > been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa in Itivutta > Atthakathaa. > > "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa > khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa > khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi > parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati > attho." > > "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete > extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of > defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and > the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical > machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel." > > Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment > Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is literally circle, cycle, > or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) > Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery > Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality > > Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely another name of > pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken strongly by craving or > attachment (tanhaa). > > As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa Nibbaana is emptied > of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of an Arahant, the > scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness component > (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is no textual > support for such a scenario. > > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org > 9506 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 10:39am Subject: speed of cittas [Erik] Erik, you wrote: > Perhaps it may be helpful to find where, specifically, in the Sutta > Pitaka, the Buddha explicitly mentioned the speed at which cittas > arise and pass away. I hope this will be helpful---AN. I, v (48): "Nothing, O monks, do I know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing consciousness." Here, "consciousness" is "citta". The commentary elaborates on this and creates the similes of billions of cittas arising and passing away in a flash of lightning. Billions in a flash? I don't know about the numbers, but if you think about all the mental activity occuring in a second, I bet you could describe 100 cittas without much trouble. Buddha talked about it. The commentators talked about it. Abhidhamma talks about it. Why do you think they did so? 9507 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 0:18pm Subject: Re: meththa meditation Dear All, Sorry to be so slow, but may I refer back to a topic discussed a few days ago, where I still need a little clarification? During the discussion on Metta, the argument was put that Metta ought not be directed to 'oneself'; that Metta ought always to be 'other-directed'. I have been wondering if the scriptures quoted were directed at people living in a practising community where each individual would be 'caught in the crossfire' (so to speak) of everyone else's radiated metta......and that there was no conception of the isolation of many people practicing now in the West. Does Metta actually affect the target being/s, or does it only affect the person initiating metta? i.e. in the form of making them more sensitive, kindly and other-directed? Perhaps altering the dynamics of their relationships with the other being /s- or maybe just creating a satisfying self-view of themselves as a caring person......... If 'self-directed metta' is an error, why do the majority of meditation courses/retreats teach both 'self directed' plus 'other directed metta, but suggest practicing 'self directed' first? If metta practice does actually affect the target being/s - wouldn't it be dependent on the strength and 'quality' of the feeling being radiated? New practitioners are warned not to initially choose someone of the opposite gender as this could arouse emotions other than loving-kindness. (Presumably only in the meditator, otherwise the world would be a little more chaotic than it is.) If a practitioner has been psychologically damaged at a "critical period" for development of attachment, trust, autonomy, individuation, etc. as a very young child - by, say, physical, sexual or emotional abuse - how would the idea of "using oneself as an example" work? - if the feelings held for oneself are tinged with loathing or disgust? "Just as for myself.....so also for.........?" metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > Dear Mike and all friends > > Thank you very much for all your taking part. I learnt much from your > contributions. And Nina, once replying I forgot to include your name... I > appologize... > > And a small quote from another Dhamma friend... > "we all have meththa within us... we have to grow it" > "to a beginer (like me) its ok just to know whether you have meththa is > present or not (at a particular moment)" > > ~meththa > Ranil 9508 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:01pm Subject: [dsg] Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Hi Kenneth, Are you reading Nanavira Thera 'Clearing the Path' Notes on Dhamma (1960-65)??? I dipped into it a few weeks ago, and found some aspects puzzling. http://ww.geocities.com/Athens/9366/ctp-cont.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi All > > One interesting site titled "Nibbana and Anatta". > > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban1.htm > Kind regards > Ken O 9509 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana Ooops...make that http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/ctp-cont.htm --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > Hi Kenneth, > > Are you reading Nanavira Thera 'Clearing the Path' Notes on Dhamma > (1960-65)??? > I dipped into it a few weeks ago, and found some aspects puzzling. > http://ww.geocities.com/Athens/9366/ctp-cont.htm > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi All > > > > One interesting site titled "Nibbana and Anatta". > > > > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban1.htm > > > Kind regards > > Ken O 9510 From: m. nease Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 2:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Hi Herman, --- hhofman@d... wrote: > I am in admiration of your venture (going forth). I > am scared for > myself because I am in admiration of your venture. You can stop being scared--looks like not working out. > Please don't read the following as a desire for an > argument. That's a bargain sir. > The Buddha appointed no successor! Right--just the Dhamma. > The Suttas start with , Thus have I heard, but I > have never heard the > Buddha saying , It is so because such and such said. > > St Paul and all the church fathers cannot add one > single iota to the > message of Jesus, but they can serve to confuse, as > is apparent. > > What is the shortcoming of the Buddha, the > self-realised one, that he > needs Buddhaghosa to clarify his teaching? I accept as a working hypothesis that the Buddha had no shortcomings (other than, perhaps, mortality). Explanations are necessary (whether by the Buddha or Sariputta e.g. in the suttas or others in the abhidhamma) for the rest of us, I think. Best Wishes Sir, mike 9511 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 3:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Dear Ken, I am not up to speed on the sensitivities of all the traditions around the globe. I am sorry if I offended anyone. I have previously written about my appreciation of Buddhaghosa. I hope we can agree that ultimately it is the message that is important, not so much the bearer of the message. I think there was reference in my post to institutional religions being pointers to themselves. This is what traditions do. They become things in themselves for themselves. Jon often writes about how the light of the Buddha's teaching will grow dimmer over the aeons. I believe that the attachment to tradidions is part of this process of losing sight of the reality of the Four Noble Truths, as set out by the Buddha. If you do things, because you have been taught to do them, without knowing or understanding why, then you are just building on the tradition that taught you to do these things. Eventually a river with no flow in it will silt up and become stagnant. And a stagnant river is not the parinibbana of the river. I read in the paper the other day that the very respected and influential Sinhalese Buddhists in Sri Lanka have managed to ban sport on all full moon days. I am sorry if I offend anyone, but I am very underwhelmed by such nonsense. It is not the outward things that defile a man. All the best, Ken Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Herman > > > The Buddha appointed no successor! > > k: That is true > > > > The Suttas start with , Thus have I heard, but I have never heard the > > Buddha saying , It is so because such and such said. > > > > St Paul and all the church fathers cannot add one single iota to the > > message of Jesus, but they can serve to confuse, as is apparent. > > > > What is the shortcoming of the Buddha, the self-realised one, that he > > needs Buddhaghosa to clarify his teaching? > > k: Honestly speaking, we have to be fair that there are many good > teachers after the Buddha that helps us understand the path better. For > eg Nagarjuna and Hui Neng. It is still up to individual to decide for > themselves. I rather find it insensitive to make such a statement bc > Buddhaghosa is a widely respected venerable of the Thervadan Traditions. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > 9512 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 5:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Dear Jon > If a person who has never heard the dhamma develops, for example, samatha, > is that person developing the path factor of right concentration, would > you say? (... and if not, what is the difference between that person > developing samatha and someone who has heard the dhamma developing > samatha?) This thread has been very interesting and I hope it will continue. I suspect it will lead to an explanation of how and why the Dhamma is indispensable. Could it be that an uninstructed worldling could go so far as to actually see Nibbana but without attaining Path consciousness? I am thinking of the Mulapariyaya Sutta (MN 1): "He [the uninstructed worldling] perceives Nibbana as Nibbana. Perceiving Nibbana as Nibbana, he conceives things about Nibbana, he conceives things in Nibbana, he conceives things coming out of Nibbana, he conceives Nibbana as 'mine,' he delights in Nibbana. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you." Would it be Nibbana itself that is perceived in this case, or would it be only the concept of Nibbana? Kind regards Ken H. 9513 From: Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 7:24pm Subject: "engaged" [Christine] Hi Christine, I'm reading through some old posts, and I am enjoying your recent comments and questions immensely. At one point, you write: > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged buddhism?) > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find > themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this question eloquently: "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had been put in bondage by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some with clogs, some with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of bhikkhus dressed...and saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a great mass of people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi of Kosala, some with ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' "Then the Blessed One, having understood the meaning of this, on that occasion recited these verses: 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong Made of iron, wood, or rope; But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, Anxious concern for wives and children-- This, the wise say, is the strong bond, Degrading, supple, hard to escape. But even this they cut and wander forth, Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" I read this in the context of the real root of suffering being craving born of ignorance, and not the external conditions (e.g. human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not to say that human rights are not important in an external way, but ultimately, the external conditions are superficial. One of my favorite passages addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two- handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the passage is that it points out in stark terms that the real crux of the teaching is not so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw but instead to develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw strikes, it does not give rise to suffering. Pursuit of human rights begins with the recognition of an injustice, then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the discussion of the injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, etc. It is eerily similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does Buddha then say, "Then, I must fight against this injustice and pursue my rights by making him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: "...those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in verse 4: "...those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred." Buddha did not exhort us to battle against those awful other people who don't respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. The real issue is the development of the mind: "Whatever harm an enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, an ill-directed mind inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). Dan 9514 From: manji Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 7:37pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? A most auspicious post, maybe kamma can end here. Traditions, individuals... Kamma kamma. So tough to answer this post. -----Original Message----- From: hhofman@d... [mailto:hhofman@d...] Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 6:05 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? Dear Ken, I am not up to speed on the sensitivities of all the traditions around the globe. I am sorry if I offended anyone. I have previously written about my appreciation of Buddhaghosa. I hope we can agree that ultimately it is the message that is important, not so much the bearer of the message. I think there was reference in my post to institutional religions being pointers to themselves. This is what traditions do. They become things in themselves for themselves. Jon often writes about how the light of the Buddha's teaching will grow dimmer over the aeons. I believe that the attachment to tradidions is part of this process of losing sight of the reality of the Four Noble Truths, as set out by the Buddha. If you do things, because you have been taught to do them, without knowing or understanding why, then you are just building on the tradition that taught you to do these things. Eventually a river with no flow in it will silt up and become stagnant. And a stagnant river is not the parinibbana of the river. I read in the paper the other day that the very respected and influential Sinhalese Buddhists in Sri Lanka have managed to ban sport on all full moon days. I am sorry if I offend anyone, but I am very underwhelmed by such nonsense. It is not the outward things that defile a man. All the best, Ken Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Herman > > > The Buddha appointed no successor! > > k: That is true > > > > The Suttas start with , Thus have I heard, but I have never heard the > > Buddha saying , It is so because such and such said. > > > > St Paul and all the church fathers cannot add one single iota to the > > message of Jesus, but they can serve to confuse, as is apparent. > > > > What is the shortcoming of the Buddha, the self-realised one, that he > > needs Buddhaghosa to clarify his teaching? > > k: Honestly speaking, we have to be fair that there are many good > teachers after the Buddha that helps us understand the path better. For > eg Nagarjuna and Hui Neng. It is still up to individual to decide for > themselves. I rather find it insensitive to make such a statement bc > Buddhaghosa is a widely respected venerable of the Thervadan Traditions. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > 9515 From: m. nease Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 7:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Hi Ken, --- khow14@h... wrote: > Could it be that an uninstructed > worldling could > go so far as to actually see Nibbana but without > attaining Path > consciousness? I am thinking of the Mulapariyaya > Sutta (MN 1): > > "He [the uninstructed worldling] perceives Nibbana > as Nibbana. > Perceiving Nibbana as Nibbana, he conceives things > about > Nibbana, he conceives things in Nibbana, he > conceives things > coming out of Nibbana, he conceives Nibbana as > 'mine,' he delights > in Nibbana. Why is that? Because he has not > comprehended it, I tell > you." > > Would it be Nibbana itself that is perceived in this > case, or would it > be only the concept of Nibbana? The matching passage for the 'learner' goes, "He directly knows nibbaana as nibbaana. Having directly known nibbaana as nibbaana, let him not conceive (himself as) nibbaana; let him not conceive (himself apart) from nibbaana; let him not conceive 'nibbaana is mine; let him not delight in nibbaana. What is the reason? In order that he may fully understand it, I declare." and for the arahat, "He directly knows nibbaana as nibbaana. Having directly known nibbaana as nibbaana, he does not conceive (himself as) nibbaana; he does not conceive (himself apart) from nibbaana; he does not conceive 'nibbaana is mine; he does not delight in nibbaana. What is the reason? Because it has been fully understand by him, I declare." So the puthujjana perceives, then conceives of; the learner and the arahat directly know. So the former seems to me to refer to concept (pa~n~natti), because perceived/conceived of rather than 'directly known'. Maybe someone with more Pali can help to clarify this. It isn't clear to me from the text or the commentary whether by 'learner' a puthujjana might be meant or only a sotaapanna (or potentially both). In one paragraph/sentence it seems to refer first to an 'kalyaanaputhujjana' as separate from a sotaapanna, then by the end of the sentence seems to exclude the 'kalayaanaputhujjana' and to refer specifically to a sotaapanna. As for the ordinary puthujjana though, s/he does clearly (I think) 'conceive of' nibbaana, rather than directly experiencing it as does the 'learner' and the arahant. I assume (again) that this direct experience refers to satipatthaana. If this is correct then the aarammana (of the learner and the arahat) must be paramatthadhamma, not pa~n~nati, I think. Anyway the question remains, for me, whether nibbaana can be directly experienced by any but ariyapuggala. In other words, is a sekkha always a sotaapanna (at least in the context of this sutta)? If so, the rest of us are only conceiving of nibbaana--i.e., the aarammana is pa~n~natti--right? mike 9516 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 10:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] concept, reality and awareness (RobE) Dear Rob, I read the posts and yes, I did find them very interesting and informative. However, I don't see that they answered the question of 'speed', which implies that an observing citta is there simeoltaneously with the quickly passing cittas in order to observe them. I don't see how speed can exist except as a relative concept. However, the idea of thousands of cittas conditioning the 'object' for knowing by passing on successive clarity to the new cittas as they arise, is a comprehensible idea for me. Best, Robert Ep. ======== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- Dear Rob E. > Hear are two posts , one from Kom and one from me that you might be > interested in: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1526 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1753 > best wishes > robert > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Sarah [and Jon and Robert K. and Mike], > > I think this post of yours, Sarah, is very sweet and reflective and > I found it > > helpful in considering the cultivation [not through effort of > course] of kusala > > cittas and mettha. I enjoyed your response to Robert K in this > interesting post. > > > > Please forgive me then if I take a ripe opportunity here to ask for > advice on a > > few technical points. I will quote the relevant portion below, and > then take off > > from there. I think they are interesting questions, some of which > have arisen > > lately and have not been resolved. Your clear statement below > gives me a good > > opportunity to frame them again, in what I think may be a more > answerable form: > > > > >>> If we're just thinking of ourselves and hoping we'll be happy, > is the citta > > > really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only > awareness can be aware > > > of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise > reflection on the > > > quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it > can be > > > wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and > attachment again. It > > > just depends. >>> > > > > My question is this, as I try to understand the nature of the > cittas, and the > > relationship between cittas and accompanying cetasikas: > > > > If 'only awareness can be aware of what the nature of the citta > really is', is > > awareness [sati?] the reflection of a mindful citta upon a previous > citta? Or is > > the awareness a cetasika through which the citta is able to > acknowledge its own > > property? I am just a little confused about how the mechanism of > being aware of a > > citta's true quality would work. > > > > Since you know I am particularly keen on the subject of awareness, > and interested > > to see how mindfulness arises and relates to the content of this or > that citta's > > experience, it seems like a good opportunity to take another look > at how this > > happens. > > > > Right now I have the idea that as a particular citta experiences > something, there > > may be deluded cetasikas misinforming it as to what is really > there, or there may > > be mindful, discerning cetasikas accomanying the citta, which would > include sati > > or satipatthana, and give the citta a much greater grasp of what is > really taking > > place in that moment. If you can confirm or clarify this, I would > be very > > grateful. > > > > It also leads back to that other issue of how a particular citta or > cetasika can > > take in the 'blur' of other cittas seeming to move by very fast, > when in fact they > > are really coming quite discretely one at a time. I am still > trying to understand > > whether this posits a sort of 'watcher' consciousness which stands > apart from the > > individual cittas and which lasts for longer than the single > cittas, or whether > > there is another way in which certain cittas or cetasikas attempt > to 'take stock' > > of the general flow of cittas going by and assess them wrongly as > a 'blurred > > continuous' event or rightly as a series of single events connected > one to the > > next, like beads on a string. [Of course there would be no string, > I guess, just > > beads]. > > > > One more issue along these lines that has come up lately is the > nature of > > ignorance or delusion. Rob K. and Jon, I believe, if I remember > correctly, have > > spoken of this as a positive state or object of some kind which > directly > > interferes with discernment. Pardon me if I don't quite have that > right. I would > > more tend to think that delusion would be a general way of > indicating a particular > > citta or cetasika which contained untrue perception or mistaken > material in its > > experience, rather than a separate force or object that exists > independently of > > some particular arising. I wonder how you would explain this? I > don't think that > > those who are speaking this way mean to establish > delusion/ignorance as a 'real > > object', ie, an entity or permanent force or being of some kind, a > kind of > > Mara-like figure that has its own intention of deluding. I would > expect that it > > would be more of what I said, an ignorant quality to a given citta, > or a > > particular kind of cetasika which just doesn't do the right job and > comes up with > > the wrong information about reality. > > > > I could even imagine that a deluded consciousness or mental factor > of this kind > > could be responsible for positing the kind of 'blur' that was > spoken of as the > > mistaken way of apprehending the accumulation of individual citta- > moments that > > arise. This mistaken consciousness would not actually be viewing > multiple cittas > > as a 'blur' while standing apart from them. Rather it would be a > kind of single > > thought of its own in which it 'imagined' such a blur existing in > place of an > > actual perception, and thus substituted its own mistaken notion for > a real moment > > of seeing. > > > > In other words, it would be a kind of mistake on top of a mistake. > This citta > > might fancy itself a kind of intellectual citta. It would first > ignore the > > sense-moment and mistake a mental moment for a real moment of > perception. And it > > would then say about its own mistaken perceptual object, really a > thought-form, > > 'these moments are all part of a continous movement' based on its > own > > mis-perception. > > > > Thanks for anything you can say to these questions. Perhaps Nina > has said > > something about these issues that I could be directed to, if that > is also > > appropriate. I know she's the expert on these mechanics. > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ===================== > > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > Dear Rob K, > > > > > > I've been appreciating all your posts recently;-) > > > > > > I've been quite busy, so only got a chance to have another look > at the Vis. > > > passages you mentioned as I was getting ready to go to bed last > night..As a > > > result, I had lots of useful reflection on metta as I was falling > asleep:-) I'm > > > not sure I'll be able to add anything much to your comments here, > but I'm happy > > > to have another chance to consider further. > > > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > > > Thanks for this which all makes a lot of sense to me. > > > > I was wondering if you'd like to tackle a passage in the > > > > Vissuddhimagga which is harder to understand: ix8 Metta should > first > > > > of all "be developed only to oneself, doing it repeastedly > thus: may > > > > I be happy..." The next sections notes that someone may > question > > > > this because it is not in the Tipitaka and that in the > > > > patisambhidimagga and vibhanga no mention is made of developing > metta > > > > to oneself. The answer is that for jhana this can't succeed by > way of > > > > taking oneself as an object. And later ix9 it makes it clear > that > > > > developing to oneself means "just as I want to be happy and > dread > > > > pain so do others..." Thus making oneself as an example. > > > > > > > > I think the meaning is basically that we considr how we like to > be > > > > treated and thought of and so we should think of others in the > same > > > > way. I can also see how a not so careful reading of the text > could > > > > lead to the conclusion that one should be trying to love > oneself > > > > more. I'd like you to read over ix8-10 and see what you think. > > > > > > I think we understand the lines in a similar way. If we reflect > on what we > > > appreciate when we're with others, don't we appreciate kind words > and gestures, > > > consideration, friendliness, assistance, humility and so on. > Isn't it so true > > > that we really find ourselves so very dear. And so, others find > themselves just > > > as dear and would also like to hear kind words, experience > consideration, > > > friendliness and so on. > > > > > > Hence by reflecting on the qualities we appreciate with kusala > cittas, it can > > > be a condition for metta and the other brahma viharas to be > developed towards > > > others. If we're giving something to another, for example, there > is concern for > > > the other's benefit and there is bound to be some metta even if > we don't `name' > > > it. However, for metta or other wholesome states to develop, > there has to be > > > the understanding of which moments are wholesome and which are > unwholesome (as > > > you, of course, know so well). > > > > > > If we're just thinking of ourselves and hoping we'll be happy, is > the citta > > > really wholesome? Is it really calm at that moment? Only > awareness can be aware > > > of what the nature of the citta really is. If there is wise > reflection on the > > > quality of real metta or generosity shown earlier in the day, it > can be > > > wholesome and calm at this time or it can be conceit and > attachment again. It > > > just depends. > > > > > > I think as it says in the text, by reflecting on what makes us > happy, by using > > > `ourselves' as examples, it can be a way to condition metta for > other beings. > > > It's not a matter of wishing ourselves to be happy, which is > bound (I think) to > > > be with attachment. > > > > > > However, if we reflect thus: `...Just as I want to be > happy and dread > > > pain, as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, > too.', making > > > himself the example, then desire for other beings' welfare and > happiness arises > > > in him'. > > > > > > I'd forgotten that these lines are then followed by the same > verse from the > > > Udana I quoted the other day. > > > > > > And so, I think the first line you quote that metta should first > of all `..be > > > developed only to oneself' is explained by the following ones > that `it does not > > > conflict' with the other texts which clearly show metta is never > towards > > > oneself because here it `refers to (making oneself) an example.' > > > > > > Later (1X, 92) we read: > > > > > > `As to the characteristic, etc., lovingkindness is characterized > here as > > > promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer > welfare. It is > > > manifested as the removal of annoyance. Its proximate cause is > seeing > > > lovableness in beings. it succeeds when it makes ill will > subside, and it > > > fails when it produces (selfish) affection' > > > > > > Thanks Rob, I find all these reminders very helpful. > > > > > > Sarah > > > 9517 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 10:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendecies Dear Robert, Well, I really wasn't thinking of whether I thought the Buddha or Buddhaghosa was responsible for the concept of the rapid movement of cittas. I was interested in a logical inconsistency in the concept itself. It means that I am either missing an important piece of information about how cittas can apprehend a sense of the passage of large groups of other cittas and 'blur' them, or experience them as being 'greatly fast' and then 'slowing down' in satipatthana, or else there is a continuous observer consciousness sneaking into the equation which does not break down into the single citta theory. I am not well versed enough in the Suttas to be able to say whether Buddha explicitly said or implied that 1/ the passage of cittas is extremely rapid, or that 2/ cittas are only momentary and follow one at a time, as described in the Abhidhamma commentaries. Since I have always held the belief that consciousness is a continuous presence and that it is the *moments* within consciousness that rise and pass away, I have no problem with the idea of a very fast succession of conscious events. The 'speed' of this fastness would be in comparison to the relative slowness of the apprehending mental process, which is going on simeoltaneously and cannot keep up with the raw sense data arising and falling and being 'flashed' at it by the sense organs and the sense organ transmission. Or in the case of a purely mental process, the mental events would be moving faster than the mental processes can process or comprehend them, and thus it would also appear to be extremely fast. This would create the blur of the mental processes either picking up a merged image of something too fast for it to grasp, or putting together bits and pieces of that which is perceived or conceived, and then pasting them together to form a semblance of a reality imperfectly understood. As the mental faculties and perceptual process itself became 'sharper' with greater skill, wisdom and energy, the advanced person would pick up more of the individual moments and be able to see each arising reality for what it is. The problem comes into it when the consciousness itself, not only the arising phenomena, are see as arising only in discrete, separate units. There is no over-arching consciousness that can take it all in, either perfectly or imperfectly. So we are left with each single citta passing its material to the next. I can understand that a citta can pass on a 'blurred or glossed image' of a previous percept or a previous citta and pass this on to another one, which perhaps could distort it more. This would be a good definition of 'delusion' which would involve a series of specific realities mistaken for a less specific, more permanent object. This makes a lot of sense. But I cannot understand, and have not yet heard an explanation, of how a single consciousness which only has contact with a previous consciousness, can have an 'overall experience' of a succession of cittas being 'very fast'. This seems to torture the concept of a succession of single cittas in a row, even if each one is passing down the individual attributes or discoveries of the previous one. There can be no 'perception of a longer stream of cittas' in such a scheme, and that makes it difficult for me to understand how you are even saying that it works. The post you asked me to read which said that it takes hundreds of cittas which repeatedly go over an object until it finally becomes clear, gives an image of how cittas keep working over an object and passing down understanding from one to the next -- like an informational relay race -- to gradually firm up the understanding of what is being apprehended. It is an interesting description. But it still doesn't give any indication of a citta that would be capable of taking in the hundreds that are going by and seeing them as 'fast', 'slow', 'clear' or 'blurred'. So whether the Buddha or Buddhaghosa developed this concept, I am still left not understanding how it is possible within the theory of cittas of Abhidhamma. I think the reason that Abhidhamma may be very staunch about having only single-moment cittas and no continuous consciousness is that it clearly does not want to posit a consciousness that is like an 'super-object in space' that can hang around and take in all kinds of phenomena. I understand the danger in an image of consciousness that turns it into an ever-present entity. On the other hand, when only single cittas are admitted, Howard has noted some of the problems that may attend that model: cittas arising like little 'things' and then being 'annihilated'. The reason I think it is worth questioning our image of these things is that it is very possible that consciousness is neither a thing that hangs around with duration, nor a little thing that pops up and goes away. These may only be convenient ways of talking about consciousness, but it may be a 'middle way' problem where both descriptions take something away from the reality. It is important to me to get closer to the nature of consciousness because it directs my 'seeing' to a good extent. If I am looking for something that is really there for a moment only and then another and then another, that is one form of looking, if I am being mindful of a continuous ebb and flow of experience, that is going to give rise to a slightly different way of being mindful. As to whether the Buddha or Buddhaghosa is responsible for these concepts, I cannot answer. But I also have to say that this is not the most important issue to me. Even if Buddhaghosa derived this description from his enlightened understanding of the Buddha's teachings, I would not rule out its importance. I would listen very carefully to anything an Arahat or Master had to say. More important to me is what the reality is. And where there is a logical inconsistency there must be a potential clarification available. There are certain questions that are paradoxes that really cannot be answered and these the Buddha has asked us not to waste our time on, so as not to indulge in endless speculation or unbalance our minds through trying to conceive the inconceiveable. But I don't believe this is one of those areas. Thanks for anything you can say to the question of 'speed of cittas', and the cittas that perceive this speed and/or blur it. Best, Robert Ep. =============================== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Howard and Rob. E., > Can I clarify your position a little. Do you agree that the Buddha > taught that citta arises and passes away very very rapidly? Or do you > think he didn't teach this but that people like Buddhaghosa dreamed > it up to try to explain some things? > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, "Roberts" ;-)) > > > > In a message dated 11/21/01 2:33:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > > > > Robert, > > > I hate to be a stickler, but it is impossible for the passage of > namas, > > > including > > > cittas to be 'infinitely rapid' except with reference to > something that is > > > slower, > > > like an apprehending consciousness which is observing them go by > and trying > > > to > > > grasp them as an experience. > > > > > > If there is only the passage of one citta to the next, one nama > to the next > > > with > > > no additional consciousness observing them, then their speed of > passage can > > > only > > > be neither fast nor slow. There is no speed without a point of > reference. > > > > > > If according to the commentaries, the passage is extremely rapid, > they are > > > inherently positing an observer consciousness for whom it is seen > as fast. > > > > > > Best, > > > Robert Ep. > > > > > ============================= > > YES, EXACTLY!!! You have hit it on the > head!! > > > > 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) 9518 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 22, 2001 11:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah [and Jon and Robert K. and Mike], > I think this post of yours, Sarah, is very sweet and reflective and I found > it > helpful in considering the cultivation [not through effort of course] of > kusala > cittas and mettha. I enjoyed your response to Robert K in this interesting > post. .................... Sarah: Thanks as always.... Now, when I read your kind words, I know they’ll be followed by some tricky comments;-) I’m hoping the others may come to my rescue, but I’ll make a start anyway. .................... > Please forgive me then if I take a ripe opportunity here to ask for advice on > a > few technical points. I will quote the relevant portion below, and then take > off > from there. I think they are interesting questions, some of which have > arisen > lately and have not been resolved. Your clear statement below gives me a > good > opportunity to frame them again, in what I think may be a more answerable > form: .................... Sarah: we’ll see.... .................... > My question is this, as I try to understand the nature of the cittas, and the > relationship between cittas and accompanying cetasikas: > > If 'only awareness can be aware of what the nature of the citta really is', > is > awareness [sati?] the reflection of a mindful citta upon a previous citta? > Or is > the awareness a cetasika through which the citta is able to acknowledge its > own > property? I am just a little confused about how the mechanism of being aware > of a > citta's true quality would work. .................... Sarah: Awareness (sati) is a cetasika (mental factor) accompanying a citta (or several cittas) which is mindful or aware of any reality (paramatha dhamma) that appears to it. Remember the cittas and cetasikas work and co-ordinate together. Num gave us the analogy of painting a water colour whereby citta is the water and the cetasikas are the various colours. The colours need the water and vice versa. It’s helpful, as Ken O has argued so well, to understand the exact details and mechanics, but for awareness to be aware of a characteristic of reality, for example of metta, I don’t think it’s necessary to pinpoint in words whether it is metta, alobha or the citta that is the object at any given moment. In the beginning, just to know whether it is kusala or akusala or nama or rupa can be very helpful and gradually more can be known about the nature of the mental factor. .................... > Since you know I am particularly keen on the subject of awareness, and > interested > to see how mindfulness arises and relates to the content of this or that > citta's > experience, it seems like a good opportunity to take another look at how this > happens. .................... Sarah: Excellent and delighted to read about this interest. .................... > Right now I have the idea that as a particular citta experiences something, > there > may be deluded cetasikas misinforming it as to what is really there, or there > may > be mindful, discerning cetasikas accomanying the citta, which would include > sati > or satipatthana, and give the citta a much greater grasp of what is really > taking > place in that moment. If you can confirm or clarify this, I would be very > grateful. .................... Sarah: I would say that most the time there is ignorance (moha) which doesn’t misinform in the way that micha ditthi (wrong view) does, but just doesn’t know anything. What about the seeing that just passed or the hearing? Was anything known about it or about the visible object or sound that were just experienced? Mostly we live life in ignorance. Then there are all the times when there is a distorted view of what is experienced with ditthi. Occasionally, there are wholesome moments which are always accompanied by sati. If and only if we have heard and considered what realities really are (as distinct from concepts and not as a self), there may be occasional moments of sati at the level of satipatthana accompanying the cittas. .................... > It also leads back to that other issue of how a particular citta or cetasika > can > take in the 'blur' of other cittas seeming to move by very fast, when in fact > they > are really coming quite discretely one at a time. I am still trying to > understand > whether this posits a sort of 'watcher' consciousness which stands apart from > the > individual cittas and which lasts for longer than the single cittas, or > whether > there is another way in which certain cittas or cetasikas attempt to 'take > stock' > of the general flow of cittas going by and assess them wrongly as a 'blurred > continuous' event or rightly as a series of single events connected one to > the > next, like beads on a string. [Of course there would be no string, I guess, > just > beads]. .................... Sarah: I’ve been working hard to stay clear of the ‘blur’ thread and questions, but you have a particularly skilful way of drawing me in, Rob.... Like Ken O and Rob K say, there can be reasons why it’s helpful to talk about the speed of consciousness and indeed the Buddha described all realities in detail. This doesn’t mean at all, that all these details can or will ever be known or any attempt should be made to be aware of the speed or flow of cittas. This is merely thinking and usually with attachment and wrong view if an attempt is made to be aware of them. At the moment of awareness of one reality, say metta, just the nature of the characteristic of metta is known. There is no thought at all about processes, speeds or even beads;-). By developing awareness of realities, gradually it becomes easier to understand that there is no ‘watcher’, just different namas and rupas with different characteristics. Panna begins to understand how there are sense-door realities followed by mind-door realities and so on, none lasting for a split second. I really don’t think it’s a question of having to blindly accept all sorts of complicated abhidhammic details which are unrelated to daily life experience or having to have any blind faith at all. It’s a gradual process of accepting what has some relevance or some meaning today according to the limited understanding which may be different tomorrow. Rob K mentioned that he recently re-read the entire Visuddhimagga and how it seemed like a different text from when he’d read it before. I’d say this is how it is for me whatever I read. If I read a passage on metta today, it may have more significance than when I read the same passage last week even. With regard to any blur, I’ve forgotten the original context and I think the others gave some very helpful responses. Of course any cittas perform their functions perfectly. Seeing clearly sees visible object and so on. Even if our eyesight is not so good, moments of seeing still see their visible objects just as they’re conditioned to see them. If there is any awareness, it is either aware of a reality or not. Maybe we can say, however, in the beginning it is not strong or strongly developed so of course the nature and characteristics known are not as clear or as in ‘depth’ as for the highly developed awareness. For example, the highly developed awareness is aware of the characteristics of the arising, ‘existing’ and falling away of realities. In the beginning this is impossible. Also, I think that because any moments of awareness are infrequent and likely to be followed by ignorance, doubt and wondering, it can seem like it’s ‘blurry’ perhaps. Different moments and this is probably just thinking about the story. .................... Sarah: > One more issue along these lines that has come up lately is the nature of > ignorance or delusion. Rob K. and Jon, I believe, if I remember correctly, > have > spoken of this as a positive state or object of some kind which directly > interferes with discernment. Pardon me if I don't quite have that right. I > would > more tend to think that delusion would be a general way of indicating a > particular > citta or cetasika which contained untrue perception or mistaken material in > its > experience, rather than a separate force or object that exists independently > of > some particular arising. I wonder how you would explain this? .................... Sarah: Moha has the nature of just ‘not knowing’. “‘Delusion’ has the characteristic of blindness or opposition to knowledge” (Atth.) Most the time there is just ‘not knowing’, not necessarily ‘mistaken material’ or wrong view. Wrong view really does ‘interfere with discernment’. There just isn’t any discernment at the other moments of ignorance. “What on that occasion is dullness? The lack of knowledge, ov vision, which is there on that occasion; the lack of coordination, of judgment, of enlightenment, of penetration, the inability to comprehend, to grasp thoroughly; the inability to compare, to consider, to demonstrate; the folly, the childishness, the lack of intelligence; the dullness that is vagueness, obfuscation, ignorance, the Flood (ogha) of ignorance, the Bond (yoga) of ignorance, the bias of ignorance, the obsession of ignorance, the barrier of ignorance; the dullness that is the root of badness - this is the dullness that there then is.” (Dhammasdangani, Buddhist Manual of Psychological Ethics, 390) Like other cetasikas, it has its nature, characteristic, function and so on. Can there be awareness of moha? It’ll depend on individual accumulations, I think. What about now? Are we lost in a story of words with ignorance or are there moments of awareness. Perhaps there’ll be awareness of ignorance now, but it won’t be by trying or wanting to have it. .................... >I don't think > that > those who are speaking this way mean to establish delusion/ignorance as a > 'real > object', ie, an entity or permanent force or being of some kind, a kind of > Mara-like figure that has its own intention of deluding. I would expect that > it > would be more of what I said, an ignorant quality to a given citta, or a > particular kind of cetasika which just doesn't do the right job and comes up > with > the wrong information about reality. .................... Sarah: I think I’d say it just doesn’t come up with the right or any information. As I said, wrong view (ditthi) comes up with the wrong information. .................... > I could even imagine that a deluded consciousness or mental factor of this > kind > could be responsible for positing the kind of 'blur' that was spoken of as > the > mistaken way of apprehending the accumulation of individual citta-moments > that > arise. This mistaken consciousness would not actually be viewing multiple > cittas > as a 'blur' while standing apart from them. Rather it would be a kind of > single > thought of its own in which it 'imagined' such a blur existing in place of an > actual perception, and thus substituted its own mistaken notion for a real > moment > of seeing. .................... Sarah: I think this would be an excellent description of thinking with ditthi (wrong view). Of course there is ignorance accompanying all unwholesome cittas including these ones with wrong view. .................... > In other words, it would be a kind of mistake on top of a mistake. This > citta > might fancy itself a kind of intellectual citta. It would first ignore the > sense-moment and mistake a mental moment for a real moment of perception. > And it > would then say about its own mistaken perceptual object, really a > thought-form, > 'these moments are all part of a continous movement' based on its own > mis-perception. .................... Sarah: Exactly so, with many, many deviations.....There is no limit to the number of wrong views posible, but the categories of wrong views are neatly described in the Brahmajala Sutta. .................... > Thanks for anything you can say to these questions. Perhaps Nina has said > something about these issues that I could be directed to, if that is also > appropriate. I know she's the expert on these mechanics. ................... Sarah: That’s true. The following paragraph is taken from her translation of Khun Sujin’s talks in Cambodia (Ch 10, no 1) which she posted the other day and it may be helpful to re-read it now: ******************** . ‘...... Avijjå, ignorance, accompanies citta, it cannot arise with rúpa. Whenever we do not understand the truth of realities there is avijjå. If we study the Dhamma more in detail we shall know when there is akusala citta and when vipåkacitta, citta that is result of kamma. Avijjå cetasika is not conascent with vipåkacitta, but there is the latent tendency of avijjå, avijjånusaya, in each citta so long as avijjå has not been eradicated. More understanding of the details of the Dhamma is a condition for beginning to develop the paññå that realizes the truth, and then there will not be clinging to mere words and concepts.......’ ******************** I’m always glad to discuss these areas, Rob. I can’t think of any topic more useful than that of sati and its objects. Thanks again. Sarah p.s. did you see my response on the yoga/tai chi thread or were you too busy standing on your head?;-) (not that it needed a response I should add) ==================== 9519 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meththa meditation Dear Christine, I just have a few minutes only left after my lengthy, verbose post to Rob Ep, so i'll just make some brief comments here and hope others will do better. I'm not an expert on metta;-) --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > Sorry to be so slow, but may I refer back to a topic discussed a few > days ago, where I still need a little clarification? During the > discussion on Metta, the argument was put that Metta ought not be > directed to 'oneself'; that Metta ought always to be 'other-directed'. > I have been wondering if the scriptures quoted were directed at > people living in a practising community where each individual would > be 'caught in the crossfire' (so to speak) of everyone else's > radiated metta......and that there was no conception of the isolation > of many people practicing now in the West. I think the Teachings were for us all, regardless of our lifestyles. Even if we live in relative isolation (a joke in Hong Kong..), aren't there still many opportunities in a day for metta? What about when you talk to your dogs, milk the cows;-), drive to work and encounter other polite and impolite drivers, or on the bus, or at the hospital or speaking to the kids on the phone or here on the list and so on and so on.... Aren't there so many missed opportunities for all kinds of kusala in a day? There are for me, I know. Still, no use in clinging or wishing for more, otherwise it's just more attachment to oneself;-) > Does Metta actually affect the target being/s, or does it only affect > the person initiating metta? i.e. in the form of making them more > sensitive, kindly and other-directed? Aren't we affected when others show us kindness and considertion? Of course there are many different conditions at work, but most of us, most the time respond to courtesy and kindness, I think. >Perhaps altering the dynamics > of their relationships with the other being /s- or maybe just > creating a satisfying self-view of themselves as a caring > person........ sounds like the attachment to self again here... . > If 'self-directed metta' is an error, why do the majority of > meditation courses/retreats teach both 'self directed' plus 'other > directed metta, but suggest practicing 'self directed' first? pass... > If metta practice does actually affect the target being/s - wouldn't > it be dependent on the strength and 'quality' of the feeling being > radiated? Many, many conditions....time, place, person, recipient, accumulations and so on. If we show kindness to the old woman on the bus, we don't have to think about how she'll repond or how she has responded....ultimately we're not responsible for the other's reaction and cannot control it...just do our best with kusala cittas... >New practitioners are warned not to initially choose > someone of the opposite gender as this could arouse emotions other > than loving-kindness. (Presumably only in the meditator, otherwise > the world would be a little more chaotic than it is.) Rather than setting too many rules, I'd rather just see the value of helping or showing kindness to others when we have a chance..even if it's just the little ant on our path;-) > If a practitioner has been psychologically damaged at a "critical > period" for development of attachment, trust, autonomy, > individuation, etc. as a very young child - by, say, physical, sexual > or emotional abuse - how would the idea of "using oneself as an > example" work? - if the feelings held for oneself are tinged with > loathing or disgust? > "Just as for myself.....so also for.........?" This is a little more complex, but doesn't the person who has really suffered in these ways appreicate the value just as much of being treated well? just as this person has been abused and suffered so much which has caused such a lot of misery, so others also don't wish to experience such misery or be so tormented....Therefore let's see how we can make life pleasanter with kindness and without abuse for others.... When we are angry or impatient are we not also 'abusing'? Certainly there's no metta at these times. Nor is there any metta or other kind of skilful state when we have (negative) thoughts with dosa. It may seem that these are a result of others' actions, and of course others' actions are a condition for the mental states, but really they (the negative thoughts) are our 'own' accumulations and it is our 'own' vipaka to hear and suffer these unpleasant sounds and bodily experiences. Christine, I have to run and this is rather rushed.....and I'll be 'off' for the weekend...look forward to any more of your pertinent comments as always. metta, Sarah 9520 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 2:06am Subject: [dsg] Speed of cittas Hi All, I was thinking of the speed of cittas. When I was locking up the door, I realise that a few things "seem" to act simultaneously. a. My hand movement locking the door. b. At the same time I am looking at the door c. At the same time I was hearing the sound of the locking sound. d. At the same time my hand to move the fingers e. At the same time, the concept of this is the door and this is key f. At the same time, the concept of how to lock the door correctly. g. At the same time, feeling the coldness of the keys. I do not know how fast is citta speed, but I think it should be fast enough for us to do all these things at the same time ( or in a span of moment of our conditioned thoughts). Kind regards Ken O 9521 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 4:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] concept, reality and awareness (RobE) --- Dear Rob E. THe buddha said words to the effect that it is hard to give a simile or comparison that does justice to the speed of the rise and fall. The reason is that this is the only way to comprehend time actually. The commentators use the time it takes for a flash of lighting to occur and use this as the standard against which it is compared. They say billions in that space of time. You might say this is relative but I think it is fast no matter where or what existence. Even an insect that only lived for a few seconds would still have experienced trillions of absolute deaths in that time. I do not see where it says or implies that there is an observing citta to observe them at all if you mean something that is separate from the khandas. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Rob, > I read the posts and yes, I did find them very interesting and informative. > However, I don't see that they answered the question of 'speed', which implies > that an observing citta is there simeoltaneously with the quickly passing cittas > in order to observe them. I don't see how speed can exist except as a relative > concept. > > However, the idea of thousands of cittas conditioning the 'object' for knowing by > passing on successive clarity to the new cittas as they arise, is a comprehensible > idea for me. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ======== > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- Dear Rob E. > > Hear are two posts , one from Kom and one from me that you might be > > interested in: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1526 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1753 > > best wishes > > robert > > > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Sarah [and Jon and Robert K. and Mike], > > > I think this post of yours, Sarah, is very sweet and reflective and 9522 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 0:30am Subject: On Replying (...No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana: To Howard, Bob E, Mike) Hi, Suan - Thanks for replying. For *sure* take your time. Sometimes when one person asks several questions pertaining to a post, if the questions aren't completely trivial, and especially when several people ask questions, it may seem as though one is being given a "work assignment"! ;-)) Obviously, we all have lives that go well byond our participation on this list, and these "other lives" really do include obligations that cannot be ignored. So, if one takes actually quite a long time in replying to questions, or even if sometimes we should respond to a post by saying "Sorry, I just don't have the time to properly respond to this post, and will just have to let it go", I think that is perfectly legitimate and should be readily accepted by everyone of us with no further thought. Now, I completely realize that you merely say below that you can't give an *immediate* reply and that you will reply soon. It is very nice of you to send this immediate reply indicating that more will be forthcoming. What I am doing at this moment is actually using your current post as an opportunity for making the general point that particpating on this (and other) lists should be simply a joy, an oasis from the desert of everyday life, and shouldn't serve as a source of added life complexity. When we reply quickly and in an extended fashion, that's great, when we put off a reply it's great, when we give a cursory reply it's great, and when we say that we will have to forgo a reply entirely that's great as well! :-) Again, thanks for your reply, and I look forward to your further comments when it is time. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/22/01 9:57:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, abhidhammika@y... writes: > > Dear Howard, Robert Epstein, Mike, And Erik > > How are you? > > Thank you for your profound questions. This post is merely to say > that I have read your messages. > > The time I had a chance to read them has been very late in Canberra, > and I am already sleepy. So I won't be able to post a considered > reply now. But, as soon as possible, I will reply. > > I did know in advance, though, that the expression > 'Apannattikabhaavam - the state of undefined reality' could pose some > problems, and thought about writing further commentary on that > expression. As I do not have Dhammapada Tiikaa (subcommentary) on my > Chatthasangaayanaa CD-ROM, I would try to write a modern > subcommentary on the expression - not in Paali -, but in English, of > course. > > I have some insights on that expressions your questions did not > address. So, even if my subcommentary may or may not answer your > profound questions to your satisfaction, it could throw some light on > your present puzzelment. > > Won't be long! > > With regards > > Suan > > /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) 9523 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Erik] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 11/22/01 1:39:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, dalthorp@o... writes: > I hope this will be helpful---AN. I, v (48): "Nothing, O monks, do I > know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may > be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing > consciousness." > ========================= Thank you for this quote! Do you (or anyone on the list) happen to know what Pali word is translated here as 'consciousness'? Is it 'vi~n~nana'? That would be interesting. 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) 9524 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Erik] > > I hope this will be helpful---AN. I, v (48): "Nothing, O monks, do I > > know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may > > be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing > > consciousness." > > > ========================= > Thank you for this quote! Do you (or anyone on the list) happen to > know what Pali word is translated here as 'consciousness'? Is it > 'vi~n~nana'? That would be interesting. The Pali word here is 'citta'. Howard, you really should get a copy of the CSCD, which has the entire Tipitaka, commentaries, subcommentaries, and additional gems (e.g. Abhidhammatha sangaha and commentaries) all in Pali, all on one CD. It is available for free (with a nominal postage and handling fee) from VRI (Goenka's group-- http://www.tipitaka.org/). It has a search engine so you can find all occurances of, say, 'citta.m' or 'citta' or 'cittani' or 'citt*' in all the Pali literature. There's also a dictionary on the disk. Don't worry if all the Pali you know is the hundred or so words thrown around on this list. You can still look up things like which word is used for what in this or that sutta, and you may find yourself learning more and more Pali as time passes. 9525 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 3:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Erik] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 11/23/01 10:27:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, dhd5@c... writes: > > Thank you for this quote! Do you (or anyone on the list) > happen to > > know what Pali word is translated here as 'consciousness'? Is it > > 'vi~n~nana'? That would be interesting. > > The Pali word here is 'citta'. > > =============================== Thank you for this! It is also interesting, but in a different way than if the word were 'vi~n~nana'. Doesn't 'citta' often mean 'thought'? 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) 9526 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 9:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana - Apology Hi All, After talking to one valuable post mate, I like to clarify that I could sense that this site is lean against Abhidhamma, and it is not my intention to do this. I just like to share that this site good article on the preception of negativity of Nibbana which the Venerable argue quite well against such a negativity perception. Once again, I am not against Abhidhamma and neither am I doing anything or promoting against it. I sincerely apologise for any misunderstanding caused. With my deepest apology Ken O > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > Hi All > > > > > > One interesting site titled "Nibbana and Anatta". > > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban1.htm > > > > > Kind regards > > > Ken O 9527 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 5:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Howard, ________________________________ Thank you for this quote! Do you (or anyone on the list) > happen to > > know what Pali word is translated here as 'consciousness'? Is it > > 'vi~n~nana'? That would be interesting. > > The Pali word here is 'citta'. > > =============================== Thank you for this! It is also interesting, but in a different way than if the word were 'vi~n~nana'. Doesn't 'citta' often mean 'thought'? __________________________________ From my poor Pali, vi~n~na.na is a synonym of citta. Vi, means clearly, all over, spreading out, detail... ~N~na.na means knowledge. So vi~n~na.na means know clearly, or know in detail. That's a character of citta, a capability of knowing its arammana clearly. In Thai, for a layperson, nowadays vi~n~na.na also means ghost or spirit which kind of continue after death. I remember from Milinda-panha that King Milinda asked about jeta-bhuti which means sth exists after death. The debate ended up that there is only continuation of vi~n~na.na but jeta-bhuti is not existing. In 5 aggregations (khandha), vi~n~na.na khandha also means for citta-paramattha as well. I have similar problem, reading English translation is at times difficult. Yeap, sometime citta was translated as thought, sometime as consciousness, sometime as perception, and even more. Even in R.Davids's Pali-Eng. dictionary, the various definitions of citta is 3 pages long ! Just a non-expert input. I think Jim or other Pali gurus can give a clearer Pali root, meaning and definition. Num 9528 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 10:25am Subject: Cambodia Ch 11, no. 1 Cambodian Lectures by A. Sujin Boriharnwanaket. Chapter 11, no. 1 Dhamma Discussions in Hotel Gakkalok, Siem Reap (Part I) Question: I have a problem in daily life. I am a person who worries and who is tense. I like to sit and concentrate on something in order to get rid of my tenseness, but I can only concentrate, I do not know how to progress further. Sujin: What do you want to acquire? Answer: I want to acquire happiness, I hope for a great deal of happiness. I experience a lot of unhappiness in my life and if my suffering can disappear I will be happy and I wish happiness to last for a long time. I think that if I sit and concentrate there will be happiness. I believe that this is wholesome. Priya: I used to sit and concentrate for a long time, two hours daily, and I thought that this was happiness. I kept on concentrating, but was this real happiness? When I came to study the Dhamma I changed my ideas. I knew that when I concentrated I did not know anything, thus, this did not mean happiness, it was rather ignorance. But during the time I was concentrating I was not unhappy. When I came to study the Dhamma, I realized that I had lobha during the time I was sitting with concentration. Nina: We can verify everything ourselves. Acharn Sujin speaks about seeing what appears through the eyes, hearing sound that appears through the ears, and we can verify this. Seeing is not the same as thinking about what we have seen. Seeing or hearing are different from thinking of concepts of beings, people, a table or a chair. We can verify everything ourselves through the six doorways of the senses and the mind. There are only six worlds appearing one at a time through these doorways. We think that there are people, beings, a table or a chair, but in reality there are only nåma and rúpa, and we can prove this ourselves. Nipat: How can we prove this ourselves? By means of which? Nina: We should listen to the Dhamma very often; we need to hear about seeing and hearing, and then we shall have more understanding. This is a condition for sati to very gradually be aware of the characteristics that appear. However, we should remember that it is not self who develops understanding. Pradhib: I understand that when someone sits and concentrates, he accumulates akusala. Sujin: Some people think that it is akusala to sit and concentrate, but I feel that someone simplifies matters when he says that as soon as he is contented and relaxed there must be akusala citta. This shows that if someone does not understand realities, he does not know precisely when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta at the moment of feeling contented. Or someone may erroneously think that there is kusala citta and he may try with attachment to make it arise. In reality kusala citta can arise without the need to sit with concentration. Whenever there is right understanding, it is a kind of kusala. There are many kinds of kusala. Some people think that only giving things away is kusala. However, when one abstains from akusala it is kusala. When we listen to the Dhamma at this moment, there is kusala citta accompanied by paññå. This is kusala of a higher level than kusala of dåna, generosity, or síla, morality. Also other religions teach kusala of the level of dåna and of síla, but they do not teach the development of paññå that understands the true nature of realities; this is only taught in Buddhism. Other religions do not teach that the truth of realities is penetrated through the attainment of enlightenment. Priya: Kusala of the level of satipaììhåna is much higher than the development of samatha. We should listen to the Dhamma so that we have more understanding. When someone performs meritorious deeds, puñña, there is purity of citta. There are ten kinds of meritorious deeds that can be classified as threefold: as dåna, síla and bhåvanå, mental development. Dåna includes giving, transference of merit, that is, giving others the opportunity to rejoice in one¹s kusala, and rejoicing in the kusala of others. Síla includes: abstinence from akusala, kusala through body and speech, the observance of five or eight precepts and kusala such as helping other people. Nipat: Respectful behaviour through body, speech and mind towards people who are superior in age, in rank or superior with regard to kusala dhamma, is also kusala included in síla. Jaran: Do we have to remember each subject of the Dhamma we have learnt? Nipat: We should understand the Dhamma that is within ourselves, not in the texts. Fongchan: Does listening often to the Dhamma help our understanding? Sujin: Remembering is not the same as understanding. Kulavilo: If we listen to Acharn who explains the way to understand realities in daily life, it will help us to have more understanding 9529 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 10:25am Subject: Budhaghosa Dear Sarah, what a good idea to quote parts from the Co to the Vinaya, I find it very interesting. In India I bought " The Life and Work of Buddhaghosa", by B. Charan Law. He tells about the old commentaries Budhaghosa found in India and mentions that he mainly translated. As Robert once said, he seldom added his own opinion, as stated in the Visuddhimagga. Nina. 9530 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 11:12am Subject: Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hi, Forgive me for butting in. One way to understand the discourse AN. I, v (48) is to see that this quickly changing mind as being fickle. Isn't it true? An fickle mind is undeveloped and uncultivated. And undeveloped and uncultivated mind brings much stress and suffering. I find it helpful to understand the discourse AN. I, v (48) with reading Anguttara Nikaya I.21-26 Abhavita Sutta Untamed http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an01-021.html and Anguttara Nikaya I.49-52 Pabhassara Suttas Luminous http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an01-049.html And of course there are many mental activities going on in a given instance, and that is one way to understand the discourse AN. I, v (48). Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > Erik, you wrote: > > Perhaps it may be helpful to find where, specifically, in the Sutta > > Pitaka, the Buddha explicitly mentioned the speed at which cittas > > arise and pass away. > > I hope this will be helpful---AN. I, v (48): "Nothing, O monks, do I > know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may > be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing > consciousness." > > Here, "consciousness" is "citta". The commentary elaborates on this > and creates the similes of billions of cittas arising and passing > away in a flash of lightning. Billions in a flash? I don't know about > the numbers, but if you think about all the mental activity occuring > in a second, I bet you could describe 100 cittas without much > trouble. > > Buddha talked about it. The commentators talked about it. Abhidhamma > talks about it. Why do you think they did so? 9531 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah, Thanks for your thoughtful answers to my questions, which I have snipped below, but which were much appreciated. I have only one question about what you said: You said that cetasikas, such as sati for instance, can have one or more cittas as its object. Do the mental factors function independently of individual cittas? I had had the impression that the cetasikas were tied to their specific citta, but if that is not the case, that would be very interesting. Can a single occurence of sati take in a stream of several cittas? And if so, how does this work. Other than that, I am not raising any new issues in this post!!! But a few comments below: --- Sarah wrote: > I’m always glad to discuss these areas, Rob. I can’t think of any topic more > useful than that of sati and its objects. Thanks again. > > Sarah Well, I thank you again. You have a lot of patience with my incessant questions and challenges, and I appreciate it. > p.s. did you see my response on the yoga/tai chi thread or were you too busy > standing on your head?;-) (not that it needed a response I should add) > ==================== I wish I was standing on my head. Lately I've been too busy to stand on my head, I'm too busy running around on my feet. But I'm going to have to go back to look at that post. I have saved some posts that I couldn't answer at the time, and I believe that was one of them. Sometimes the more interesting or complicated messages wind up getting left for later, especially when there have been 35-40 new posts a day here lately! Yikes!! But I believe I have it on the queue.......... Best Regards, Robert Ep. 9532 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] concept, reality and awareness (RobE) Okay, Rob. I appreciate your response. I agree that from my standpoint a flash of lightning is incredibly fast. I'm just wondering 'for what' the cittas are incredibly fast. Obviously something slower than them. I still wonder what that 'slower' thing would be, since there is no human entity to take the cittas in. Best, Robert Ep. ================ --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > Dear Rob E. > THe buddha said words to the effect that it is hard to give a simile > or comparison that does justice to the speed of the rise and fall. > The reason is that this is the only way to comprehend time actually. > The commentators use the time it takes for a flash of lighting to > occur and use this as the standard against which it is compared. They > say billions in that space of time. > You might say this is relative but I think it is fast no matter where > or what existence. Even an insect that only lived for a few seconds > would still have experienced trillions of absolute deaths in that > time. I do not see where it says or implies that there is an > observing citta to observe them at all if you mean something that is > separate from the khandas. > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Rob, > > I read the posts and yes, I did find them very interesting and > informative. > > However, I don't see that they answered the question of 'speed', > which implies > > that an observing citta is there simeoltaneously with the quickly > passing cittas > > in order to observe them. I don't see how speed can exist except > as a relative > > concept. > > > > However, the idea of thousands of cittas conditioning the 'object' > for knowing by > > passing on successive clarity to the new cittas as they arise, is a > comprehensible > > idea for me. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ======== > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > > --- Dear Rob E. > > > Hear are two posts , one from Kom and one from me that you might > be > > > interested in: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1526 > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1753 > > > best wishes > > > robert 9533 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 0:22pm Subject: Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hi all, change in distance speed = ------------------- change in time How does the citta move? How does one measure the speed of the citta? Or rather, how does one measure the frequency of the citta rising and falling, namely, number of times a citta rises and falls in one second? Regards, Victor 9534 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 8:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi, num - In a message dated 11/23/01 1:07:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, srnsk@a... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > ________________________________ > > > Thank you for this quote! Do you (or anyone on the list) > > happen to > > > know what Pali word is translated here as 'consciousness'? Is it > > > 'vi~n~nana'? That would be interesting. > > > > The Pali word here is 'citta'. > > > > > =============================== > Thank you for this! It is also interesting, but in a different way than > if the word were 'vi~n~nana'. Doesn't 'citta' often mean 'thought'? > __________________________________ > > From my poor Pali, vi~n~na.na is a synonym of citta. Vi, means clearly, > all > over, spreading out, detail... ~N~na.na means knowledge. So vi~n~na.na > means know clearly, or know in detail. That's a character of citta, a > capability of knowing its arammana clearly. > > In Thai, for a layperson, nowadays vi~n~na.na also means ghost or spirit > which kind of continue after death. I remember from Milinda-panha that > King > Milinda asked about jeta-bhuti which means sth exists after death. The > debate > ended up that there is only continuation of vi~n~na.na but jeta-bhuti is > not > existing. > > > In 5 aggregations (khandha), vi~n~na.na khandha also means for > citta-paramattha as well. > > I have similar problem, reading English translation is at times difficult. > Yeap, sometime citta was translated as thought, sometime as consciousness, > sometime as perception, and even more. Even in R.Davids's Pali-Eng. > dictionary, the various definitions of citta is 3 pages long ! > > Just a non-expert input. I think Jim or other Pali gurus can give a clearer > > Pali root, meaning and definition. > > > Num > > ============================ Thanks for the info. It had been my impression that they were not quite synonyms, and that, outside of Abhidhamma, 'citta' is a general term much like the informal English word 'mind'. 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) 9535 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 2:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Herman > > > The Buddha appointed no successor! > > k: That is true > > > > The Suttas start with , Thus have I heard, but I have never heard the > > Buddha saying , It is so because such and such said. > > > > St Paul and all the church fathers cannot add one single iota to the > > message of Jesus, but they can serve to confuse, as is apparent. > > > > What is the shortcoming of the Buddha, the self-realised one, that he > > needs Buddhaghosa to clarify his teaching? > > k: Honestly speaking, we have to be fair that there are many good > teachers after the Buddha that helps us understand the path better. For > eg Nagarjuna and Hui Neng. It is still up to individual to decide for > themselves. I rather find it insensitive to make such a statement bc > Buddhaghosa is a widely respected venerable of the Thervadan Traditions. > > Kind regards > Ken O Dear Ken, To be fair to Herman, I think his comment was in reference to Mike saying that 'you'll never convince those who are convinced that Buddhaghosa made it all up.' I think Herman's point here is that Buddhaghosa may well be an important teacher and commentator in the history of Buddhism, but we cannot assume that everyone should take his words to be the equal of the Buddha's. I think if people doubt the Buddha on a regular basis, it may be hard to think of them as being 'Buddhists'. But to have doubts about Buddhaghosa's commentaries should not shed a negative light on one's sincerity, no matter how much he may be revered as a teacher. Best, Robert Ep. 9536 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 2:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana: To Howard, Bob E, Mike, Erik Suan, I am very much looking forward to your 'subcommentary', particularly on the very interesting "Apannattikabhaavam". I really did enjoy your translation of the original verse. It seems very fresh. Why is it that the Buddha comes up with these little ways of saying things that are so enticing? Regards, Robert Ep. =============== --- abhidhammika@y... wrote: > > > Dear Howard, Robert Epstein, Mike, And Erik > > How are you? > > Thank you for your profound questions. This post is merely to say > that I have read your messages. > > The time I had a chance to read them has been very late in Canberra, > and I am already sleepy. So I won't be able to post a considered > reply now. But, as soon as possible, I will reply. > > I did know in advance, though, that the expression > 'Apannattikabhaavam - the state of undefined reality' could pose some > problems, and thought about writing further commentary on that > expression. As I do not have Dhammapada Tiikaa (subcommentary) on my > Chatthasangaayanaa CD-ROM, I would try to write a modern > subcommentary on the expression - not in Paali -, but in English, of > course. > > I have some insights on that expressions your questions did not > address. So, even if my subcommentary may or may not answer your > profound questions to your satisfaction, it could throw some light on > your present puzzelment. > > Won't be long! > > With regards > > Suan > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Previously on this list: > > > The follwoing quote from Section 89, Dhammapada Atthakathaa clearly > tells us that there is no consciousness component in Parinibbaana > after the death of an Arahant. > > I tried my best to provide as lateral a translation as possible - > syntatically in particular - while making sure that the readers can > read as natural English as possible. If you found any unclear points > in the translation, please let me know. My present translation has > been influenced by Nibbaanadhaatu Sutta Atthakathaa in Itivutta > Atthakathaa. > > "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa > khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa > khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi > parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati > attho." > > "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete > extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of > defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and > the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical > machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel." > > Parinibbaana - complete extinguishment > Kilesavatta - defilement machinery (vatta is literally circle, cycle, > or round. We have 'Vicious Circle' in English) > Khandhavatta - psychophysical machinery > Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined reality > > Upaadisesa - existential residues (upaadi is merely another name of > pancakkhadhaa). Upaadi means phenomena taken strongly by craving or > attachment (tanhaa). > > As such, we can know for sure that Anupaadisesa Nibbaana is emptied > of the five khandhaas. Therefore, after the death of an Arahant, the > scenario of nibbaana having the consciousness component > (viññaanakkhandho) is out of the question. There is no textual > support for such a scenario. > > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org 9537 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 2:59pm Subject: speed of cittas [Howard] > =============================== > Thank you for this! It is also interesting, but in a different way than > if the word were 'vi~n~nana'. Doesn't 'citta' often mean 'thought'? Sheesh. "Citta" is certainly translated in a number of different ways, depending on who's doing the translating and what is being translated. In most cases, I don't like "thought" because that has much more of a "discursive" feel to it, akin to vitakka. Also, there are lots of types of cittas that I can't squeeze into a "thought" basket, e.g. seeing. For the passage in question, AA explains the quote as moments of consciousness arising and vanishing very rapidly. B. Bodhi points out that the same language used in AN I, v.(48) is used in other places in the canon to refer to people changing their mind quickly. My inclination is to trust the commentaries unless there's pretty good reason not to. In this case, a moment's reflection convinces me that the number of cittas that arise and pass away in a second or two is enormous. For example, try paying close attention to what kinds of consciousness are arising and passing away at a time. In particular, see if hearing and seeing arise at the same moment. You may notice that they really don't. They really are separate and different kinds of consciousness. Then, you might notice that "thoughts" are in turn different from the seeing and hearing. These "thoughts" are popping up very frequently, but really they are not simultaneous with seeing and hearing as may become quite clear with further investigation. These different kinds of consciousness are arising and passing with great rapidity, alternating with each other, and always so ephemeral. Then, it becomes clear that there are a bunch of other kinds of consciousness popping up in between moments of seeing, hearing, thinking. It happens fast. Very fast. The suttas refer to it. The Abhidhamma refers to it. The commentaries discuss it. That it happens is clearly observable in practice. This there need be no doubt about. So is it helpful to hear and consider such things? Of course it is. Dan 9538 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 3:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Erik] --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Erik, you wrote: > > Perhaps it may be helpful to find where, specifically, in the Sutta > > Pitaka, the Buddha explicitly mentioned the speed at which cittas > > arise and pass away. > > I hope this will be helpful---AN. I, v (48): "Nothing, O monks, do I > know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may > be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing > consciousness." > > Here, "consciousness" is "citta". The commentary elaborates on this > and creates the similes of billions of cittas arising and passing > away in a flash of lightning. Billions in a flash? I don't know about > the numbers, but if you think about all the mental activity occuring > in a second, I bet you could describe 100 cittas without much > trouble. > > Buddha talked about it. The commentators talked about it. Abhidhamma > talks about it. Why do you think they did so? Well, I think it is significant too! It seems that they are talking about the speed of the mind compared to physical events and perhaps the perceptions that are tied to these physical events and move at a much slower speed. They are also I think talking about the speed at which awareness tries to 'capture' passing thoughts and experiences them slipping through its fingers. In such a case, the cetasika, 'awareness' of a certain kind, is grasping after the content or flow of thought, and is aware of its enormous speed. So there is some sort of relative judgment made here. If the Buddha says 'mental activity moves incredibly quickly, like lightning', or something to that effect, he is talking to people who normally observe and take in experiences at a much slower pace. If a car speeds by and we just see it in passing, and it appears as a blur, what is taking place? To some extent the eye cannot take it all in quickly enough to process it clearly. To some extent the mental processes are slower than the external event, so we can say that it occurred 'incredibly quickly'. If the mind is here said to move infinitely quicker than the speeding car, it cannot be that this super-fast mind is the one that is flustered by trying to capture the goings-on of the speeding car. It must be the mind which is flustered by the speeding car and by lightning, that is also flustered by the incredible speed of thought. So what is this 'slow mind' that cannot keep up with these incredibly fast events? Is it a series of slow cittas? Is is a set of slow-moving cetasikas that cannot take in what is happening? Is it moha? And is this 'slow mind' replaced by a more efficient one when one reaches the stage where realities are captured on that infinitesimal level? Either the cittas or cetasikas at that point have become much more refined and 'quick'. I would like to know what the proper way would be to talk about this process. Regards, Robert Ep. 9539 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 3:03pm Subject: Speed of cittas [Ken] Hi Ken, Comments interspersed: > I was thinking of the speed of cittas. When I was locking up the door, I > realise that a few things "seem" to act simultaneously. This is really great, Ken. Look a bit more closely and you may discover that they are really not acting simultaneously. > I do not know how fast is citta speed, but I think it should be fast > enough for us to do all these things at the same time... They are happening so fast that when we don't pay close attention, we are deluded into thinking they act simulataneously. Dan 9540 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 3:16pm Subject: Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Victor, you caught me! I was wondering if anyone would. Knowing that everyone recognizes that cheetahs are fast, I couldn't resist using the headline "Speed of cittas", despite its obvious silliness. Thanks for setting me straight. > change in distance > speed = ------------------- > change in time > > How does the citta move? If you really want to be technically correct, you define speed as the magnitude of the change in position per unit time! > Or rather, how does one measure the frequency of the citta rising and > falling, namely, number of times a citta rises and falls in one > second? I don't think it's necessary, desirable, or even possible. Suffice to say it is fast, as reported in the suttas, the abhidhamma, the commentaries, and in everyday experience. Dan 9541 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 3:23pm Subject: Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > One way to understand the discourse AN. I, v (48) is to see that this > quickly changing mind as being fickle. > Isn't it true? An fickle mind is undeveloped and uncultivated. And > undeveloped and uncultivated mind brings much stress and suffering. How true! But, AA defines it in the more Abhidhammic sense of cittas arising and passing with great rapidity. This makes perfect sense to me. This understanding of it just reeks with anatta and anicca; the "fickle mind" interpretation makes sense too, but in a less penetrating way that doesn't penetrate to the heart of the teaching as readily. Dan 9542 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 3:35pm Subject: lucid dreaming and seafood vegetarians I had an interesting lucid dream today. I was sitting on the beach in kauai, watching huge colorful fish swimming around for about 20 minutes. They all had such distinct personalities, and some of them popped their head out of the water to look at me curiously. the thought occured me, "something about this scene doesn't seem right. I'm home on the beach in kauai, that feels right, but something is odd. Maybe I'm lucid dreaming." So I got up, walked around, started looking for clues to determine if it's a lucid dream. There were very few people, only two in fact that i encountered, but this is after world trade center, and kauai doesn't get that much tourism anyway. so I kept searching. I came across an inland lagoon, (which doesn't exist! But didn't occur to me at the time) Then I thought, I'll test out if this is a dream by jumping in the water and breathe in some water to see what happens. If it's a dream, then I won't choke and drown. then I got scared, because it seemed SO REAL, and no one around to help if I drown. but somehow I felt bold and jumped in, and ... I could breathe in the water! I just swam around effortlessly and the ocean was lit, and there were colorful buildings, like I had discovered atlantis. One of the things I had resolved to do the next time I lucid dream was investigate the sense of smell. What I notice about lucid dreams is that: 1. Colors are extremely vivid 2. Visible objects cognizable to the eye are very convincing. If this were the only sense base I possess, then it would be very hard for me to tell reality from dream. 3. My dream worlds tend to be fairly serene and quiet, I'm not sure if audible sounds happen or if when I talk to people it's just mental telepathy which I take for granted as natural. I'm not sure my auditory faculty works very well in dreams, or works at all. 4. Tactile sensation seems to be very localized, and appear only when I really concentrate on it, like I have to create teh illusion on demand. for example, I know I should feel more pressure when I jump in water all over my body, but it was maybe only about 10% of the pressure that it should have been, and when I try to specifically touch things with my hand, it's like the sensation of touch happens with tape delay, like I create the illusion of pressure when I direct my attention at it. 5. I was underwater, so once again I'm thwarted on testing out the sense base of smell! Damn! 6. All right, lucid dream time. Traditionally, once I'm certain it's a dream, time to have some fun, where society's silly rules and physical laws of nature are subservient to my interests. Fly into space like superman? No problem. Do ridiculous dunks on a basketball court like that savage Vince Carter posterization of Frederic Weiss in the Olympics(*) or look for some hot mermaid babe action. Damn, I'm underwater. Can't fly, can't dunk, not a mermaid in sight. At least I'm swimming around like Aquaman, that's pretty cool at least. 7. I notice the clarity of my dreams is commensurate, directly proportional to my meditative concentration, qi, ching, vitality. For example, in my present state of eating in moderation, nutritously, not oversleeping generally (when I lucid dream it usually means I oversleep :-), strict celibacy, I notice that my ability to focus, concentrate, and the stability and convincingness of the dream is much sharper. When my vitality is not as high, then there are clues that it's a dream because it's harder and takes more effort to "look" at things with my dream visible sense base, and sometimes things change on me a few seconds later. when my health is good and vitality is high, the images persist much more like reality, and it takes less effort to perceive (with different sense bases). My question is, do other members lucid dream with all 6 sense bases? Which ones work better? Do they all work? -fk (*) The vince carter dunk I'm talking about, if you haven't seen it with your own eyes: Carter is 6'7". Weiss is SEVEN FOOT TWO INCHES. Carter jumps OVER Weiss so that his crotch completely clears Weiss's 7'2" HEAD!?!! while doing a savage windmill jam! It's unbelievable - arguably the greatest dunk of all time. 9543 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 4:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No Existential Residues In Parinibbaana --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Hi Kenneth, > > Are you reading Nanavira Thera 'Clearing the Path' Notes on Dhamma > (1960-65)??? > I dipped into it a few weeks ago, and found some aspects puzzling. > http://ww.geocities.com/Athens/9366/ctp-cont.htm I'd go all the way to 'very confusing' myself. Robert Ep. > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi All > > > > One interesting site titled "Nibbana and Anatta". > > > > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban1.htm > > > Kind regards > > Ken O 9544 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 0:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Speed of cittas [Ken] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 11/23/01 6:04:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, dalthorp@o... writes: > > Hi Ken, > > Comments interspersed: > > > I was thinking of the speed of cittas. When I was locking up the > door, I > > realise that a few things "seem" to act simultaneously. > > This is really great, Ken. Look a bit more closely and you may > discover that they are really not acting simultaneously. > > > I do not know how fast is citta speed, but I think it should be fast > > enough for us to do all these things at the same time... > > They are happening so fast that when we don't pay close attention, we > are deluded into thinking they act simulataneously. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: But who (or what) is this "we" who are so overwhelmed by the speed of cittas to think they act simultaneously when it is only the cittas, themselves, that are aware? You see, Dan, I don't really have any problem at all with the Buddha saying that the mind moves very quickly. I see it as a conventional observation that compared to the speed of change of "things"observed in the world, such as mountains, trees, rivers etc, the mind changes very quickly, from moment to moment. My problem is with the citta theory and its ramifications. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Dan > ============================= 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) 9545 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 5:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Christine] Dan, I think the Buddha's radical message on suffering here is meant for those who are advanced enough to contemplate a real detachment from personal suffering, the ability to see it as unreal, to avoid reacting negatively, etc. I don't believe that this should inform our view as to how to deal with human rights in the real world, not for ourselves, but for others. If Buddha in fact did not see the suffering of the enslaved masses of the local King at that time, I'm afraid I would have a serious problem with that. I don't believe that is his message. I believe that what he said was for the instruction of monks and other serious practitioners. At least I hope that is the case. Should we ignore the suffering of those for whom it appears as extremely real and torturesome? I remember some here making the point that we don't insist on finding out who manufactured the arrow before we allows the doctor to take it out. In the same way, we should end the suffering that presents itself to us first, and then work on the deeper level when those in bondage are free and able to sit down and have a conversation. We can't say that our purpose in life is to end suffering, and then ignore people in pain, because their brand of suffering is 'not the real kind'. If Buddhists don't work to insure human rights and end the *experience* of suffering in all its forms, we will wind up going very far down a very wrong path. This is the kind of thing that gives spiritual people a very bad reputation. Robert Ep. ================================= --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Christine, > I'm reading through some old posts, and I am enjoying your recent > comments and questions immensely. > > At one point, you write: > > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged > buddhism?) > > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find > > themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? > > SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this question eloquently: > > "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had been put in bondage > by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some with clogs, some > with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of bhikkhus dressed...and > saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a great mass of > people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi of Kosala, some with > ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' > > "Then the Blessed One, having understood the meaning of this, on that > occasion recited these verses: > 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong > Made of iron, wood, or rope; > But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, > Anxious concern for wives and children-- > This, the wise say, is the strong bond, > Degrading, supple, hard to escape. > But even this they cut and wander forth, > Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" > > I read this in the context of the real root of suffering being > craving born of ignorance, and not the external conditions (e.g. > human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not to say that human > rights are not important in an external way, but ultimately, the > external conditions are superficial. One of my favorite passages > addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, > even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two- > handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not > be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the passage is that it > points out in stark terms that the real crux of the teaching is not > so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw but instead to > develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw strikes, it does not > give rise to suffering. > > Pursuit of human rights begins with the recognition of an injustice, > then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the discussion of the > injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, etc. It is eerily > similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He abused me, he struck > me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does Buddha then say, "Then, > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my rights by making > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: "...those who harbor > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in verse 4: "...those > who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred." Buddha did not > exhort us to battle against those awful other people who don't > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > The real issue is the development of the mind: "Whatever harm an > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, an ill-directed mind > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). > > Dan 9546 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 6:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > My inclination is to trust the commentaries unless there's pretty > good reason not to. In this case, a moment's reflection convinces me > that the number of cittas that arise and pass away in a second or two > is enormous. For example, try paying close attention to what kinds of > consciousness are arising and passing away at a time. In particular, > see if hearing and seeing arise at the same moment. You may notice > that they really don't. They really are separate and different kinds > of consciousness. Then, you might notice that "thoughts" are in turn > different from the seeing and hearing. These "thoughts" are popping > up very frequently, but really they are not simultaneous with seeing > and hearing as may become quite clear with further investigation. > These different kinds of consciousness are arising and passing with > great rapidity, alternating with each other, and always so ephemeral. > Then, it becomes clear that there are a bunch of other kinds of > consciousness popping up in between moments of seeing, hearing, > thinking. It happens fast. Very fast. The suttas refer to it. The > Abhidhamma refers to it. The commentaries discuss it. That it happens > is clearly observable in practice. This there need be no doubt about. Dan, Nobody's doubting that consciousness arises and falls incredibly rapidly. I think your description above is enormously helpful in conceiving how this takes place. The only question is who is it so fast for? And I still think this is the most intriguing question, which so far, I don't believe anyone has answered -- except that Sarah has given an idea. I think it's fascinating that everything goes by so fast - but for who? Since we are working on the assumption that there is no ego that is observing these cittas jump around like mad, who or what is watching these cittas whiz by? If it's not an 'observer consciousness', which I know everyone will say it is not, then it is a 'slower citta' that can't keep up? Is it a sensory citta that can't keep up with a mental citta? Is it a cetisika watching several cittas whiz by or a citta being overrun by incredibly fast cetasikas? Or what? I would be very interested to know what you would think about this. I apologize for pressing the point, now for about the fourth time today, but I really think there's something valuable hidden in this. Such as how we have overriding, comparative or relative experiences without an ego to hold and compare it all. Regards, Robert Ep. 9547 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 6:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Speed of cittas [Ken] Okay, Howard. At this point it's starting to get kind of annoying to write something and then see in the next post that you have already written the exact same thing. As I have said in the past, if you are going to steal my material, you might have the courtesy of waiting until I have a chance to say it first. Thank you, Robert Ep. ====================== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Dan - > > In a message dated 11/23/01 6:04:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, > dalthorp@o... writes: > > > > > > Hi Ken, > > > > Comments interspersed: > > > > > I was thinking of the speed of cittas. When I was locking up the > > door, I > > > realise that a few things "seem" to act simultaneously. > > > > This is really great, Ken. Look a bit more closely and you may > > discover that they are really not acting simultaneously. > > > > > I do not know how fast is citta speed, but I think it should be fast > > > enough for us to do all these things at the same time... > > > > They are happening so fast that when we don't pay close attention, we > > are deluded into thinking they act simulataneously. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > But who (or what) is this "we" who are so overwhelmed by the speed of > cittas to think they act simultaneously when it is only the cittas, > themselves, that are aware? You see, Dan, I don't really have any problem at > all with the Buddha saying that the mind moves very quickly. I see it as a > conventional observation that compared to the speed of change of > "things"observed in the world, such as mountains, trees, rivers etc, the mind > changes very quickly, from moment to moment. My problem is with the citta > theory and its ramifications. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Dan > > > ============================= > 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) 9548 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 6:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] absolute realities Nina I’m just coming out of a very busy week or two at work, and hoping to find some time to catch up on the list. Thanks for the very pertinent commentary passage below. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, I have here the Co in Pali to M.N.5, No Blemishes, about > paramatthadesana, I shall translate: > Buddhassa Bhagavato duvidhaa desanaa: sammuttidesanaa, paramatthadesanaa > caa ti. > There is a twofold teaching of the Buddha, the Blessed One: the teaching in > the conventional way and the teaching by way of ultimate realities. > Tattha puggalo, satto, itthii, puriso, khattiyo, braama.no, devo, Maaro ti > evaruupa sammutidesanaa. > There is a human, a being, a woman, a man, a man of the warrior caste, a > brahman, a god, and Mara. Such is the teaching in the conventional way. > Anicca.m, dukkha.m, anattaa, khandhaa, dhaatuu, aayatanaani, > satipa.t.thaanaa ti evaruupaa paramattha desanaa. > Impermanence, dukkha, anattaa, the aggregates, elements, sensefields, > satipa.t.thaana. Such is the teaching by way of ultimate realities. > Tattha Bhagavaa, ye sammutivasena desana.m sutvaa attha.m > pa.tivijjhitvaa > moha.m pahaaya visesam adhigantu.m samatthaa, tesa.m sammuti desana.m > deseti. > Here the Blessed One taught to those in the conventional way who by > means of > it, after having heard the teaching , penetrated the meaning and > abandoned > ignorance, and were skilled to attain distinction. > Ye pana paramatthavasena desana.m sutvaa attha.m pa.tivijjhitvaa moha.m > pahaaya visesam adhigantu.m samatthaa, tesa.m paramatthadesana.m deseti. > But who by means of ultimate realities after having heard the teaching , > penetrated the meaning and abandoned ignorance, and were skilled to > attain > distinction, to those he taught by way of ultimate realities. I do find it fascinating that there were so many in the Buddha’s time who could ‘get it’ simply by hearing the dhamma expressed in conventional terms (samutti desana). Presumably they could also have become enlightened on hearing the dhamma expressed in terms of ultimate realties (a paramattha desana), whereas the reverse would not necessarily apply. Or do you read the passage as suggesting otherwise? In either case, the underlying truths that had to be realised were of course the same, namely, the truths referred to in the teachings as ultimate truths (paramattha sacca). > You gave me some ideas for my India talks, very helpful. I shall write > about > nimitta. Ultimate realities: some people do not like this, but it is > difficult to find the perfect translation. A. Sujin stressed that words > are > not so important, they are just the means to explain realities so that > these > can be directly understood without needing words, without having to > think > about them in words. More about that later on, I like your tips as to > what > to write about, Nina. I was not aware that I was providing you with ideas for what to write about! However, since I have not got around to writing up my own notes for the list, let me give a brief and highly subjective summary of some highlights (I hope others will excuse my use of our customary ‘dhamma shorthand’ in what follows). From discussion with KS– The world as known is dhammas, and those dhammas are of 2 kinds only. (“All is dhamma (except concept), and all dhammas are either nama or rupa”). Knowing by direct experience the distinction between namas and rupas comes before any other knowledge by direct experience. Seeing and hearing, for example, are known initially by the characteristic that is unique to all namas. There are only 2 questions to be answered – is there a reality appearing now, and is there awareness of that reality? The frequent reference to the adze-handle simile, illustrating the merit of patience, confidence and continuous application. The danger of unrecognised wrong view, given that “there are only 2 kinds of view, right view and wrong view; there is no in between”. The significance of nimitta and anubyanjana. Points that came up in other discussions— The pervasive presence of conceit in our daily lives The explanation of the “tanha that is to be pursued” (tanha that is a ‘necessary’ part of our daily lives) There was much else, of course, but these were my personal highlights. Jon 9549 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 6:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] cankamma Nina and Num --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Num, I am inclined not try to find too much behind the word > cankamma. > When sitting or lying down for a long time, one should change posture, > we > all do. The Buddha and the monks did some walking just to change > posture. > Nothing else, just walking naturally. Not walking slowly to induce sati, > that is lobha and it hinders the development. > Take care of yourself, do not play tennis, but maybe some cankamma > instead? > Best wishes for a speedy recovery, > Nina. I recall having seen a sutta that mentions the benefits of regular cankamma. These include benefits to bodily health as well as to general well-being and, if I recall correctly, the development of the path (to be understood in the sense of being a useful condition in the case of the monk who is living the holy life as it should be lived) Will provide a reference if I come across it again. Jon 9550 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 6:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Christine] Dan Very well said (your post to Christine below)! Delighted to have you posting at a time when I am also around (was beginning to think you were timing your come-backs to coincide with my absences...) Jon --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Christine, > I'm reading through some old posts, and I am enjoying your recent > comments and questions immensely. > > At one point, you write: > > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged > buddhism?) > > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find > > themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? > > SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this question eloquently: > > "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had been put in bondage > by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some with clogs, some > with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of bhikkhus dressed...and > saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a great mass of > people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi of Kosala, some with > ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' > > "Then the Blessed One, having understood the meaning of this, on that > occasion recited these verses: > 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong > Made of iron, wood, or rope; > But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, > Anxious concern for wives and children-- > This, the wise say, is the strong bond, > Degrading, supple, hard to escape. > But even this they cut and wander forth, > Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" > > I read this in the context of the real root of suffering being > craving born of ignorance, and not the external conditions (e.g. > human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not to say that human > rights are not important in an external way, but ultimately, the > external conditions are superficial. One of my favorite passages > addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, > even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two- > handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not > be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the passage is that it > points out in stark terms that the real crux of the teaching is not > so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw but instead to > develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw strikes, it does not > give rise to suffering. > > Pursuit of human rights begins with the recognition of an injustice, > then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the discussion of the > injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, etc. It is eerily > similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He abused me, he struck > me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does Buddha then say, "Then, > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my rights by making > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: "...those who harbor > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in verse 4: "...those > who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred." Buddha did not > exhort us to battle against those awful other people who don't > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > The real issue is the development of the mind: "Whatever harm an > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, an ill-directed mind > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). > > Dan 9551 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 1:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Speed of cittas [Ken] Geez - sorry, Rob! [ : > ( With metta Howard ;-)) In a message dated 11/23/01 9:19:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Okay, Howard. > > At this point it's starting to get kind of annoying to write something and > then > see in the next post that you have already written the exact same thing. > As I > have said in the past, if you are going to steal my material, you might > have the > courtesy of waiting until I have a chance to say it first. > > Thank you, > Robert Ep. > /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) 9552 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 6:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Jon] > Delighted to have you posting at a time when I am also around (was > beginning to think you were timing your come-backs to coincide with my > absences...) Well, there might just be something to that! But I am glad to hear from you now. Dan 9553 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 8:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Speed of cittas [Ken] --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Geez - sorry, Rob! [ : > ( > > With metta > Howard ;-)) That's okay Howard. I've decided to just 'let it go'. It's the 'enlightened' thing to do. With a vague smile of false humility, Robert Ep. =============== > In a message dated 11/23/01 9:19:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Okay, Howard. > > > > At this point it's starting to get kind of annoying to write something and > > then > > see in the next post that you have already written the exact same thing. ... 9554 From: m. nease Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 8:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Christine] Dan and Robert, Just briefly, I think Dan's reading of this sutta is spot-on. Understanding will of course and always condition kind behavior to all beings to the extent that it has been cultivated. The forms this mental, verbal and physical action will take will of course depend on the 'accumulations' of the individual concerned. At any rate, the Buddha's approach to suffering on all levels was to attack the very source of all ill, individual and social--i.e. ignorance, aversion and desire. Political action only attacks the symptoms. This is not to say that kindly motivated politcal action can't be a good thing--just something else. Did I understand you correctly to say that you would 'have a problem' with the Buddha's failure to conform to your idea of correct action? Just curious... mike p.s. I see nothing in this sutta or in Dan's comments to suggest that 'we ignore the suffering of those for whom it appears as extremely real and torturesome'--or anything else for that matter. Ignorance is bad, no? --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dan, > I think the Buddha's radical message on suffering > here is meant for those who are > advanced enough to contemplate a real detachment > from personal suffering, the > ability to see it as unreal, to avoid reacting > negatively, etc. > > I don't believe that this should inform our view as > to how to deal with human > rights in the real world, not for ourselves, but for > others. If Buddha in fact > did not see the suffering of the enslaved masses of > the local King at that time, > I'm afraid I would have a serious problem with that. > I don't believe that is his > message. I believe that what he said was for the > instruction of monks and other > serious practitioners. At least I hope that is the > case. > > Should we ignore the suffering of those for whom it > appears as extremely real and > torturesome? I remember some here making the point > that we don't insist on > finding out who manufactured the arrow before we > allows the doctor to take it out. > In the same way, we should end the suffering that > presents itself to us first, > and then work on the deeper level when those in > bondage are free and able to sit > down and have a conversation. > > We can't say that our purpose in life is to end > suffering, and then ignore people > in pain, because their brand of suffering is 'not > the real kind'. If Buddhists > don't work to insure human rights and end the > *experience* of suffering in all its > forms, we will wind up going very far down a very > wrong path. This is the kind of > thing that gives spiritual people a very bad > reputation. > > Robert Ep. > > ================================= > > --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > I'm reading through some old posts, and I am > enjoying your recent > > comments and questions immensely. > > > > At one point, you write: > > > > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human > rights (engaged > > buddhism?) > > > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life > that people find > > > themselves in secondary to learning the way out > of Samsara? > > > > SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this > question eloquently: > > > > "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had > been put in bondage > > by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some > with clogs, some > > with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of > bhikkhus dressed...and > > saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a > great mass of > > people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi > of Kosala, some with > > ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' > > > > "Then the Blessed One, having understood the > meaning of this, on that > > occasion recited these verses: > > 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong > > Made of iron, wood, or rope; > > But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, > > Anxious concern for wives and children-- > > This, the wise say, is the strong bond, > > Degrading, supple, hard to escape. > > But even this they cut and wander forth, > > Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" > > > > I read this in the context of the real root of > suffering being > > craving born of ignorance, and not the external > conditions (e.g. > > human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not > to say that human > > rights are not important in an external way, but > ultimately, the > > external conditions are superficial. One of my > favorite passages > > addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta > (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, > > even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by > limb with a two- > > handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate > towards them would not > > be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the > passage is that it > > points out in stark terms that the real crux of > the teaching is not > > so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw > but instead to > > develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw > strikes, it does not > > give rise to suffering. > > > > Pursuit of human rights begins with the > recognition of an injustice, > > then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the > discussion of the > > injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, > etc. It is eerily > > similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He > abused me, he struck > > me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does > Buddha then say, "Then, > > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my > rights by making > > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: > "...those who harbor > > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in > verse 4: "...those > > who do not harbor such thoughts still their > hatred." Buddha did not > > exhort us to battle against those awful other > people who don't > > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > > > The real issue is the development of the mind: > "Whatever harm an > > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, > an ill-directed mind > > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). > > > > Dan 9555 From: m. nease Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw Achaarn Kantasilo just sent me an interview he did with Bhikkhu Bodhi in June. Haven't had a chance to read it yet but would be glad to send it to any interested parties. It's a twelve-page MS Word document--let me know if you need me to convert it to text format before sending. Cheers, mike 9556 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Achaarn Kantasilo just sent me an interview he did > with Bhikkhu Bodhi in June. Haven't had a chance to > read it yet but would be glad to send it to any > interested parties. It's a twelve-page MS Word > document--let me know if you need me to convert it to > text format before sending. Other than the fact it was fantastic to finally meet you in person yesterday in the presence of Ajahn Kantasilo, I'm curious to read the interview as well. I have to say I was quite impressed with Ajahn Kantasilo in general, and his Khmer is WAY better than mine! My wife Eath was so impressed by him that she formally requested teachings from him after you left, and spent most of last night crying tears of happiness at the wonderful good fortune of meeting someone like that. She says she feels as though she knows him from somewhere :). Funny how she mentioned how familiar you looked to her as well, Mike! ;) The Dhamma is a funny thing, innit? A "chance" meeting with you there rather than someplace else, that turned out to have huge repercussions for Eath--because she met a monk who can speak her language as well--because a big problem for Eath is that the state of Buddhism in Cambodia is miserable, and here's someone who can instruct the Dhamma in Thai, Khmer, AND English! Wow! 9557 From: Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: speed of cittas [Erik] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > > One way to understand the discourse AN. I, v (48) is to see that > this > > quickly changing mind as being fickle. > > Isn't it true? An fickle mind is undeveloped and uncultivated. > And > > undeveloped and uncultivated mind brings much stress and suffering. > > How true! > > But, AA defines it in the more Abhidhammic sense of cittas arising > and passing with great rapidity. This makes perfect sense to me. This > understanding of it just reeks with anatta and anicca; the "fickle > mind" interpretation makes sense too, but in a less penetrating way > that doesn't penetrate to the heart of the teaching as readily. Hi Dan, I would have to voice some reservations with this intepretation. Why? Because how relevant is the notion that millions of cittas arise and pass away at any given moment? What seems far more relevant to me--at least in terms of eradicating dukkha at the root-- is recognizing that thoughts are fleeting and impermanent; they arise and pass away quickly. How quickly? Quckly enough that we can discern their impermanence and insubstantiality with a bit of careful observation. To go much beyond this, to the point of entertaining the idea of millions of these flickering mind-moments to me, seems an entrance into a realm of theory having little to do with overcoming dukkha. It seems like gilding the lotus, as it were. What I have found helpful is when craving or aversion arise, to observe the mental sensations associated with them, and recognize that "this too shall pass." And pass a lot more quickly than the physical form of my body, for example, which is aging much too slowly to observe the way I can observe the speed at which my thoughts change. So I think the teaching "fickle mind" is MORE penetrating--at least in terms of relevance to terminating dukkha. Why do so many teachers (like Ajahn Chah) mention the "monkey mind", rather than a Saganesque "billions and billions" (you should appreciate that reference having spent time in Ithaca and all :) of cittas? Who but one with an omniscient mind can discern such things anyway? And if we can't discern these sorts of processes, it's a bit like talking about the impermanence of atomic particlesm which we can't even see, vs. the impermanence of the human body. At least as I see it. To summarize, then, what I have found helpful is in meditating on those things I CAN observe and understand and see directly, rather than engage in what appears to me akin to speculative theorizing. In other words, how am I feeling RIGHT NOW? Is there attachment arising NOW? Is there aversion arising NOW? These "cittas" arise and pass away fairly quickly, but not so quickly they can't be discerned by one who's been trained in what to look for, namely, what is craving, aversion, ignorance. In this way the Buddha's speaking about the speed at which cittas arise and pass away seems a more helpful interpertation, because it is something I can see how to apply here and now. 9558 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 11:34pm Subject: Is Suffering real? (was: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Christine]) --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dan and Robert, > > Just briefly, I think Dan's reading of this sutta is > spot-on. Understanding will of course and always > condition kind behavior to all beings to the extent > that it has been cultivated. Yes, I would agree with that as a general principle. The forms this mental, > verbal and physical action will take will of course > depend on the 'accumulations' of the individual > concerned. I would agree with that too. At any rate, the Buddha's approach to > suffering on all levels was to attack the very source > of all ill, individual and social--i.e. ignorance, > aversion and desire. I agree with that as well. Political action only attacks > the symptoms. This is not to say that kindly > motivated politcal action can't be a good thing--just > something else. I agree with that, except that I would say that it is also very important to end suffering as a 'symptom' as well as at the source, and perhaps that's where there may be some room for controversy. It has always been an issue in spiritual life to what extent we try to end the absolutely overwhelming manifestations of suffering, as opposed to focussing our attention on the 'ultimate' solution: an end to the delusion of self that causes the sufferer in the first place. And I believe the answer is to strike a balance that is neither totally inclusive of manifest suffering, nor totally exclusive of manifest suffering. And you have said as much above, too. > Did I understand you correctly to say that you would > 'have a problem' with the Buddha's failure to conform > to your idea of correct action? Just curious... Well, as a matter of principle I reserve the right to form my own sense of what is right and wrong, on a provisional and worldly level, of course. As a citizen of the world, I feel some responsibility to be responsible for my involvement in the world or lack thereof. If I really found myself in opposition to something the Buddha said, that would be a source of a very long meditation...... But what I am saying at this point is that I don't believe that this is what the Buddha meant, but that he was telling his monks not to be distracted by the suffering in the world, because their job was to focus unremittingly on the matter of liberation, which will have a greater impact in the long run. Part of me, however, I will admit, is disappointed, that he doesn't feel inclined to free those imprisonned people. I have a real problem with the idea that all those people in physical chains, being made into slaves, is incidental to real suffering. I'm sure, from the Buddha's point of view, who has seen the suffering of immeasureable aeons, and knows the karmic causes of people's current situations, the focus on liberation would be the only thing that would ultimately make any difference. From my limited perspective, I still feel obliged to care about those enslaved people and try to get them free. Perhaps that is truly deluded, but I won't give up on them until I personally know better. Otherwise, I run the risk of becoming inhuman. When I no longer care about people's actual suffering in the world, I will know that I've gone down the wrong path. So it's not a matter of 'having a problem' with the Buddha's standpoint. I need to stay with what he says and absorb it. But it is a matter of understanding my obligation *now*, from all that seems right to me under current conditions, and I have to be true to that, not take an intellecual position towards other people's sufferings. Hope that makes my point of view clearer, if not more acceptable. > mike > > p.s. I see nothing in this sutta or in Dan's comments > to suggest that 'we ignore the suffering of those for > whom it > appears as extremely real and torturesome'--or > anything else for that matter. Well, nothing against Dan, whom I think knows a lot, and whose posts I enjoy reading, but I do see a view in Dan's comments that external suffering is unimportant compared to the real suffering. Here's a quote: =============== Dan: ..." Does > > Buddha then say, "Then, > > > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my > > rights by making > > > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: > > "...those who harbor > > > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in > > verse 4: "...those > > > who do not harbor such thoughts still their > > hatred." Buddha did not > > > exhort us to battle against those awful other > > people who don't > > > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > > > > > The real issue is the development of the mind: > > "Whatever harm an > > > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, > > an ill-directed mind > > > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). ================== Ignorance is bad, no? Yes, ignorance is 'bad', and is the ultimate cause of suffering. I just feel obliged to add that the suffering, illusory or not, is bad too. And that's where I'll stand. Best, Robert Ep. ==================================== ==================================== > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dan, > > I think the Buddha's radical message on suffering > > here is meant for those who are > > advanced enough to contemplate a real detachment > > from personal suffering, the > > ability to see it as unreal, to avoid reacting > > negatively, etc. > > > > I don't believe that this should inform our view as > > to how to deal with human > > rights in the real world, not for ourselves, but for > > others. If Buddha in fact > > did not see the suffering of the enslaved masses of > > the local King at that time, > > I'm afraid I would have a serious problem with that. > > I don't believe that is his > > message. I believe that what he said was for the > > instruction of monks and other > > serious practitioners. At least I hope that is the > > case. > > > > Should we ignore the suffering of those for whom it > > appears as extremely real and > > torturesome? I remember some here making the point > > that we don't insist on > > finding out who manufactured the arrow before we > > allows the doctor to take it out. > > In the same way, we should end the suffering that > > presents itself to us first, > > and then work on the deeper level when those in > > bondage are free and able to sit > > down and have a conversation. > > > > We can't say that our purpose in life is to end > > suffering, and then ignore people > > in pain, because their brand of suffering is 'not > > the real kind'. If Buddhists > > don't work to insure human rights and end the > > *experience* of suffering in all its > > forms, we will wind up going very far down a very > > wrong path. This is the kind of > > thing that gives spiritual people a very bad > > reputation. > > > > Robert Ep. > > > > ================================= > > > > --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > > > Hi Christine, > > > I'm reading through some old posts, and I am > > enjoying your recent > > > comments and questions immensely. > > > > > > At one point, you write: > > > > > > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human > > rights (engaged > > > buddhism?) > > > > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life > > that people find > > > > themselves in secondary to learning the way out > > of Samsara? > > > > > > SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this > > question eloquently: > > > > > > "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had > > been put in bondage > > > by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some > > with clogs, some > > > with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of > > bhikkhus dressed...and > > > saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a > > great mass of > > > people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi > > of Kosala, some with > > > ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' > > > > > > "Then the Blessed One, having understood the > > meaning of this, on that > > > occasion recited these verses: > > > 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong > > > Made of iron, wood, or rope; > > > But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, > > > Anxious concern for wives and children-- > > > This, the wise say, is the strong bond, > > > Degrading, supple, hard to escape. > > > But even this they cut and wander forth, > > > Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" > > > > > > I read this in the context of the real root of > > suffering being > > > craving born of ignorance, and not the external > > conditions (e.g. > > > human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not > > to say that human > > > rights are not important in an external way, but > > ultimately, the > > > external conditions are superficial. One of my > > favorite passages > > > addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta > > (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, > > > even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by > > limb with a two- > > > handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate > > towards them would not > > > be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the > > passage is that it > > > points out in stark terms that the real crux of > > the teaching is not > > > so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw > > but instead to > > > develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw > > strikes, it does not > > > give rise to suffering. > > > > > > Pursuit of human rights begins with the > > recognition of an injustice, > > > then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the > > discussion of the > > > injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, > > etc. It is eerily > > > similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He > > abused me, he struck > > > me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does > > Buddha then say, "Then, > > > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my > > rights by making > > > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: > > "...those who harbor > > > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in > > verse 4: "...those > > > who do not harbor such thoughts still their > > hatred." Buddha did not > > > exhort us to battle against those awful other > > people who don't > > > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > > > > > The real issue is the development of the mind: > > "Whatever harm an > > > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, > > an ill-directed mind > > > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). > > > > > > Dan 9559 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 23, 2001 11:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw I'd love it, Mike, and Word would be fine for me. Robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Achaarn Kantasilo just sent me an interview he did > with Bhikkhu Bodhi in June. Haven't had a chance to > read it yet but would be glad to send it to any > interested parties. It's a twelve-page MS Word > document--let me know if you need me to convert it to > text format before sending. > > Cheers, > > mike 9560 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 0:00am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw Dear Mike, I would be interested in receiving a copy of the interview also - could you convert it to text format please? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Achaarn Kantasilo just sent me an interview he did > with Bhikkhu Bodhi in June. Haven't had a chance to > read it yet but would be glad to send it to any > interested parties. It's a twelve-page MS Word > document--let me know if you need me to convert it to > text format before sending. > > Cheers, > > mike 9561 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 0:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: meththa meditation Dear Sarah, Thanks for your patient explanations - I do not dispute anything you have said. I learn a great deal from all of your posts, if not from the words themselves - then from the thinking about the words later :-) But I am interested to notice my reactions and how this topic troubled me and came to assume such an importance to me. I think it grew out of need. At work, I feel constantly buffeted by waves of distressed feelings flooding off people in heartrending situations.........Theoretically, I could leave the job.......do I want to?.........maybe I'm addicted to pain, or have an 'If not I, then who...?' complex.........don't know...... I think I have been using Metta Meditation as a personal first-aid mechanism, and, at this point in time, I cannot see any alternative to continuing to act in this way. Some sort of psychic shield would be great. :-) Does Buddhism offer such a thing? I don't know of anything other than Metta Meditation (beginning with self as target) that revitalises, restores - puts money back in the emotional bank, when there has been a heavy pay-out. A friend sent me this from Bhikkhu Bodhi (who is always a favourite of mine) - and I am content to rest here unless/until internal or external circumstances change............ Bhikkhu Bodhi once wrote: "The method of development is //metta-bhavana//, the meditation on lovingkindness, one of the most important kinds of Buddhist meditation. The meditation begins with the development of lovingkindness towards oneself.[6] [6]. This might appear to contradict what we said earlier, that //metta// is free from self-reference. The contradiction is only apparent, however, for in developing //metta// towards oneself one regards oneself objectively, as a third person. Further, the kind of love developed is not self-cherishing but a detached altruistic wish for one's own well-being. It is suggested that one take oneself as the first object of //metta// because true lovingkindness for others only becomes possible when one is able to feel genuine lovingkindness for oneself. Probably most of the anger and hostility we direct to others springs from negative attitudes we hold towards ourselves. When //metta// is directed inwards towards oneself, it helps to melt down the hardened crust created by these negative attitudes, permitting a fluid diffusion of kindness and sympathy outwards." and also from Bhikku Bodhi - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html The Intention of Good Will The intention of good will opposes the intention of ill will, thoughts governed by anger and aversion. As in the case of desire, there are two ineffective ways of handling ill will. One is to yield to it, to express the aversion by bodily or verbal action. This approach releases the tension, helps drive the anger "out of one's system," but it also poses certain dangers. It breeds resentment, provokes retaliation, creates enemies, poisons relationships, and generates unwholesome kamma; in the end, the ill will does not leave the "system" after all, but instead is driven down to a deeper level where it continues to vitiate one's thoughts and conduct. The other approach, repression, also fails to dispel the destructive force of ill will. It merely turns that force around and pushes it inward, where it becomes transmogrified into self-contempt, chronic depression, or a tendency to irrational outbursts of violence. The remedy the Buddha recommends to counteract ill will, especially when the object is another person, is a quality called in Pali metta. This word derives from another word meaning "friend," but metta signifies much more than ordinary friendliness. I prefer to translate it by the compound "lovingkindness," which best captures the intended sense: an intense feeling of selfless love for other beings radiating outwards as a heartfelt concern for their well-being and happiness. Metta is not just sentimental good will, nor is it a conscientious response to a moral imperative or divine command. It must become a deep inner feeling, characterized by spontaneous warmth rather than by a sense of obligation. At its peak metta rises to the heights of a brahmavihara, a "divine dwelling," a total way of being centered on the radiant wish for the welfare of all living beings. The kind of love implied by metta should be distinguished from sensual love as well as from the love involved in personal affection. The first is a form of craving, necessarily self-directed, while the second still includes a degree of attachment: we love a person because that person gives us pleasure, belongs to our family or group, or reinforces our own self-image. Only rarely does the feeling of affection transcend all traces of ego-reference, and even then its scope is limited. It applies only to a certain person or group of people while excluding others. The love involved in metta, in contrast, does not hinge on particular relations to particular persons. Here the reference point of self is utterly omitted. We are concerned only with suffusing others with a mind of lovingkindness, which ideally is to be developed into a universal state, extended to all living beings without discriminations or reservations. The way to impart to metta this universal scope is to cultivate it as an exercise in meditation. Spontaneous feelings of good will occur too sporadically and are too limited in range to be relied on as the remedy for aversion. The idea of deliberately developing love has been criticized as contrived, mechanical, and calculated. Love, it is said, can only be genuine when it is spontaneous, arisen without inner prompting or effort. But it is a Buddhist thesis that the mind cannot be commanded to love spontaneously; it can only be shown the means to develop love and enjoined to practice accordingly. At first the means has to be employed with some deliberation, but through practice the feeling of love becomes ingrained, grafted onto the mind as a natural and spontaneous tendency. The method of development is metta-bhavana, the meditation on lovingkindness, one of the most important kinds of Buddhist meditation. The meditation begins with the development of lovingkindness towards oneself.[19] It is suggested that one take oneself as the first object of metta because true lovingkindness for others only becomes possible when one is able to feel genuine lovingkindness for oneself. Probably most of the anger and hostility we direct to others springs from negative attitudes we hold towards ourselves. When metta is directed inwards towards oneself, it helps to melt down the hardened crust created by these negative attitudes, permitting a fluid diffusion of kindness and sympathy outwards. Once one has learned to kindle the feeling of metta towards oneself, the next step is to extend it to others. The extension of metta hinges on a shift in the sense of identity, on expanding the sense of identity beyond its ordinary confines and learning to identify with others. The shift is purely psychological in method, entirely free from theological and metaphysical postulates, such as that of a universal self immanent in all beings. Instead, it proceeds from a simple, straightforward course of reflection which enables us to share the subjectivity of others and experience the world (at least imaginatively) from the standpoint of their own inwardness. The procedure starts with oneself. If we look into our own mind, we find that the basic urge of our being is the wish to be happy and free from suffering. Now, as soon as we see this in ourselves, we can immediately understand that all living beings share the same basic wish. All want to be well, happy, and secure. To develop metta towards others, what is to be done is to imaginatively share their own innate wish for happiness. We use our own desire for happiness as the key, experience this desire as the basic urge of others, then come back to our own position and extend to them the wish that they may achieve their ultimate objective, that they may be well and happy. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > I just have a few minutes only left after my lengthy, verbose post to Rob Ep, > so i'll just make some brief comments here and hope others will do better. I'm > not an expert on metta;-) > > --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > > > Sorry to be so slow, but may I refer back to a topic discussed a few > > days ago, where I still need a little clarification? During the > > discussion on Metta, the argument was put that Metta ought not be > > directed to 'oneself'; that Metta ought always to be 'other- directed'. > > I have been wondering if the scriptures quoted were directed at > > people living in a practising community where each individual would > > be 'caught in the crossfire' (so to speak) of everyone else's > > radiated metta......and that there was no conception of the isolation > > of many people practicing now in the West. > > I think the Teachings were for us all, regardless of our lifestyles. Even if we > live in relative isolation (a joke in Hong Kong..), aren't there still many > opportunities in a day for metta? What about when you talk to your dogs, milk > the cows;-), drive to work and encounter other polite and impolite drivers, or > on the bus, or at the hospital or speaking to the kids on the phone or here on > the list and so on and so on.... > > Aren't there so many missed opportunities for all kinds of kusala in a day? > There are for me, I know. Still, no use in clinging or wishing for more, > otherwise it's just more attachment to oneself;-) > > > Does Metta actually affect the target being/s, or does it only affect > > the person initiating metta? i.e. in the form of making them more > > sensitive, kindly and other-directed? > > Aren't we affected when others show us kindness and considertion? Of course > there are many different conditions at work, but most of us, most the time > respond to courtesy and kindness, I think. > > >Perhaps altering the dynamics > > of their relationships with the other being /s- or maybe just > > creating a satisfying self-view of themselves as a caring > > person........ > > sounds like the attachment to self again here... > . > > If 'self-directed metta' is an error, why do the majority of > > meditation courses/retreats teach both 'self directed' plus 'other > > directed metta, but suggest practicing 'self directed' first? > > pass... > > > If metta practice does actually affect the target being/s - wouldn't > > it be dependent on the strength and 'quality' of the feeling being > > radiated? > > Many, many conditions....time, place, person, recipient, accumulations and so > on. If we show kindness to the old woman on the bus, we don't have to think > about how she'll repond or how she has responded....ultimately we're not > responsible for the other's reaction and cannot control it...just do our best > with kusala cittas... > > >New practitioners are warned not to initially choose > > someone of the opposite gender as this could arouse emotions other > > than loving-kindness. (Presumably only in the meditator, otherwise > > the world would be a little more chaotic than it is.) > > Rather than setting too many rules, I'd rather just see the value of helping or > showing kindness to others when we have a chance..even if it's just the little > ant on our path;-) > > > If a practitioner has been psychologically damaged at a "critical > > period" for development of attachment, trust, autonomy, > > individuation, etc. as a very young child - by, say, physical, sexual > > or emotional abuse - how would the idea of "using oneself as an > > example" work? - if the feelings held for oneself are tinged with > > loathing or disgust? > > "Just as for myself.....so also for.........?" > > This is a little more complex, but doesn't the person who has really suffered > in these ways appreicate the value just as much of being treated well? just as > this person has been abused and suffered so much which has caused such a lot of > misery, so others also don't wish to experience such misery or be so > tormented....Therefore let's see how we can make life pleasanter with kindness > and without abuse for others.... When we are angry or impatient are we not > also 'abusing'? Certainly there's no metta at these times. Nor is there any > metta or other kind of skilful state when we have (negative) thoughts with > dosa. It may seem that these are a result of others' actions, and of course > others' actions are a condition for the mental states, but really they (the > negative thoughts) are our 'own' accumulations and it is our 'own' vipaka to > hear and suffer these unpleasant sounds and bodily experiences. > > Christine, I have to run and this is rather rushed.....and I'll be 'off' for > the weekend...look forward to any more of your pertinent comments as always. > > metta, > > Sarah 9562 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 1:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > I think it's fascinating that everything goes by so fast - but for who? Since we > are working on the assumption that there is no ego that is observing these cittas > jump around like mad, who or what is watching these cittas whiz by? If it's not > an 'observer consciousness', which I know everyone will say it is not, then it is > a 'slower citta' that can't keep up? Is it a sensory citta that can't keep up > with a mental citta? Is it a cetisika watching several cittas whiz by or a citta > being overrun by incredibly fast cetasikas? Or what? I would be very interested > to know what you would think about this. > > I apologize for pressing the point, now for about the fourth time today, but I > really think there's something valuable hidden in this. Such as how we have > overriding, comparative or relative experiences without an ego to hold and compare > it all. > ====== Dear Rob ep. I think I have mentioned on a few occasions that, as one example, the cetasika that is panna can know past and present (and even future moments in the case of the Buddha ). It falls away immediately but has the function of understanding. best wishes robert 9563 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 3:34am Subject: Re: "engaged" [Christine]/Dan Hi Dan, Nice of you to say you enjoyed my posts. :) I do sometimes feel inhibited by the high standard of discussion on this List, but have decided to carry on regardless. However, one of my 'faults' is an interest in everything that I don't know. This results in a grasshopper mind jumping after any interesting item. Which is a roundabout way of saying 'Sorry I'm so late replying to your great post!'. I started off looking up the Kosalasamyutta that you mentioned, and got sidetracked into all the other Suttas where the Buddha was reminding King Pasenadi of this and that. They seemed to see quite a bit of one another. Have you noticed that King Pasenadi rarely asks the Blessed One a direct question? He tends to make statements 'at' Him. Maybe a literary conceit? A Royal arrogance? But King Pasenadi doesn't come across as an insensitive enslaver of people, as could be inferred from the part you quoted......unless, as often is the case with me at least, high sounding words are matched by very 'ordinary' behaviours at times. In the Appaka Sutta sn III.6 (Few): King Pasenadi:'This train of thought arose in my awareness 'Few are those people in the world who, when acquiring lavish wealth, don't become intoxicated and heedless, don't become greedy for sensual pleasures, and don't mistreat other beings.'........ In the Piya Sutta sn III.4 (Dear): King Pasenadi: 'This train of thought arose in my awareness:'Who are dear to themselves, and who are not dear to themselves?' Then it occurred to me......... In the Atthakarana Sutta sn III.7 (In Judgement) King Pasenadi:'Just now Lord as I was sitting in judgment I saw even affluent nobles........tell deliberate lies with sensual pleasures as the cause......' A slight echo here (in the use of the word 'even') of the prejudice even today that the 'poorer' classes have all the moral imperfections? And then I came across the Pabbatopana Sutta which alway gives me a little frisson to read of the relentless, unswerving approach of aging and death. "Coming this way crushing all living beings in its path". Interesting how quickly I can put it out of my mind though.....:-) Finally I looked up the other one you mentioned. The graphic one. The Kakacupama Sutta. Very powerful images. One wonders if life was really that violent in the immediate surroundings of the Buddha or whether he knew human nature so well and our attraction to dramatic happenings (e.g.The ancient equivalent of the on-lookers at traffic accidents, TV news, horror movies) that he gave teachings coupled with graphic images that are remembered 2500 years later. On first reading I wondered about the 'two'-handed saw.....then I remembered that most surgeons nowadays have power saws (whatever the name of the medical types are) and most surgeons I know are fairly strong males. Very few women become Orthopaedic Surgeons. So it must have been a fairly common sight to see this saw being used. With all the wars going on, surgeons would have been essential?? And with all of this wondering about conditions in those days and what the people were like including a delightful travelogue through King Pasenadi's time and thoughts - I did get the point of what you were saying Dan, and I thank you for illustrating it with such interesting Suttas - That the real root of suffering is craving born of ignorance not external conditions. And that the real issue and the way to end suffering is the practice of the development of the mind. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Christine, > I'm reading through some old posts, and I am enjoying your recent > comments and questions immensely. > > At one point, you write: > > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged > buddhism?) > > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find > > themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? > > SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this question eloquently: > > "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had been put in bondage > by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some with clogs, some > with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of bhikkhus dressed...and > saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a great mass of > people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi of Kosala, some with > ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' > > "Then the Blessed One, having understood the meaning of this, on that > occasion recited these verses: > 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong > Made of iron, wood, or rope; > But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, > Anxious concern for wives and children-- > This, the wise say, is the strong bond, > Degrading, supple, hard to escape. > But even this they cut and wander forth, > Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" > > I read this in the context of the real root of suffering being > craving born of ignorance, and not the external conditions (e.g. > human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not to say that human > rights are not important in an external way, but ultimately, the > external conditions are superficial. One of my favorite passages > addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, > even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two- > handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not > be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the passage is that it > points out in stark terms that the real crux of the teaching is not > so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw but instead to > develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw strikes, it does not > give rise to suffering. > > Pursuit of human rights begins with the recognition of an injustice, > then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the discussion of the > injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, etc. It is eerily > similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He abused me, he struck > me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does Buddha then say, "Then, > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my rights by making > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: "...those who harbor > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in verse 4: "...those > who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred." Buddha did not > exhort us to battle against those awful other people who don't > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > The real issue is the development of the mind: "Whatever harm an > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, an ill-directed mind > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). > > Dan 9564 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 3:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Speed of cittas Dear Ken, You describe carefully a number of processes of which you are aware that are occuring as you lock the door. Have you ever found yourself inside the house with the door locked, with no conscious recollection of the processes you have described? I have, a thousand ti?es (that's twice the number of monks that are hanging around in your average sutta :-)) Did the processes still take place, despite my non-awareness? I think they did. What role does awareness play in the process? Any process? While you were locking the door you could have been aware of your heart beat, how your left knee-cap felt, the smell of the carpet, the face of a friend you have not seen for some time. Being aware of these things only, you could have still very efficiently and effectively locked the door. It is important to be aware when you are learning a new task. You know how to lock a door, how to smell old carpet, to recognise the face of a friend, how to beat your heart, how to breathe. These things do not require awareness. The function of awareness in any moment can be to teach that the moment isn't what you think it is, only what you want it to be (your intention and previous learning which was intention and previous learning which was intention and previous learning etc etc etc. It may be of interest to become aware of the selection processes that determine, what, out of a zillion possibilities, becomes the object of awareness at any given moment. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi All, > > I was thinking of the speed of cittas. When I was locking up the door, I > realise that a few things "seem" to act simultaneously. > > a. My hand movement locking the door. > > b. At the same time I am looking at the door > > c. At the same time I was hearing the sound of the locking sound. > > d. At the same time my hand to move the fingers > > e. At the same time, the concept of this is the door and this is key > > f. At the same time, the concept of how to lock the door correctly. > > g. At the same time, feeling the coldness of the keys. > > > I do not know how fast is citta speed, but I think it should be fast > enough for us to do all these things at the same time ( or in a span of > moment of our conditioned thoughts). > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > 9565 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 6:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Speed of cittas Hi Herman > > You describe carefully a number of processes of which you are aware > that are occuring as you lock the door. Have you ever found yourself > inside the house with the door locked, with no conscious recollection > of the processes you have described? k: That is true. It is usually happens to me as I am oftenly unmindful of the body actions. But just happen that day I was thinking of the speed of cittas during locking of the door, that makes some sense out of it. > I have, a thousand times (that's twice the number of monks that are > hanging around in your average sutta :-)) > > Did the processes still take place, despite my non-awareness? I think > they did. k: that is what Abhidhamma says cittas continues to do their role even we are not aware. There is some truth to an extent bc our body organ functions without most of our awareness. > What role does awareness play in the process? Any process? > While you were locking the door you could have been aware of your > heart beat, how your left knee-cap felt, the smell of the carpet, the > face of a friend you have not seen for some time. Being aware of > these things only, you could have still very efficiently and > effectively locked the door. > It is important to be aware when you are learning a new task. You > know how to lock a door, how to smell old carpet, to recognise the > face of a friend, how to beat your heart, how to breathe. These > things do not require awareness. > The function of awareness in any moment can be to teach that the > moment isn't what you think it is, only what you want it to be (your > intention and previous learning which was intention and previous > learning which was intention and previous learning etc etc etc. It > may be of interest to become aware of the selection processes that > determine, what, out of a zillion possibilities, becomes the object > of awareness at any given moment. k: According to my interpretation of what this list usually says, they seems are not worried abt the these instanteous process because they are too fast for the conditioned mind to be aware of. Their main concerns are kusala, akusala, vipaka and kiriya. But I am more interested in the thought process rather than kusala and akusala. I find looking at process is much better to understand anatta and breaking out our conditioned concepts then minding abt kusala and akusala (they are impt though). My reservations with kusala and akusala is that, when do you know a pleasant feelings is kusala and akusala. It could originate from both cittas. When we feel joy reading the dhamma, is this pleasant feeling kusala, that is difficult to analyse and judge, I would said. I would prefer to the study the process of joy when is arise. Deciphering it until minute details, until in a sense they are just the process of cittas and the concept of joy is not in existence anymore in a sense. Sound mechanical I think :). k: I am reading the Abhidhammic books in relation to other Mahayana books like the "The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines" translated by Edward Conze. Studying of Abhidhamma helps me to understand (just intellectual understanding) one impt theory of Mahayana Buddhism, the nature of khandhas is the same as Nibbana. Since khandhas is devoid of self nature, hence it is impossible to grasped them or to discriminate them, that is why I think they are signless and markless. It is through our conditioned mine that we put concepts or names (sign or mark) on these khandhas. In this context of argument we could say that they are the same as Nibbana. (sorry off track a bit for this list). Hence maybe now I could get a glimpse why the Mahayana keep saying abt non discrimination as in the first place how to discriminate things (including dhammas) that are inherently devoid of a self nature. k: I like to puruse and study Abhidhamma teachings due to its strength in understanding anatta. There are still some questions I like to ask but could not get a hold out of it yet. After that, I would look at the Chinese Abhidhamma teachings as I recently found it in the internet (need to brush up my Chinese again :)). I believe there are a lot of deviations between the Thervada and Chinese Abhidhammas. k: On your last email abt traditions, i would not say traditions are at fault, i would say it is the pple in the tradition who caused the problems. They are the pple who do not promote correct understanding of Buddhism. In Singapore, I seen a lot of Mahayana traditions are making a mockery out of Buddhism and that is very sad. > > All the best > > > Herman Kind regards Ken O 9566 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 2:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi, Robert (and Robert E) - In a message dated 11/24/01 4:44:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Rob ep. > I think I have mentioned on a few occasions that, as one example, the > cetasika that is panna can know past and present (and even future > moments in the case of the Buddha ). It falls away immediately but > has the function of understanding. > best wishes > robert > ============================ Indeed you have said this, and it would explain much and be very pleasing to me if it were so. And perhaps it is. However, I see a troublesome apparent contradiction: In Abhidhammic theory, each citta has but one object, and cetasikas accompanying a citta, including pa~n~na, have that very same object. This *seems* to me to constitute an outright contradiction. I would be pleased to come to understand why it is not. 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) 9567 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 10:09am Subject: Cambodia Ch 11, no. 2 Cambodia Lectures, ch 11, no 2. Soun Osoth: I know that it is very important to remember the theory of the Dhamma one has learned. In the ³Questions of King Milinda² Nagasena speaks about seventeen kinds of sati. Sati that remembers is most important. There can be remembrance with sati. Would Mother Sujin explains this, please? Nipat: It is useful to remember correctly. But what is the benefit of remembrance? Soun: It is beneficial for the development of satipaììhåna. We should remember the objects of satipaììhåna. Nipat: There should be remembrance that leads to understanding. Remembrance of terms will not lead to understanding. When you only remember the terms you will not understand the characteristics of realities. Sujin: Remembrance is not sati, it is saññå cetasika. When we come across a certain term we should have correct understanding of its meaning. We cannot change its characteristic. No matter whether saññå arises together with effort or with paññå, saññå is still saññå. There are other cetasikas which also arise together with saññå; saññå can be firm remembrance and that is because paññå cetasika arises together with it. Saññå that is just ordinary remembrance is different from saññå that arises with viriya, effort, and this is saññå of a different level. We should not overlook the original meaning of saññå we are familiar with. We should not confuse saññå with sati. Soun: Saññå can arise with kusala citta or with akusala citta. Sati is a sobhana cetasika. There is a level of sati when we listen to the Dhamma or read the texts and understand the Dhamma. In the ³Questions of King Milinda² it is said that while counting there can also be sati. Please would you explain this? Sujin: We used to remember a great deal, but don¹t we also forget what we learned? It makes, however, a great difference if we remember something that we have understood. We shall not forget what we have understood. But if we only remember names, concepts or different topics, don¹t we forget? We should not believe that we should follow all the texts without understanding the meaning of those topics and words. When we read certain texts we should know their meaning, we should know why different topics are stated in a specific order, because then we shalll have more understanding. We should know the reason for such classifications. However, it is more important that we understand realities at this moment. If Khun Soun would not hold on to all the things he has memorized and he would consider the realities that are appearing in order to understand them, he could explain the meaning of what is real at this moment by correct understanding. Then it is his own understanding stemming from reading, listening, thinking, investigation, careful consideration and awareness of the characteristics of realities. Therefore, the real benefit of the study of Buddhism is the understanding of the realities that are appearing. Perhaps we have studied the Tipiìaka a great deal in former lives, but who can remember this? If we in this life do not understand realities, we may try again to memorize them. But it may happen that, as soon as we hear explanations about realities, we immediately understand them and this is conditioned by former moments of listening. That is why we can consider and investigate the characteristic of nåma that is different from the characteristic of rúpa. When somebody speaks about nåma and rúpa we do not think of them as mere names. In some texts the terms nåma and rúpa are translated as name and form and one may wonder what the reason is. One should understand the meaning of the reality of ³name², that is the translation of nåma. Nåma is a Pali term that can be translated as that which bends towards an object 1, thus, the realities of citta and cetasika which arise because of the apppropriate conditions. Whenever citta and cetasikas arise, they must experience an object, their characteristic is different from the characteristic of rúpa. We should really understand this and not merely remember names and terms, so that we shall not be confused. Amara: We are different from someone who is dead because for us there is nåma. If we do not study nåma and rúpa more profoundly, we do not know that there is the element, dhåtu, that experiences; we do not know that there is nåma. Because of nåma we are different from someone who is dead. 9568 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 5:32am Subject: Some Thoughts on Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas Hi, all - Some things have just occurred to me. Let's for the moment forget about all the proposed details of cittas and cetasikas, and simply proceed with informally accepting the general notion of cittas and cetasikas. There is no observing self. At any moment, there is just the knowing which is the function of the current citta, conditioned by all its cetasikas; and the citta and all its accompaniments are conditioned by previous cittas and their characteristics. This means that whatever is the current cognitive state is a carrying forward of an infinite history of acts of cognition, of cognitive events, with much of the transmitted information in the form of "accumulations" or "seeds", at a subliminal level. Whatever seeming of continuity there may be is held within each moment of knowing, and there is a regular, lawful passing on of information, inclinations, and "flavors" from mindstate to mindstate. These mindstates are not "things" in the substance sense; they are complex events whose components are interdependently related and all arising together in dependence on previous events, thus lacking in independent existence or essence/core. What am I saying here? What I'm saying is that the citta theory, if not interpreted in a substantialist/annihilationist manner is not *necessarily* off the mark, and that there may be good reason for me to look a bit more carefully at it; not so much at all of the specific details necessarily, but definitely at the general thrust of the matter. Will I still have problems with specifics, and especially with what I see as substantialist and annihilationist tendencies? You bet I will! But I do find myself a bit more accepting of the general framework than previously. A separate question is to what extent such a theory is useful or necessary for Buddhist practice. I tend to think that given that the theory is more than just theory, it will become useful only to the very advanced practitioner whose insight is already well developed. What is most important at all stages of the path, it seems to me, is not a microscopic, analytic observation of various phenomena, let alone a mere intellectual encyclopedic detailing of them, but rather, a direct knowing of all dhammas *as* impermanent, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and without core. We need to *see through* and let go of the world of apparently independent, self-existing things, and awaken to a direct seeing of that vast dynamic emptiness which is the way things are. 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) 9569 From: ppp Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 3:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw Hi, Mike: I prefer a simple text format of the paper. tadao 9570 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 1:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw I have word 2000, if you have newer version text would be good. Thank you very much Mike!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "ppp" To: Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw > Hi, Mike: > I prefer a simple text format of the paper. > tadao > 9571 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 1:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Hello Mike The questions that occur to you about the Mulapariyaya Sutta are the same ones that occur to me. This I find very reassuring. It is a helpful Sutta to read regardless of whether we understand it properly. It is presented in a way that is clearly descriptive, not prescriptive and this, in itself, is therapeutic. As you have said, some assistance with the Pali would be appreciated. Kind regards Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Ken, > > --- khow14@h... wrote: > > > Could it be that an uninstructed > > worldling could > > go so far as to actually see Nibbana but without > > attaining Path > > consciousness? I am thinking of the Mulapariyaya > > Sutta (MN 1): > > > > "He [the uninstructed worldling] perceives Nibbana > > as Nibbana. > > Perceiving Nibbana as Nibbana, he conceives things > > about > > Nibbana, he conceives things in Nibbana, he > > conceives things > > coming out of Nibbana, he conceives Nibbana as > > 'mine,' he delights > > in Nibbana. Why is that? Because he has not > > comprehended it, I tell > > you." > > > > Would it be Nibbana itself that is perceived in this > > case, or would it > > be only the concept of Nibbana? > > The matching passage for the 'learner' goes, > > "He directly knows nibbaana as nibbaana. Having > directly known nibbaana as nibbaana, let him not > conceive (himself as) nibbaana; let him not conceive > (himself apart) from nibbaana; let him not conceive > 'nibbaana is mine; let him not delight in nibbaana. > What is the reason? In order that he may fully > understand it, I declare." > > and for the arahat, > > "He directly knows nibbaana as nibbaana. Having > directly known nibbaana as nibbaana, he does not > conceive (himself as) nibbaana; he does not conceive > (himself apart) from nibbaana; he does not conceive > 'nibbaana is mine; he does not delight in nibbaana. > What is the reason? Because it has been fully > understand by him, I declare." > > So the puthujjana perceives, then conceives of; the > learner and the arahat directly know. So the former > seems to me to refer to concept (pa~n~natti), because > perceived/conceived of rather than 'directly known'. > Maybe someone with more Pali can help to clarify this. > > It isn't clear to me from the text or the commentary > whether by 'learner' a puthujjana might be meant or > only a sotaapanna (or potentially both). In one > paragraph/sentence it seems to refer first to an > 'kalyaanaputhujjana' as separate from a sotaapanna, > then by the end of the sentence seems to exclude the > 'kalayaanaputhujjana' and to refer specifically to a > sotaapanna. As for the ordinary puthujjana though, > s/he does clearly (I think) 'conceive of' nibbaana, > rather than directly experiencing it as does the > 'learner' and the arahant. I assume (again) that this > direct experience refers to satipatthaana. If this is > correct then the aarammana (of the learner and the > arahat) must be paramatthadhamma, not pa~n~nati, I > think. > > Anyway the question remains, for me, whether nibbaana > can be directly experienced by any but ariyapuggala. > In other words, is a sekkha always a sotaapanna (at > least in the context of this sutta)? If so, the rest > of us are only conceiving of nibbaana--i.e., the > aarammana is pa~n~natti--right? > > mike > > 9572 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Commentary on Samannaphala Dear Jon, Thanks for your reply. You're right, it isn't easy to understand at first...(or second or third approach.) And understanding the 'how you do it'bit always seems harder than the 'this is what it is' bit. Not much info. elsewhere on the Net that I can find - My way of learning is to gather as much information, from as many sources as possible about a subject or term and then try to sift the wheat from the chaff. Not the quickest or most efficient way, and sometimes prone to error....I find lots of irrelevant details, without the ability yet to discern initially what's relevant and what's not. Sort of like making a soup - all the ingredients seem unrelated and not very palatable - but in the end it all hopefully works in together.... So please don't if I seem to be missing completely a very simple point you are making - I might not have lightning fast intelligence, but I have perseverance. :-) A (gentle) kick on the rudder now and then to help me change direction would be appreciated.(eventually) :-) "The Noble Eightfold Path" by Bhikkhu Bodhi Ch V 'Right Effort' {I like his description of the mind with no sense control - makes it sound like a juvenile delinquent out on the town on a Saturday Night looking for action...... "If sense control is lacking, the mind roams recklessly over the sense fields. First it grasps the sign, which sets the defilements into motion, then it explores the particulars, which permits them to multiply and thrive."} {His description of "greed" in the last paragraph, gives me some qualms about my wanting to learn about every new term or subject that catches my interest - "on account of greed one will become fascinated by an agreeable object" hmmmm. And here I thought it was commendable, wanting to learn.} ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BB: "Generally what sparks the hindrances into activity is the input afforded by sense experience. The physical organism is equipped with five sense faculties each receptive to its own specific kind of data - - the eye to forms, the ear to sounds, the nose to smells, the tongue to tastes, the body to tangibles. Sense objects continuously impinge on the senses, which relay the information they receive to the mind, where it is processed, evaluated, and accorded an appropriate response. But the mind can deal with the impressions it receives in different ways, governed in the first place by the manner in which it attends to them. When the mind adverts to the incoming data carelessly, with unwise consideration (ayoniso manasikara), the sense objects tend to stir up unwholesome states. They do this either directly, through their immediate impact, or else indirectly by depositing memory traces which later may swell up as the objects of defiled thoughts, images, and fantasies. As a general rule the defilement that is activated corresponds to the object: attractive objects provoke desire, disagreeable objects provoke ill will, and indeterminate objects provoke the defilements connected with delusion. Since an uncontrolled response to the sensory input stimulates the latent defilements, what is evidently needed to prevent them from arising is control over the senses. Thus the Buddha teaches, as the discipline for keeping the hindrances in check, an exercise called the restraint of the sense faculties (indriya-samvara): When he perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, or an object with the mind, he apprehends neither the sign nor the particulars. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome states, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses.[5] Restraint of the senses does not mean denial of the senses, retreating into a total withdrawal from the sensory world. This is impossible, and even if it could be achieved, the real problem would still not be solved; for the defilements lie in the mind, not in the sense organs or objects. The key to sense control is indicated by the phrase "not apprehending the sign or the particulars." The "sign" (nimitta) is the object's general appearance insofar as this appearance is grasped as the basis for defiled thoughts; the "particulars" (anubyanjana) are its less conspicuous features. If sense control is lacking, the mind roams recklessly over the sense fields. First it grasps the sign, which sets the defilements into motion, then it explores the particulars, which permits them to multiply and thrive. To restrain the senses requires that mindfulness and clear understanding be applied to the encounter with the sense fields. Sense consciousness occurs in a series, as a sequence of momentary cognitive acts each having its own special task. The initial stages in the series occur as automatic functions: first the mind adverts to the object, then apprehends it, then admits the percept, examines it, and identifies it. Immediately following the identification a space opens up in which there occurs a free evaluation of the object leading to the choice of a response. When mindfulness is absent the latent defilements, pushing for an opportunity to emerge, will motivate a wrong consideration. One will grasp the sign of the object, explore its details, and thereby give the defilements their opportunity: on account of greed one will become fascinated by an agreeable object, on account of aversion one will be repelled by a disagreeable object. But when one applies mindfulness to the sensory encounter, one nips the cognitive process in the bud before it can evolve into the stages that stimulate the dormant taints. Mindfulness holds the hindrances in check by keeping the mind at the level of what is sensed. It rivets awareness on the given, preventing the mind from embellishing the datum with ideas born of greed, aversion, and delusion. Then, with this lucent awareness as a guide, the mind can proceed to comprehend the object as it is, without being led astray." Http://www.vipassana.com/resources/8fp5.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The only other mention of nimitta that I found is in an article by Bhikkhu Sona on "The Mystery of the Breath Nimitta" which I have resolutely resisted reading, as I have an Assignment to complete. It seems to speak of nimitta with a slightly different meaning, and raises questions saying..............." there is a significant puzzle to be solved by any meditator or scholar who tries to clearly understand the qualities of experience, I will attempt to show that there are good grounds for confusion on this matter as one traces the historical progression of the commentarial accounts from the Patisambhidamagga through the Vimuttimagga to the (later) Visuddhimagga. Since the Visuddhimagga is so influential and so widely quoted by modern teachers, it would seem critical that it is reliable and, if in certain aspects it is not, then, with supporting evidence, to show clearly why it is not." Hmmmmmmmmm The resolution not to read yet is fading a little, sounds fascinating.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Christine > > --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Just a few questions on: > > Restraint of the Sense Faculties verse 64: (p.38) The Discourse on > > the Fruits of Reclusehip > > > > "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense > > faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the > > bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were > > to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil > > unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, > > he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves > > restraint over the faculty of the eye." and so on and so forth, for > > ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. > > Here is the earlier discussion on 'sign and details' ('nimitta and > anubyancanna') that I referred to in my recent reply. As i mentioned, it > is not easy to understand, so don't feel daunted if at first it doesn't > make sense! > > Jon > > In message # 8949, I said: > This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another > world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours ago, > but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different > only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and anupayancanna > -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') appearing > through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through the > various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, and > it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding that > we are urged to develop. > > In message # 9019, Sarah said: > Would you kindly elaborate on the nimitta and anupayancanna as mentioned > above and the distinction between them in this context. > > In message # 9070, I said: > I would be very happy to, but I'm afraid I don't know much about this > area, except that it's an important aspect of both sila and satipatthana. > As I understand it, when impressions are received through the sense- doors > there will inevitably be paying attention with kilesa to the `sign' > (shape-and-form/nimitta) and `particulars' (details/anubya~njana) of those > sense-impressions. It seems to mean the absence of the guarding of the > sense-doors. I don't know any more than this. Further study required, > for sure. I am hoping Nina will have something to say about it in her > writings on the trip, since it came up for discussion and Nalanda and > again at Patna. > > In the meantime, here are some references to get started with— > > Nyanatiloka's `Buddhist Dictionary': > > 1/ > `Nimitta' is defined as `mark, sign; image; target, object; cause, > condition', with the comment that, `These meanings are used in, and > adapted to, many contexts'. > > Several doctrinal usages are discussed, of which #3 is— > <<'Outward appearance': of one who has sense-control it is said- that "he > does not seize upon the general appearance" of an object (na nimittaggáhí; > M. 38, D. 2; …).>> > > > 2/ > There is further discussion under the 4 kinds of morality consisting of > purification (catupárisuddhi-síla), as follows: > > <<(2) Restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara-síla). "Whenever the monk > perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the > nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, an object with > the mind, *he neither adheres to the appearance [J: nimitta?] as a whole, > nor to its parts [J: anubyancana?]*. And he strives to ward off that > through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, > if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, > restrains his senses" (M 38).>> Visudhimagga I, 42, 54 > > At I, 42, a discussion of `Virtue as restraint of sense faculties': > <<`On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends *neither the > signs nor the particulars* through which, if he left the eye faculty > unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might > invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye > faculty, he undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. … [and so on for > the other sense doors] …' (M.i, 180) [This] is virtue of restraint of the > sense faculties.>> > > At I, 54, an explanation of the 2 terms: > <<"Apprehends neither the signs": he does not apprehend the sign of woman > or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of > beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. "Nor the particulars": he > does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot , smile, laughter, > talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name > `particular (anubya~njana)' because of its particularising ( anu anu > bya~njanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. > He only apprehends what is really there.>> > > Hope this is helpful. > > > 9573 From: m. nease Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 5:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw Hi Christine, Here you go... mike --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Mike, > > I would be interested in receiving a copy of the > interview also - > could you convert it to text format please? > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > wrote: > > Achaarn Kantasilo just sent me an interview he > did > > with Bhikkhu Bodhi in June. Haven't had a chance > to > > read it yet but would be glad to send it to any > > interested parties. It's a twelve-page MS Word > > document--let me know if you need me to convert it > to > > text format before sending. > > > > Cheers, > > > > mike ---------- Bhikkhu Bodhi Interview Thank you Bhante for talking to us. Could you tell us about your early years, where you were born, your lay name, your parents' names? I was born in NYC in 1944, my civilian name was Jeffrey Block, and my parents were a middle class Jewish family living in Brooklyn. Could you tell us where you went to school, your primary education? I went to a public elementary school quite close to the family house, also to junior high school, high school in the neighborhood, which is Borough Park, in Brooklyn. And then I went to Brooklyn College… And you got your bachelors degree? I got a BA degree in Philosophy. What year would that be? I completed my BA degree in 1966. And then after that? And then I went to Claremont Graduate School. This is in Claremont, California. Southern CA? Yeah. Again I specialized in Philosophy and completed my doctorate degree in 1972. You were telling me earlier that you had met a Vietnamese Buddhist monk which was probably your first introduction to Buddhism? Actually I had become interested in Buddhism in my junior year in college, mainly just by strolling in bookshops and looking at book titles and then somehow I became interested in a few books on Buddhism that I could find there. I think this interest in Buddhism arose from the kind of surge or quest for some deeper understanding of human existance that was offered by the materialistic philosophy of modern American civilization, and I wasn't satisfied with my ancestral Jewish religion, and also I didn't find much long term value in Christianity. But I was drawn at an early period, say during my junior year of collage to the religions of the east. I began reading some of the Upanishads, Bhagavadgita, then I found in the bookshops some books on Buddhism. These were by D.T. Suzuki and Alan Watts so they were mainly on Zen Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism. Then when I went to Claremont Graduate School my interest in Buddhism continued and I felt increasingly a deeper need to lead a spiritual life. At the same time I always had an underlying doubt or skepticism about any type of spiritual philosophy. But finally when I was in graduate school I met a Buddhist monk from Vietnam who was attending the same school and living in the same residence hall in which I was living. I became friends with him, and I approached him as a teacher and from him I received my first instructions in Buddhism and meditation. Do you remember his name? His name is Thich Giac Duc. I have not heard from him in many, many years, so I'm not sure whether he is still alive. In fact, when I was still living in Washington D.C. at the Washington Buddhist Vihara he was in the Vietnamese temple, which was a few blocks right up the street, and he was the monk in charge of that temple. Is that the temple that's on the same street as the Washington Buddhist Vihara? The one on the same street as the Washington Buddhist Vihara, not the Jetavana temple. No, no, but there is a Vietnamese temple just right down the street from the [Washington Buddhist] Vihara and has a very big Kuan Yin [image located] in the precincts there. Is that the same temple? It must be the same temple. It was called…something like… the Vietnamese Buddhist Church of America, or something like that. Yes, that's probably it. Yeah, he was in charge of that at the same time that I was in the Washington Buddhist Vihara, just by pure coincidence that we wound up on the same street after several years of separation. But he was getting into an increasingly antagonistic relationship with the Vietnamese community. I think mainly because of the different political affiliations…because Vietnamese monks had very strong political affiliations. And this was at the time the United States was involved in the… No, this was years after the Vietnam War - this was 1981, perhaps early 82. He came to the United States in 1975 just at the very time that Saigon collapsed and fell to the Viet Cong. And that he was educated in the United States and he had somewhat pro-western sympathies compared to those monks who took a more radical stance against the United States. His life was in danger because once the Viet Cong took power they would have singled out or weeded out those monks who were known to be sympathetic to the west, or to the United States, and [would have] eliminated him physically and so he had to escape Vietnam immediately. Were you practicing any type of Vietnamese meditations [at this time]? He started me off with Anapanasati. What is interesting is Vietnamese Buddhism is Mahayana but I think because of the proximity to Cambodia, or perhaps because they've also received a stream of transmission from Indian Mahayana, not only Chinese Mahayana coming down from south China to Vietnam, Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhism tends to have a stronger strain of classical Indian Buddhism within it. So the meditations he taught me were basically mindfulness of breathing, the meditation on loving kindness, and a meditation based on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness which is…its sort of a line, each foundation of mindfulness links up with a particular one of the four perversions or distortions. To contemplate the body as being essentially impure - asubha, to contemplate all feelings as being suffering, to contemplate every state of mind as being anicca - impermanent, and to contemplate all dhammas as being without self. And you were ordained as a samanera? Yeah, after I became friends with him and I began the practice of meditation, through the practice my skepticism and doubts about Buddhism or the spiritual life dissipated. I became convinced that this is the proper path for me to follow. And so then I asked my friend, teacher, if he could give me ordination as a monk. Also, I have to confess that there was an underlying pragmatic motive as well. I wouldn't say that was the main reason why I wanted ordination, but this was a period when America decided it had to beef up its armed forces and it was expanding its roll-call of people subject to the draft. And so I also thought it might be an extra security measure to have a formal ordination as a monk in order to be able to submit some kind of document to receive exoneration from the obligation to serve in the armed forces. Conscientious objector? It wouldn't have been conscientious objector, it would have been a ministerial deferment. And you were ordained for about two months before you went to South Vietnam? No, I was ordained by him only as a samanera in May 1967, five years before I left for Asia. Where? In the United States. And then…? And I remained as a samanera for five years in the United States. I see. And then you traveled straight to Vietnam? I was planning to go to Asia all along, from the time that I received ordination. It was not exactly certain where I would go for ordination or training, though my teacher, my Vietnamese teacher, had some contact with Sri Lankan Buddhists…with Ven. Narada - famous monk Venerable Narada. And he was always constantly advising me to go to Sri Lanka to ordain and to receive training. But as a Vietnamese monk…or? At that time it was unclear but I think he thought I should take reordination as a Theravada monk but then eventually I should come back to Vietnam and then ordain again in the Mahayana Order as a Bhikshu. So how long were you in South Vietnam? Okay, so this is after I completed my graduate studies and then I had to teach for two years…this was while I was working on my dissertation, I was teaching in order to earn money to pay back debts that I had incurred from loans to support my education. So you were already a samanera, and you were working, and you were still working on your dissertation… Yeah, yeah, I was completing my dissertation. Then when I completed it…I completed it in February 1972 and I continued to work through the end of that academic year, then I was ready to leave for Asia. And by this time I had also come into contact several times with Sri Lankan Buddhist monks who were passing through Los Angels. After my first Vietnamese teacher left the United States he had a friend, another Vietnamese monk who was living in Los Angeles. He had originally gone to teach Buddhism at U.C.L.A. and then he established a Buddhist meditation center in Los Angeles. Do you recall his name? His name is Dr. Thich Thien An. He died from cancer in 1980. In 1971 I went to stay and live at that meditation center with Dr. Thich Thien An. And while I was staying there I got to know a Buddhist monk from Sri Lanka who was passing through Los Angeles and we invited him to come to stay at our meditation center and to give a series of talks over a period of a week. This was Venerable Piyadassi of Vajirarama in Columbo. I became friendly with Venerable Piyadassi and I drove him around Los Angeles. I introduced him at talks and I brought him to my classes at the university to teach, to give lectures. And then when we parted at the Los Angeles airport he suggested to me that some time I should come to Sri Lanka and he could arrange for me to stay at a Buddhist monastery. And then some time later I met another monk named Venerable Ananda Mangala who is actually a Sri Lankan monk but he was stationed in Singapore. Then I became friendly with him, he stayed with us also for about a week. Then there was Dikwella Piyananda who was at the time chief monk at the Washington Buddhist Vihara, he also came to stay with us for a few days and I became friendly with him. And so it seems I have some deep underlying karmic connection with Sri Lanka, which was getting reinforced by these visiting monks. And so then when I decided to go to Sri Lanka, I wrote to Venerable Piyadassi and told him about my intention and asked him if he could recommend a place I could go to ordain and study. Then he recommended to me a monk, Venerable Balangoda Ananda Maitreya, Who later became the Sangha nayaka…? Actually, at that time he was the Mahanayaka of the United Amarapura Nikaya. He had become already the Mahanayaka Thera of the Amarapura nikaya, this would have been in early 1972. I think he received that appointment…it must have been 1969 or 1970. Cause I remember he was the holder for a five-year period and then he relinquished…that period came to an end in 1976. So he might have had the appointment in 1971. I was under the impression that after you gained samanera ordination in the Vietnamese tradition you left California to visit your monk friend in Vietnam. Actually I hadn't reached that point yet in my narrative. I had written to Venerable Piyadassi and he gave me the name of Venerable Balangoda Ananda Maitreya. I wrote to Venerable Ananda Maitreya asking if I could come and stay with him to ordain and to study and he wrote back saying I was welcome. So then in August 1972, I left the United States and my plane came first to Thailand and so I spent one week in Thailand at Wat Pleng Vipassana. From there I went to Vietnam in order to visit my friend, the first Buddhist monk that I had contact with. This was Venerable Thich Giac Duc. Then I stayed in Vietnam for two months, mostly in Saigon, a few weeks I went up to Hue in central Vietnam. Were there any meditation centers in Hue or were you just sight-seeing? It was more sight-seeing. There were monasteries in Hue but everything was in a rather hectic and chaotic state at that time because of the Vietnam War. The monks were very uncertain about the future of Buddhism and the future of the country itself. So from Vietnam you…? Then from Vietnam I went to Sri Lanka. But at this point, I want to make it clear you were a Mahayana samanera. I was a Mahayana samanera still and I arrived in Sri Lanka wearing my Vietnamese style robe. My teacher wanted me to wear the yellow robe when I came to Sri Lanka since with the brown robe I might not have been recognized as a Buddhist monk. So I wore this flowing yellow robe. Then, after a week or so in Colombo I went out to Balangoda to stay at the monastery of my ordination teacher - Venerable Balangoda Ananda Maitreya. Then a few weeks later I took a new ordination into the Theravada Order as a samanera. How long did you remain a samanera in the Theravada tradition? The samanera ordination took place in November 1972, then I took the Upasampada ordination in May, 1973. So it was six months. Can you give us you preceptor's name? My preceptor was Venerable Bibile Sumangala Nayaka Thero. He was a prominent monk in the upcountry Amarapura nikaya. But he was not known outside of the upcountry Amarapura nikaya. He did not have an international reputation. Did you have a relationship with him? No, no. No relationship at all. His function as the upajjhaya at the upasampada ceremony was purely ceremonial or a formal function. My real close relationship was with Venerable Ananda Mettreya. Can you tell us about that relationship? Well, I came to him because he had a great reputation as a scholar and also as an outstanding monk. When I first came to him and found out that he was 77 years old I was a little apprehensive because I was coming here as a young monk and I thought that I would have to spend five years of study with him and I was worried that at the age of 77 he might die at any time. But he wound up going on to live till the age of almost 102 and he was very strong and vigorous. And while I was staying with him I found out one of the secrets of his excellent health was going for long walks several times a week, about twice a week. His temple was located about two miles in one direction from the town of Balangoda itself, in a village, in one direction and he also had a pirivena, a monastic school, two miles in the other direction, on the other side of Balangoda. But by that time he had retired from his function as the principle of the monastic school and he left it in the charge of his pupils. But he kept his library there. He was a very avid reader, always doing research on different subjects. And so twice a week he would walk from his temple to the pirivena, the monastic school, with a bunch of books under his arm. And quite often he would ask me to go along with him and so we would walk about four miles in one direction - four miles going and then we would rest and have a cup of tea, then walk back another four miles. And he was quite fit and vigorous I was quite surprised. So he was a very influential person in your life? I would say so, definitely so. And it was with him I began my study of Pali and Buddhism. Though I have said pretty much I learned Pali on my own, he didn't give me formal lessons in the grammer. But I'd work with some textbooks and he would check my exercises. Then once I'd learned enough Pali to start going through the texts…we went through certain texts together. Such as…? We started with the first part of the Samyutta Nikaya, the collection with verses, then we went through some suttas in the Majjhima Nikaya, then he took me through the Abhidhammatthasamgaha. And you would translate what was already Pali into English or vise-versa? I would just translate it to myself. At that time I was not yet doing written translations. So you were reading the Romanized Pali? Actually, he wanted me to learn the Burmese script, which I did, because he had the entire Burmese Sixth Council Edition in his library. He was one of the monks who participated…in fact, he was like the leader of the Sri Lankan delegation during the Sixth Buddhist Council. And so he urged me to learn the Burmese script, which I did and then we worked through texts…those texts in the Burmese script. I think I remember reading somewhere that you had a very close relationship with Venerable Nyanaponika? Venerable Nyanaponika each year would go to Europe for a month or two, he started making these trips in the late 1960s up till 1980. I had met Venerable Nyanaponika first when I made a visit to Island Hermitage. This was shortly after my ordination. Just by coincidence he happened to come down there. He was staying in Kandy, at Forest Hermitage, but each year at the time when the Island Hermitage held its Kathina ceremony, he would go down to Island Hermitage. And so just at the time I made my visit to Island Hermitage he was visiting there and so I had some talks with him. Then occasionally when I had questions about points on Dhamma, I would write to him to get his views. Then in 1974 when he was going to Europe, he asked if I would come and look after the Forest Hermitage in his absence. And I agreed to do that, and in this way I became friendly with him. And then in 1975 I left Sri Lank and I went to India, to Bangalore, and stayed in Bangalore for ten months at the Maha Bodhi Society there, which was under Acariya Buddharakkhita. It happened that while I was staying with Venerable Ananda Mettreyya in Balangoda, an Indian monk came to stay at the same monastery. His name was Saddharakkhita and I became friendly with him and he told me that his home monastery was the Mahabodhi Society in Bangalore. And so when he had completed his studies in Sri Lanka, and decided to go back to Bangalore, he suggested that I go along with him. And also I wanted to go to India because I wanted to make a pilgrimage to the Buddhist Holy sites. And so I came along with him to Bangalore and I stayed altogether for ten months at the Mahabodhi Society there which I found quite inspiring because his teacher, Venerable Acariya Buddharakkhita spoke English very fluently, had very good understanding and knowledge of Dhamma, and each week he would give very very good Dhamma talks. At that time there were three western monks staying with him..er..I'm sorry, actually there were five or six monks there. One of them received ordination only toward the end of my stay there under the name Sangharatana. But later he came to Thailand and became reordained as Silaratana, staying with Ajaan Maha Bua. I think you know him. They call him Phra Dick now - Richard Byrd. Yes, I know him very well. So he was there, and then there were two young Indian monks, and a Sweedish monk who was even senior to myself named Lakkhana. And Venerable Buddharakkhita…Actually, at that time Venerable Lakkhana was very into Abhidhamma, and I was into the study of suttas. And so he had Venerable Lakkhana teach the Abhidhamma to all the monks and he had me teach the suttas to all the monks, even though I didn't have much knowledge at the time, but it really forced me to prepare talks on the suttas and to study the suttas carefully and learn how to explain them. And then occasionally Acariya Buddharakkhita would ask us to give the Sunday public Dhamma talk in place of himself, and that forced us to learn how to give public discourses. While I was staying in Bangalore, it became clear that our visas would not be renewed another year so I had to find another place to go. And meanwhile the Venerable Nyanaponika wrote to me and told me that if I decided to come back to Sri Lanka I would be welcome to stay with him, and so I decided to do so. So then I came back at the very end of 1975, I came back to Sri Lanka and went to stay with venerable Nyanaponika. Actually in the place right next to…there are two places about 100 meters apart within the same precincts. One is the Forest Hermitage where venerable Nyanaponika stays, the other is called Senanayakarama, where Venerable Piyadasi would stay when he came to Kandy. And so I was staying in Senanayakarama since Venerable Nyanaponika had only one guest room, and he was expecting to come within a few months none other than, Venerable Phra Khantipalo. And so then I stayed…Anyway, I stayed all together close to two years with Venerable Nyanaponika in that place. And Venerable Khantipalo stayed with us for about a year. When I took ordination, my parents were extremely upset with this. And they would write to me frequently, sometimes angry letters, sometimes letters of grief and sorrow, sometimes letters critical of Buddhism and of myself, sometimes letters pleading with me to go back. And so I actually decided that I wouldn't be able to continue as a monk and that I would disrobe and go back to the United States. And I told this decision to Venerable Nyanaponika and he regretted it very much. But he thought that I had to make my own decisions so he didn't try to compel me, though he felt that I would have been justified in continuing as a monk rather than conceding to my parent's wishes. But I felt that maybe this was necessary to do. I actually fixed the date that I would disrobe. I was already making arrangements with my parents to get the ticket for the trip back to the United States. It was about two or three weeks away from the time I was scheduled to disrobe and one day I was sitting up in my room…at this point I was living in the Forest Hermitage with Venerable Nyanaponika - this was after Venerable Khantipalo left Sri Lanka. Then I was just thinking that the whole purpose of my life was to live as a Buddhist monk and if I were to disrobe just to satisfy my parent's wishes it would be like nullifying all that was of value and of meaning, of significance in my own life, just to fulfill their expectations. So I told this to Venerable Nyanaponika and he said 'in that case go back but go back as a monk', and I thought 'why not'. So then I went back, this was in August 1977, then I went back to the United States as a monk. And when my parents, who were expecting me to come down in lay clothes, saw me coming in my saffron robes with an alms bowl on my back and the monk's umbrella in my hand…this is what my father told me later, they had seen me before I saw them. My mother said to my father, 'that's not our son, let's go' and she actually started to walk away from the airport but my father held her back and they took me... So they took you home? Yeah, yeah. But of course they were very unhappy with this. And this was in NY or this was in…? At this time they were living in Long Island, outside NYC. But you went to stay for some time at the Sri Lankan Buddhist Vihara, so was this at the very beginning of that stay? No. You see the first place I stayed when I went back to the United States was called the Lamaist Buddhist Monastery of America. In? It's in New Jersey. In a place called Washington, New Jersey. It was established by a Kalmuk lama named Geshe Wangyal who was one of the first… You see there was a Kalmuk community which had come to the United States, I think during the period when Stalin was persecuting the Kalmuk Mongolians, or it could even have been immediately after the Bolshevik revolution - I'm not sure when. But they had come to the United States and settled in southern New Jersey. ..and set up a center? The Buddhist centers would have come some time later. And Geshe Wangyal he was a Kalmuk Mongolian. He had studied in Tibet and China then they had set up a monastery for him and he attracted to himself some of the first Americans who studied Tibetan Buddhism. Later they became quite prominent scholars of Tibetan Buddhism, like Robert Thurman, Jeffrey Hopkins - they were originally students of Geshe Wangyal. So how long did you visit your parents? Well, I stayed with my parents a couple of weeks then I went to stay at this Lamaist Buddhist monastery. And I wanted also to study some aspects of Indian Mahayana Buddhism through the Tibetan. So actually I studied Sanskrit and Tibetan there - to some extent. But then I visited Washington D.C., this would have been Vesak 1978, and I visited the Washington Buddhist Vihara and met monks there. Some of the lay followers, the American lay followers of the Washington Buddhist Vihara, then requested me to come and take up residence at the Washington Buddhist Vihara. And so then I left New Jersey and I came to settle in Washington D.C. This would be in May 1979. Then I stayed at the Washington Buddhist Vihara for three years till 1982. Then I felt that I wanted to go back to Asia in order to do more intensive training and meditation. My original plan was to go to Burma and to practice meditation with Mahasi Sayadaw. And I started to make plans to go to Burma. Several years earlier, Burma started to loosen up its visa policy and they were giving long term residence visas to foreigners who would come and stay at Buddhist monasteries and meditation centers just for the purpose of practicing meditation, or studying Buddhism. And so I was hoping to ride in on that wave. But just when I started to make the application, then Burma went through one of these paranoid phases and threw all the foreigners out of the country and was refusing to give any long term visas. Yes, I remember that. They ordered all foreigners to leave the country within 48 hours. Yeah, yeah. Yes, I remember that very clearly. I think that there were some Americans who said that they had planned to come to Burma for the purpose of meditation and then after they would do a period of meditation then without permits, without the approval of the authorities they would just on their own started to travel about. And then the Burmese government became afraid that these were spies going about disguised as monks. And they started to…the safest policy was to just get them all out of the country. Okay, so then I had to reroute my trip and so I decided to come back to Sri Lanka. It was in May 1982, that I arrived back in Sri Lanka. When were you made head of the B.P.S.? Well, I became the editor of the B.P.S. in 1984. When I first came back to Sri Lanka, I spent my first Vassa together with Venerable Nyanaponika. But after the Vassa I went to a different monastery. This was a meditation monastery called Nissarana Vanaya, Mitirigula Nissarana Vannaya …and I stayed. Is that Mitirigula? That's Mitiri…yeah. A place called Mitirigula. But now there are two monasteries in Mitirigula. So Mitirigula is the name of an area? Mitirigula is a village, and the monastery itself is called Nissarana Vanaya - Nissarana Vana, the Grove, or Forest, of Deliverance. But then on the hill just beyond Nissarana Vanaya, another monastery was started. Originally, that was to be a study monastery but the study program never worked out there…never worked out successfully. Then the Burmese monk, the pupil of Pa Auk Sayadaw named U Agganya was invited to go there and give meditation training to Sri Lankan monks. And he was very popular, quite successful. Because now this other monastery that was originally set up as the study center turned into an intensive meditation center teaching the Pa Auk system of meditation. The other monastery still functions more or less as a meditation monastery but after the death of Venerable Nyanarama the quality of meditation training there has declined. It is virtually turning into an old-age home for monks, rather than a place for younger monks who are really keen on intensive practice. During Venerable Nyanaponika's last years you were…he was living with you..or? Well, I'd say that I was living with him. While I was at Nissarana Vanaya I stayed with him on and off for about two years…close to two years. Then in 1984 Venerable Nyanaponika was already was in his 80s, getting quite weak, and I felt that I should go to stay with him to look after him. And then about a month after I came to stay with him he told me that he would like to pass on the editorship of the BPS to me. I wasn't quite prepared to take it but I agreed to do so. And so he retired as editor but he remained president for another four years till 1988 then he decided to retire from the presidency and he asked me to succeed him as president, which I did. But he continued to live on till 1994, he was 93 at the time of his death. So you've brought us up to 1984… can you bring us up to the present? Any other interesting anecdotes or events in your life? Okay well in 1984 then I took over as editor for the Buddhist Publications Society. In 1988 I became president then I lived on constantly there with Venerable Nyanaponika, very rarely leaving the Forest Hermitage, in looking after him quite diligently. He remained in quite good health up till the last few weeks of his life, because he was getting weaker and his eyesight had deteriorated. His eyesight really started to go in 1988 and by about late 1989 he was not able to read anymore. So each evening we would have our evening tea and I would read to him for about one hour from various books and I would also record what I read so that later he could listen again. And I tried to obtain tapes from various teachers for him to listen to. My own life I think is rather flat. I don't think so! I think its event packed. No, if I were to write a biography from that period on it might be difficult to fill two or three pages. So you've completed several very important translations from the Pali Canon…being the Majjhimanikaya and the two volume set of the Samyuttanikaya. Yeah, yeah. So that's quite…and some other editions that I haven't mentioned, some smaller booklets, and you do the very important…uh..is it the B.P.S. newsletter? Yeah. Is that four times a year? Well, now it comes out three times a year. That I wouldn't call flat… How the edition of the Majjhimanikaya came about…Well actually the proposal for the Samyuttanikaya came out even earlier than the Majjhimanikaya. And it was none other than Phra Khantipalo, who initiated that. He felt that there was an urgent need for a new translation of the Samyuttanikaya, and I had already started this practice of translating Canonical suttas from the Canon and attaching to them translations of large portions of the commentary and sub-commentary. The first work in this genre that I did was the Brahmajala Sutta together with its commentary and sub-commentary. I did this on the urging of Venerable Nyanaponika, he was very keen to have this done. And many years earlier he had translated large portions of the commentary and sub-commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta, which he had kept in a notebook. So I really learned very much, to read and understand the commentaries and sub-commentaries from these notebooks of Venerable Nyanaponika. The style of the commentaries and sub-commentaries, particularly the Tikas can be quite difficult…because the sub-commentator writes in the style of the classical Sanskrit commentator. You know, like Shankhara, well he preceded Shankharacariya, but its in a similar style, very terse, using very complex sentences with a lot of abstract nouns linked together by various indirect cases. So it's quite a project to translate the sub-commentary sentence by sentence…I really learned to understand the sub-commentarial style from these notebooks of Venerable Nyanaponika. And then I put together this Brahmajala Sutta with the commentary and sub-commentary. And that was printed by itself once. It is, it still is printed by itself. It's called the Discourse on the All Embracing Net of Views. Then after that I did the first Discourse of the Majjhimanikaya, this is the Mulapariyaya Sutta and its commentary and sub-commentary, then the Mahanidana Sutta, that's the Great Discourse on Causation, and the Samannaphala Sutta, the second discourse in the Dighanikaya -- The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship. So Venerable Khantipalo liked my translations and he proposed to me that I do a new translation of the Samyuttanikaya for the Pali Text Society. But I was somewhat doubtful that the Pali Text Society was interested in taking on new translations. Bhikkhu Khantipalo wrote to Richard Gombrich who was then the secretary of the P.T.S. asking him to write to me to assure me that they would be interested in new translations. And Gombrich did so. This was in 1985. But just about that same time Wisdom Publications had written to Venerable Nyanaponika…you see, Venerable Khantipalo had put together 90 suttas from the Majjhimanikaya that were translated by Bhikkhu Nyanamoli and these were published in Bangkok in three volumes by Mahamakut Press called A Treasury of the Buddha's Words. Nick Ribush of Wisdom Publications found out about those three books, these three volumes, and he had the idea to have an entire translation of the Majjhimanikaya published. He asked Venerable Nyanaponika if he would be able to edit the remaining 32 discourses of the Majjhimanikaya that Venerable Nyanamoli had translated. But Venerable Nyanaponika, at this point, was in his mid-eighties already and he thought it was just too much for himself to take on. And he asked me if I would be willing to do it and I said okay. And so I started doing this in 1985 and as I went through then I felt that some of Venerable Nyanamoli's terminology had to be altered. He was using a rather experimental terminology, which would not have been so readily comprehensible to an ordinary reader in English. I made these alterations with the approval of Venerable Nyanaponika who totally endorsed them. So I worked on that from 1985 till about early 1989 because I wasn't able to do this full time. I also had to do the editing for the Buddhist Publications Society. It was April 1989 that I sent the completed manuscript off to Wisdom Publications and it remained in limbo with them for about three years since they couldn't find anybody to oversee the project. This was the age before computers had come into general usage, at least in Sri Lanka. And so what I submitted to Wisdom was a typed script, typed on a manual typewriter. And so, they had various people enter the text into computer format using different computers and different editorial styles. And then they needed someone to oversee the whole project but they couldn't find anybody for several years and it remained in limbo till one person named John Bullitt came along and he took the responsibility for overseeing the text preparation, copy editing of the whole work. So finally it came out in 1995. After I finished the Majjhima, several months later I started translating the Samyuttanikaya…this would have been about June 1989. I started doing the Samyuttanikaya not with the first volume, which is the collection of verses, since the verses can be very difficult and I thought that if I started doing the verses first I would quickly get discouraged and give up on the project. And so I started with volume two, the first of the prose volumes and so I did volume two and three pretty quickly but then I got involved in other projects, books at the B.P.S. had to be edited, also various things came, even for several years I couldn't return to the Samyuttanikaya for so many years. Then I would return to it for periods then back to other things. Not that I was wasting my time or throwing my time away on trifling enjoyments, but various other projects called for my attention and deflected it away from the Samyutta. So I couldn't return to that, sometimes for several years, then I would work on it. I must have finished the first draft in 1993. Then I had to prepare the notes and the verse collection was very, very difficult I went through it several times making drastic alterations, as I compiled the notes then I saw places where I interpreted certain verses wrongly and I had to retranslate the verses. And the preparation of the notes was very time consuming, a year was spent on the notes alone. And so it was completed…I was…diddling on again accepting invitations to various projects, to various engagements, and so on. So finally, Wisdom Publications gave me a deadline, which was in a way a lifesaver, in that it forced me to put my attention wholeheartedly on the Samyutta and complete it. I think the deadline was something like September 21st, 1999, and I completed all of the work…you know, everthing that had to be done…and put everything on disks and sent the disks off to them by courrier on September 17 so that the disks arrived at their office on September 21. That's what we call a close call. Yeah, but nothing would have happened if I missed the deadline. They wanted to enter it into their catalogue for a particular release date. So if I missed the deadline then it wouldn't have gotten into the catalogue and so their release would have been postponed for another season. Their releases are done three times a year, so that it would have had to have been postponed from I think a spring or summer release to a fall or winter release. It wouldn't have meant that I would have been killed [laugh]…for missing the deadline. So you've brought us up to the present… But one thing I didn't mention is the problem with the headache. This seems to be some type of karmic destiny that I've had which is…I've repeated this story so often to different doctors it gets boring to repeat it in detail over and over. But starting in 1976 early 77 I started to get this headache condition which gradually grew worse, and I consulted various doctors. First, the problem developed around the eyes so I thought something might be wrong with the eyes so I saw optometrists and they led me on to EMT specialists who thought that there could have been inflammation in the sinuses and they passed me on to neurologists thinking that something could have been wrong with the nerves. But none of these doctors could find anything organically wrong. Then I tried different types of medical treatment, not only western medicine but Ayurvedic medicine, traditional Sri Lankan herbal medicine, Chinese acupuncture, homeopathic medicine, Tibetan medicine. Now here in Singapore, along with western medicine I'm also trying Chinese herbal medicine and massage therapy. So this headache has been quite a major obstruction to my work and other activities through the years. So hopefully through the power of your punna these will soon come to an end. It seems that it will take a lot of punna [laugh]. One of the reasons that I wanted you to tell us your story is that in the past there have been many western monks, this is not a new thing, and with the passing of Venerable Nyanaponika…I think that we lose a lot without asking pertinent questions at the right time. So I'm very glad that you've agreed to tell us your story. And he [Suchao Ploychum] wanted me to ask you about your views of Buddhism in Sri Lanka…what are your impressions, do you think it will remain a vital place for westerners to seek ordination and training there? Okay, well rather sadly I have to say that my impression of Buddhism in Sri Lanka is that to a large extent it has deteriorated. In the older generation you could find monks who were quite good scholars and sincere practitioners. Now, because of various changes, political changes in the country, economic changes the large impact of westernization I would say that the quality of the monastic life has declined a lot. There are still pockets of monks who are very good, very earnest, very dedicated. Particularly within this community or organization called the Sri Kalyani Yogashrama Sanstava which is a distant cousin of the Dhammayut nikaya in Thailand. Could you repeat that name clearly? Okay, Sri Kalyani Yogashrama Sanstava. Sanstava is something like association of the Yogashramas…meditation monasteries. Sri kalyani…I think its name comes from the Kalyani river in Burma in which the ordinations were performed by the monastic community which is the parent of the Ramanyanikaya…it must be in the Ramanyadesa of Burma. This was a kind of association of monasteries established by one Venerable Jinavamsa who is still alive today at the age of…could be 95, 96, and Venerable Sri Nyanarama who was the meditation master at Mitirigula Nissarana Vanaya monastery. The original motivation for the starting of this organization was to revive the true monastic life in Sri Lankan monastic Buddhism based on close adherence to the Vinaya, study of the texts…very precise and careful study of the text, and the practice of meditation. And this particular monastic community has been in rather close contact in recent years with Pa Ok Sayadaw in Burma and some of the monks from this organization have gone to Burma to practice with Pa Auk Sayadaw, and others are studying in Sri Lanka under Pa Auk Sayadaw's disciple U Agganya. So I'd say that this is a quite healthy stream within the Sri Lanka sangha. Otherwise,… Outside of this organization there are other good monks here and there. But by and large I have to say that monasteries have become rather depressing places. Many of the younger monks get ordained solely for the purpose of pursuing their education, if they are capable they go to the universities, get their degrees, then disrobe. Others remain as monks but they work at salaried jobs as teachers, which I would say is not so condemnable in itself but other monks who are rather clever and enterprising become involved in various activities which go quite against the whole grain of the monastic life, involvement in business, finance, politics. So for westerners who wish to ordain and receive proper training I find it rather difficult to recommend Sri Lanka. Though there are a few places I could suggest, like Nissarana Vanaya, if a monk is capable of taking care of himself with a little outside guidance, then its still a suitable place. The other place connected with the strict meditative training…I say that its too narrow in its focus for a new monk who needs a broader base of training, some guidance in the monastic rules, a general introduction to the teaching, the Dhamma, in a place like that one doesn't find the training, one finds only the exclusive teaching of meditation according to a particular technique. A place like that is suitable for a monk who has already completed his basic training and wants some intensive practice in meditation. So the opportunities for a foreigner coming to Sri Lanka…there are opportunities to ordain…often monks will have no hesitation to give the formal ordination to a candidate but once they get ordained they largely have to make out on their own to get proper instruction in the Dhamma. Are there any closing statements you would like to offer? I think I've covered everything. Thank you Bhante. Venerable Kantasilo conducted this interview at the Palelai meditation center, Singapore, on Sunday, June 20, 2001. ? Kantasilo. 9574 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 5:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Bodhi Interveiw Thanks Mike - darn the assignment, it can wait just a little while! Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Here you go... > > mike 9575 From: m. nease Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 5:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Thoughts on Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas Hi, Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: Glad to see this post. Just a couple of minor comments: > What is most important > at all stages of the path, it seems to me, is not a > microscopic, analytic > observation of various phenomena, let alone a mere > intellectual encyclopedic > detailing of them, but rather, a direct knowing of > all dhammas *as* > impermanent, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and without > core. Couldn't agree more. > We need to *see > through* and let go of the world of apparently > independent, self-existing > things, and awaken to a direct seeing of that vast > dynamic emptiness which is > the way things are. I would say that understanding of the nature of pa~n~naa is useful here even for someone without advanced insight, because it is pa~n~naa itself that sees through and 'lets go',--right? Though conceptual, I think this is very helpful to seeing 'of all dhammas *as* impermanent, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and without core'--including of course the dhamma that sees through and lets go. mike 9576 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- Dear Howard, I do see your point. The thing is that the cittas with panna that know a past object have that past object as the object they understand. In practice - for us- this past object is so infinitesimally close to being present that it is called the present moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is possible to directly insight even moments from aeons ago. This direct insight is different from thinking or conceptualising about the moment even though it is past. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Robert E) - > > In a message dated 11/24/01 4:44:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > Dear Rob ep. > > I think I have mentioned on a few occasions that, as one example, the > > cetasika that is panna can know past and present (and even future > > moments in the case of the Buddha ). It falls away immediately but > > has the function of understanding. > > best wishes > > robert > > > ============================ > Indeed you have said this, and it would explain much and be very > pleasing to me if it were so. And perhaps it is. However, I see a troublesome > apparent contradiction: > In Abhidhammic theory, each citta has but one object, and cetasikas > accompanying a citta, including pa~n~na, have that very same object. This > *seems* to me to constitute an outright contradiction. I would be pleased to > come to understand why it is not. > > 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) 9577 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 3:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Thoughts on Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas Hi, Mike - In a message dated 11/24/01 9:00:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > I would say that understanding of the nature of > pa~n~naa is useful here even for someone without > advanced insight, because it is pa~n~naa itself that > sees through and 'lets go',--right? Though > conceptual, I think this is very helpful to seeing 'of > all dhammas *as* > impermanent, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and without > core'--including of course the dhamma that sees > through and lets go. > ========================== I definitely think that intellectual/conceptual understanding of the Dhamma is very important, so long as the limitations and lack of ultimacy of such understanding is recognized. 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) 9578 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/24/01 11:02:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard, > I do see your point. The thing is that the cittas with panna that > know a past object have that past object as the object they > understand. In practice - for us- this past object is so > infinitesimally close to being present that it is called the present > moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is possible to directly > insight even moments from aeons ago. This direct insight is different > from thinking or conceptualising about the moment even though it is > past. > best wishes > robert > > ============================= Mmm, hmm. I get what you are saying as well. It is an interesting explanation which you give, though I find myself somewhat uncomfortable with the notion of a past object, truly past, being the direct object (and not as a memory) of a current mindstate. That is similar to the position of the Sarvastivadins to the effect that dhammas exist throughout all the three time periods, a position which I understand the Theravadins took issue with because of its eternalistic scent. 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) 9579 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Robert K, Could you kindly quote the commentary that says that. Or is it saying that it is the memory of the past cittas that an enlighted person able to remember past events eons ago. To me, all that is the past is only in the memory as past objects have already ceased. If the past object do not ceased, then I think it would be a contradiction of the standing that cittas ceased. Kind Regards Ken O --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/24/01 11:02:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > Dear Howard, > > I do see your point. The thing is that the cittas with panna that > > know a past object have that past object as the object they > > understand. In practice - for us- this past object is so > > infinitesimally close to being present that it is called the present > > moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is possible to directly > > insight even moments from aeons ago. This direct insight is different > > from thinking or conceptualising about the moment even though it is > > past. > > best wishes > > robert > > > > > ============================= > Mmm, hmm. I get what you are saying as well. It is an interesting > > explanation which you give, though I find myself somewhat uncomfortable > with > the notion of a past object, truly past, being the direct object (and > not as > a memory) of a current mindstate. That is similar to the position of the > > Sarvastivadins to the effect that dhammas exist throughout all the three > time > periods, a position which I understand the Theravadins took issue with > because of its eternalistic scent. > > 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) 9580 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > I think it's fascinating that everything goes by so fast - but for > who? Since we > > are working on the assumption that there is no ego that is > observing these cittas > > jump around like mad, who or what is watching these cittas whiz by? > If it's not > > an 'observer consciousness', which I know everyone will say it is > not, then it is > > a 'slower citta' that can't keep up? Is it a sensory citta that > can't keep up > > with a mental citta? Is it a cetisika watching several cittas whiz > by or a citta > > being overrun by incredibly fast cetasikas? Or what? I would be > very interested > > to know what you would think about this. > > > > I apologize for pressing the point, now for about the fourth time > today, but I > > really think there's something valuable hidden in this. Such as > how we have > > overriding, comparative or relative experiences without an ego to > hold and compare > > it all. > > ====== > Dear Rob ep. > I think I have mentioned on a few occasions that, as one example, the > cetasika that is panna can know past and present (and even future > moments in the case of the Buddha ). It falls away immediately but > has the function of understanding. > best wishes > robert Dear Robert, How does panna know past and present moments? Does it pick them up from other cittas? Does it have a supernatural element? Or is there an explainable mechanism? Panna has the function of understanding. But that does not explain why a 'blur' of moments can be seen as going by incredibly fast. Once again, I still don't know to whom or what this experience occurs. Is it a cetaskia which experiences the fast-moving cittas? How does it apprehend more than one moment in a row? And see them as fast-moving, or a 'blur'? Thanks, Robert Ep. 9581 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:59pm Subject: Cheetahs and owls _____________________________________________ Howard: But who (or what) is this "we" who are so overwhelmed by the speed of cittas to think they act simultaneously when it is only the cittas, themselves, that are aware? Robert Ep.: The only question is who is it so fast for?...Since we are working on the assumption that there is no ego that is observing these cittas jump around like mad, who or what is watching these cittas whiz by? ... [H]ow [can] we have overriding, comparative or relative experiences without an ego to hold and compare it all? _____________________________________________ Howdy, Howard and Robert Ep., You've inspired me to reflect again on the nature of cittas and cetasikas, and I thank you. I don't know if my investigations have any relevance to what you've been talking about, and it's always dangerous to burst into a ongoing conversation between two sharp cookies, but you may be able to help me think more clearly about the issues. Here's what I've been thinking... I looked up a wonderful passage in Brahmajala sutta (DN 1, i 34 PTS or §49 BPS): "In this case some recluse or Brahmin is addicted to logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusions of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and based on his flight of thought thus: 'That which is [connected with] "the eye", "the ear", "the nose", "the tongue" and "the body"--that self is impermanent, unstable, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which is called "citta", "mano", or "viññana"--that self is permanent, eternal, not subject to change..." Although the rationalistic partial- eternalist described by Buddha in the passage above posits a "who" to experience and compare cittas, it really isn't necessary. The commentary discusses this interesting case in more detail: "The rationalist sees the breakup of the eye, etc.; but because every preceding act of consciousness (citta), in ceasing, conditions the arising of its successor, he does not see the breakup of the consciousness, even though the latter is more pronounced than the breakup of the eye, etc. Since he does not see the breakup of consciousness, he assumes that when the bodily frame breaks up the consciousness goes elsewhere...This he declares as his view." Blurred vision (ignorance) prevents a clear view of the moment-to- moment breakup of consciousness. A consequence of that blurred vision is an intensification of the impression of continuity and the positing of a self to "hold" that sense of continuity. The subcommentary elaborates further: "'He does not see the breakup of consciousness': although consciousness is breaking up moment after moment, each act of consciousness, in breaking up, becomes the proximity condition for the following act of consciousness. Because each succeeding act of consciousness arises concealing, as it were, the absence of its predecessor, the aspect of presence alone is strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Thus he does not see the destruction of consciousness. This matter becomes very clear by the example of the fire-disc (i.e. the unbroken disc of flame formed by swinging a firebrand in rapid circular motion). Because the rationalistic partial-eternalist is still more remote from understanding and applying the method of diversity (viz. discrete cittas), and wrongly applies the method of unity, he arrives at the conviction: 'This very consciousness which always occurs with a single nature, just this is a permanent self.'" So the view of a self to house the and interpret the experiences will naturally take root when each succeeding act of consciousness arises and conceals the absence of its predecessor, and the aspect of presence alone is strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Then, there is no clear view of the dissolution of consciousness. To resolve the problem of the "who who experiences" requires a proper balance of the "methods of diversity and unity". B. Bodhi gives a good description of these "methods" in the introduction to his translation of DN 1: "The eternalist doctrine is said to originate through a misapplication of the 'method of unity' (ekattanaya) to the continuum of experience which is the subject of examination....The method of unity disloses the coherence of the succession of distinct experiential occasions making up the continuum. It shows them as bound together in a single series, participants in a process of transmission and development, interconnected members unified through a law of conditional dependence. The method of diversity balances this by showing up the difference. Though unified, the current of experience is still a chain made up of distint links. Some of these funciton as causes, others as effects.... When these two methods are applied in conjunction, the current of experience will be correctly understood; but when they are misapplied or applied in a one-sided fashion, it will be misunderstood. The misapplication of the method of unity will lead to the belief in an identical self and thence to eternalism. The misapplication of the method of diversity will take the disruptive, discontinuous element in experience as absolute and thence lead to a doctrine of annihilationism. The correct application of both will show the continuum to be a causally connected succession of momentary processes, which continues so long as the causes retain their efficacy and ceases when the causes are deactivated, in either case without harboring a pesisting core to be grasped as a personal self. This is the middle way which avoids the two extremes." With its abundance of conventional language about "this bhikkhu, that householder" and similes about "gold" and "luminous mind", it is easy to (mis)read the suttas with a unity bias. With its elaborate description and classification of cittas and cetasikas, Abhidhamma (esp. Dhammasangani and the first few chapters of Abhidhammatha sangaha) seems to emphasize more the method of diversity. I find it very helpful to study Abhidhamma, and then I read the suttas with a little more of a "diversity" method than a "conventional" reading would give. Ledi Sayadaw asks: "But how are we to understand the momentary arising and ceasing of mind?" (JPTS 7(1):115-163, 1913). He draws his discussion from the Citta chapter of Yamaka, and his answer is typical of both the suttas and Abhidhamma. Here's my take on it... There are six kinds of consciousness -- those of the five special senses and the "coordinating sense" (mano). If with seeing there is the sense, "I see a visible object", the visual cognition has been taken as a "self". Same with hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling. If there is the sense, "It is a mental phenomenon, an element, a sphere of sense, it is not 'mine,' not 'I', not my 'self'", then the sensation is not taken as self. But what about cognition itself (mano), considered apart from seeing and other occasions of sense? Consider the sentiment: "I think such- and-such", or "I experience a citta", or "I observed lots of cittas passing by in the span of a second." Here, consciousness has been taken as a "self" as soon as a distinction is sought between the experience and the experiencer, between the act and the agent (or actor). Abhidhamma makes no such distinction, and no such distinction is necessary. The mind (citta) is not distinct from the act "thinking". Similarly, there is no agent apart from the act "sensation" (or "contact" or "sankhara" or "recognition"), i.e. there is not a citta that experiences sensation. To think of citta as something that experiences sensation is once again to make a distinction between the experience and the experiencer; the act and the agent; the actor and the action; the self that does this, experiences that, and thinks this-or-that. BOOM! "Self" is found masquerading right in the midst of a bunch of fancy Pali terminology that merely serves as cover for sakayaditthi--and an effective cover at that! Citta doesn't experience sensation; Citta IS the experience, and sensation is one of the characteristics of that experience. Experience (citta) at one moment differs from that at another moment, and sensation is an aspect of each citta. So is sañña (perception, recognition, memory). "This moment is similar to the moment a moment ago" -- that impression is sañña, which "has the characteristic of noting and the function of recognizing what has been previously noted" [Asl I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 110), cited in Nina's "Cetasikas"]. The object of sañña is the same as the object of the citta; but the cognizing itself is "citta", while "sañña" is the name given to a category of ingredient that flavors the cognition. [When I was in high school, I had the good fortune to get to visit Hawaii. I ordered a dinner at a fancy restaurant, and the waiter asked, "What kind of starch would you like with that?" I'd never heard it asked quite that way before (or since), but I thought it was brilliant. "Sañña" is like "starch" -- it comes with the citta, but it comes in different flavors.] A "function" of sañña is the "recognition" of similarity or dissimilarity between cittas. There is no sañña entity to do any recognizing; there is merely cognition (with a certain sañña flavor, vedana flavor, phassa flavor, etc.). Of course, we may speak of an act of recognition or an object of sañña, but we must be very clear that there is no "sañña" doing the acting and the "object" is not "experienced" by any sañña entity. And although the temptation is overwhelming, the sañña flavor of cittas does not necessitate a the positing of a self to explain the experience of speedy cittas. Dan 9582 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 9:23pm Subject: Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > I would have to voice some reservations with this intepretation. That's fine, Erik. Fast cittas is standard Theravada stuff, though, and it seems to me to be an apt description. > So I think the teaching "fickle mind" is MORE penetrating--at least > in terms of relevance to terminating dukkha. Why do so many teachers > (like Ajahn Chah) mention the "monkey mind", rather than a > Saganesque "billions and billions" (you should appreciate that > reference having spent time in Ithaca and all :) of cittas? I don't know why they mention it, Erik. I presume they think it's helpful, and it seems like a fine description to me. I think the original source for the "monkey mind" simile comes from SN II, 12 (61): "Just as a monkey roaming through a forest grabs hold of one branch, lets that go and grabs another, then lets that go and grabs still another, so too that which is called 'mind' and 'mentality' and 'consciousness' arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night." The commentary states: "...'Day and night' is said by way of continuity, taking a continuity of lesser duration than the previous one (i.e., the one stated for the body). But one citta is not able to endure for a whole day or a whole night. Even in the time of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. The simile of the monkey should be understood thus: The 'grove of objects' is like the forest grove. The mind arising in the grove of objects is like the monkey wandering in the forest grove. The mind's taking hold of an object islike the monkey grabbing hold of a branch just as the monkey, roaming through the forest, leaves behind one branch and grabs hold of another, so the mind, roaming through the grove of objects, arises sometimes grasping hold of a visible object, sometimes sometimes a sound, sometimes the past, sometimes the present or future, sometimes an internal object, sometimes an external object. When the monkey does not find a new branch it does not descend and sit on the ground, but sits holding to a single leafy branch. So too, when the mind is roaming through the grove of objects, it cannot be said that it arises without holding to an object; rather, it arises holding to an object of a single kind." B. Bodhi has an interesting take on this: "It should be noted that neither the sutta nor the commentary interprets the monkey simile here as saying that the untrained mind is restless as a monkey; the point, rather, is that the mind is always dependent on an object." Dan 9583 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 9:28pm Subject: Kathavatthu's take on it... I don't have my own copy of Kathavatthu, but I found a sheet of paper with a note scribbled on it from when I checked it out of the library several months ago: Kathavatthu V, 9: "Of knowledge of the present. Controverted point-- that the present may be known. If there be a knowledge of the present, does one know THAT knowledge by the same act of knowledge?" I didn't quote it further and apparently didn't look up the passage in the commentary, but it might be interesting... 9584 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 9:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Robert Ep.] _________________________ Robert Ep. > We can't say that our purpose in life is to end suffering, and then ignore people > in pain, because their brand of suffering is 'not the real kind'. If Buddhists > don't work to insure human rights and end the *experience* of suffering in all its > forms, we will wind up going very far down a very wrong path. This is the kind of > thing that gives spiritual people a very bad reputation. __________________________ Dan: I certainly can't argue with that! I must say, though, that I don't see how it relates to what I wrote. 9585 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 10:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Robert Ep.] --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > _________________________ > Robert Ep. > > We can't say that our purpose in life is to end suffering, and then > ignore people > > in pain, because their brand of suffering is 'not the real kind'. > If Buddhists > > don't work to insure human rights and end the *experience* of > suffering in all its > > forms, we will wind up going very far down a very wrong path. This > is the kind of > > thing that gives spiritual people a very bad reputation. > __________________________ > > Dan: > I certainly can't argue with that! I must say, though, that I don't > see how it relates to what I wrote. You wrote that the Buddha did not exhort us to get involved with people who were suffering, to be 'good people' and try to free those who were being oppressed. The exact quote, which I no longer have in front of me, was associated with what I said above. The statement tended to suggest that as Buddhists our responsibility was not to help others in material discomfort or oppression, but rather to deal with the spiritual source of suffering. My answer was that I believed it was necessary to do both. I certainly don't think that you as a person would ignore someone in suffering, but I felt a need to respond to this very ancient issue, of whether we hurt others more by responding to the 'symptom' and trying to alleviate it, or whether we hurt them more by ignoring the symptom so as to attend to the greater issue of the root cause. Best, Robert Ep. 9586 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Rob Ep I think perhaps you are saying that while the *experience* of nibbana is speculative for us, a clear understanding of the *concept* of nibbana is necessary or at least worthwhile, in the sense that only if we have a clear concept of nibbana as the final destination can we have the confidence to embark on the practice or, as you put it, to commit ourselves to the path. I think one should regard such thoughts as a purely personal perspective, in the sense that there would I think be many here for whom these considerations would be a non-issue. While some may see the need for the kind of clarification you are seeking, others find the teachings on, say, different realities appearing through different doorways so fresh and yet so 'obvious' once pointed out as to inspire immediate further study without the need for a detailed grasp of the ultimate goal. I mention this only to suggest that it would be a pity to let one's quest for a satisfactory grasp of the nibbana concept to be an obstacle to the more relevant task of the present reality! Jon --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Jon, > I think you are right that the 'experience' of nibbana or parinibbana is > speculative for us, and is not of practical benefit on a > moment-to-moment everyday > level on which we must focus in order to develop. > > However, I think the limited benefit of these topics is simple: If we > are > committing ourselves to a path, possibly an extremely long one, we want > to know at > least provisionally that the end goal of that path is something that we > at least > theoretically understand, and, if it is not too bold, that it is > something that we > actually want to achieve. I don't think there's anyone who follows > Buddhism who > does not attempt to some extent to emulate and understand the Buddha, > his > experience and his reasons for prescribing the path he does. Even to > come to > understand that the path is a path of discernment, and not one of > achievement or > self-transformation [in the sense that anatta does not allow for > personal > ownership of the process] is to focus on both the method or lack > thereof, and the > goal of the path. > > So I think that some of us rightly want to know where our long focus > should be, > where we are headed if we are able to continue on this path, and why it > is the way > it is. Of course, we won't understand directly until we get there, if > and when we > get there, but it still seems important to understand the components of > the whole > system on some level. > > And then, I would agree with you, at some point we have to put our focus > on right > where we are and what we need to do now to keep learning. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9587 From: Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: "engaged" [Christine] Dan, I recall that there was an occasion where the Buddha literally ran for his life, being pursued by someone who wanted to harm him. Is this an act of self-preservation, an indication of chains, bonds fetters etc. Or is there merit in preventing, albeit passively, others from doing harm? If the Buddha had stood still, he would have been slaughtered. No harm to the Buddha, but great harm to the murderer. Don't you think there is room for wise "interference" with one's environment? All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Christine, > I'm reading through some old posts, and I am enjoying your recent > comments and questions immensely. > > At one point, you write: > > > Is the Buddha's attitude to pursuing human rights (engaged > buddhism?) > > recorded? Or are the varied situations in life that people find > > themselves in secondary to learning the way out of Samsara? > > SN I, 3:10 (kosalasamyutta) addresses this question eloquently: > > "Now on that occasion a great mass of people had been put in bondage > by King Pasenadi of Kosala--some with ropes, some with clogs, some > with chains. Then, in the morning, a number of bhikkhus dressed...and > saind to the Blessed One: 'Here, venerable sir, a great mass of > people have been put in bondage by King Pasenadi of Kosala, some with > ropes, some with clogs, some with chains.' > > "Then the Blessed One, having understood the meaning of this, on that > occasion recited these verses: > 'That bond, the wise say, is not strong > Made of iron, wood, or rope; > But infatuation with jewellery and earrings, > Anxious concern for wives and children-- > This, the wise say, is the strong bond, > Degrading, supple, hard to escape. > But even this they cut and wander forth, > Unconcerned, having abandoned sensual pleasures.'" > > I read this in the context of the real root of suffering being > craving born of ignorance, and not the external conditions (e.g. > human rights) one may find oneself in. This is not to say that human > rights are not important in an external way, but ultimately, the > external conditions are superficial. One of my favorite passages > addressing this issue is in the Kakacupama sutta (MN 21): "Bhikkhus, > even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two- > handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not > be carrying out my teaching." The relevance of the passage is that it > points out in stark terms that the real crux of the teaching is not > so much struggling to find ways to avoid the saw but instead to > develop wisdom and strength so that when the saw strikes, it does not > give rise to suffering. > > Pursuit of human rights begins with the recognition of an injustice, > then comes the pointing out of the injustice, the discussion of the > injustice, the plans to rectify the injustice, etc. It is eerily > similar to the words we read in Dhp. 3-4: "'He abused me, he struck > me, he overpowered me, he robbed me'..." Does Buddha then say, "Then, > I must fight against this injustice and pursue my rights by making > him behave better"? Not at all, he continues: "...those who harbor > such thoughts do not still their hatred", and in verse 4: "...those > who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred." Buddha did not > exhort us to battle against those awful other people who don't > respect human rights like us good Buddhists do. > > The real issue is the development of the mind: "Whatever harm an > enemy may do to an enemy, or a hater to a hater, an ill-directed mind > inflicts on oneself greater harm." (Dhp. 42). > > Dan 9588 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 11:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) Rob Ep Your comments (below) certainly don’t *seem* like the comments of a 'confused' mind, Rob! I think you are saying that a person who has not heard about and understood at some level the notion of anatta could not develop the factors of the path (such as right effort)? I would agree with this as far as it goes. It is sometimes overlooked that anatta is given not as a concept to ponder on, and to be related to our views and our experience of life, but as a verifiable characteristic of each and every reality (dhamma). As such, anatta can only be *realised* as an adjunct of the direct experience and awareness of a characteristic of a reality appearing at the present moment. To my understanding, any other pondering over or understanding about the notion of anatta, even to the extent of 'enlightening' or life-changing moments when we see things differently, is not a level of *realisation* of anatta, since there is no aspect of directly experiencing a characteristic of a reality (dhamma). Let me suggest something that you may well wish to take issue with. Without the direct awareness of the characteristic of a present reality (dhamma) at a given moment, any 'understanding' of anatta at that or any other moment is understanding at the thinking level. In other words, I am suggesting that, regardless of the depth of one's pondering over anatta and one's ability to relate that concept to one's 'self' or the experiences of the present moment, it is thinking only and so is understanding at a purely conceptual level. So even for someone who has heard the teachings and has a highly developed understanding of anatta in the sense I have described, a moment of kusala of any kind, other than satipatthana, is no more capable of being a path factor moment than for the person who has never heard the teaching of anatta. Were it otherwise then, according to the 'factors to be individually and separately developed' view, any person exerting conventional effort to perform kusala would be developing the path factor of Right Effort. This is why, for me, all paths lead back to the understanding of the characteristic of the present reality, and the factors that form the foundation for this understanding. Jon --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > It might perhaps be suggested that the fact that someone who has not > heard > > the dhamma has no notion of the teaching of 'not-self' makes a > difference. > > However, I do not think this can truly be said. Both the one who has > > studied dhamma and the non-Buddhist have an innate view of self, and > both > > can strive without at that moment there being a manifest view of a > self > > who is making effort. So there is not necessarily any difference > between > > the two here. > > > > I would be interested to hear your views on this. > > > > Jon > > Well Jon, for some reason this question is very confusing to me. I kind > of enjoy > being confused, but I'll see if I can get out of it. I have always > thought that > the difference between Buddhism and all other teachings, is that the > Buddha > inherently recognized that the path was one of consciousness and not of > changing, > altering or somehow fixing up the self. > > If a Buddhist is doing Buddhism to accumulate kusala, in the sense of > 'bettering > his self', then he is not really practicing Buddhism at that time. > :Perhaps > eventually he will see that the self is an illusion in the sense that he > normally > thinks of it, and then he will be practicing Buddhism. The attempt to > see through > the ordinary self and see that it is not one's actual identity, and the > attempt to > see what the nature of consciousness is beyond that, based on that > discovery, to > me is the Buddhist path. > > So the person who was trying to accumulate kusala without this > understanding may > call himself a Buddhist or something else, but he is not rightly on the > path the > Buddha discovered. > > The truth of anatta, that the psychophysical being that we find > ourselves being in > this life, is not a 'self', but a filter for the experience of > consciousness, I > think in some language or another we can all agree on -- you may not > like my > wording, or you may disagree on my emphasis on 'consciousness', but we > can agree > that the ordinary self is really not-self, or an empty concept that we > mistake for > the being that we think we are. That's what makes it a 'Buddhist' > discussion. > > Beyond this, I see no reason to differentiate between mundane and > supra-mundane > Right Effort, in the sense that all Effort should be made with the > understanding > that there is no one at the center of such effort. Does that mean that > effort is > non-volitional? Does there need to be a self in order to have volition > or will? > Can consciousness, through focussing on certain factors, increase it's > discernment? And is such focussing totally predetermined by kamma and > khandas? > These questions are open to dispute and might be disagreed about between > us. But > the basic truth that there is no central self coordinating the action, > we would > agree upon. And that would be a basic Buddhist perspective. > > So I see this view as making all the difference, and I don't see the > path as being > basically about accumulating kusala states, except in so far as this > allows for > greater discernment. In the past, I have argued for the application of > Buddhist > principles to the experience of kusala in the affairs of daily life. > But this is > because I was focussed in those issues on daily life and how to improve > it. In > truth, being around this list has 'killed' some of that for me. I have > realized > that fixing daily living is more a property of attachment and aversion > than of > progressing on the path of discernment. So perhaps I have either made > some > progress, or fallen into a trap of another kind. > > Anyway, Right Effort in a Buddhist sense does not exist without a notion > of > anatta. Without that, it is not Buddhist, and if it has that, it is > Buddhist, > whether it is on the mundane level or on the supramundane. I will be > anxious to > hear your comments on this. both Jon and Howard, and others. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9593 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 24, 2001 11:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling Rob K Thanks for this point. I am indeed relieved to hear that those who are developing the path are no longer regarded as 'uninstructed and foolish'. I'm not sure if the same distinction is always maintained in the suttas, but in any event it would have been better to use the term 'worldling' in the context below. Jon --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once this moment has been > experienced > > final enlightenment is inevitable in the fullness of time. Prior > to the > > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. at the mundane level), > > attainment to final enlightenment is not assured. The texts refer > to one > > who has attained to stream entry as a *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > > whereas one who has not attained to a moment of supramundane > experience is > > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. So it is not a path in > the > > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the worldling, as the term > seems > > to be understood nowadays. > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > Dear Jon, > The commentaries talk about two types of putthujana (worldling): 1) > the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the kalyana-putthujana (good > worldling) who is learning and developing the path. > best wishes > robert 9594 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for your thoughtful answers to my questions, which I have snipped > below, > but which were much appreciated. > > I have only one question about what you said: You said that cetasikas, such > as > sati for instance, can have one or more cittas as its object. I think you'd have to quote my words as this doesn't ring any bells or sound like my words... >Do the mental > factors function independently of individual cittas? There cannot be mental factors without a citta and they all condition and affect each other, even though they all have their own distinct functions. There is no moment without citta. >I had had the > impression > that the cetasikas were tied to their specific citta, but if that is not the > case, > that would be very interesting. Sorry, I'm not sure how I confused you to think otherwise. >Can a single occurence of sati take in a > stream > of several cittas? And if so, how does this work. No, only one object or reality at a time (citta, cetasika or rupa). > > Other than that, I am not raising any new issues in this post!!! Not sure whether to be happy or sad!!! > > ==================== > > I wish I was standing on my head. Lately I've been too busy to stand > on my > head, I'm too busy running around on my feet. ...and glad to see, busy at the keyboard too;-)..keeping up to speed with all those cittas..... (speed as in 'fast', not as in 'standard', Christine;-) > > But I'm going to have to go back to look at that post. I have saved some > posts > that I couldn't answer at the time, and I believe that was one of them. Like Howard put so well, no obligations or pressures or apologies ever necessary here in this regard;-) > Sometimes > the more interesting or complicated messages wind up getting left for later, > especially when there have been 35-40 new posts a day here lately! Yikes!! ...and we all know who is the main trouble-maker in this regard;-) Let me know if I misunderstood anything above, Sarah 9595 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:42am Subject: catching up with Erik;-) Hi Erik, Glad to hear from you and to know you're still around;-) Also glad to hear that you and Mike met up, just when I was asking him if he'd bumped into you too... --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > I have to say I was quite impressed with Ajahn Kantasilo in general, > and his Khmer is WAY better than mine! My wife Eath was so impressed > by him that she formally requested teachings from him after you > left, and spent most of last night crying tears of happiness at the > wonderful good fortune of meeting someone like that. She says she > feels as though she knows him from somewhere :). Funny how she > mentioned how familiar you looked to her as well, Mike! ;) Very glad to hear this news and I hope Eath (wasn't it Aert last time?) is settling well in Thailand.....That's wonderful to hear that she can understand and appreciate what A.Kantasilo is saying. There are one or two very learned Cambodians who sometimes visit Bkk whom she may like to meet. K.Sujin would be happy to tell you when they're in town. The elderly lady (forget the name) accompanied us when we were in Cambodia lst year and was on the India trip. she has a lot of knowldege and wisdom. Anyway, Erik, hope to see you when we visit Bkk at the end of the year. To close off , I'd like to comment that while we've often discussed our different understandings on dsg, recently I've been struck by the gist and pleasantness of some of your helpful comments, such as these ones to Ken O on anatta: ******************** Erik to Ken O, Udana-Nibbana 4, 31st Oct: > There is no truly existent "chair" there, no "chairness" to be found > among the legs, the cushion, the backrest. "Chair" is merely a > concept, and thus unreal ultimately. Yet conventionally it performs > the function of supporting your behind all the same! Anatta also says > that that there is not truly any "oneness", nor is there > truly "manyness"--meaning things are neither one nor many--this is > the Middle Way betwen saying things exist as "things in themselves" > and denying things exist at all. > > Furthermore, all composed things are impermanent, undergoing constant > change, and as such this also implies they are devoid of any > intrinsic or permanent "self". This is the atta (self) denied by the > teaching of anatta, which is implied by anicca (impermanence), which > in turn implies dukkha (suffering), since we tend to cling to these > impermenent fabrications as "real", since we are under the spell that > they truly exist. As a result, we experience pain as a result of this > ignorance of their true nature, because we either attach to them if > they appear pleasurable (and thus get upset when they change or > disappear on us, which is inevitable following the law of > impermanence), or feel aversion and disgust toward them if they > appear unpleasant. > > The point is to come to see that there is nothing in the triple-realm > that possesses intrinsic identity (self, atta), that even we sentient > beings, as composed entities, also lack substantial entity. Once this > undersatnding is permanently established (as it is for arahats) then > all suffering ceases, because all the causes for suffering have been > eradicated, starved of their fuel (the ignorance that conceives of > an "I, me, mine"). This delusion is permanently abolished in those > who have brought the Buddhist path to completion. ******************** Best wishes to you and Eath, Sarah p.s Have you or Rob K or anyone heard from Bruce? If so, pls tell him his super questions and posts are missed here.... (just dosa to the loss of what is held 'dear', I know...) 9596 From: Victor Yu Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:23 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] [snip] >Even in the time > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. Hi Dan, How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease in the time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? Regards, Victor 9597 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:34am Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] --- Dear Victor, I think Dan has made it fairly plain that it is not a matter of counting cittas. He was relying on the suttas and the ancient commentaries and provided references to these in other posts. What he did say was that one can infer, just from fairly mundane insights into the changes at the sense doors is that the rise and fall must be exceedingly fast. In fact, only in later stages of vipassana is the rise and fall seen directly by developed wisdom. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Victor Yu" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:23 AM > Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > > > [snip] > >Even in the time > > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. > > Hi Dan, > > How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease in the > time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? > > Regards, > Victor 9598 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 3:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Dear Ken O, and Howard Every moment once it has passed has absolutely ceased according to the Theravada. However, this doesn't mean that it can't be known. If that was the case then we would be like newborn babies, only worse, and know nothing. Direct seeing should be distinguished from thinking about past events but it doesn't mean that direct seeing doesn't need sanna. Sanna arises with every citta and thus it arises also in cittas assocaited with panna. It is so complex how it all comes together, just for a moment, to understand. Here are some brief quotes: Abhidhammattha sangaha( Anuruddha) translated as A comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi: Guide(note by bodhi) p.136 "although citta experiences objects, citta in turn can become an object. It should be noted that a citta in its immediacy cannot become an its own object, for the cognizer cannot cognize itself; but a citta in an individual mental continuum can experience earlier cittas in that same continuum as well as the cittas of other beings" p137 "Mind-door cittas can also cognise an object belonging to any of the three periods of time- past present and future" p138 "the Vibhavani tika explains: acording to whether the cittas are sense sphere javanas, direct knowledge javanas , the remaining smile- producing javanas etc. For the sense sphere javanas...take objects of the three times[past, present, future] and timeless objects (nibbana and concepts]. The smile producing consciousness takes only objects of the three times[past, present, future]. The direct knowledge cittas take objects of the three times as well as the timeless" p138 The door freed consciousness (ie. patisandhicitta, cuti citta and bhavanga citta ) "can be of six kinds: it can be any of the five sense objects, either past or present, or it can be a mental object" best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K, > > Could you kindly quote the commentary that says that. Or is it saying > that it is the memory of the past cittas that an enlighted person able to > remember past events eons ago. To me, all that is the past is only in the > memory as past objects have already ceased. If the past object do not > ceased, then I think it would be a contradiction of the standing that > cittas ceased. > > > > Kind Regards > Ken O > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 11/24/01 11:02:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > I do see your point. The thing is that the cittas with panna that > > > know a past object have that past object as the object they > > > understand. In practice - for us- this past object is so > > > infinitesimally close to being present that it is called the present > > > moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is possible to directly > > > insight even moments from aeons ago. This direct insight is different > > > from thinking or conceptualising about the moment even though it is > > > past. > > > best wishes > > > robert > > > > > > > > ============================= > > Mmm, hmm. I get what you are saying as well. It is an interesting > > > > explanation which you give, though I find myself somewhat uncomfortable > > with > > the notion of a past object, truly past, being the direct object (and > > not as > > a memory) of a current mindstate. That is similar to the position of the > > > > Sarvastivadins to the effect that dhammas exist throughout all the three > > time > > periods, a position which I understand the Theravadins took issue with > > because of its eternalistic scent. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > 9599 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 3:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Victor Yu" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:23 AM > Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > > > [snip] > >Even in the time > > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. > > Hi Dan, > > How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease in the > time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? As an aside, the Abhidharmakosa says there are 65 cittas that arise and pass away within the span of a fingersnap. For another take on the matter, anyway! :) 9600 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 4:32am Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hi all, It may be of interest to some that the human eye/mind does not register changes shorter than 1/70th a second. Take the monitor you are looking at. It appears the image is static, yet it is being completely refreshed more than 50 times a second. If it is considered a sign of wisdom/insight to be able to discern changes at a more rapid rate than the average worldling, perhaps rebirth as a fly would be appealing. The fly sees at 120 Hz (refreshes the visual field 120 times per second). All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Victor, > I think Dan has made it fairly plain that it is not a matter of > counting cittas. He was relying on the suttas and the ancient > commentaries and provided references to these in other posts. What he > did say was that one can infer, just from fairly mundane insights > into the changes at the sense doors is that the rise and fall must be > exceedingly fast. > In fact, only in later stages of vipassana is the rise and fall seen > directly by developed wisdom. > best wishes > robert > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Victor Yu" wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:23 AM > > Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > > > > > > [snip] > > >Even in the time > > > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease > in the > > time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? > > > > Regards, > > Victor 9601 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 4:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Robert, "It is so complex how it all comes > together, just for a moment, to understand. " I saw that paragraph too. I can understand past cittas can be observed with direct insight due to sanna but future cittas that is something, I like to know how it works. Kind regards Ken O --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Ken O, and Howard > Every moment once it has passed has absolutely ceased according to > the Theravada. However, this doesn't mean that it can't be known. If > that was the case then we would be like newborn babies, only worse, > and know nothing. Direct seeing should be distinguished from thinking > about past events but it doesn't mean that direct seeing doesn't need > sanna. Sanna arises with every citta and thus it arises also in > cittas assocaited with panna. It is so complex how it all comes > together, just for a moment, to understand. Here are some brief > quotes: > Abhidhammattha sangaha( Anuruddha) translated as A comprehensive > Manual of Abhidhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi: > Guide(note by bodhi) p.136 "although citta experiences objects, citta > in turn can become an object. It should be noted that a citta in its > immediacy cannot become an its own object, for the cognizer cannot > cognize itself; but a citta in an individual mental continuum can > experience earlier cittas in that same continuum as well as the > cittas of other beings" > p137 "Mind-door cittas can also cognise an object belonging to any of > the three periods of time- past present and future" > p138 "the Vibhavani tika explains: acording to whether the cittas are > sense sphere javanas, direct knowledge javanas , the remaining smile- > producing javanas etc. For the sense sphere javanas...take objects of > the three times[past, present, future] and timeless objects (nibbana > and concepts]. The smile producing consciousness takes only objects > of the three times[past, present, future]. The direct knowledge > cittas take objects of the three times as well as the timeless" > p138 The door freed consciousness (ie. patisandhicitta, cuti citta > and bhavanga citta ) "can be of six kinds: it can be any of the five > sense objects, either past or present, or it can be a mental object" > best wishes > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Robert K, > > > > Could you kindly quote the commentary that says that. Or is it > saying > > that it is the memory of the past cittas that an enlighted person > able to > > remember past events eons ago. To me, all that is the past is only > in the > > memory as past objects have already ceased. If the past object do > not > > ceased, then I think it would be a contradiction of the standing > that > > cittas ceased. > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > Ken O > > > > > > > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > In a message dated 11/24/01 11:02:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > I do see your point. The thing is that the cittas with panna > that > > > > know a past object have that past object as the object they > > > > understand. In practice - for us- this past object is so > > > > infinitesimally close to being present that it is called the > present > > > > moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is possible to > directly > > > > insight even moments from aeons ago. This direct insight is > different > > > > from thinking or conceptualising about the moment even though > it is > > > > past. > > > > best wishes > > > > robert > > > > > > > > > > > ============================= > > > Mmm, hmm. I get what you are saying as well. It is an > interesting > > > > > > explanation which you give, though I find myself somewhat > uncomfortable > > > with > > > the notion of a past object, truly past, being the direct object > (and > > > not as > > > a memory) of a current mindstate. That is similar to the position > of the > > > > > > Sarvastivadins to the effect that dhammas exist throughout all > the three > > > time > > > periods, a position which I understand the Theravadins took issue > with > > > because of its eternalistic scent. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > > 9602 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] -- Dear ken O, Great that you are getting an idea of how past moments can be insighted. The future moments are another matter....! This applies only to a Buddha or, to a very limited degree, some very wise person (I'm talking about direct insight, not the intuitions of the future that some clairvoyants may have). The Parammattha manjusa (see note 7 Visuddhimagga VII)"This is not an object for ratiocination; for the blessed one has said thus:'The objective field of Enlightened Ones is unthinkable, it cannot be thought out; anyone who tries to think it out would reap madness and frustration' Aii, 80) The agreed explanation here is this: whatever the Blessed one wants to know, there his knowlede occurs as actual experience....And the Blessed one'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"endquote best wishes robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert, > > "It is so complex how it all comes > > together, just for a moment, to understand. " > > I saw that paragraph too. I can understand past cittas can be observed > with direct insight due to sanna but future cittas that is something, I > like to know how it works. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > 9603 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Robert K Thanks for the explanation. No wonder Buddha is called the Teacher of Gods and Man :). With thanks Ken O --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > -- > Dear ken O, > Great that you are getting an idea of how past moments can be > insighted. > The future moments are another matter....! > This applies only to a Buddha or, to a very limited degree, some very > wise person (I'm talking about direct insight, not the intuitions of > the future that some clairvoyants may have). > The Parammattha manjusa (see note 7 Visuddhimagga VII)"This is not an > object for ratiocination; for the blessed one has said thus:'The > objective field of Enlightened Ones is unthinkable, it cannot be > thought out; anyone who tries to think it out would reap madness and > frustration' Aii, 80) The agreed explanation here is this: whatever > the Blessed one wants to know, there his knowlede occurs as actual > experience....And the Blessed one'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"endquote > best wishes > robert > 9604 From: Victor Yu Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 6:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hello Robert and all, Is there any reference to the discourse in which the phenomenon of many trillions of cittas rising and falling in the time of a fingersnap is mentioned? What is the purpose of developing insight? To see the phenomenon of trillions of cittas rising and falling in the time of fingersnap? Is it necessary for one to see trillions of cittas rising and falling in the time of fingersnap in order to understand that citta is impermanent, is dukkha, is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my self."? Rise and fall seen directly by developed wisdom? But wisdom is not self, not you, not I. :-) Regards, Victor ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 5:34 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > --- > Dear Victor, > I think Dan has made it fairly plain that it is not a matter of > counting cittas. He was relying on the suttas and the ancient > commentaries and provided references to these in other posts. What he > did say was that one can infer, just from fairly mundane insights > into the changes at the sense doors is that the rise and fall must be > exceedingly fast. > In fact, only in later stages of vipassana is the rise and fall seen > directly by developed wisdom. > best wishes > robert > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Victor Yu" wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:23 AM > > Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > > > > > > [snip] > > >Even in the time > > > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease > in the > > time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? > > > > Regards, > > Victor 9605 From: Victor Yu Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 6:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hello Erik, 65 cittas are certainly much less than many trillions cittas. :-) Regards, Victor ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 6:24 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Victor Yu" wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 12:23 AM > > Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] > > > > > > [snip] > > >Even in the time > > > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease > in the > > time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? > > As an aside, the Abhidharmakosa says there are 65 cittas that arise > and pass away within the span of a fingersnap. For another take on > the matter, anyway! :) 9606 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 6:35am Subject: Re: catching up with Erik;-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Erik, > > Glad to hear from you and to know you're still around;-) Around, well, sorta--been more busy than ever in my whole life, and so much to be done right now I'me feeling a bit overtaxed. > Also glad to hear that you and Mike met up, just when I was asking him if he'd > bumped into you too... Yes, I was very happy to finally meet our friend Mike! Great guy! :) > --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > > I have to say I was quite impressed with Ajahn Kantasilo in general, > > and his Khmer is WAY better than mi?e! My wife Eath was so impressed > > by him that she formally requested teachings from him after you > > left, and spent most of last night crying tears of happiness at the > > wonderful good fortune of meeting someone like that. She says she > > feels as though she knows him from somewhere :). Funny how she > > mentioned how familiar you looked to her as well, Mike! ;) > > Very glad to hear this news and I hope Eath (wasn't it Aert last time?) Try transliterating from Khmer to Roman characters and you'll understand when you hear her name pronounced. The correct transliteration is "Eath", she spelled it "Ert" (which caused her no end of laughter when I asked about "Urt" at one point. Pronunciation is closest to "eeyeht". Enough of that, though. What does aplhpabets have to do with the Dhamma anyway? Except that Cambodia has so little Dhamma now, and it is in deseprate need of those who can transmit the Dhamma correctly in the native language. Eath and I were compring the Tibetan and Khmer alphabets tonight, and how similar they are, being Sanskritic in origin both, and even the system of memorization and intonations are very similar. Now Thai, that's another story. > is > settling well in Thailand.....That's wonderful to hear that she can understand > and appreciate what A.Kantasilo is saying. Yesterday, both Phra Kantasilo remarked that she is someone of great merit, and my Vipassanana teacher from Wat Mahatat went as far to call her a "genius" after a brie conversation with her. Truly someone with a mind for the Dhamma, who's really studying hard even as I write this now. > There are one or two very learned Cambodians who sometimes visit Bkk whom she > may like to meet. K.Sujin would be happy to tell you when they're in town. The > elderly lady (forget the name) accompanied us when we were in Cambodia lst year > and was on the India trip. she has a lot of knowldege and wisdom. That would be wonderful. Please let me know when they're in town. > Anyway, Erik, hope to see you when we visit Bkk at the end of the year. You shall! The end of the year is not far off! :) Cheers, Erik 9607 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 1:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Hi, Dan - I'd like to make a couple comments about the post of yours copied below. My main comment is that it is one of the most useful, clear, and insightful posts I have read in a long time! It is *wonderful*, and I thank you for it! A second comment: My recent post entitled "Some Thoughts on Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas" was headed rather much in the same direction as this post of yours; that is, its intention was to "see" the matters addressed in the title of my post in a way that does *not* involve a separate observer, agent, or self, and also does not require convoluted explanation. Sometimes one sidesteps problems in a particular theory by using "explanations" that present more problems than the original theory! In my post, I believe I was starting to get somewhat below the outer flesh of the matter, but, in this post of yours, to paraphrase a certain Zen master, you have gotten within the bones to the very marrow. I think that if one were to continually contemplate on nothing but the fact of each mindstate being an impersonal cognitive event, following upon and conditioned by previous cognitive acts, with the only discerning of objects there ever is being these very cognitive events themselves, one could make much progress in disabusing oneself of the annoyingly persistent sense of "self". There *is* no observer standing back observing the flux of mindstates. Whatever is known is known *there*, with there being no "knower". As you imply, should ignorance sufficiently diminish and insight increase sufficiently, the arising and falling away of mindstates and of their associated objects and concomitants would be "seen", that seeing/wisdom itself being an aspect or concomitant of the mindstates, and there would be a growing realization of impersonality and emptiness, with neither continuity nor discreteness being an adequate characterization of the way things truly appear. The *details* of the map we use of this domain are less important than the critical requirement that the map be free of the views of personality and of essence. The more and more closely I look, the more I see how many, varied, and treacherous are the "pitfalls of self" waiting for us on the path, subtly hidden by dense leaf-layers of wrongly formulated, wrongly interpreted, and wrongly grasped theories. Your post goes a long way, for me, in clearing away these layers, exposing the pitfalls below. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/25/01 12:00:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, dalthorp@o... writes: > _____________________________________________ > Howard: But who (or what) is this "we" who are so overwhelmed by the > speed of cittas to think they act simultaneously when it is only the > cittas, themselves, that are aware? > > Robert Ep.: > The only question is who is it so fast for?...Since we are working on > the assumption that there is no ego that is observing these cittas > jump around like mad, who or what is watching these cittas whiz > by? ... [H]ow [can] we have overriding, comparative or relative > experiences without an ego to hold and compare it all? > _____________________________________________ > > Howdy, Howard and Robert Ep., > You've inspired me to reflect again on the nature of cittas and > cetasikas, and I thank you. I don't know if my investigations have > any relevance to what you've been talking about, and it's always > dangerous to burst into a ongoing conversation between two sharp > cookies, but you may be able to help me think more clearly about the > issues. Here's what I've been thinking... > > I looked up a wonderful passage in Brahmajala sutta (DN 1, i 34 PTS > or §49 BPS): "In this case some recluse or Brahmin is addicted to > logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusions > of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and based on his flight > of thought thus: 'That which is [connected with] "the eye", "the > ear", "the nose", "the tongue" and "the body"--that self is > impermanent, unstable, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which > is called "citta", "mano", or "viññana"--that self is permanent, > eternal, not subject to change..." Although the rationalistic partial- > eternalist described by Buddha in the passage above posits a "who" to > experience and compare cittas, it really isn't necessary. The > commentary discusses this interesting case in more detail: "The > rationalist sees the breakup of the eye, etc.; but because every > preceding act of consciousness (citta), in ceasing, conditions the > arising of its successor, he does not see the breakup of the > consciousness, even though the latter is more pronounced than the > breakup of the eye, etc. Since he does not see the breakup of > consciousness, he assumes that when the bodily frame breaks up the > consciousness goes elsewhere...This he declares as his view." > > Blurred vision (ignorance) prevents a clear view of the moment-to- > moment breakup of consciousness. A consequence of that blurred vision > is an intensification of the impression of continuity and the > positing of a self to "hold" that sense of continuity. The > subcommentary elaborates further: "'He does not see the breakup of > consciousness': although consciousness is breaking up moment after > moment, each act of consciousness, in breaking up, becomes the > proximity condition for the following act of consciousness. Because > each succeeding act of consciousness arises concealing, as it were, > the absence of its predecessor, the aspect of presence alone is > strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Thus he does not see the > destruction of consciousness. This matter becomes very clear by the > example of the fire-disc (i.e. the unbroken disc of flame formed by > swinging a firebrand in rapid circular motion). Because the > rationalistic partial-eternalist is still more remote from > understanding and applying the method of diversity (viz. discrete > cittas), and wrongly applies the method of unity, he arrives at the > conviction: 'This very consciousness which always occurs with a > single nature, just this is a permanent self.'" > > So the view of a self to house the and interpret the experiences will > naturally take root when each succeeding act of consciousness arises > and conceals the absence of its predecessor, and the aspect of > presence alone is strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Then, > there is no clear view of the dissolution of consciousness. > > To resolve the problem of the "who who experiences" requires a proper > balance of the "methods of diversity and unity". B. Bodhi gives a > good description of these "methods" in the introduction to his > translation of DN 1: "The eternalist doctrine is said to originate > through a misapplication of the 'method of unity' (ekattanaya) to the > continuum of experience which is the subject of examination....The > method of unity disloses the coherence of the succession of distinct > experiential occasions making up the continuum. It shows them as > bound together in a single series, participants in a process of > transmission and development, interconnected members unified through > a law of conditional dependence. The method of diversity balances > this by showing up the difference. Though unified, the current of > experience is still a chain made up of distint links. Some of these > funciton as causes, others as effects.... When these two methods are > applied in conjunction, the current of experience will be correctly > understood; but when they are misapplied or applied in a one-sided > fashion, it will be misunderstood. The misapplication of the method > of unity will lead to the belief in an identical self and thence to > eternalism. The misapplication of the method of diversity will take > the disruptive, discontinuous element in experience as absolute and > thence lead to a doctrine of annihilationism. The correct application > of both will show the continuum to be a causally connected succession > of momentary processes, which continues so long as the causes retain > their efficacy and ceases when the causes are deactivated, in either > case without harboring a pesisting core to be grasped as a personal > self. This is the middle way which avoids the two extremes." > > With its abundance of conventional language about "this bhikkhu, that > householder" and similes about "gold" and "luminous mind", it is easy > to (mis)read the suttas with a unity bias. With its elaborate > description and classification of cittas and cetasikas, Abhidhamma > (esp. Dhammasangani and the first few chapters of Abhidhammatha > sangaha) seems to emphasize more the method of diversity. I find it > very helpful to study Abhidhamma, and then I read the suttas with a > little more of a "diversity" method than a "conventional" reading > would give. > > Ledi Sayadaw asks: "But how are we to understand the momentary > arising and ceasing of mind?" (JPTS 7(1):115-163, 1913). He draws his > discussion from the Citta chapter of Yamaka, and his answer is > typical of both the suttas and Abhidhamma. Here's my take on it... > > There are six kinds of consciousness -- those of the five special > senses and the "coordinating sense" (mano). If with seeing there is > the sense, "I see a visible object", the visual cognition has been > taken as a "self". Same with hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling. > If there is the sense, "It is a mental phenomenon, an element, a > sphere of sense, it is not 'mine,' not 'I', not my 'self'", then the > sensation is not taken as self. > > But what about cognition itself (mano), considered apart from seeing > and other occasions of sense? Consider the sentiment: "I think such- > and-such", or "I experience a citta", or "I observed lots of cittas > passing by in the span of a second." Here, consciousness has been > taken as a "self" as soon as a distinction is sought between the > experience and the experiencer, between the act and the agent (or > actor). Abhidhamma makes no such distinction, and no such distinction > is necessary. The mind (citta) is not distinct from the > act "thinking". Similarly, there is no agent apart from the > act "sensation" (or "contact" or "sankhara" or "recognition"), i.e. > there is not a citta that experiences sensation. To think of citta as > something that experiences sensation is once again to make a > distinction between the experience and the experiencer; the act and > the agent; the actor and the action; the self that does this, > experiences that, and thinks this-or-that. BOOM! "Self" is found > masquerading right in the midst of a bunch of fancy Pali terminology > that merely serves as cover for sakayaditthi--and an effective cover > at that! > > Citta doesn't experience sensation; Citta IS the experience, and > sensation is one of the characteristics of that experience. > Experience (citta) at one moment differs from that at another moment, > and sensation is an aspect of each citta. So is sañña (perception, > recognition, memory). "This moment is similar to the moment a moment > ago" -- that impression is sañña, which "has the characteristic of > noting and the function of recognizing what has been previously > noted" [Asl I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 110), cited in > Nina's "Cetasikas"]. The object of sañña is the same as the object of > the citta; but the cognizing itself is "citta", while "sañña" is the > name given to a category of ingredient that flavors the cognition. > [When I was in high school, I had the good fortune to get to visit > Hawaii. I ordered a dinner at a fancy restaurant, and the waiter > asked, "What kind of starch would you like with that?" I'd never > heard it asked quite that way before (or since), but I thought it was > brilliant. "Sañña" is like "starch" -- it comes with the citta, but > it comes in different flavors.] A "function" of sañña is > the "recognition" of similarity or dissimilarity between cittas. > There is no sañña entity to do any recognizing; there is merely > cognition (with a certain sañña flavor, vedana flavor, phassa flavor, > etc.). Of course, we may speak of an act of recognition or an object > of sañña, but we must be very clear that there is no "sañña" doing > the acting and the "object" is not "experienced" by any sañña entity. > And although the temptation is overwhelming, the sañña flavor of > cittas does not necessitate a the positing of a self to explain the > experience of speedy cittas. > > Dan > /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) 9608 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 7:12am Subject: Cambodia Ch 11, no. 3 Cambodia Lectures. Ch 11, no. 3 aran: Acharn said that when there is understanding you can remember what you learnt. Did I understand this correctly? When I listen to the Dhamma and I understand what I heard, kusala citta arises. Then there is sati with the level of kusala that is listening to the Dhamma, thus, the level of theoretical understanding. Saññå cetasika that arises with sati of that level will be of such strength that one can remember what one has heard. Is that correct? Sujin: Saññå accompanies each citta and it depends on conditions what type of citta arises. Saññå accompanies kusala citta of the level of dåna, of síla, of samatha and of satipaììhåna. Thus, the degrees of saññå are different, but saññå is not sati. Amara: Saññå and sati can arise together, but they perform each their own function. Soun: All dhammas that arise do so because there are conditions, paccayas, for their arising. These conditions are realities. We should often study the Dhamma. Mahå-kusala cittas are of different degrees, and confidence, saddhå, in the Buddha is of different degrees. Also sati has different degrees: sati arises when we read the scriptures or when we listen to the Dhamma. Saññå, remembrance, arises with sati. I would like to ask what sati arising with the fivefold Path is. Sujin: It is satipaììhåna. It is of the fivefold Path, without the three abstinences 2 . Soun: When sati arises with paññå, the kusala citta is ñåùa-sampayutta (accompanied by paññå), and kusala is of the level of satipaììhåna. Jaran: What are puñña, merit, and påpa, evil? Pradip: Puñña are the citta and cetasikas that are kusala of the level of dåna, síla and bhåvanå, including samatha and satipaììhåna. When citta is not engaged with the ten meritorious actions, it is påpa, evil. Sujin: Påpa are the realities that are not good, not beautiful. Puñña are the realities that are good, that are beautiful. Dhammas are very intricate because they arise and fall away very rapidly. Citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away together. Sometimes they are kusala, sometimes akusala, and the series of kusala cittas and of akusala cittas alternate with each other extremely rapidly. Sometimes people mistakenly say that at this or that moment there is kusala or akusala. They should study the Dhamma so that they know that when lobha, dosa, moha and other akusala dhammas arise there is påpa, unwholesomeness. Jeaoulsy, isså, and stinginess, macchariya, for example, are characteristics of akusala dhammas. Kusala or puñña is the opposite of akusala, thus, at that moment citta and cetasikas that are beautiful and wholesome arise together. Body and speech are the doorways of kusala citta and of akusala citta. There are not only citta and cetasika, there is also rúpa. If there would only be citta that is kusala or akusala, could other people be troubled? There is rúpa, and thus, when akusala citta arises, there are doorways of kamma, namely, bodily action and speech that are evil. Such action and speech originate from akusala citta and they harm and trouble other people. In reality, when akusala arises someone harms himself first, because he feels unhappy. 9609 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] That's Vasubandhu, right Erik? With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/25/01 6:25:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, rikpa21@y... writes: > As an aside, the Abhidharmakosa says there are 65 cittas that arise > and pass away within the span of a fingersnap. For another take on > the matter, anyway! :) > /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) 9610 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hi, Herman - In a message dated 11/25/01 7:34:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@d... writes: > Hi all, > > It may be of interest to some that the human eye/mind does not > register changes shorter than 1/70th a second. Take the monitor you > are looking at. It appears the image is static, yet it is being > completely refreshed more than 50 times a second. > > If it is considered a sign of wisdom/insight to be able to discern > changes at a more rapid rate than the average worldling, perhaps > rebirth as a fly would be appealing. The fly sees at 120 Hz > (refreshes the visual field 120 times per second). > > All the best > > Herman > > ============================ You make an amusing point here! ;-)) As I noted in a recent post, far more important than being able to see microscopic detail, is to see whatever appears as impermanent, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and without core. 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) 9611 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 9:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Robert Ep.] _______________________________ Robert Ep.: You wrote that the Buddha did not exhort us to get involved with people who were suffering, to be 'good people' and try to free those who were being oppressed. Dan: That's right. The Buddha's message was strictly spiritual. As wisdom develops, then compassion is deepened and the impulse to relieve suffering of all kinds is increased. Buddha did not teach that liberation comes through this particular good deed or that particular political view or even that these political struggles are helpful in any way. The reason is simply because these issues are ultimately not relevant to the real roots of suffering. Can these political struggles help soften material conditions to temporarily lessen the sting of suffering? Of course! But such struggles are not particularly Buddhist. Neither are they un-Buddhist. Just different. Historically speaking, confusing political issues with religious issues is a recipe for disaster, as anyone with an interest in Buddhism can attest for Christianity (e.g., Pat Robertson, Jesse Jackson in the U.S.; crusade and inquisitions in Europe; etc.), Islam (e.g., Omar and bin Laden in Afghanistan; Khomeini in Iran), Communism (a secular, rationalist, materialist "religion") in USSR and Cambodia. Dan 9612 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 9:42am Subject: Re: "engaged" [Christine] > I recall that there was an occasion where the Buddha literally ran > for his life, being pursued by someone who wanted to harm him. > Is this an act of self-preservation, an indication of chains, bonds > fetters etc. This is the story of Angulimala, who was going to kill the Buddha (MN 86). If he had been scared, it would certainly have been an act of self-preservation and an indication of fetters. But he wasn't the slightest bit scared. Angulimala was so impressed that he struck up a conversation with Buddha and was converted on the spot. Later, he became a sotapanna! If Buddha had not "run", he would have been killed, and Angulimala would not have been freed. > Don't you think there is room for wise "interference" with one's > environment? Of course there is. In a sense, that's the whole ball game. Dan 9613 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 9:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] Hi Victor, This is just a quote from the commentaties. I don't know the rate at which cittas arise and pass away; suffice it to say that the rate is fast, and that can readily be observed. Dan > [snip] > >Even in the time > > of a fingersnap many trillions of cittas arise and cease. > > Hi Dan, > > How do you know there are many trillions of cittas arise and cease in the > time of fingersnap? Did you count it? If so, how? > > Regards, > Victor 9614 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 11:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Dear Jon, I basically agree with what you are saying, and I agree that to let a lack of clarity on the exact nature of Nibbana keep one from trying to discern the present reality and develop mindfulness, would be a terrible shame. I certainly would never encourage anyone, including myself, to refrain from the obvious practices that give sanity and centeredness to one's life until they have solved the conceptual secret of Nibbana! This would be replacing intellectual pursuits for the real practice of Buddhism and is as unnecessary as it is distracting. However, I will just put in my two cents that I do think that if one is not just practicing for one's momentary benefit, but is committed to the path of Buddhism as a life's endeavor, that they would want to know what the expected end result would be. It does not have to be spelled out or agreed upon in explicit detail. Again, this would be silly or distracting. But they should be clear enough that they know that this is the result they seek. We may not agree, or ever come to agree, about whether Nibbana involves an annihilation of all experience, or whether it may resolve into a sort of 'base awareness' totally removed from the five kandhas, but we can certainly both agree that Nibbana must be the 'perfect state of Peace, free from further rebirth into forms of suffering'. And I'm sure that's all that's necessary to embark upon real practice with some confidence. Best, Robert Ep. ============== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob Ep > > I think perhaps you are saying that while the *experience* of nibbana is > speculative for us, a clear understanding of the *concept* of nibbana is > necessary or at least worthwhile, in the sense that only if we have a > clear concept of nibbana as the final destination can we have the > confidence to embark on the practice or, as you put it, to commit > ourselves to the path. > > I think one should regard such thoughts as a purely personal perspective, > in the sense that there would I think be many here for whom these > considerations would be a non-issue. While some may see the need for the > kind of clarification you are seeking, others find the teachings on, say, > different realities appearing through different doorways so fresh and yet > so 'obvious' once pointed out as to inspire immediate further study > without the need for a detailed grasp of the ultimate goal. > > I mention this only to suggest that it would be a pity to let one's quest > for a satisfactory grasp of the nibbana concept to be an obstacle to the > more relevant task of the present reality! > > Jon > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Dear Jon, > > I think you are right that the 'experience' of nibbana or parinibbana is > > speculative for us, and is not of practical benefit on a > > moment-to-moment everyday > > level on which we must focus in order to develop. > > > > However, I think the limited benefit of these topics is simple: If we > > are > > committing ourselves to a path, possibly an extremely long one, we want > > to know at > > least provisionally that the end goal of that path is something that we > > at least > > theoretically understand, and, if it is not too bold, that it is > > something that we > > actually want to achieve. I don't think there's anyone who follows > > Buddhism who > > does not attempt to some extent to emulate and understand the Buddha, > > his > > experience and his reasons for prescribing the path he does. Even to > > come to > > understand that the path is a path of discernment, and not one of > > achievement or > > self-transformation [in the sense that anatta does not allow for > > personal > > ownership of the process] is to focus on both the method or lack > > thereof, and the > > goal of the path. > > > > So I think that some of us rightly want to know where our long focus > > should be, > > where we are headed if we are able to continue on this path, and why it > > is the way > > it is. Of course, we won't understand directly until we get there, if > > and when we > > get there, but it still seems important to understand the components of > > the whole > > system on some level. > > > > And then, I would agree with you, at some point we have to put our focus > > on right > > where we are and what we need to do now to keep learning. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. 9615 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path (esp. right effort) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob Ep > > Your comments (below) certainly don’t *seem* like the comments of a > 'confused' mind, Rob! I think I got a little less confused in thinking out loud, Jon. But I was confused when I started out!! > I think you are saying that a person who has not heard about and > understood at some level the notion of anatta could not develop the > factors of the path (such as right effort)? I would agree with this as > far as it goes. > > It is sometimes overlooked that anatta is given not as a concept to ponder > on, and to be related to our views and our experience of life, but as a > verifiable characteristic of each and every reality (dhamma). As such, > anatta can only be *realised* as an adjunct of the direct experience and > awareness of a characteristic of a reality appearing at the present > moment. To my understanding, any other pondering over or understanding > about the notion of anatta, even to the extent of 'enlightening' or > life-changing moments when we see things differently, is not a level of > *realisation* of anatta, since there is no aspect of directly experiencing > a characteristic of a reality (dhamma). > > Let me suggest something that you may well wish to take issue with. > Without the direct awareness of the characteristic of a present reality > (dhamma) at a given moment, any 'understanding' of anatta at that or any > other moment is understanding at the thinking level. In other words, I am > suggesting that, regardless of the depth of one's pondering over anatta > and one's ability to relate that concept to one's 'self' or the > experiences of the present moment, it is thinking only and so is > understanding at a purely conceptual level. Let me just ask you on the way, do you think that one's 'self' can be the object of discernment to see the principle of anatta at play in the present moment? Can one look to the 'self' to see that it is really not an entity but a thought-form? > So even for someone who has heard the teachings and has a highly developed > understanding of anatta in the sense I have described, a moment of kusala > of any kind, other than satipatthana, is no more capable of being a path > factor moment than for the person who has never heard the teaching of > anatta. > > Were it otherwise then, according to the 'factors to be individually and > separately developed' view, any person exerting conventional effort to > perform kusala would be developing the path factor of Right Effort. > > This is why, for me, all paths lead back to the understanding of the > characteristic of the present reality, and the factors that form the > foundation for this understanding. I don't mean to be dense, Jon, but I'm not sure exactly what you are or aren't taking exception to in my discussion below. If the 'separate factors to be developed' theory is wrong, then it is just as wrong for people who think they're Buddhists. If I am aware of anatta as a concept, as you describe, and this will not help to develop satipatthana, then how am I better off than a mundanely aware non-Buddhist? I think that what you are saying implies that there are no true pracitioners of Buddhism who have not entered the supra-mundane level. All else, whether Buddhist or non-Buddhist is just conventional effort that has nothing really to do with the Buddha's teachings. You seem to be saying here that even being subjected to the teachings of the suttas will not help if one is still conceptualizing. Thus this seems to put the mundane Buddhist on the same par as the mundane non-Buddhist. I would tend to have a less severe view of mundane efforts, whether Buddhist or non-Buddhist and tend to think that they are gradually leading to an ability to really discern the characteristics of the moment with satipatthana. Moments of mindfulness, of sati, should in either case gradually accumulate to allow for satipatthana, real insight, and in those moments the truth of anatta, anicca and dukkha should perhaps be visible to the experiencer. I tend to think that the Buddha found real and actual principles that exist 'in nature', and therefore, anyone who practices discernment for a period of time should eventually get some glimpse of this. I would certainly think that reading the Suttas and knowing 'what to look for' conceptually should help the focus and speed up the time that one might see the truth of these principles in actual living observation. Anyway, I am really not sure what the conclusion of this is, but I think that the mundane path leads slowly to the supra-mundane path, and that the non-Buddhist mundan path may be a lot less efficient than the Buddhist mundane path, but that even this path, if followed sincerely, *may* eventually open a door to an understanding of non-entity, impermanence, and the universal nature of dissatisfaction or suffering. Whaddaya think? And if this is not true, how *do* the supra-mundane path factors ever 'kick in'? Good talking to you, and I mean that! I like this topic. Best, Robert Ep. ============ > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > It might perhaps be suggested that the fact that someone who has not > > heard > > > the dhamma has no notion of the teaching of 'not-self' makes a > > difference. > > > However, I do not think this can truly be said. Both the one who has > > > studied dhamma and the non-Buddhist have an innate view of self, and > > both > > > can strive without at that moment there being a manifest view of a > > self > > > who is making effort. So there is not necessarily any difference > > between > > > the two here. > > > > > > I would be interested to hear your views on this. > > > > > > Jon > > > > Well Jon, for some reason this question is very confusing to me. I kind > > of enjoy > > being confused, but I'll see if I can get out of it. I have always > > thought that > > the difference between Buddhism and all other teachings, is that the > > Buddha > > inherently recognized that the path was one of consciousness and not of > > changing, > > altering or somehow fixing up the self. > > > > If a Buddhist is doing Buddhism to accumulate kusala, in the sense of > > 'bettering > > his self', then he is not really practicing Buddhism at that time. > > :Perhaps > > eventually he will see that the self is an illusion in the sense that he > > normally > > thinks of it, and then he will be practicing Buddhism. The attempt to > > see through > > the ordinary self and see that it is not one's actual identity, and the > > attempt to > > see what the nature of consciousness is beyond that, based on that > > discovery, to > > me is the Buddhist path. > > > > So the person who was trying to accumulate kusala without this > > understanding may > > call himself a Buddhist or something else, but he is not rightly on the > > path the > > Buddha discovered. > > > > The truth of anatta, that the psychophysical being that we find > > ourselves being in > > this life, is not a 'self', but a filter for the experience of > > consciousness, I > > think in some language or another we can all agree on -- you may not > > like my > > wording, or you may disagree on my emphasis on 'consciousness', but we > > can agree > > that the ordinary self is really not-self, or an empty concept that we > > mistake for > > the being that we think we are. That's what makes it a 'Buddhist' > > discussion. > > > > Beyond this, I see no reason to differentiate between mundane and > > supra-mundane > > Right Effort, in the sense that all Effort should be made with the > > understanding > > that there is no one at the center of such effort. Does that mean that > > effort is > > non-volitional? Does there need to be a self in order to have volition > > or will? > > Can consciousness, through focussing on certain factors, increase it's > > discernment? And is such focussing totally predetermined by kamma and > > khandas? > > These questions are open to dispute and might be disagreed about between > > us. But > > the basic truth that there is no central self coordinating the action, > > we would > > agree upon. And that would be a basic Buddhist perspective. > > > > So I see this view as making all the difference, and I don't see the > > path as being > > basically about accumulating kusala states, except in so far as this > > allows for > > greater discernment. In the past, I have argued for the application of > > Buddhist > > principles to the experience of kusala in the affairs of daily life. > > But this is > > because I was focussed in those issues on daily life and how to improve > > it. In > > truth, being around this list has 'killed' some of that for me. I have > > realized > > that fixing daily living is more a property of attachment and aversion > > than of > > progressing on the path of discernment. So perhaps I have either made > > some > > progress, or fallen into a trap of another kind. > > > > Anyway, Right Effort in a Buddhist sense does not exist without a notion > > of > > anatta. Without that, it is not Buddhist, and if it has that, it is > > Buddhist, > > whether it is on the mundane level or on the supramundane. I will be > > anxious to > > hear your comments on this. both Jon and Howard, and others. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. 9616 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] meththa meditation Dear Sarah, Your reassurance that there can only be one citta for a particular cetasika, including sati, takes away the particular question I was confused about. Of course it raises other ones But I have raised them separately and won't repeat them at this time. There are mainly about how can 'impressions regarding the flow of cittas' be created, whether this is one of speed, confusion, blur, etc. For another time! Regards, Robert Ep. =========================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for your thoughtful answers to my questions, which I have snipped > > below, > > but which were much appreciated. > > > > I have only one question about what you said: You said that cetasikas, such > > as > > sati for instance, can have one or more cittas as its object. > > I think you'd have to quote my words as this doesn't ring any bells or sound > like my words... > > >Do the mental > > factors function independently of individual cittas? > > There cannot be mental factors without a citta and they all condition and > affect each other, even though they all have their own distinct functions. > There is no moment without citta. > > >I had had the > > impression > > that the cetasikas were tied to their specific citta, but if that is not the > > case, > > that would be very interesting. > > Sorry, I'm not sure how I confused you to think otherwise. > > >Can a single occurence of sati take in a > > stream > > of several cittas? And if so, how does this work. > > No, only one object or reality at a time (citta, cetasika or rupa). > > > > > Other than that, I am not raising any new issues in this post!!! > > Not sure whether to be happy or sad!!! > > > > ==================== > > > > I wish I was standing on my head. Lately I've been too busy to stand > > on my > > head, I'm too busy running around on my feet. > > ...and glad to see, busy at the keyboard too;-)..keeping up to speed with all > those cittas..... (speed as in 'fast', not as in 'standard', Christine;-) > > > > > But I'm going to have to go back to look at that post. I have saved some > > posts > > that I couldn't answer at the time, and I believe that was one of them. > > Like Howard put so well, no obligations or pressures or apologies ever > necessary here in this regard;-) > > > Sometimes > > the more interesting or complicated messages wind up getting left for later, > > especially when there have been 35-40 new posts a day here lately! Yikes!! > > ...and we all know who is the main trouble-maker in this regard;-) > > Let me know if I misunderstood anything above, > > Sarah 9617 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Dear Rob, I would be very grateful if you could tell me the mechanism by which a moment once completely passed, can be seen as an object by a new, emergent citta. I just don't understand it, but I'm sure there is a good structural explanation. It must be involved in how one citta passes its attributes to the next. And I am equally confused about how this 'handing-off' takes place, since each citta is 'flattened' before the next arises...or is this not the case? Regards, Robert Ep. ================= --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Ken O, and Howard > Every moment once it has passed has absolutely ceased according to > the Theravada. However, this doesn't mean that it can't be known. If > that was the case then we would be like newborn babies, only worse, > and know nothing. Direct seeing should be distinguished from thinking > about past events but it doesn't mean that direct seeing doesn't need > sanna. Sanna arises with every citta and thus it arises also in > cittas assocaited with panna. It is so complex how it all comes > together, just for a moment, to understand. Here are some brief > quotes: > Abhidhammattha sangaha( Anuruddha) translated as A comprehensive > Manual of Abhidhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi: > Guide(note by bodhi) p.136 "although citta experiences objects, citta > in turn can become an object. It should be noted that a citta in its > immediacy cannot become an its own object, for the cognizer cannot > cognize itself; but a citta in an individual mental continuum can > experience earlier cittas in that same continuum as well as the > cittas of other beings" > p137 "Mind-door cittas can also cognise an object belonging to any of > the three periods of time- past present and future" > p138 "the Vibhavani tika explains: acording to whether the cittas are > sense sphere javanas, direct knowledge javanas , the remaining smile- > producing javanas etc. For the sense sphere javanas...take objects of > the three times[past, present, future] and timeless objects (nibbana > and concepts]. The smile producing consciousness takes only objects > of the three times[past, present, future]. The direct knowledge > cittas take objects of the three times as well as the timeless" > p138 The door freed consciousness (ie. patisandhicitta, cuti citta > and bhavanga citta ) "can be of six kinds: it can be any of the five > sense objects, either past or present, or it can be a mental object" > best wishes > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Robert K, > > > > Could you kindly quote the commentary that says that. Or is it > saying > > that it is the memory of the past cittas that an enlighted person > able to > > remember past events eons ago. To me, all that is the past is only > in the > > memory as past objects have already ceased. If the past object do > not > > ceased, then I think it would be a contradiction of the standing > that > > cittas ceased. > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > Ken O > > > > > > > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > In a message dated 11/24/01 11:02:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > I do see your point. The thing is that the cittas with panna > that > > > > know a past object have that past object as the object they > > > > understand. In practice - for us- this past object is so > > > > infinitesimally close to being present that it is called the > present > > > > moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is possible to > directly > > > > insight even moments from aeons ago. This direct insight is > different > > > > from thinking or conceptualising about the moment even though > it is > > > > past. > > > > best wishes > > > > robert > > > > > > > > > > > ============================= > > > Mmm, hmm. I get what you are saying as well. It is an > interesting > > > > > > explanation which you give, though I find myself somewhat > uncomfortable > > > with > > > the notion of a past object, truly past, being the direct object > (and > > > not as > > > a memory) of a current mindstate. That is similar to the position > of the > > > > > > Sarvastivadins to the effect that dhammas exist throughout all > the three > > > time > > > periods, a position which I understand the Theravadins took issue > with > > > because of its eternalistic scent. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > > 9618 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: speed of cittas [Erik] --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi all, > > It may be of interest to some that the human eye/mind does not > register changes shorter than 1/70th a second. Take the monitor you > are looking at. It appears the image is static, yet it is being > completely refreshed more than 50 times a second. > > If it is considered a sign of wisdom/insight to be able to discern > changes at a more rapid rate than the average worldling, perhaps > rebirth as a fly would be appealing. The fly sees at 120 Hz > (refreshes the visual field 120 times per second). That's pretty funny, Herman. Robert Ep. 9619 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 0:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > -- > Dear ken O, > Great that you are getting an idea of how past moments can be > insighted. That makes two of you. How can past moments be insighted after they are 'completely gone'? Where are they present to be inspected or insighted? Where, alternatively, are their contents recorded? Robert Ep. ============================= > The future moments are another matter....! > This applies only to a Buddha or, to a very limited degree, some very > wise person (I'm talking about direct insight, not the intuitions of > the future that some clairvoyants may have). > The Parammattha manjusa (see note 7 Visuddhimagga VII)"This is not an > object for ratiocination; for the blessed one has said thus:'The > objective field of Enlightened Ones is unthinkable, it cannot be > thought out; anyone who tries to think it out would reap madness and > frustration' Aii, 80) The agreed explanation here is this: whatever > the Blessed one wants to know, there his knowlede occurs as actual > experience....And the Blessed one'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"endquote > best wishes > robert > > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > > > "It is so complex how it all comes > > > together, just for a moment, to understand. " > > > > I saw that paragraph too. I can understand past cittas can be > observed > > with direct insight due to sanna but future cittas that is > something, I > > like to know how it works. > > > > > > Kind regards > > Ken O 9620 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Hi Howard, Comments interspersed... _________________________________ Howard: >My recent post entitled "Some Thoughts on > Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas" was headed rather much in the same direction > as this post of yours; that is, its intention was to "see" the matters > addressed in the title of my post in a way that does *not* involve a separate > observer, agent, or self, and also does not require convoluted explanation. > Sometimes one sidesteps problems in a particular theory by using > "explanations" that present more problems than the original theory! Using Occam's razor, why not just excise the "self"? Well, it's easier said than done, as you note. > have gotten within the bones to the very marrow. I think that if one were to > continually contemplate on nothing but the fact of each mindstate being an > impersonal cognitive event, following upon and conditioned by previous > cognitive acts, with the only discerning of objects there ever is being these > very cognitive events themselves, one could make much progress in disabusing > oneself of the annoyingly persistent sense of "self". Dan: Basically, I agree [But I'd change the "continually contemplate...the fact" to "thoroughly understand the fact"], and this is where the anatta flavor of Abhidhamma can be so helpful -- not as a bunch of lists and dogmas to memorize, but as a beautiful description of the meaning of anatta via a decomposition of "self" into the five aggregates and a reconstruction of experience after an Occam's razor excising of "self". __________________________________ Howard: >There *is* no observer > standing back observing the flux of mindstates. Whatever is known is known > *there*, with there being no "knower". As you imply, should ignorance > sufficiently diminish and insight increase sufficiently, the arising and > falling away of mindstates and of their associated objects and concomitants > would be "seen", that seeing/wisdom itself being an aspect or concomitant of > the mindstates, and there would be a growing realization of impersonality and > emptiness, with neither continuity nor discreteness being an adequate > characterization of the way things truly appear. Dan: Well said (or should I say, "sadhu, sadhu, sadhu"). __________________________________ Howard: The *details* of the map we > use of this domain are less important than the critical requirement that the > map be free of the views of personality and of essence. Dan: This is a great insight, Howard--we need to always bear in mind that our theorizing and book learning is not helpful per se, but if it helps condition a little more clarity in our observations, then it can be most helpful. In a similar vein, U Narada [Guide to Conditional Relations, part I) wrote: "Patthana is understood if the table of contents of Dhammasangani is understood." If you have ever seen how cryptic and bizarre looking, how detailed and extensive the Patthana really is, the import of this statement is clear: Penetrating insight is where it's at, not the memorizing and reading of a scores of lists and doctrines. > The more and more closely I look, the more I see how many, varied, and > treacherous are the "pitfalls of self" waiting for us on the path, subtly > hidden by dense leaf-layers of wrongly formulated, wrongly interpreted, and > wrongly grasped theories. Your post goes a long way, for me, in clearing away > these layers, exposing the pitfalls below. The depth and intricacy of sakayaditti are astounding, as are the consequences. We are indeed fortunate to STILL be able to read the Tipitaka and listen to Dhamma. Dan 9621 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 3:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Dan, Thanks very much for another well-reasoned and -cited post. It's a good example of how abhidhamma can help to clarify the meanings in the suttas, I think. mike --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > _____________________________________________ > Howard: But who (or what) is this "we" who are so > overwhelmed by the > speed of cittas to think they act simultaneously > when it is only the > cittas, themselves, that are aware? > > Robert Ep.: > The only question is who is it so fast for?...Since > we are working on > the assumption that there is no ego that is > observing these cittas > jump around like mad, who or what is watching these > cittas whiz > by? ... [H]ow [can] we have overriding, comparative > or relative > experiences without an ego to hold and compare it > all? > _____________________________________________ > > Howdy, Howard and Robert Ep., > You've inspired me to reflect again on the nature of > cittas and > cetasikas, and I thank you. I don't know if my > investigations have > any relevance to what you've been talking about, and > it's always > dangerous to burst into a ongoing conversation > between two sharp > cookies, but you may be able to help me think more > clearly about the > issues. Here's what I've been thinking... > > I looked up a wonderful passage in Brahmajala sutta > (DN 1, i 34 PTS > or §49 BPS): "In this case some recluse or Brahmin > is addicted to > logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the > following conclusions > of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and > based on his flight > of thought thus: 'That which is [connected with] > "the eye", "the > ear", "the nose", "the tongue" and "the body"--that > self is > impermanent, unstable, non-eternal, subject to > change. But that which > is called "citta", "mano", or "viññana"--that self > is permanent, > eternal, not subject to change..." Although the > rationalistic partial- > eternalist described by Buddha in the passage above > posits a "who" to > experience and compare cittas, it really isn't > necessary. The > commentary discusses this interesting case in more > detail: "The > rationalist sees the breakup of the eye, etc.; but > because every > preceding act of consciousness (citta), in ceasing, > conditions the > arising of its successor, he does not see the > breakup of the > consciousness, even though the latter is more > pronounced than the > breakup of the eye, etc. Since he does not see the > breakup of > consciousness, he assumes that when the bodily frame > breaks up the > consciousness goes elsewhere...This he declares as > his view." > > Blurred vision (ignorance) prevents a clear view of > the moment-to- > moment breakup of consciousness. A consequence of > that blurred vision > is an intensification of the impression of > continuity and the > positing of a self to "hold" that sense of > continuity. The > subcommentary elaborates further: "'He does not see > the breakup of > consciousness': although consciousness is breaking > up moment after > moment, each act of consciousness, in breaking up, > becomes the > proximity condition for the following act of > consciousness. Because > each succeeding act of consciousness arises > concealing, as it were, > the absence of its predecessor, the aspect of > presence alone is > strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Thus he > does not see the > destruction of consciousness. This matter becomes > very clear by the > example of the fire-disc (i.e. the unbroken disc of > flame formed by > swinging a firebrand in rapid circular motion). > Because the > rationalistic partial-eternalist is still more > remote from > understanding and applying the method of diversity > (viz. discrete > cittas), and wrongly applies the method of unity, he > arrives at the > conviction: 'This very consciousness which always > occurs with a > single nature, just this is a permanent self.'" > > So the view of a self to house the and interpret the > experiences will > naturally take root when each succeeding act of > consciousness arises > and conceals the absence of its predecessor, and the > aspect of > presence alone is strong and clear, not the aspect > of absense. Then, > there is no clear view of the dissolution of > consciousness. > > To resolve the problem of the "who who experiences" > requires a proper > balance of the "methods of diversity and unity". B. > Bodhi gives a > good description of these "methods" in the > introduction to his > translation of DN 1: "The eternalist doctrine is > said to originate > through a misapplication of the 'method of unity' > (ekattanaya) to the > continuum of experience which is the subject of > examination....The > method of unity disloses the coherence of the > succession of distinct > experiential occasions making up the continuum. It > shows them as > bound together in a single series, participants in a > process of > transmission and development, interconnected members > unified through > a law of conditional dependence. The method of > diversity balances > this by showing up the difference. Though unified, > the current of > experience is still a chain made up of distint > links. Some of these > funciton as causes, others as effects.... When these > two methods are > applied in conjunction, the current of experience > will be correctly > understood; but when they are misapplied or applied > in a one-sided > fashion, it will be misunderstood. The > misapplication of the method > of unity will lead to the belief in an identical > self and thence to > eternalism. The misapplication of the method of > diversity will take > the disruptive, discontinuous element in experience > as absolute and > thence lead to a doctrine of annihilationism. The > correct application > of both will show the continuum to be a causally > connected succession > of momentary processes, which continues so long as > the causes retain > their efficacy and ceases when the causes are > deactivated, in either > case without harboring a pesisting core to be > grasped as a personal > self. This is the middle way which avoids the two > extremes." > > With its abundance of conventional language about > "this bhikkhu, that > householder" and similes about "gold" and "luminous > mind", it is easy > to (mis)read the suttas with a unity bias. With its > elaborate > description and classification of cittas and > cetasikas, Abhidhamma > (esp. Dhammasangani and the first few chapters of > Abhidhammatha > sangaha) seems to emphasize more the method of > diversity. I find it > very helpful to study Abhidhamma, and then I read > the suttas with a > little more of a "diversity" method than a > "conventional" reading > would give. > > Ledi Sayadaw asks: "But how are we to understand the > momentary > arising and ceasing of mind?" (JPTS 7(1):115-163, > 1913). He draws his > discussion from the Citta chapter of Yamaka, and his > answer is > typical of both the suttas and Abhidhamma. Here's my > take on it... > > There are six kinds of consciousness -- those of the > five special > senses and the "coordinating sense" (mano). If with > seeing there is > the sense, "I see a visible object", the visual > cognition has been > taken as a "self". Same with hearing, smelling, > tasting, and feeling. > If there is the sense, "It is a mental phenomenon, > an element, a > sphere of sense, it is not 'mine,' not 'I', not my > 'self'", then the > sensation is not taken as self. > > But what about cognition itself (mano), considered > apart from seeing > and other occasions of sense? Consider the > sentiment: "I think such- > and-such", or "I experience a citta", or "I observed > lots of cittas > passing by in the span of a second." Here, > consciousness has been > taken as a "self" as soon as a distinction is sought > between the > experience and the experiencer, between the act and > the agent (or > actor). Abhidhamma makes no such distinction, and no > such distinction > is necessary. The mind (citta) is not distinct from > the > act "thinking". Similarly, there is no agent apart > from the > act "sensation" (or "contact" or "sankhara" or > "recognition"), i.e. > there is not a citta that experiences sensation. To > think of citta as > something that experiences sensation is once again > to make a > distinction between the experience and the > experiencer; the act and > the agent; the actor and the action; the self that > does this, > experiences that, and thinks this-or-that. BOOM! > "Self" is found > masquerading right in the midst of a bunch of fancy > Pali terminology > that merely serves as cover for sakayaditthi--and an > effective cover > at that! > > Citta doesn't experience sensation; Citta IS the > experience, and > sensation is one of the characteristics of that > experience. > Experience (citta) at one moment differs from that > at another moment, > and sensation is an aspect of each citta. So is > sañña (perception, > recognition, memory). "This moment is similar to the > moment a moment > ago" -- that impression is sañña, which "has the > characteristic of > noting and the function of recognizing what has been > previously > noted" [Asl I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 110), cited in > Nina's "Cetasikas"]. The object of sañña is the same > as the object of > the citta; but the cognizing itself is "citta", > while "sañña" is the > name given to a category of ingredient that flavors > the cognition. > [When I was in high school, I had the good fortune > to get to visit > Hawaii. I ordered a dinner at a fancy restaurant, > and the waiter > asked, "What kind of starch would you like with > that?" I'd never > heard it asked quite that way before (or since), but > I thought it was > brilliant. "Sañña" is like "starch" -- it comes with > the citta, but > it comes in different flavors.] A "function" of > sañña is > the "recognition" of similarity or dissimilarity > between cittas. > There is no sañña entity to do any recognizing; > there is merely > cognition (with a certain sañña flavor, vedana > flavor, phassa flavor, > etc.). Of course, we may speak of an act of > recognition or an object > of sañña, but we must be very clear that there is no > "sañña" doing > the acting and the "object" is not "experienced" by > any sañña entity. > And although the temptation is overwhelming, the > sañña flavor of > cittas does not necessitate a the positing of a self > to explain the > experience of speedy cittas. > > Dan 9622 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 4:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Very well-said, both! mike --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Howard, > > Comments interspersed... > _________________________________ > Howard: > >My recent post entitled "Some Thoughts on > > Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas" was headed rather > much in the same > direction > > as this post of yours; that is, its intention was > to "see" the > matters > > addressed in the title of my post in a way that > does *not* involve > a separate > > observer, agent, or self, and also does not > require convoluted > explanation. > > Sometimes one sidesteps problems in a particular > theory by using > > "explanations" that present more problems than the > original theory! > > Using Occam's razor, why not just excise the "self"? > Well, it's > easier said than done, as you note. > > > have gotten within the bones to the very marrow. I > think that if > one were to > > continually contemplate on nothing but the fact of > each mindstate > being an > > impersonal cognitive event, following upon and > conditioned by > previous > > cognitive acts, with the only discerning of > objects there ever is > being these > > very cognitive events themselves, one could make > much progress in > disabusing > > oneself of the annoyingly persistent sense of > "self". > > Dan: > Basically, I agree [But I'd change the "continually > contemplate...the > fact" to "thoroughly understand the fact"], and this > is where the > anatta flavor of Abhidhamma can be so helpful -- not > as a bunch of > lists and dogmas to memorize, but as a beautiful > description of the > meaning of anatta via a decomposition of "self" into > the five > aggregates and a reconstruction of experience after > an Occam's razor > excising of "self". > > __________________________________ > Howard: > >There *is* no observer > > standing back observing the flux of mindstates. > Whatever is known > is known > > *there*, with there being no "knower". As you > imply, should > ignorance > > sufficiently diminish and insight increase > sufficiently, the > arising and > > falling away of mindstates and of their associated > objects and > concomitants > > would be "seen", that seeing/wisdom itself being > an aspect or > concomitant of > > the mindstates, and there would be a growing > realization of > impersonality and > > emptiness, with neither continuity nor > discreteness being an > adequate > > characterization of the way things truly appear. > > Dan: > Well said (or should I say, "sadhu, sadhu, sadhu"). > __________________________________ > Howard: > The *details* of the map we > > use of this domain are less important than the > critical requirement > that the > > map be free of the views of personality and of > essence. > > Dan: > This is a great insight, Howard--we need to always > bear in mind that > our theorizing and book learning is not helpful per > se, but if it > helps condition a little more clarity in our > observations, then it > can be most helpful. In a similar vein, U Narada > [Guide to > Conditional Relations, part I) wrote: "Patthana is > understood if the > table of contents of Dhammasangani is understood." > If you have ever > seen how cryptic and bizarre looking, how detailed > and extensive the > Patthana really is, the import of this statement is > clear: > Penetrating insight is where it's at, not the > memorizing and reading > of a scores of lists and doctrines. > > > The more and more closely I look, the more > I see how many, > varied, and > > treacherous are the "pitfalls of self" waiting for > us on the path, > subtly > > hidden by dense leaf-layers of wrongly formulated, > wrongly > interpreted, and > > wrongly grasped theories. Your post goes a long > way, for me, in > clearing away > > these layers, exposing the pitfalls below. > > The depth and intricacy of sakayaditti are > astounding, as are the > consequences. We are indeed fortunate to STILL be > able to read the > Tipitaka and listen to Dhamma. > > Dan 9623 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 4:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "engaged" [Christine] Hi Herman, --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dan, > > I recall that there was an occasion where the Buddha > literally ran > for his life, being pursued by someone who wanted to > harm him. This certainly never occurred in the parts of the Tipitaka I've read and seems highly unlikely. If you can cite this event I'd be most interested. I wonder if you're thinking of Angulimala, who chased the Buddha as fast as he could to murder him and cut off one of his fingers for his necklace--though the Buddha continued walking at his regular pace, Angulimala was unable to catch up with him. > Is this an act of self-preservation, an indication > of chains, bonds > fetters etc. It's an interesting story but certainly has nothing to do either with self-preservation or social activism. The Buddha's approach to Angulimala was to teach him the Dhamma. When the Buddha spoke about chains, bonds, fetters etc., he was generally speaking about unskilled mental states. For what it's worth, mike 9624 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling Jon and Robert, The question I have is, is a 'trainer' (sekkha?) necessarily a sotaapanna, or can a kalyana-putthujana be a sekkha? This does have some bearing on issues rather than semantic ones. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob K > > Thanks for this point. I am indeed relieved to hear > that those who are > developing the path are no longer regarded as > 'uninstructed and foolish'. > I'm not sure if the same distinction is always > maintained in the suttas, > but in any event it would have been better to use > the term 'worldling' in > the context below. > > Jon > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > In > dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > > > > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once this > moment has been > > experienced > > > final enlightenment is inevitable in the > fullness of time. Prior > > to the > > > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. at > the mundane level), > > > attainment to final enlightenment is not > assured. The texts refer > > to one > > > who has attained to stream entry as a > *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > > > whereas one who has not attained to a moment of > supramundane > > experience is > > > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. So > it is not a path in > > the > > > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the > worldling, as the term > > seems > > > to be understood nowadays. > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > Dear Jon, > > The commentaries talk about two types of > putthujana (worldling): 1) > > the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the > kalyana-putthujana (good > > worldling) who is learning and developing the > path. > > best wishes > > robert 9625 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling --Dear Mike, I think a sekkha is always a sotapanna or above best wishes robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Jon and Robert, > > The question I have is, is a 'trainer' (sekkha?) > necessarily a sotaapanna, or can a kalyana-putthujana > be a sekkha? This does have some bearing on issues > rather than semantic ones. > > mike > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > Rob K > > > > Thanks for this point. I am indeed relieved to hear > > that those who are > > developing the path are no longer regarded as > > 'uninstructed and foolish'. > > I'm not sure if the same distinction is always > > maintained in the suttas, > > but in any event it would have been better to use > > the term 'worldling' in > > the context below. > > > > Jon > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > In > > dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once this > > moment has been > > > experienced > > > > final enlightenment is inevitable in the > > fullness of time. Prior > > > to the > > > > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. at > > the mundane level), > > > > attainment to final enlightenment is not > > assured. The texts refer > > > to one > > > > who has attained to stream entry as a > > *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > > > > whereas one who has not attained to a moment of > > supramundane > > > experience is > > > > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. So > > it is not a path in > > > the > > > > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the > > worldling, as the term > > > seems > > > > to be understood nowadays. > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > Dear Jon, > > > The commentaries talk about two types of > > putthujana (worldling): 1) > > > the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the > > kalyana-putthujana (good > > > worldling) who is learning and developing the > > path. > > > best wishes > > > robert > 9626 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Robert, Very interesting and I'm glad to see this documented. Completely baffling, though. Must rethink a few things. mike --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Ken O, and Howard > Every moment once it has passed has absolutely > ceased according to > the Theravada. However, this doesn't mean that it > can't be known. If > that was the case then we would be like newborn > babies, only worse, > and know nothing. Direct seeing should be > distinguished from thinking > about past events but it doesn't mean that direct > seeing doesn't need > sanna. Sanna arises with every citta and thus it > arises also in > cittas assocaited with panna. It is so complex how > it all comes > together, just for a moment, to understand. Here are > some brief > quotes: > Abhidhammattha sangaha( Anuruddha) translated as A > comprehensive > Manual of Abhidhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi: > Guide(note by bodhi) p.136 "although citta > experiences objects, citta > in turn can become an object. It should be noted > that a citta in its > immediacy cannot become an its own object, for the > cognizer cannot > cognize itself; but a citta in an individual mental > continuum can > experience earlier cittas in that same continuum as > well as the > cittas of other beings" > p137 "Mind-door cittas can also cognise an object > belonging to any of > the three periods of time- past present and future" > p138 "the Vibhavani tika explains: acording to > whether the cittas are > sense sphere javanas, direct knowledge javanas , the > remaining smile- > producing javanas etc. For the sense sphere > javanas...take objects of > the three times[past, present, future] and timeless > objects (nibbana > and concepts]. The smile producing consciousness > takes only objects > of the three times[past, present, future]. The > direct knowledge > cittas take objects of the three times as well as > the timeless" > p138 The door freed consciousness (ie. > patisandhicitta, cuti citta > and bhavanga citta ) "can be of six kinds: it can be > any of the five > sense objects, either past or present, or it can be > a mental object" > best wishes > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong > wrote: > > Hi Robert K, > > > > Could you kindly quote the commentary that says > that. Or is it > saying > > that it is the memory of the past cittas that an > enlighted person > able to > > remember past events eons ago. To me, all that is > the past is only > in the > > memory as past objects have already ceased. If > the past object do > not > > ceased, then I think it would be a contradiction > of the standing > that > > cittas ceased. > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > Ken O > > > > > > > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > In a message dated 11/24/01 11:02:11 PM Eastern > Standard Time, > > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > I do see your point. The thing is that the > cittas with panna > that > > > > know a past object have that past object as > the object they > > > > understand. In practice - for us- this past > object is so > > > > infinitesimally close to being present that it > is called the > present > > > > moment. For the Buddha and some arahants it is > possible to > directly > > > > insight even moments from aeons ago. This > direct insight is > different > > > > from thinking or conceptualising about the > moment even though > it is > > > > past. > > > > best wishes > > > > robert > > > > > > > > > > > ============================= > > > Mmm, hmm. I get what you are saying as > well. It is an > interesting > > > > > > explanation which you give, though I find myself > somewhat > uncomfortable > > > with > > > the notion of a past object, truly past, being > the direct object > (and > > > not as > > > a memory) of a current mindstate. That is > similar to the position > of the > > > > > > Sarvastivadins to the effect that dhammas exist > throughout all > the three > > > time > > > periods, a position which I understand the > Theravadins took issue > with > > > because of its eternalistic scent. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard 9627 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling Thanks Rob, So, for the kalyana-puthujjana, what means 'learning and developing the path'? Does this refer to sammuti-sacca, pariyatti or...? As it has been explained that the path refers to magga-citta? mike --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --Dear Mike, > I think a sekkha is always a sotapanna or above > best wishes > robert > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > wrote: > > Jon and Robert, > > > > The question I have is, is a 'trainer' (sekkha?) > > necessarily a sotaapanna, or can a > kalyana-putthujana > > be a sekkha? This does have some bearing on > issues > > rather than semantic ones. > > > > mike > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > Rob K > > > > > > Thanks for this point. I am indeed relieved to > hear > > > that those who are > > > developing the path are no longer regarded as > > > 'uninstructed and foolish'. > > > I'm not sure if the same distinction is always > > > maintained in the suttas, > > > but in any event it would have been better to > use > > > the term 'worldling' in > > > the context below. > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > > In > > > dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once > this > > > moment has been > > > > experienced > > > > > final enlightenment is inevitable in the > > > fullness of time. Prior > > > > to the > > > > > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. > at > > > the mundane level), > > > > > attainment to final enlightenment is not > > > assured. The texts refer > > > > to one > > > > > who has attained to stream entry as a > > > *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > > > > > whereas one who has not attained to a moment > of > > > supramundane > > > > experience is > > > > > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. > So > > > it is not a path in > > > > the > > > > > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the > > > worldling, as the term > > > > seems > > > > > to be understood nowadays. > > > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > The commentaries talk about two types of > > > putthujana (worldling): 1) > > > > the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the > > > kalyana-putthujana (good > > > > worldling) who is learning and developing the > > > path. > > > > best wishes > > > > robert 9628 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Robert Ep.] Thanks again, Dan. mike --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > _______________________________ > Robert Ep.: You wrote that the Buddha did not exhort > us to get > involved with people who were suffering, to be 'good > people' and try > to free those who were being oppressed. > > Dan: That's right. The Buddha's message was strictly > spiritual. As > wisdom develops, then compassion is deepened and the > impulse to > relieve suffering of all kinds is increased. Buddha > did not teach > that liberation comes through this particular good > deed or that > particular political view or even that these > political struggles are > helpful in any way. The reason is simply because > these issues are > ultimately not relevant to the real roots of > suffering. Can these > political struggles help soften material conditions > to temporarily > lessen the sting of suffering? Of course! But such > struggles are not > particularly Buddhist. Neither are they un-Buddhist. > Just different. > > Historically speaking, confusing political issues > with religious > issues is a recipe for disaster, as anyone with an > interest in > Buddhism can attest for Christianity (e.g., Pat > Robertson, Jesse > Jackson in the U.S.; crusade and inquisitions in > Europe; etc.), Islam > (e.g., Omar and bin Laden in Afghanistan; Khomeini > in Iran), > Communism (a secular, rationalist, materialist > "religion") in USSR > and Cambodia. > > Dan 9629 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 7:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling ---Good point Mike, I should have said :developing the way to the path: It gets confusing when we are refering to specific nuances of words. Best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks Rob, > > So, for the kalyana-puthujjana, what means 'learning > and developing the path'? Does this refer to > sammuti-sacca, pariyatti or...? As it has been > explained that the path refers to magga-citta? > > mike > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --Dear Mike, > > I think a sekkha is always a sotapanna or above > > best wishes > > robert > > > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > wrote: > > > Jon and Robert, > > > > > > The question I have is, is a 'trainer' (sekkha?) > > > necessarily a sotaapanna, or can a > > kalyana-putthujana > > > be a sekkha? This does have some bearing on > > issues > > > rather than semantic ones. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > > > Rob K > > > > > > > > Thanks for this point. I am indeed relieved to > > hear > > > > that those who are > > > > developing the path are no longer regarded as > > > > 'uninstructed and foolish'. > > > > I'm not sure if the same distinction is always > > > > maintained in the suttas, > > > > but in any event it would have been better to > > use > > > > the term 'worldling' in > > > > the context below. > > > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > > > In > > > > dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once > > this > > > > moment has been > > > > > experienced > > > > > > final enlightenment is inevitable in the > > > > fullness of time. Prior > > > > > to the > > > > > > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. > > at > > > > the mundane level), > > > > > > attainment to final enlightenment is not > > > > assured. The texts refer > > > > > to one > > > > > > who has attained to stream entry as a > > > > *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > > > > > > whereas one who has not attained to a moment > > of > > > > supramundane > > > > > experience is > > > > > > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. > > So > > > > it is not a path in > > > > > the > > > > > > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the > > > > worldling, as the term > > > > > seems > > > > > > to be understood nowadays. > > > > > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > > The commentaries talk about two types of > > > > putthujana (worldling): 1) > > > > > the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the > > > > kalyana-putthujana (good > > > > > worldling) who is learning and developing the > > > > path. > > > > > best wishes > > > > > robert 9630 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 7:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling And, of course, there is the five-fold path, which can be pre-magga, such as moments of genuine satipatthana as seen by kayana-putthujhana. best wishes robert--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > ---Good point Mike, > I should have said :developing the way to the path: It gets confusing > when we are refering to specific nuances of words. > Best wishes > robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > > Thanks Rob, > > > > So, for the kalyana-puthujjana, what means 'learning > > and developing the path'? Does this refer to > > sammuti-sacca, pariyatti or...? As it has been > > explained that the path refers to magga-citta? > > > > mike > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > > --Dear Mike, > > > I think a sekkha is always a sotapanna or above > > > best wishes > > > robert > > > > > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > > wrote: > > > > Jon and Robert, > > > > > > > > The question I have is, is a 'trainer' (sekkha?) > > > > necessarily a sotaapanna, or can a > > > kalyana-putthujana > > > > be a sekkha? This does have some bearing on > > > issues > > > > rather than semantic ones. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > > > > > Rob K > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for this point. I am indeed relieved to > > > hear > > > > > that those who are > > > > > developing the path are no longer regarded as > > > > > 'uninstructed and foolish'. > > > > > I'm not sure if the same distinction is always > > > > > maintained in the suttas, > > > > > but in any event it would have been better to > > > use > > > > > the term 'worldling' in > > > > > the context below. > > > > > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > > > > In > > > > > dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. It is a 'path' in the sense that once > > > this > > > > > moment has been > > > > > > experienced > > > > > > > final enlightenment is inevitable in the > > > > > fullness of time. Prior > > > > > > to the > > > > > > > first of the 4 stages of enlightenment (ie. > > > at > > > > > the mundane level), > > > > > > > attainment to final enlightenment is not > > > > > assured. The texts refer > > > > > > to one > > > > > > > who has attained to stream entry as a > > > > > *'path-winner'* or 'trainer', > > > > > > > whereas one who has not attained to a moment > > > of > > > > > supramundane > > > > > > experience is > > > > > > > referred to as an `uninstructed worldling'. > > > So > > > > > it is not a path in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > sense of being a 'path of practice' for the > > > > > worldling, as the term > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > to be understood nowadays. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > > > The commentaries talk about two types of > > > > > putthujana (worldling): 1) > > > > > > the uninstructed, foolish one and 2) the > > > > > kalyana-putthujana (good > > > > > > worldling) who is learning and developing the > > > > > path. > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > robert 9631 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 9:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Dear Dan, I would agree with Mike here that your explanation below is both impressive and very helpful in understanding the mechanics of how the cittas and their cetasikas function. If you tell me that sanna can have an 'impression' of a number of recently passed moments, that it has received and carried over from one single citta to the next, so that a given consequent citta can get the impression of 'speedy' or 'blurring' cittas having passed by recently, then I will have my question about how single cittas can have such an experience of a series of cittas resolved. Please tell me this is possible, and I will stop hammering on this topic with great relief! Best, Robert Ep. ====================== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Dan - > > I'd like to make a couple comments about the post of yours copied > below. My main comment is that it is one of the most useful, clear, and > insightful posts I have read in a long time! It is *wonderful*, and I thank > you for it! > A second comment: My recent post entitled "Some Thoughts on > Continuity, Blurs, and Cittas" was headed rather much in the same direction > as this post of yours; that is, its intention was to "see" the matters > addressed in the title of my post in a way that does *not* involve a separate > observer, agent, or self, and also does not require convoluted explanation. > Sometimes one sidesteps problems in a particular theory by using > "explanations" that present more problems than the original theory! In my > post, I believe I was starting to get somewhat below the outer flesh of the > matter, but, in this post of yours, to paraphrase a certain Zen master, you > have gotten within the bones to the very marrow. I think that if one were to > continually contemplate on nothing but the fact of each mindstate being an > impersonal cognitive event, following upon and conditioned by previous > cognitive acts, with the only discerning of objects there ever is being these > very cognitive events themselves, one could make much progress in disabusing > oneself of the annoyingly persistent sense of "self". There *is* no observer > standing back observing the flux of mindstates. Whatever is known is known > *there*, with there being no "knower". As you imply, should ignorance > sufficiently diminish and insight increase sufficiently, the arising and > falling away of mindstates and of their associated objects and concomitants > would be "seen", that seeing/wisdom itself being an aspect or concomitant of > the mindstates, and there would be a growing realization of impersonality and > emptiness, with neither continuity nor discreteness being an adequate > characterization of the way things truly appear. The *details* of the map we > use of this domain are less important than the critical requirement that the > map be free of the views of personality and of essence. > The more and more closely I look, the more I see how many, varied, and > treacherous are the "pitfalls of self" waiting for us on the path, subtly > hidden by dense leaf-layers of wrongly formulated, wrongly interpreted, and > wrongly grasped theories. Your post goes a long way, for me, in clearing away > these layers, exposing the pitfalls below. > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/25/01 12:00:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, > dalthorp@o... writes: > > > > _____________________________________________ > > Howard: But who (or what) is this "we" who are so overwhelmed by the > > speed of cittas to think they act simultaneously when it is only the > > cittas, themselves, that are aware? > > > > Robert Ep.: > > The only question is who is it so fast for?...Since we are working on > > the assumption that there is no ego that is observing these cittas > > jump around like mad, who or what is watching these cittas whiz > > by? ... [H]ow [can] we have overriding, comparative or relative > > experiences without an ego to hold and compare it all? > > _____________________________________________ > > > > Howdy, Howard and Robert Ep., > > You've inspired me to reflect again on the nature of cittas and > > cetasikas, and I thank you. I don't know if my investigations have > > any relevance to what you've been talking about, and it's always > > dangerous to burst into a ongoing conversation between two sharp > > cookies, but you may be able to help me think more clearly about the > > issues. Here's what I've been thinking... > > > > I looked up a wonderful passage in Brahmajala sutta (DN 1, i 34 PTS > > or §49 BPS): "In this case some recluse or Brahmin is addicted to > > logic and reasoning. He gives utterance to the following conclusions > > of his own, beaten out by his argumentations and based on his flight > > of thought thus: 'That which is [connected with] "the eye", "the > > ear", "the nose", "the tongue" and "the body"--that self is > > impermanent, unstable, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which > > is called "citta", "mano", or "viññana"--that self is permanent, > > eternal, not subject to change..." Although the rationalistic partial- > > eternalist described by Buddha in the passage above posits a "who" to > > experience and compare cittas, it really isn't necessary. The > > commentary discusses this interesting case in more detail: "The > > rationalist sees the breakup of the eye, etc.; but because every > > preceding act of consciousness (citta), in ceasing, conditions the > > arising of its successor, he does not see the breakup of the > > consciousness, even though the latter is more pronounced than the > > breakup of the eye, etc. Since he does not see the breakup of > > consciousness, he assumes that when the bodily frame breaks up the > > consciousness goes elsewhere...This he declares as his view." > > > > Blurred vision (ignorance) prevents a clear view of the moment-to- > > moment breakup of consciousness. A consequence of that blurred vision > > is an intensification of the impression of continuity and the > > positing of a self to "hold" that sense of continuity. The > > subcommentary elaborates further: "'He does not see the breakup of > > consciousness': although consciousness is breaking up moment after > > moment, each act of consciousness, in breaking up, becomes the > > proximity condition for the following act of consciousness. Because > > each succeeding act of consciousness arises concealing, as it were, > > the absence of its predecessor, the aspect of presence alone is > > strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Thus he does not see the > > destruction of consciousness. This matter becomes very clear by the > > example of the fire-disc (i.e. the unbroken disc of flame formed by > > swinging a firebrand in rapid circular motion). Because the > > rationalistic partial-eternalist is still more remote from > > understanding and applying the method of diversity (viz. discrete > > cittas), and wrongly applies the method of unity, he arrives at the > > conviction: 'This very consciousness which always occurs with a > > single nature, just this is a permanent self.'" > > > > So the view of a self to house the and interpret the experiences will > > naturally take root when each succeeding act of consciousness arises > > and conceals the absence of its predecessor, and the aspect of > > presence alone is strong and clear, not the aspect of absense. Then, > > there is no clear view of the dissolution of consciousness. > > > > To resolve the problem of the "who who experiences" requires a proper > > balance of the "methods of diversity and unity". B. Bodhi gives a > > good description of these "methods" in the introduction to his > > translation of DN 1: "The eternalist doctrine is said to originate > > through a misapplication of the 'method of unity' (ekattanaya) to the > > continuum of experience which is the subject of examination....The > > method of unity disloses the coherence of the succession of distinct > > experiential occasions making up the continuum. It shows them as > > bound together in a single series, participants in a process of > > transmission and development, interconnected members unified through > > a law of conditional dependence. The method of diversity balances > > this by showing up the difference. Though unified, the current of > > experience is still a chain made up of distint links. Some of these > > funciton as causes, others as effects.... When these two methods are > > applied in conjunction, the current of experience will be correctly > > understood; but when they are misapplied or applied in a one-sided > > fashion, it will be misunderstood. The misapplication of the method > > of unity will lead to the belief in an identical self and thence to > > eternalism. The misapplication of the method of diversity will take > > the disruptive, discontinuous element in experience as absolute and > > thence lead to a doctrine of annihilationism. The correct application > > of both will show the continuum to be a causally connected succession > > of momentary processes, which continues so long as the causes retain > > their efficacy and ceases when the causes are deactivated, in either > > case without harboring a pesisting core to be grasped as a personal > > self. This is the middle way which avoids the two extremes." > > > > With its abundance of conventional language about "this bhikkhu, that > > householder" and similes about "gold" and "luminous mind", it is easy > > to (mis)read the suttas with a unity bias. With its elaborate > > description and classification of cittas and cetasikas, Abhidhamma > > (esp. Dhammasangani and the first few chapters of Abhidhammatha > > sangaha) seems to emphasize more the method of diversity. I find it > > very helpful to study Abhidhamma, and then I read the suttas with a > > little more of a "diversity" method than a "conventional" reading > > would give. > > > > Ledi Sayadaw asks: "But how are we to understand the momentary > > arising and ceasing of mind?" (JPTS 7(1):115-163, 1913). He draws his > > discussion from the Citta chapter of Yamaka, and his answer is > > typical of both the suttas and Abhidhamma. Here's my take on it... > > > > There are six kinds of consciousness -- those of the five special > > senses and the "coordinating sense" (mano). If with seeing there is > > the sense, "I see a visible object", the visual cognition has been > > taken as a "self". Same with hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling. > > If there is the sense, "It is a mental phenomenon, an element, a > > sphere of sense, it is not 'mine,' not 'I', not my 'self'", then the > > sensation is not taken as self. > > > > But what about cognition itself (mano), considered apart from seeing > > and other occasions of sense? Consider the sentiment: "I think such- > > and-such", or "I experience a citta", or "I observed lots of cittas > > passing by in the span of a second." Here, consciousness has been > > taken as a "self" as soon as a distinction is sought between the > > experience and the experiencer, between the act and the agent (or > > actor). Abhidhamma makes no such distinction, and no such distinction > > is necessary. The mind (citta) is not distinct from the > > act "thinking". Similarly, there is no agent apart from the > > act "sensation" (or "contact" or "sankhara" or "recognition"), i.e. > > there is not a citta that experiences sensation. To think of citta as > > something that experiences sensation is once again to make a > > distinction between the experience and the experiencer; the act and > > the agent; the actor and the action; the self that does this, > > experiences that, and thinks this-or-that. BOOM! "Self" is found > > masquerading right in the midst of a bunch of fancy Pali terminology > > that merely serves as cover for sakayaditthi--and an effective cover > > at that! > > > > Citta doesn't experience sensation; Citta IS the experience, and > > sensation is one of the characteristics of that experience. > > Experience (citta) at one moment differs from that at another moment, > > and sensation is an aspect of each citta. So is sañña (perception, > > recognition, memory). "This moment is similar to the moment a moment > > ago" -- that impression is sañña, which "has the characteristic of > > noting and the function of recognizing what has been previously > > noted" [Asl I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 110), cited in > > Nina's "Cetasikas"]. The object of sañña is the same as the object of > > the citta; but the cognizing itself is "citta", while "sañña" is the > > name given to a category of ingredient that flavors the cognition. > > [When I was in high school, I had the good fortune to get to visit > > Hawaii. I ordered a dinner at a fancy restaurant, and the waiter > > asked, "What kind of starch would you like with that?" I'd never > > heard it asked quite that way before (or since), but I thought it was > > brilliant. "Sañña" is like "starch" -- it comes with the citta, but > > it comes in different flavors.] A "function" of sañña is > > the "recognition" of similarity or dissimilarity between cittas. > > There is no sañña entity to do any recognizing; there is merely > > cognition (with a certain sañña flavor, vedana flavor, phassa flavor, > > etc.). Of course, we may speak of an act of recognition or an object > > of sañña, but we must be very clear that there is no "sañña" doing > > the acting and the "object" is not "experienced" by any sañña entity. > > And although the temptation is overwhelming, the sañña flavor of > > cittas does not necessitate a the positing of a self to explain the > > experience of speedy cittas. > > > > Dan 9632 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 9:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Robert Ep.] Dan, I agree that confusing religion and politics can be disastrous. As you say, as understanding and compassion increase, one will naturally be moved to alleviate suffering without having to reason it out. And I agree that to end the source of suffering is ultimately far more valuable. At the same time, I don't think it's a coincidence, and by your words here neither do you, that those with a spiritual bent are often the ones to step forward and try to ease suffering in the moment. Best, Robert Ep. =================================== --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > _______________________________ > Robert Ep.: You wrote that the Buddha did not exhort us to get > involved with people who were suffering, to be 'good people' and try > to free those who were being oppressed. > > Dan: That's right. The Buddha's message was strictly spiritual. As > wisdom develops, then compassion is deepened and the impulse to > relieve suffering of all kinds is increased. Buddha did not teach > that liberation comes through this particular good deed or that > particular political view or even that these political struggles are > helpful in any way. The reason is simply because these issues are > ultimately not relevant to the real roots of suffering. Can these > political struggles help soften material conditions to temporarily > lessen the sting of suffering? Of course! But such struggles are not > particularly Buddhist. Neither are they un-Buddhist. Just different. > > Historically speaking, confusing political issues with religious > issues is a recipe for disaster, as anyone with an interest in > Buddhism can attest for Christianity (e.g., Pat Robertson, Jesse > Jackson in the U.S.; crusade and inquisitions in Europe; etc.), Islam > (e.g., Omar and bin Laden in Afghanistan; Khomeini in Iran), > Communism (a secular, rationalist, materialist "religion") in USSR > and Cambodia. > > Dan 9633 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 10:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- DEar Mike, I thought this might be a little confusing. It is simply theory, useful for understanding how the past can be insighted. For us, in practice, as I said to Howard, the moments that are insighted are so infinitesimally close to being present that they are considered as the present moment. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Very interesting and I'm glad to see this documented. > Completely baffling, though. Must rethink a few > things. > > mike > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > Dear Ken O, and Howard > > Every moment once it has passed has absolutely > > ceased according to > > the Theravada. However, this doesn't mean that it > > can't be known. If 9634 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 11:00pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "engaged" [Christine] Hi there, Mike, Just out of a purely theoretical interest, are you saying that this story is not in the Tipitaka, or that the story is in the Tipitaka but that my memory served me incorrectly about the Buddha running instead of walking, and possibly other details? All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Herman, > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > > Dan, > > > > I recall that there was an occasion where the Buddha > > literally ran > > for his life, being pursued by someone who wanted to > > harm him. > > This certainly never occurred in the parts of the > Tipitaka I've read and seems highly unlikely. If you > can cite this event I'd be most interested. I wonder > if you're thinking of Angulimala, who chased the > Buddha as fast as he could to murder him and cut off > one of his fingers for his necklace--though the Buddha > continued walking at his regular pace, Angulimala was > unable to catch up with him. > > > Is this an act of self-preservation, an indication > > of chains, bonds > > fetters etc. > > It's an interesting story but certainly has nothing to > do either with self-preservation or social activism. > The Buddha's approach to Angulimala was to teach him > the Dhamma. When the Buddha spoke about chains, > bonds, fetters etc., he was generally speaking about > unskilled mental states. > > For what it's worth, > > mike 9635 From: Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 11:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Rob, > I would be very grateful if you could tell me the mechanism by which a moment once > completely passed, can be seen as an object by a new, emergent citta. I just > don't understand it, but I'm sure there is a good structural explanation. > > It must be involved in how one citta passes its attributes to the next. And I am > equally confused about how this 'handing-off' takes place, since each citta is > 'flattened' before the next arises...or is this not the case? > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > > ================= >Dear Rob E., I'm not sure what you mean by 'flattened'? Each citta has completely passed away, ceased, ended before the next arises. But there is no space between them, no time gap. I've mentioned to you before the Patthana, which is considered the most profound section of the Tipitaka and it is there that the 24 conditions are elucidated. Ken O and Christine are now studying Nina Van Gorkoms introduction to it and you could download it from http://www.zolag.co.uk and we could all look at it together. It will make things clearer I think. best wishes robert 9636 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 25, 2001 11:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] lucid dreaming and seafood vegetarians Hi Frank, --- frank kuan wrote: > I had an interesting lucid dream today. I was rather hoping that someone more knowledgable would reply to your unusual post, but we seem to be 'fated' to talk together again;-) > My question is, do other members lucid dream with all > 6 sense bases? Which ones work better? Do they all > work? I know that dream analysis and dream therapy are considered very important by many people and especially by many psychotherapists. From a dhamma point of view, I understand that dreams are merely an indication of our kilesa which even follow us around as we sleep. This is the reason that arahats don't dream as I've heard (pls don't ask for the reference;-) When we give particular importance to certain dreams or to their lucidity or otherwise, I wonder if this isn't just attachment in the way there is attachment to any other stories we get 'lost' in or carried away by. In other words, if we attach importance to the papanca (proliferations) in themselves, rather than developing awareness of the present seeing or thinking, it can be most unhelpful I feel. People have expressed the idea before on dsg of different senses working whilst we sleep and dream. it's true that it really seems as though there is seeing and hearing and other sense door experiences at these times. In reality, aren't these just tricks of the mind, conditioned by sanna (perception/memory) and many other factors? In fact nothing is being seen, heard, smelt, tasted or touched, but the thinking through the mind-door is very busy and active. Of course, as soon as we're just a 'little' awake, seeing, hearing and so on are active again and sometimes it can be unclear for a few minutes whether we're dreaming or really experiencing sights and sounds and so on. So devious is the mind. Sorry if I've misunderstood or not given the kind of response you were looking for, Frank. Hope to hear your comments. Sarah 9637 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 0:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] "engaged" [Robert Ep.] Hi Dan, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks again, Dan. Like Mike, Howard, Jon and others, I've also really appreciated some of your amazing posts recently, starting with your first 'Human Rights' one and especially the one Howard commented on...(sorry, too rushed to find them now). Many thanks and hope Lisa is 'hangin' in' as best she can.....;-) Howard, also greatly appreciated your correspondence with Dan of late and your fine considerations in your 'Dear All' post.....so very glad to hear all the points you make so well. Thanks everyone else too for all the great contributions....too many to mention;-) Sarah 9638 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 1:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Rob, > > I would be very grateful if you could tell me the mechanism by > which a moment once > > completely passed, can be seen as an object by a new, emergent > citta. I just > > don't understand it, but I'm sure there is a good structural > explanation. > > > > It must be involved in how one citta passes its attributes to the > next. And I am > > equally confused about how this 'handing-off' takes place, since > each citta is > > 'flattened' before the next arises...or is this not the case? > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ================= > >Dear Rob E., > I'm not sure what you mean by 'flattened'? Each citta has completely > passed away, ceased, ended before the next arises. that's what I meant. But there is no > space between them, no time gap. So they 'touch' in a sense? And thus the material is able to be transmitted from one to the next? > I've mentioned to you before the Patthana, which is considered the > most profound section of the Tipitaka and it is there that the 24 > conditions are elucidated. Ken O and Christine are now studying Nina > Van Gorkoms introduction to it and you could download it from > http://www.zolag.co.uk and we could all look at it together. It will > make things clearer I think. > best wishes > robert That is such a nice invitation, I can't resist. I can't promise I'll keep up too well, but I will try. After all, posting on dsg is a full time job. Best, Robert Ep. 9639 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 1:41am Subject: latest edition of Buddhism in Daily Life I see that at http://www.zolag.co.uk the new editions of Buddhism in Daily Life and Abhidhamma in Daily life are now available for free download as pdf files (has the correct pali fonts). Rather nice of the publisher to do this since these books can still be purchased in hard copy. robert 9640 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Rob. Could you please tell me where on the site the intro to the Patthana is? I can't find it in the index on the site. I looked through Abhidhamma in Daily Life and a couple other of Nina's books and couldn't find it there....... Thanks, Robert ======== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Rob, > > I would be very grateful if you could tell me the mechanism by > which a moment once > > completely passed, can be seen as an object by a new, emergent > citta. I just > > don't understand it, but I'm sure there is a good structural > explanation. > > > > It must be involved in how one citta passes its attributes to the > next. And I am > > equally confused about how this 'handing-off' takes place, since > each citta is > > 'flattened' before the next arises...or is this not the case? > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ================= > >Dear Rob E., > I'm not sure what you mean by 'flattened'? Each citta has completely > passed away, ceased, ended before the next arises. But there is no > space between them, no time gap. > I've mentioned to you before the Patthana, which is considered the > most profound section of the Tipitaka and it is there that the 24 > conditions are elucidated. Ken O and Christine are now studying Nina > Van Gorkoms introduction to it and you could download it from > http://www.zolag.co.uk and we could all look at it together. It will > make things clearer I think. > best wishes > robert 9641 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 2:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Rob K: But there is no > > space between them, no time gap. > > So they 'touch' in a sense? And thus the material is able to be transmitted from > one to the next?= ++++++++++++ Dear Rob E., I used to have this simple mental picture like that. But then I found about about the plane where there is no nama at all, it is completely supressed for aeons and the state called nirodha-samapatti which some arahants attain(no nama for up to seven days). Conditions work in complex ways . Naturally we try to imagine how it works using what we know about the world we can see and so we think about nama(mentality) as if was like rupa(matter); but it is not like rupa. Actually even the world of rupa is much harder to visualise and put into words than it seems. Scientists have ever more complicated models of the atomic world but none of it really can tell us what it is exactly like. When we learned the solar system model in elementary chemistry, with electrons spinning round the atom this helped to explain some behaviour but if we thought that an atom actually looked like that we were wrong. What the Dhamma points to is seeing how it(nama or rupa) appears directly and so we don't have to have a mental picture really. Anyway you'll see more after studying conditions: the url for it is http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf best wishes robert > > > I've mentioned to you before the Patthana, which is considered the > > most profound section of the Tipitaka and it is there that the 24 > > conditions are elucidated. Ken O and Christine are now studying Nina > > Van Gorkoms introduction to it and you could download it from > > http://www.zolag.co.uk and we could all look at it together. It will > > make things clearer I think. > > best wishes > > robert > > That is such a nice invitation, I can't resist. I can't promise I'll keep up too > well, but I will try. > > After all, posting on dsg is a full time job. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9642 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 3:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Hi Robert Ep., > function. If you tell me that sanna can have an 'impression' of a number of > recently passed moments, that it has received and carried over from one single > citta to the next, so that a given consequent citta can get the impression of > 'speedy' or 'blurring' cittas having passed by recently, then I will have my > question about how single cittas can have such an experience of a series of cittas > resolved. > > Please tell me this is possible, and I will stop hammering on this topic with > great relief! Instead of saying that "sañña has an impression", it might be helpful to think of sañña AS that impression -- this helps cut out the middleman. Of course, this isn't exactly right because "sañña" is just a word. I'm still trying to figure out a good way to state all this. Maybe Howard or Robert K can help... 9643 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meththa meditation Dear Christine, --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for your patient explanations - I do not dispute anything you > have said. I learn a great deal from all of your posts, if not from > the words themselves - then from the thinking about the words > later :-) > But I am interested to notice my reactions and how this topic > troubled me and came to assume such an importance to me. I think it > grew out of need. > At work, I feel constantly buffeted by waves of distressed feelings > flooding off people in heartrending situations......... I understand well. Reminds me of when I lived in London (a long time ago now) and I worked in pyschiatric centres and centres for delinquent adolescents......enough said;-) > Theoretically, > I could leave the job.......do I want to?.........maybe I'm addicted > to pain, or have an 'If not I, then who...?' complex.........don't > know...... Well, I’m sure we all have mixed motives and mixed thoughts about what we do...but for sure there are all sorts of complex causes which lead our lives to be led as they are. I’m also sure you must help a lot and many people will be glad you do the work you do, Christine;-) The negative thoughts and reactions we have don’t last either and tend to follow us around, finding different objects, whatever our lifestyles. > I think I have been using Metta Meditation as a personal first-aid > mechanism, and, at this point in time, I cannot see any alternative > to continuing to act in this way. Some sort of psychic shield would > be great. :-) Does Buddhism offer such a thing? I don't know of > anything other than Metta Meditation (beginning with self as target) > that revitalises, restores - puts money back in the emotional bank, > when there has been a heavy pay-out. I understand what you’re saying. I also have the highest regard and respect for B.Bodhi and his wonderful work and especially his translations. Any encounters we have had with him (and before him with B. Nyanaponika) have always been inspiring and memorable too. While I appreciate most of what he writes, there are areas, however, including aspects of the development of metta, where we come to different interpretations, as you kindly and gently point out. As you have suggested before, most people share BB’s understanding and have the idea of setting a time and place for metta meditation and then developing it towards oneself in the first instance. Please accept that I am not attempting to try and stop you or change your mind about any activity which helps you with your work or daily life or ‘puts money back in the emotional bank’. When I was doing those jobs in London, I remember how on the cold winter evenings, I’d either go off to study Pali, go to a yoga class or stay at home and listen over and over and over to tapes of discussions with Khun Sujin. Perhaps these were my ways of filling up the emotional bank. We all follow our interests and inclinations in this regard. What I do question, however are: 1. When we think we are having metta to ourselves, whether this really is metta. >detached altruistic > wish for one's own well-being. I’d be interested to see any references to the above which include metta. I would think that when there’s any wish for one’s own well-being, there is attachment. It’s so common in daily life as we know and I heard the other day that this is why it is the first state under consciousness in the Satipatthana Sutta to be known. 2. I wonder what the point is of waiting for a special time and place and object, when there are so many opportunities for metta and other kinds of kusala right now. Most the time aren’t we just looking hoping or chasing some pleasant feelings rather than understanding anything about the present state. Isn’t it the understanding now that conditions more metta, compassion and so on? 3. > It is suggested that one take > oneself as the first object of //metta// because true lovingkindness > for others only becomes possible when one is able to feel genuine > lovingkindness for oneself. I wonder where the contextual support is for this argument. 4.>..Probably most of the anger and hostility > we direct to others springs from negative attitudes we hold towards > ourselves This is a popular idea. What I understand the Buddha to teach is that anger and hostility springs from attachment to and ignorance of what is experienced through the 6 sense doors. 5. Finally and most importantly, if we see the development of metta or any other kind of wholesome state as a series of steps to be followed and action to be taken at a certain time, isn’t there an idea of self that can and should control or direct again? Doesn’t it show the clinging to having more metta, and for being the person with metta? Attachment can be very comforting and very pleasant, but isn’t it better to recognise it for what it is? Christine, there are many, many other excellent points in the article you quoted and I could easily have just referred to these. Please know I have the highest respect for your considerations (as for BB’s) and by raising these questions, I’m not expecting answers or wishing to undermine any practices or ideas others may have. There is precious little metta in my day and I appreciate all the quotes and reminders. In appreciation, Sarah 9644 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 2:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/25/01 3:19:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Dear Rob, > I would be very grateful if you could tell me the mechanism by which a > moment once > completely passed, can be seen as an object by a new, emergent citta. I > just > don't understand it, but I'm sure there is a good structural explanation. > > It must be involved in how one citta passes its attributes to the next. > And I am > equally confused about how this 'handing-off' takes place, since each citta > is > 'flattened' before the next arises...or is this not the case? > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > ============================== With regard to your first question about "seeing the past" ;-)), I have no answer. (I suspect that if the matter is an actual one, then what might be going on is that it is possible to pass along faithful replicas - more than mere memories - for the mind door to take as object, but, of course, this is rank speculation on my part.) This is a matter which I also would like to see further explanation of. Also, with regard to the citta theory, and its many assumptions, I have to hold back from full, willing commitment. However, the notion of one event conditioning another "at a distance" so to speak does not really trouble me. The Buddha never really taught causality in the sense of involving some sort of underlying, substantial "causal powers". He taught *conditionality*: When this is, that is. when this arises, that arises. We never see any kind of causal power. Conditionality amounts to a means of *explaining* the arising of phenomena. We merely point to the arising of previous phenomena to "account" for current phenomena. When someone asks *how* it is that A caused Z, we then simply show a chain of intermediate conditions, A => B => C => Z which refines the original, and continue to further refine the explanatory chain until it is fine enough to satisfy the questioner. Conditionality is a matter of recognizing patterns of regular and necessary pre-occurrence and co-occurrence, and not of discerning occult causal powers. 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) 9645 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 7:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: meththa meditation Hi, [snip] > What I do question, however are: > > 1. When we think we are having metta to ourselves, whether this really is > metta. > > >detached altruistic > > wish for one's own well-being. > > I'd be interested to see any references to the above which include metta. I > would think that when there's any wish for one's own well-being, there is > attachment. It's so common in daily life as we know and I heard the other day > that this is why it is the first state under consciousness in the Satipatthana > Sutta to be known. > [snip] > > 3. > It is suggested that one take > > oneself as the first object of //metta// because true lovingkindness > > for others only becomes possible when one is able to feel genuine > > lovingkindness for oneself. > > I wonder where the contextual support is for this argument. > [snip] These two discourses might be relevant to questions 1 and 3. Samyutta Nikaya III.4 Piya Sutta Dear http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn03-004.html Udana V.1 Raja Sutta The King http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/udana/ud5-01.html > > 5. Finally and most importantly, if we see the development of metta or any > other kind of wholesome state as a series of steps to be followed and action to > be taken at a certain time, isn't there an idea of self that can and should > control or direct again? Not necessarily. Doesn't it show the clinging to having more metta, and > for being the person with metta? Not necessarily. Attachment can be very comforting and very > pleasant, but isn't it better to recognise it for what it is? > Metta can lead to pleasant, comforting feeling. And this feeling is impermanent, is dukkha, is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my self." Metta, Victor 9646 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 8:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Thanks, Robert, and thanks for the specific link. I will read it and look forward to discussing it with you all. I hope my brain will eventually be informed as to how a citta can be the object for another citta after it is completely gone. If not, I will have to calm my brain down and tell it to 'let go'. Best, Robert Ep. =========================== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > > Rob K: But there is no > > > space between them, no time gap. > > > > So they 'touch' in a sense? And thus the material is able to be > transmitted from > > one to the next?= > ++++++++++++ > > Dear Rob E., > I used to have this simple mental picture like that. But then I found > about about the plane where there is no nama at all, it is completely > supressed for aeons and the state called nirodha-samapatti which some > arahants attain(no nama for up to seven days). Conditions work in > complex ways . > Naturally we try to imagine how it works using what we know about the > world we can see and so we think about nama(mentality) as if was like > rupa(matter); but it is not like rupa. Actually even the world of > rupa is much harder to visualise and put into words than it seems. > Scientists have ever more complicated models of the atomic world but > none of it really can tell us what it is exactly like. When we > learned the solar system model in elementary chemistry, with > electrons spinning round the atom this helped to explain some > behaviour but if we thought that an atom actually looked like that we > were wrong. > What the Dhamma points to is seeing how it(nama or rupa) appears > directly and so we don't have to have a mental picture really. > Anyway you'll see more after studying conditions: > the url for it is > http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf > > best wishes > robert > > > > > I've mentioned to you before the Patthana, which is considered > the > > > most profound section of the Tipitaka and it is there that the 24 > > > conditions are elucidated. Ken O and Christine are now studying > Nina > > > Van Gorkoms introduction to it and you could download it from > > > http://www.zolag.co.uk and we could all look at it together. It > will > > > make things clearer I think. > > > best wishes > > > robert > > > > That is such a nice invitation, I can't resist. I can't promise > I'll keep up too > > well, but I will try. > > > > After all, posting on dsg is a full time job. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. 9647 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 8:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Rob. I just took a look at the book. 159 pages!!!! I don't mean to be sacreligious, but holy catfish!!!! Okay, I better start reading...... ....Do you think 'homework' is the result of un-worked-out kamma???? Best, Robert Ep. =================== --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > > Rob K: But there is no > > > space between them, no time gap. > > > > So they 'touch' in a sense? And thus the material is able to be > transmitted from > > one to the next?= > ++++++++++++ > > Dear Rob E., > I used to have this simple mental picture like that. But then I found > about about the plane where there is no nama at all, it is completely > supressed for aeons and the state called nirodha-samapatti which some > arahants attain(no nama for up to seven days). Conditions work in > complex ways . > Naturally we try to imagine how it works using what we know about the > world we can see and so we think about nama(mentality) as if was like > rupa(matter); but it is not like rupa. Actually even the world of > rupa is much harder to visualise and put into words than it seems. > Scientists have ever more complicated models of the atomic world but > none of it really can tell us what it is exactly like. When we > learned the solar system model in elementary chemistry, with > electrons spinning round the atom this helped to explain some > behaviour but if we thought that an atom actually looked like that we > were wrong. > What the Dhamma points to is seeing how it(nama or rupa) appears > directly and so we don't have to have a mental picture really. > Anyway you'll see more after studying conditions: > the url for it is > http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf > > best wishes > robert > > > > > I've mentioned to you before the Patthana, which is considered > the > > > most profound section of the Tipitaka and it is there that the 24 > > > conditions are elucidated. Ken O and Christine are now studying > Nina > > > Van Gorkoms introduction to it and you could download it from > > > http://www.zolag.co.uk and we could all look at it together. It > will > > > make things clearer I think. > > > best wishes > > > robert > > > > That is such a nice invitation, I can't resist. I can't promise > I'll keep up too > > well, but I will try. > > > > After all, posting on dsg is a full time job. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. 9648 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 8:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cheetahs and owls Hi Dan. Well the important point to me is that you seem to be confirming that sanna can pass the imprint of accumulated impressions, and has the capability to record the results of one citta to the next to the next, so that the 'impression' of a number of cittas passing could be recorded by a given resultant citta, even though the former cittas are completely gone. This would allow for a citta having a blurred, speedy or mistaken impression about the 'passage of cittas' as a concept, or even as a kind of perceptual impression that has been stored and released into the current citta. Your clarification that sanna is closer to *being* the impression makes sense and does cut out the 'middleman' who could turn out to be yet another sneaky 'entity-object'. It gives me the image of perhaps a photographic impression that is impressed upon the citta, perhaps transmitted from former experiences and projected upon the citta. If you think of the photograph example, you can impress an image on a piece of photographic paper by blocking it with an object and allowing the light to hit it around the object. The resultant image is 'of' the object that was in the way of the light. In this sense, the citta might be like the blank sheet of paper and sanna might be like the object whose image is impressed upon the citta. Metaphors and similes a-plenty, Robert Ep. ============================= --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Robert Ep., > > function. If you tell me that sanna can have an 'impression' of a > number of > > recently passed moments, that it has received and carried over from > one single > > citta to the next, so that a given consequent citta can get the > impression of > > 'speedy' or 'blurring' cittas having passed by recently, then I > will have my > > question about how single cittas can have such an experience of a > series of cittas > > resolved. > > > > Please tell me this is possible, and I will stop hammering on this > topic with > > great relief! > > Instead of saying that "sañña has an impression", it might be helpful > to think of sañña AS that impression -- this helps cut out the > middleman. Of course, this isn't exactly right because "sañña" is > just a word. I'm still trying to figure out a good way to state all > this. Maybe Howard or Robert K can help... 9649 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 8:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/25/01 3:19:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Dear Rob, > > I would be very grateful if you could tell me the mechanism by which a > > moment once > > completely passed, can be seen as an object by a new, emergent citta. I > > just > > don't understand it, but I'm sure there is a good structural explanation. > > > > It must be involved in how one citta passes its attributes to the next. > > And I am > > equally confused about how this 'handing-off' takes place, since each citta > > is > > 'flattened' before the next arises...or is this not the case? > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > ============================== > With regard to your first question about "seeing the past" ;-)), I > have no answer. (I suspect that if the matter is an actual one, then what > might be going on is that it is possible to pass along faithful replicas - > more than mere memories - for the mind door to take as object, but, of > course, this is rank speculation on my part.) This is a matter which I also > would like to see further explanation of. Also, with regard to the citta > theory, and its many assumptions, I have to hold back from full, willing > commitment. > However, the notion of one event conditioning another "at a distance" > so to speak does not really trouble me. The Buddha never really taught > causality in the sense of involving some sort of underlying, substantial > "causal powers". He taught *conditionality*: When this is, that is. when this > arises, that arises. We never see any kind of causal power. Conditionality > amounts to a means of *explaining* the arising of phenomena. We merely point > to the arising of previous phenomena to "account" for current phenomena. When > someone asks *how* it is that A caused Z, we then simply show a chain of > intermediate conditions, A => B => C => Z which refines the original, and > continue to further refine the explanatory chain until it is fine enough to > satisfy the questioner. Conditionality is a matter of recognizing patterns of > regular and necessary pre-occurrence and co-occurrence, and not of discerning > occult causal powers. > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard, So are you saying that conditional arising is not like a billiard ball heading in a certain direction which hits another billiard ball and sends it speeding in a related direction of its own? This would have a kind of causality to it, but it is a combination of the tendencies of the billiard ball being hit and the impact of the billiard ball that is hitting it. That would give one model of dependent co-arising. If you are instead saying that the billiard balls don't actually hit each other, or don't actually change each other's direction and speed by meeting, then this sounds more mystical to me than some sort of actual contact. Are you saying the relations between objects is *only* explanatory, or would you say there is some kind of actual contact and effect. Best, Robert Ep. 9650 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 8:38am Subject: serious questions about lucid dreaming Hi Sarah, I was surprised by the lack of response to my query, and I can only conclude that: 1) People wrote off my post as completely frivolous and did not see the importance of what I was really asking 2) People simply have not paid attention to the details in their own dreams that I was asking about and hence do not have any comments or answers at this time. let me re-ask my questions in a different way. 1) I care not about astrology or any special signifigance of non-lucid or lucid dreams, and I don't waste time wondering about my fate or the future. 2) The really key point that I observed in this lucid dream is that based on the visual sense door alone I could not distinguish whether it was a dream world or "real" world! I had to rely on the other sense faculties being somewhat defective to give me the evidence that it was not the "real" world. 2a) do other members experience perfect clarity in the visual sense door while dreaming? I.e. dream in color, good peripheral vision, image persists without great effort (i.e. world environment isn't changing every 2 seconds in some subtle or nonsubtle way)? 3) Do the other sense faculties for members work as well in lucid dreams as visual? For me, they were far inferior in quality. 4) A friend of mine mentioned he is able to manipulate his dreamworld and reshape the environment, change characteristics of people, like a big virtual reality playground. 5) The same friend also mentioned occasionaly even though realizing the lucidity of the dream initially, after playing around and reshaping the dream world, he would forget his lucidity and reimmerse into the dream reality thinking it was real. 6) Do other members do some form of meditation in their lucid or non-lucid dreams? My father mentions doing mindfulness of breathing or chanting mantras in his dreams, but those dreams are non-lucid (i.e. while in the dream he thinks they're real). 6a) Other meditators I talked to say they meditate in their dream, and they know they're dreaming, so they effectively double their daily spiritual practice by making use of sleep time :-) 7) When I'm "awake" in the "real" world, I don't question the reality of things - i.e. I take for granted my personality view is a real "I", subtle conceit is a real "I", objects in reality have some ultimate existence. Only when dreaming to I start to question whether things are really true. 8) Along the lines of what Sarah says below, I was also theorizing how the sense organ of the mind is really the most important one, and in the dream world, it would seem to be the only one active (i.e. it simulates and tricks us into thinking the other 5 or making contact and receiving stimulus). I was mighty surprised that an abidhamma list did not produce a horde of responses explaining this phenomena in explicit detail giving a blow by blow citta account of what's happening :-) 9) To reiterate my earlier insight from my lucid dream, if I was ONLY relying on the visual sense door, I can not discern whether I'm dreaming or awake! Does this not stun or bother anyone else? -fk --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Frank, > > --- frank kuan wrote: > I had > an interesting lucid dream > today. > > I was rather hoping that someone more knowledgable > would reply to your unusual > post, but we seem to be 'fated' to talk together > again;-) > > > > My question is, do other members lucid dream with > all > > 6 sense bases? Which ones work better? Do they all > > work? > > I know that dream analysis and dream therapy are > considered very important by > many people and especially by many psychotherapists. > > From a dhamma point of view, I understand that > dreams are merely an indication > of our kilesa which even follow us around as we > sleep. This is the reason that > arahats don't dream as I've heard (pls don't ask for > the reference;-) When we > give particular importance to certain dreams or to > their lucidity or otherwise, > I wonder if this isn't just attachment in the way > there is attachment to any > other stories we get 'lost' in or carried away by. > In other words, if we attach > importance to the papanca (proliferations) in > themselves, rather than > developing awareness of the present seeing or > thinking, it can be most > unhelpful I feel. > > People have expressed the idea before on dsg of > different senses working whilst > we sleep and dream. it's true that it really seems > as though there is seeing > and hearing and other sense door experiences at > these times. In reality, aren't > these just tricks of the mind, conditioned by sanna > (perception/memory) and > many other factors? In fact nothing is being seen, > heard, smelt, tasted or > touched, but the thinking through the mind-door is > very busy and active. Of > course, as soon as we're just a 'little' awake, > seeing, hearing and so on are > active again and sometimes it can be unclear for a > few minutes whether we're > dreaming or really experiencing sights and sounds > and so on. So devious is the > mind. > > Sorry if I've misunderstood or not given the kind of > response you were looking > for, Frank. Hope to hear your comments. > > Sarah 9651 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 4:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/26/01 11:21:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Hi Howard, > So are you saying that conditional arising is not like a billiard ball > heading in > a certain direction which hits another billiard ball and sends it speeding > in a > related direction of its own? This would have a kind of causality to it, > but it > is a combination of the tendencies of the billiard ball being hit and the > impact > of the billiard ball that is hitting it. That would give one model of > dependent > co-arising. > > If you are instead saying that the billiard balls don't actually hit each > other, > or don't actually change each other's direction and speed by meeting, then > this > sounds more mystical to me than some sort of actual contact. > > Are you saying the relations between objects is *only* explanatory, or > would you > say there is some kind of actual contact and effect. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > ============================== I don't know what that "actual contact" would amount to. Even in terms of physics theory, I doubt that there is any notion of actual "contact". There is nothing mystical in conditionality to the effect that when this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises. It is mere matter of fact. What would constitute a better explanation? When we push a stalled car, we conventionally think of ourselves as "making contact", but all that means phenomenologically is that certain experiences occur, the feelings of pressure/resistance, the sense of touch activated, a sense of motion, etc, and these occurring following upon intention. Not only is there impersonality involved as far as "beings" are concerned, but just as much is there impersonality involved in the relations among "things". When one looks for one thing having the "causal power" to affect another thing, one is engaged in a subtle kind of personification, I believe. With respect to this matter, I encourage you to look at Garfield's translation of and commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamaka Karika, and particularly at the early chapter (it may be the first) on causality. It is excellent, and, in my estimation, is very solid, traditional Dhamma. One example that Garfield gives that I like very much is the following (not verbatim): If we were to ask a farmer whether a sprout has the power to grow into a plant, he would certainly confirm that it does. But were we to then ask him where in the plant that power is to be found, he would look at us as if we were out of our mind! It is a mere manner of speaking to say that the sprout has the power to grow into a plant. Unpacking that terminology would involve saying something along the lines that given the presence of adequate other conditions, including decent soil, rainfall, sun (but not too much), etc, the sprout will grow. 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) 9652 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 4:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] serious questions about lucid dreaming Hi, Frank - I think this follow-up post of yours is very well done. Lucid dreaming is a topic of interest to me, particularly because I see lucid dreams not only as an opportunity for practice (as you bring up), but also because I see the very fact of "awakening" in one's dreams as a metaphor for and a pointing to the possibility of a general awakening. I don't have the time to get into a detailed discussion of this matter right now, but I hope to in the not-too-distant future. 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) 9653 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 4:40am Subject: TYPO Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi, Robert - When I wrote: > But were we to then > ask him where in the plant that power is to be found, he would look at us > as > if we were out of our mind! I meant to write "where in the sprout" instead of "where in the plant". 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) 9654 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 10:18am Subject: Cambodia Ch 11, no. 4 Cambodian Lectures, Ch 11, no. 4 When lobha arises we believe that this is good. Lobha is clinging to and desire for something. When we acquire what we want we are glad, we are absorbed in it and rejoice in it; we believe that it is something good. What we ourselves believe to be valuable is different from what is valuable in the way of the Dhamma. We estimate happy feeling to be valuable. However, in reality, lobha is akusala, it is the reality that clings. People are not satified to cling just a little, they want to cling more intensely, so that they have pleasant feeling accompanying clinging. No matter what they are doing, they desire pleasant feeling, not just indifferent feeling. Thus we see that if we do not study the Dhamma we have wrong understanding of it. When people, for example, do not feel happy, they sit and concentrate. They believe that at such a moment the citta is kusala, but they do not know that there are lobha and moha at such moments. Thus, there are then both ignorance and clinging. If someone has studied the Dhamma, he will more clearly understand that there cannot be lobha, dosa and moha at the moment of kusala citta. When kusala citta arises he will correctly understand what the objective of kusala citta is. It is not easy to know the characteristic of that citta, but when it expresses itself by deeds through body or speech we can know it. However, someone¹s understanding should be correct, otherwise he will be misled and have wrong understanding. When we see a poor person and we think of helping him, is there kusala citta or akusala citta? When we think of helping, it is kusala citta, but kusala has not been completed, because we did not perform any action. If kusala that has not been completed would be regarded as an accomplished action, everybody would have a wealth of kusala. When someone thinks of performing kusala, it is not sure that the wholesome action he intends to perform will arise. There are three times, kåla, of kusala: the time before one performs kusala, and then cetanå, intention or volition, is called: pubba cetanå (pubba meaning former); there is the actual time of performing kusala, and then cetanå is called: muñcana cetanå (muñcana meaning emitting or bestowing); there is the time after one has performed kusala, and then cetanå is called: apara cetanå (apara meaning following)3. The citta is kusala, it is pure, when one can help someone else to be free from suffering and to be happier. Kusala are the meritorious actions which can be classified in brief as threefold: dåna, síla and bhåvanå. In the case of the monk, kusala can be classified as síla, samådhi and paññå. Kusala dhammas arise with the citta, they are the dhammas that are good and wholesome. Akusala dhammas arise also with the citta, they are the dhammas that are unwholesome, such as lobha, moha and dosa. Do we have today a great deal of kusala or of akusala? If a person is truthful he is actually taking his refuge in the Dhamma. Fongchan: Someone may be sincere, but he has akusala time and again. At least he knows that it is important to be sincere. ******* Footnotes 1. The Påli term namati means to bend. 2. Only when the citta is lokuttara citta the three abstinences arise all at the same time. 3. When someone, for example, performs dåna, there can be three times of kusala: before, when he thinks of giving, during the action of dåna and afterwards, when he thinks with kusala citta of his kusala. ****** 9655 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 10:30am Subject: conventional language Hello all, I've seen people using the term "conventional speech" or "conventional language" or "conventionally speaking" in this group and the dhamma-list, and I wonder what it means by "conventional." My questions are: 1. What does it mean by "conventional"? 2. When the Buddha taught: Form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my self.", was he using conventional speech or not? If so, how so? If not, what is not conventional about the speech the Buddha used? Thank you for your time. Regards, Victor 9656 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 1:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Good explanation Howard, but one requiring more reflection for this mind. One comment below: --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/26/01 11:21:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Hi Howard, > > So are you saying that conditional arising is not like a billiard ball > > heading in > > a certain direction which hits another billiard ball and sends it speeding > > in a > > related direction of its own? This would have a kind of causality to it, > > but it > > is a combination of the tendencies of the billiard ball being hit and the > > impact > > of the billiard ball that is hitting it. That would give one model of > > dependent > > co-arising. > > > > If you are instead saying that the billiard balls don't actually hit each > > other, > > or don't actually change each other's direction and speed by meeting, then > > this > > sounds more mystical to me than some sort of actual contact. > > > > Are you saying the relations between objects is *only* explanatory, or > > would you > > say there is some kind of actual contact and effect. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > ============================== > I don't know what that "actual contact" would amount to. Even in terms > of physics theory, I doubt that there is any notion of actual "contact". > There is nothing mystical in conditionality to the effect that when this is, > that is, and when this arises, that arises. It is mere matter of fact. What > would constitute a better explanation? > When we push a stalled car, we conventionally think of ourselves as > "making contact", but all that means phenomenologically is that certain > experiences occur, the feelings of pressure/resistance, the sense of touch > activated, a sense of motion, etc, and these occurring following upon > intention. Not only is there impersonality involved as far as "beings" are > concerned, but just as much is there impersonality involved in the relations > among "things". When one looks for one thing having the "causal power" to > affect another thing, one is engaged in a subtle kind of personification, I > believe. > With respect to this matter, I encourage you to look at Garfield's > translation of and commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamaka Karika, and > particularly at the early chapter (it may be the first) on causality. Oh no, not more homework! No! I won't do it!!!!!! Okay, I'll put it on my 'reading list'. Now that's suffering! Robert Ep. ===================== It is > excellent, and, in my estimation, is very solid, traditional Dhamma. One > example that Garfield gives that I like very much is the following (not > verbatim): If we were to ask a farmer whether a sprout has the power to grow > into a plant, he would certainly confirm that it does. But were we to then > ask him where in the plant that power is to be found, he would look at us as > if we were out of our mind! It is a mere manner of speaking to say that the > sprout has the power to grow into a plant. Unpacking that terminology would > involve saying something along the lines that given the presence of adequate > other conditions, including decent soil, rainfall, sun (but not too much), > etc, the sprout will grow. > > 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) 9657 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 3:52pm Subject: Re: conventional language ---Dear Victor, Conventional speech is vohara vaca in pali. Buddhism in a Nutshell Narada Mahathera "In the Sutta Pitaka is found the conventional teaching (vohara desana) while in the Abhidhamma Pitaka is found the ultimate teaching (paramattha-desana). " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/nutshell.html On your question below: while the thinking process occurs "this is not mine. This I am not.." If there is direct awareness and comprehension of the actual thinking it will be known(to some degree) that there is no one who is thinking this, but that thinking arises due to conditions. Otherwise we can think and think that there is no self but without direct insight, and that can't eradicate the deep rooted view of self. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., victoryu@s... wrote: > Hello all, > > I've seen people using the term "conventional speech" > or "conventional language" or "conventionally speaking" in this group > and the dhamma-list, and I wonder what it means by "conventional." > > My questions are: > > 1. What does it mean by "conventional"? > > 2. When the Buddha taught: Form is to be seen as it actually is with > right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is > not my self.", was he using conventional speech or not? If so, how > so? If not, what is not conventional about the speech the Buddha > used? > > Thank you for your time. > ++++++++++ 9658 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 5:09pm Subject: Mundane Path Hello All, Could someone please remind me why the 5/6fold path is the 'mundane' path? I do understand what it is and why, but it seems like magga to me. It doesn't arise in a puthujjana, does it? Any documentation would also be welcomed. Thanks in advance, mike 9659 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling Thanks Robert, I posted my last message before receiving this one. Again, I'd be very interested in any citations. mn --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > And, of course, there is the five-fold path, which > can be pre-magga, > such as moments of genuine satipatthana as seen by > kayana-putthujhana. > best wishes > robert--- 9660 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 5:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: conventional language --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > ---Dear Victor, > Conventional speech is vohara vaca in pali. > Buddhism in a Nutshell > Narada Mahathera > "In the Sutta Pitaka is found the conventional teaching (vohara > desana) while in the Abhidhamma Pitaka is found the ultimate teaching > (paramattha-desana). " > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/nutshell.html > On your question below: while the thinking process occurs "this is > not mine. This I am not.." If there is direct awareness and > comprehension of the actual thinking it will be known(to some degree) > that there is no one who is thinking this, but that thinking arises > due to conditions. Otherwise we can think and think that there is no > self but without direct insight, and that can't eradicate the deep > rooted view of self. Dear Rob, This is a very good and important point, worthy of further discussion, I think. I would like to ask some questions that may not have answers: 1/ Where is the 'deep-rooted view of the self' contained? Is it a matter of a content of consciousness that is passed along from citta to citta along with many other false concepts? Is there a variety of contents in each citta or does each one only have *one* main object? If there is only one main object for each citta, how does the view of self arise? Is it a recurring object of consciousness which occurs in certain cittas after certain other cittas and keeps associating a sense of self with cittas that have arisen immediately before it? Beyond these technicalities, I think it is very worthwhile to differentiate between conceptual knowing -- the conviction that one may develop that indeed anatta is the truth of existence and that cittas do not arise *for someone* -- and the experience of direct insight into a moment, to see that there is no self there while the moment is being apprehended. If you could say a little more about this, it would be very interesting. While we're on the subject of direct insight, I have another question: could you describe what a rupa consists of a little more specifically? And perhaps distinguish this in a little detail from a nama? I have a bit of a hard time really understanding a rupa. I think I have a misconception about it, because I have an impression that there is always a mental act in every perception, which would disqualify it from being a direct knowing of a physical object. Any clarification would be appreciated. Best, Robert Ep. ======================== > best wishes > robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., victoryu@s... wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I've seen people using the term "conventional speech" > > or "conventional language" or "conventionally speaking" in this > group > > and the dhamma-list, and I wonder what it means by "conventional." > > > > My questions are: > > > > 1. What does it mean by "conventional"? > > > > 2. When the Buddha taught: Form is to be seen as it actually is > with > > right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is > > not my self.", was he using conventional speech or not? If so, how > > so? If not, what is not conventional about the speech the Buddha > > used? > > > > Thank you for your time. > > ++++++++++ 9661 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] worldling --- Dear Mike, From the atthasalini, p204 where they talk about the fivefold path: "For althogh the pAth is eightfold, yet, in the wordly consciousness the tthree abstinences are not obtained at one and the same instant. hence it is said to be fivefold only. BUT it may be objected, there is this scripture;'The path by which one came is a phrase for the eightfold ariyan path'(samyutta 1v 195)In this sutta the path of insight preceeding the transcendental path is eightfold. now since the mundane path as implied by the term 'path by which they came'is eightfold, should it not be eightfold here also?' Nay, it should not be. the suttanta teaching is carried out by expounding. In this way he said, for instance, 'verily his bodily acts, vocal acts and life were quite pure'(majhhimma 111 289). BUT this abhidhamma teaching is bare teaching without exposition. in the worldly consciousness the three abstinces are not obtained at one and the same instant and therefore the Path is fivefold"ENDQUOTE. It helps us to read the texts if we know that satipatthana and the eighfold (fivefold) path are identical. A moment of satipatthana is a moment of the fivefold path. It is the beginning of direct insight into paramattha dhamma, patipatti. It happens for kalyana-putthujhana and will gradually lead to magga citta. These things become a little clearer to me over the years. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks Robert, > > I posted my last message before receiving this one. > Again, I'd be very interested in any citations. > > mn > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > And, of course, there is the five-fold path, which > > can be pre-magga, > > such as moments of genuine satipatthana as seen by > > kayana-putthujhana. > > best wishes > > robert--- 9662 From: Victor Yu Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: conventional language Hello Robert, Thank you for taking the time to reply. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 6:52 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: conventional language > ---Dear Victor, > Conventional speech is vohara vaca in pali. Ok, so conventional speech is vohara vaca in pali. The question was: What does it mean by "conventional"? > Buddhism in a Nutshell > Narada Mahathera > "In the Sutta Pitaka is found the conventional teaching (vohara > desana) while in the Abhidhamma Pitaka is found the ultimate teaching > (paramattha-desana). " > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/nutshell.html > On your question below: while the thinking process occurs "this is > not mine. This I am not.." >If there is direct awareness and > comprehension of the actual thinking it will be known(to some degree) > that there is no one who is thinking this, but that thinking arises > due to conditions. Thanks for the link and quote. The question was: When the Buddha taught: Form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my self.", was he using conventional speech or not? If so, how so? If not, what is not conventional about the speech the Buddha used? Otherwise we can think and think that there is no > self but without direct insight, and that can't eradicate the deep > rooted view of self. >++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Hello all, > > > > I've seen people using the term "conventional speech" > > or "conventional language" or "conventionally speaking" in this > group > > and the dhamma-list, and I wonder what it means by "conventional." > > > > My questions are: > > > > 1. What does it mean by "conventional"? > > > > 2. When the Buddha taught: Form is to be seen as it actually is > with > > right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is > > not my self.", was he using conventional speech or not? If so, how > > so? If not, what is not conventional about the speech the Buddha > > used? > > > > Thank you for your time. > > ++++++++++ Again, thank you for taking the time to reply. Regards, Victor 9663 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] speed of cittas [Howard] Hi Robert, I don't mind so much that it's baffling. If fact, I couldn't care less whether or not all this abhidhamma theory actually happens exactly like this or not--i.e. how short-lived cittas are, whether they're discrete or not, etc. etc.--the question to me is twofold: (1) Does this model help or hinder the understanding of a subjective moment of experience? (2) Does it agree or disagree with the Dhammavinaya, as well as I'm able to understand it? which is why I remain keenly interested in the abhidhamma. I have yet to know it to fail to answer either of these question in the affirmative, as well as I'm able to grasp it. mike --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > DEar Mike, > I thought this might be a little confusing. > It is simply theory, useful for understanding how > the past can be > insighted. For us, in practice, as I said to Howard, > the moments that > are insighted are so infinitesimally close to being > present that they > are considered as the present moment. > best wishes > robert > 9664 From: Victor Yu Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: conventional language Hello Robert, > On your question below: while the thinking process occurs "this is > not mine. This I am not.." Thinking process? How did you get that idea? If there is direct awareness and > comprehension of the actual thinking it will be known(to some degree) > that there is no one who is thinking this, but that thinking arises > due to conditions. The Buddha taught: Form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my self." Again, how did you get the idea of thinking process? Otherwise we can think and think that there is no > self but without direct insight, and that can't eradicate the deep > rooted view of self. What is an example of a deep rooted view of self? Regards, Victor 9665 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "engaged" [Christine] Hi Herman, --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi there, Mike, > > Just out of a purely theoretical interest, are you > saying that this > story is not in the Tipitaka, or that the story is > in the Tipitaka > but that my memory served me incorrectly about the > Buddha running > instead of walking, and possibly other details? If you're referring to Angulimalasutta, it's the latter. If you're referring to an instance of the Buddha 'running for his life', I'm requesting a citation as I don't recall it and find it unlikely--thanks in advance. Best Wishes, mike 9666 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] serious questions about lucid dreaming Hi Frank, I do think I treat your post as completely frivolous neither do I don't paid attention. It is just that I am not good at this topic of help or in fact, I know nothing abt such issues. As Howard says he is interested, so maybe we got to wait for his post (hope not too long :)) Kind regards Ken O --- frank kuan wrote: > Hi Sarah, > I was surprised by the lack of response to my query, > and I can only conclude that: > 1) People wrote off my post as completely frivolous > and did not see the importance of what I was really > asking > 2) People simply have not paid attention to the > details in their own dreams that I was asking about > and hence do not have any comments or answers at this > time. > > let me re-ask my questions in a different way. > 1) I care not about astrology or any special > signifigance of non-lucid or lucid dreams, and I don't > waste time wondering about my fate or the future. > 2) The really key point that I observed in this lucid > dream is that based on the visual sense door alone I > could not distinguish whether it was a dream world or > "real" world! I had to rely on the other sense > faculties being somewhat defective to give me the > evidence that it was not the "real" world. > 2a) do other members experience perfect clarity in > the visual sense door while dreaming? I.e. > dream > in color, good peripheral vision, image > persists > without great effort (i.e. world environment > isn't changing every 2 seconds in some subtle or > nonsubtle way)? > 3) Do the other sense faculties for members work as > well in lucid dreams as visual? For me, they were far > inferior in quality. > 4) A friend of mine mentioned he is able to manipulate > his dreamworld and reshape the environment, change > characteristics of people, like a big virtual reality > playground. > 5) The same friend also mentioned occasionaly even > though realizing the lucidity of the dream initially, > after playing around and reshaping the dream world, he > would forget his lucidity and reimmerse into the dream > reality thinking it was real. > 6) Do other members do some form of meditation in > their lucid or non-lucid dreams? My father mentions > doing mindfulness of breathing or chanting mantras in > his dreams, but those dreams are non-lucid (i.e. while > in the dream he thinks they're real). > 6a) Other meditators I talked to say they meditate > in their dream, and they know they're dreaming, so > they effectively double their daily spiritual practice > by making use of sleep time :-) > 7) When I'm "awake" in the "real" world, I don't > question the reality of things - i.e. I take for > granted my personality view is a real "I", subtle > conceit is a real "I", objects in reality have some > ultimate existence. Only when dreaming to I start to > question whether things are really true. > 8) Along the lines of what Sarah says below, I was > also theorizing how the sense organ of the mind is > really the most important one, and in the dream world, > it would seem to be the only one active (i.e. it > simulates and tricks us into thinking the other 5 or > making contact and receiving stimulus). I was mighty > surprised that an abidhamma list did not produce a > horde of responses explaining this phenomena in > explicit detail giving a blow by blow citta account of > what's happening :-) > 9) To reiterate my earlier insight from my lucid > dream, if I was ONLY relying on the visual sense door, > I can not discern whether I'm dreaming or awake! Does > this not stun or bother anyone else? > > -fk > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Hi Frank, > > > > --- frank kuan wrote: > I had > > an interesting lucid dream > > today. > > > > I was rather hoping that someone more knowledgable > > would reply to your unusual > > post, but we seem to be 'fated' to talk together > > again;-) > > > > > > > My question is, do other members lucid dream with > > all > > > 6 sense bases? Which ones work better? Do they all > > > work? > > > > I know that dream analysis and dream therapy are > > considered very important by > > many people and especially by many psychotherapists. > > > > From a dhamma point of view, I understand that > > dreams are merely an indication > > of our kilesa which even follow us around as we > > sleep. This is the reason that > > arahats don't dream as I've heard (pls don't ask for > > the reference;-) When we > > give particular importance to certain dreams or to > > their lucidity or otherwise, > > I wonder if this isn't just attachment in the way > > there is attachment to any > > other stories we get 'lost' in or carried away by. > > In other words, if we attach > > importance to the papanca (proliferations) in > > themselves, rather than > > developing awareness of the present seeing or > > thinking, it can be most > > unhelpful I feel. > > > > People have expressed the idea before on dsg of > > different senses working whilst > > we sleep and dream. it's true that it really seems > > as though there is seeing > > and hearing and other sense door experiences at > > these times. In reality, aren't > > these just tricks of the mind, conditioned by sanna > > (perception/memory) and > > many other factors? In fact nothing is being seen, > > heard, smelt, tasted or > > touched, but the thinking through the mind-door is > > very busy and active. Of > > course, as soon as we're just a 'little' awake, > > seeing, hearing and so on are > > active again and sometimes it can be unclear for a > > few minutes whether we're > > dreaming or really experiencing sights and sounds > > and so on. So devious is the > > mind. > > > > Sorry if I've misunderstood or not given the kind of > > response you were looking > > for, Frank. Hope to hear your comments. > > > > Sarah 9667 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] serious questions about lucid dreaming (SORRY BIG MISTAKE) Hi Frank the front portion should be "I don't think I treat your post as completely frivilous". My deepest apology. Sometime the fingers do the thinking than the mind. With apology Ken O --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Frank, > > I do think I treat your post as completely frivolous neither do I don't > paid attention. It is just that I am not good at this topic of help or > in > fact, I know nothing abt such issues. As Howard says he is interested, > so > maybe we got to wait for his post (hope not too long :)) > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > > --- frank kuan wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > I was surprised by the lack of response to my query, > > and I can only conclude that: > > 1) People wrote off my post as completely frivolous > > and did not see the importance of what I was really > > asking > > 2) People simply have not paid attention to the > > details in their own dreams that I was asking about > > and hence do not have any comments or answers at this > > time. > > > > let me re-ask my questions in a different way. > > 1) I care not about astrology or any special > > signifigance of non-lucid or lucid dreams, and I don't > > waste time wondering about my fate or the future. > > 2) The really key point that I observed in this lucid > > dream is that based on the visual sense door alone I > > could not distinguish whether it was a dream world or > > "real" world! I had to rely on the other sense > > faculties being somewhat defective to give me the > > evidence that it was not the "real" world. > > 2a) do other members experience perfect clarity in > > the visual sense door while dreaming? I.e. > > dream > > in color, good peripheral vision, image > > persists > > without great effort (i.e. world environment > > isn't changing every 2 seconds in some subtle or > > nonsubtle way)? > > 3) Do the other sense faculties for members work as > > well in lucid dreams as visual? For me, they were far > > inferior in quality. > > 4) A friend of mine mentioned he is able to manipulate > > his dreamworld and reshape the environment, change > > characteristics of people, like a big virtual reality > > playground. > > 5) The same friend also mentioned occasionaly even > > though realizing the lucidity of the dream initially, > > after playing around and reshaping the dream world, he > > would forget his lucidity and reimmerse into the dream > > reality thinking it was real. > > 6) Do other members do some form of meditation in > > their lucid or non-lucid dreams? My father mentions > > doing mindfulness of breathing or chanting mantras in > > his dreams, but those dreams are non-lucid (i.e. while > > in the dream he thinks they're real). > > 6a) Other meditators I talked to say they meditate > > in their dream, and they know they're dreaming, so > > they effectively double their daily spiritual practice > > by making use of sleep time :-) > > 7) When I'm "awake" in the "real" world, I don't > > question the reality of things - i.e. I take for > > granted my personality view is a real "I", subtle > > conceit is a real "I", objects in reality have some > > ultimate existence. Only when dreaming to I start to > > question whether things are really true. > > 8) Along the lines of what Sarah says below, I was > > also theorizing how the sense organ of the mind is > > really the most important one, and in the dream world, > > it would seem to be the only one active (i.e. it > > simulates and tricks us into thinking the other 5 or > > making contact and receiving stimulus). I was mighty > > surprised that an abidhamma list did not produce a > > horde of responses explaining this phenomena in > > explicit detail giving a blow by blow citta account of > > what's happening :-) > > 9) To reiterate my earlier insight from my lucid > > dream, if I was ONLY relying on the visual sense door, > > I can not discern whether I'm dreaming or awake! Does > > this not stun or bother anyone else? > > > > -fk > > > > 9668 From: Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 7:51pm Subject: where is self view stored? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > I would like to ask some questions that may not have answers: 1/ Where is the > 'deep-rooted view of the self' contained? Is it a matter of a content of > consciousness that is passed along from citta to citta along with many other false > concepts? +++++++++++++++++ Dear Rob. E,. It is rather hard to put this into words because it is not like the citta is some sort of container where stuff is squashed in. Ditthi is not really stored somewhere in this fleeting mind or in any part of the Body. But dependent on conditions, including accumulated ditthi and ignorance and attachment it manifests itself at opportune moments. Just as mangoes are not said to be stored somewhere in the mango tree, but dependent on the mango tree they spring up in due season. The milinda-panha gives an example of kamma that is perhaps relevant: Kamma is "like a shadow that never leaves " . ...It is not possible to point to those deeds and say that they remain here or there" "what do you think king ? is it possible to point to the fruits of a tree that has not yet borne fruit and say that the fruits are here or there? NO , revered sir. In the same way it is not possible to point to those deeds and say that they remain either here or there". +++++++++ > Beyond these technicalities, I think it is very worthwhile to differentiate > between conceptual knowing -- the conviction that one may develop that indeed > anatta is the truth of existence and that cittas do not arise *for someone* -- and > the experience of direct insight into a moment, to see that there is no self there > while the moment is being apprehended. +++++++++++ Yes, and this is why such details as the extreme rapidity of change are useful. Then we know that our understanding of anatta is still almost all theoretical and not yet is there penetrating insight into the characteristics of actual realities. In the beginning it is still vague. +++++++++++++ > > While we're on the subject of direct insight, I have another question: could you > describe what a rupa consists of a little more specifically? And perhaps > distinguish this in a little detail from a nama? I have a bit of a hard time > really understanding a rupa. I think I have a misconception about it, because I > have an impression that there is always a mental act in every perception, which > would disqualify it from being a direct knowing of a physical object. Any > clarification would be appreciated. +++++++ Ok, after we finish with a through look at the Patthana lets move onto another book by Nina, "Rupa". http//www.zolag.co.uk best wishes robert 9669 From: m. nease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] where is self view stored? Robert, Doesn't ditthi arise with sankhaarakhanda? Or have I misunderstood this? I do take your point re. its being conditioned rather than stored. mike --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein > wrote: > > > I would like to ask some questions that may not > have answers: 1/ > Where is the > > 'deep-rooted view of the self' contained? Is it a > matter of a > content of > > consciousness that is passed along from citta to > citta along with > many other false > > concepts? > > +++++++++++++++++ > > Dear Rob. E,. > It is rather hard to put this into words because it > is not like the > citta is some sort of container where stuff is > squashed in. > > Ditthi is not really stored somewhere in this > fleeting mind or in any > part of the Body. But dependent on conditions, > including accumulated > ditthi and ignorance and attachment it manifests > itself at opportune > moments. Just as mangoes are > not said to be stored somewhere in the mango tree, > but dependent > on the mango tree they spring up in due season. > The milinda-panha gives an example of kamma that is > perhaps > relevant: Kamma is "like a shadow > that never leaves " . ...It is not possib