6000 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 8:05pm Subject: Re: Howard on anatta and rebirth --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Sorry , > I just reread the article and see right at the end that he says > Nibbana is not anatta. This contradicts the Theravada tradition. The second Majhima is one I find very interesting. It reads: "As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self ...or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self ...or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self ...or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine -- the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions -- is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. --------------- First of all, the view "I have no self" arises inappropriately. I have already explained why thinking "I have a self" is equally futile. I also find the sixth view interesting, in the sense that the "constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, which will endure as long as eternity" -self is not actually negated. BTW, am I the only one who finds it odd that the Buddha refers to himself as the "Rightly Self-awakened" one? Also, I don't think I have ever heard him say that there is categorically no self. he has aid that there is no self in this world (Samsara), but wouldn't it just be easier for him to state there is categorically no self, if that was really true? Also, if there is no self, why did the Buddha label such a view as annihilation? Is there anyone here, who can explain to me, how it is not holding the view of annihilation to say that there is no self? So far, the only thing I have seen in the scriptures that could in any way indicate that the deathless is *not* self, is the statement that all dhammas are annatta. But the article which I linked to, shows that 'dhammas' don't necessarily include Nibbana in such a context. 6001 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 8:10pm Subject: Re: Hello --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Anders > Nibbana is "unconditioned released awareness" you say. Could you > explain what it is aware of? It wouldn't be correct to say that it is really aware of anything, as it doesn't dwell on anything. There is just awareness. and that includes Samsara of course. > > When I say 'real consciousness' I mean released awareness). > ------ > By this released awareness you mean Nibbana? Are you now > composed of Nibbana since your enlightenment (thus nibbana is > self as you said earlier)? You don't have to quote scripture > just tell us as best you can. To say that 'I' am composed of Nibbana would not be correct either, as this would entail self-identity view. Perhaps the most exact description (although it still misses the mark by a mile) is to say that Nibbana *is*. 6002 From: Herman Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 8:13pm Subject: Re: Hello Robert, How will a blind man verify the light? One man keeps the precepts Another keeps a library And a third sits, smiling In conventional terms, I find your behaviour in this thread to be somewhere between offensive and disgusting. Will you go somewhere else or will I? Herman --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Anders, > > Thanks for replying, even though it may seem disagreeable to you. The > purpose of these questions is frankly to gain confidence in your claim to > enlightenment (and your transmission of dhammas) or (personally) > disregard your claim (not to discredit, but to determine if you have gained > insights according to what the Buddha has taught). > > I am one of those people who benefits from listening to the teachings in > the practical sense. For example, you quoted "Nissaraniya Sutta", Means > of Escape, when I listen to it, I become more motivated to develop such > qualities which I do not have. So, I think some people (definitely myself) > will benefit if you bear with me. > > > --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > > > Well, the kandha of consciousness which the Buddha refers to as > > not- > > > > self, refers to the grasping consciousness, ie, that which dwells > > on > > > > the objects of the objects. > > > > > > I don't think this is quite right. The kandha of consciousness > > > (presumably Vinnana kandha) refers to all consciousness, regardless > > > whether or not it is the grasping consciousness. An arahat would > > also > > > have consciousness, and hence the vinnana kandha, even though they > > > no longer have any grasping consciousness. > > The original objection is to illustrate that you are quoting a Buddha's > teaching that is not matching your own experiences. Since we are > establishing what you are experiencing, we can do this two ways (at > least). One is to use the Buddha's teaching, which I don't think matches > your experience in this specific circumstance, or the other way is to > explain in your own words, which may be less or more troublesome for me. > > > But that consciousness would have been "transformed" > > This I agree, since the conciousness of an arahat no longer have any > defilement tendencies. > > > (one cannot > > really speak of transforming of that which is unmoving. > > If you refer to nibbana here, I also agree, as Nibbana is unconditioned. > > > Rather the grasping consciousness is seen trhough as illusionary) > > I would like an elaboration of why you are saying that grasping > consciousness is illusionary. > > > But that consciousness (...) would have been "transformed" into the > > deathless, which dwells nowhere, so it is beyond grasping. The fifth > > Here again, how you are explaining the deathless (nibbana) is not > matching the scripture. In the scripture, nibbana is an unconditioned > element, but the consciousness is conditioned. A conditioned element > doesn't get transformed into an unconditioned element. > > (Given that most people do not yet experience nibbana, do you think they > should use the Buddha's teachings as the basic model, or some specific > individual's? I remember a chant similar to this in a non- theravadan > tradition: the buddha's dhamma is profound and subtle, and rare in even > 1,000 million kalapas. Are our conducts in studying the dhamma [in > theory and in practice] in congruent with this chant?). > > > aggregate is illusionary. I think I can find some scripture to > > underline this. > > > The Nissaraniya Sutta says: > > "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk might say, 'Although the > > signless [Nibbana, anders] has been developed, pursued, given a means > > of transport, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well- > > undertaken by me as my release of awareness, still my consciousness > > follows the drift of signs.' He should be told, 'Don't say that. You > > shouldn't speak in that way. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One, for > > it's not right to misrepresent the Blessed One, and the Blessed One > > wouldn't say that. It's impossible, there is no way that -- when the > > signless has been developed, pursued, given a means of transport, > > given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken as a > > release of awareness -- consciousness would follow the drift of > > signs. That possibility doesn't exist, for this is the escape from > > all signs: the signless as a release of awareness.' > > ---------------- > > There, Nibbana is referred as the release of awareness, in which one > > no longer dwells on objects, and thus the grasping consciousness > > (which is not-self and impermanent) is dissolved. > > Thanks again for quoting the scripture. My first impression after reading > this sutta is that the signless here refers to the sense object of the arupa- > jhana, and not nibbana. Therefore, your interpretation of how this works > is different from mine (and your experience is not that of nibbana, > according to my interpretation.) I am researching other textual references > to re-confirm/refute both interpretations. > > > How can the sense objects ever be unconditioned realities, since they > > are by natue, conditioned? > > This we are in agreement. > > > > bound? In the sense of being conditioned? In the sense of > > grasping? > > > > Yes. > > I think we are still not in sync here. Again, the Buddha taught that all > consciousness is conditioned and thus is bound by its conditioning > elements. I interpret your explanation of your experience to be that your > awareness and consciousness are transformed into the unconditioned > element. Am I saying this right? > > > New topic: Maybe this is too personal, but the group guidelines said > > that it was aimed at the practical aspects, so I'll go ahead. I would > > like to know why you would like some scriptural back-up for this. It > > seems to me that you are gathering conceptual knowledge in this > > regard. > > Again, as I have mentioned at the top. We are (or at least I am!) > establishing what you are experiencing, whether or not it matches the > scriptures or not. There are different claims about how things are, just in > the theravadan traditions alone, not counting other claims from other > traditions. For example, there was a "sect" in Thailand (claiming > Theravadan traditions) that claimed the fixation on the "nimita" of a > spherical, bright object is a sign of being on the path to reach nibbana. > This is an exagerated example not matching the scriptures, but there are > even more subtle claims, not matching the scriptures, about what the path > is and what enlightenment means. > > > If that is so, then what is the point? It's quite simple: > > Wherever there are concepts, Panna cannot be. > > I agree with you that Panna that leads to the eradication of all kilesa > cannot rise by conceptualization. > > > Concepts merely install > > a false sense of knowing and can never lead to liberation. > > I disagree with this as this depends on one person to another. Rahula, > the Buddha's son, was instructed by the Buddha and his disciples for more > than 13 years about the proper conducts, things that should be focussed > upon, and the *conceptual* noble truths before he becomes enlightened. > I have no doubt that the teachings, despite its being conceptual, aided his > practice. > > > It's not that I don't want to answer your question, but unless it has > > any actual practical appliance in daily life for you, I would prefer > > not to, since any sort of conceptualising will obstruct your progress. > > I hope my answers above have attenuated your fear that your taking time > to answer wouldn't benefit me. > > kom 6003 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 8:26pm Subject: Re: unconditioned awareness(anders) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Anders, > I thought we could look at some practical issues. On your > website you write that: > ""Do not imagine that this unconditioned awareness is somehow > apart from the world and daily life. On the contrary, it could > be said that one is even more closer to life than ever before, > because there is no separation between you and the world. When > caught up in dualism, one creates the illusion of someone being > aware (subject) and something to be aware of (object). Yet there > is just this awareness, there is nothing to be aware of. > Conditioned phenomena are not apart from awareness in any way, > yet they not really awareness either.''''' > ____________ > You say that this unconditioned awareness has nothing to be > aware of. Could you explain this as it pertains to our lives. > When there is seeing what is occuring for instance? > I notice on one of your websites where you mention having > champagne on your 18th birthday a few weeks ago. Could you > describe the type of awareness that occured when you had the > intention to drink. Intention arising depending on object, sustained by presence of object, object of intention ceasing, intention ceasing. I was not being mindful at the time though. I think it says somewhere that a stream-entrant can never kill, some other things, but also never lie nor drink alcoholic substances. On account of this, I am not. Maybe I am wrong about this, but it seems to me that you are somehow taking up the role of the hunter. Watching out for any mistakes I might make, to try to verify or falsify any potential enlightenment. I have already stated that 'enlightenment' means nothing to me, so why should it to you? I've also said that you shouldn't rely on anything I say to be true or false. I get the impression that some people here make the mistake of comparing what they are debating with the scriptures, rather than their own understanding. thus, they remove themselves from it, by taking the message of the scriptures as something apart from themselves, to be examined. The thing is that the scriptures were never written to be understood in any way. They were written for you to *become* that understanding so to speak. 6004 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 9:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetasikas : ? Panna (understanding) ? op 07-07-2001 14:27 Num: > Dear Nina, new members and all. > 1) what are the differences between panna in lokiya (mahakusala, mahakiriya, > mahavipaka, and all 27 kind of jhanacittas) and lokuttara citta? They do > have the same character, penetrating, but I guess it penetrates at different > level and objects. When it said that there is panna in doing smathi, what > does panna penetrate in this case? In case of Pra-Devadhatta, the Buddha's > cousin, even though he attained jhana and abhinna (from my reading), he still > committed two greatest kamma, did schism in sankha and made a bruise on the > Buddha by trying to kill him. Someone said about miccha-smathi, I don't > know much about it, but how far can miccha-smathi develop. I guess it cannot > get up to jhana level. > Dear Num, you are right that there are many levels of understanding, pa~n~naa, there can be panna with generosity, with observing sila (panna knows what is kusala), with the development of samatha, with theoretical understanding of the Dhamma, on the level of listening, and with satipatthana. In samatha panna knows exactly when the citta is akusala and when it is kusala, it knows how to develop kusala citta with calm by means of a suitable meditation subject. It knows the conditions for the growth of calm so that jhana can be attained. The objective is not penetrating the true characteristics of reality, impermanence, dukkha and anatta. The objective in samatha is being free from attachment to sense objects, by the development of a meditation subject, temporarily free from the hindrances. As to wrong concentration, this cannot go together with panna. By wrong concentration jhana cannot be attained, but there may be extraordinary experiences one takes for jhana. Someone may attain jhana and after that commit crimes, because by jhana defilements are not eradicated. Num: 2) in Cuti, Patisandhi and Bhavanga-citta, if a person born with three > sobhana hetus, he will always has panna in his bhavanga moment, right? What > does panna do in this case? I am still not clear by what does panna do in > vipaka-citta as well. Nina: Yes, when you are born with panna, panna accompanies all bhavangacittas in that life and the dying-consciousness. Those are the same types of citta in that life. In that case panna is result, vipaka, result of kusala kamma with panna. Being born with panna means that one has the potentiality to develop it more. It conditions one's whole life, because if one develops samatha one is able to attain jhana, and if one develops panna of insight, vipassana, one can attain enlightenment. However, panna has to be developed on and on during one's life, the result will not come true without its development. If one is not born with panna, jhana cannot be attained, nor can enlightenment be attained. Num: Let me digress a little bit, phassa in these three kinds of cittas, cuti, > patisandhi and bhavanga, as you mentioned, experience (contact) the same > object as the last javana cittas which arose before the cuti-citta in > previous life. May I ask what kind of object is that? Just curious, so > every bhavanga-citta in this life can still experiences (contacts) that > object. Nina: It is as you say, these types of citta experience the same object. Since we are born humans, it was kusala kamma that conditioned the last javana cittas to be kusala cittas and to experience a pleasant object. That kusala kamma produced birth as a human, which is a happy rebirth. The object experienced shortly before dying in the previous life is an object which can appear through one of the six doors, it can be a symbol or sign of the kusala kamma one performed, or of one's future destiny. We cannot know what kind of object it is, but it is pleasant. It does not matter if we do not know, but we can remember that this birth is the right opportunity to develop understanding. We still have the opportunity to listen to true Dhamma. Even if we are not born with panna, understanding can still be developed. We should not cling to a result such as rapid progress or an idea we might have of enlightenment. Some people may doubt about it whether they have attained enlightenment, but if there is doubt, there is no panna. One can check oneself: what does panna know now? If there is no understanding of seeing or visible object now it is not real panna. The panna of a person who is sotapanna knows precisely the realities appearing naturally through the six doors in his daily life. If these are not known in daily life as non-self it is not panna. Num: I mean to ask about Sati (mindfulness) as well but I think I better put it in another mail. Nina: Yes that is OK. It is a pleasure to correspond with you. > >Num:Thanks everyone for your patience, kindness, energy and willing to share your > wisdom with me. Dhamma for me is difficult and hard to see and penetrate. Nina: Yes it is for me too difficult and hard to see. How can panna be fully developed in the course of only one life. Let us be grateful that we can still listen to the teachings. There will be a time that they disappear. Num: Have to go for a tennis match. Nina: Right you are, but how difficult to be aware of just hardness or sound, when we are absorbed in something like a game. Nobody says that it is easy. Still panna has to be developed in daily life, if it is not in daily life it is not panna of vipassana. Nina. 6005 From: bruce Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 9:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello herman, you are kidding, right? robert has been making his usual calm and rational inquiries into a situation that is most certainly not usual: not only do we have someone claiming to this group to be at least a sotapanna, but also someone who is proclaiming it to the world from a website....don't you think that something like this needs to be looked into as thoroughly as possible? what could robert have possibly said in this thread to engender so much lobha? bruce At 12:13 2001/07/08 -0000, you wrote: > Robert, > > How will a blind man verify the light? > > One man keeps the precepts > Another keeps a library > And a third sits, smiling > > In conventional terms, I find your behaviour in this thread to be > somewhere between offensive and disgusting. > > Will you go somewhere else or will I? > > Herman > > > --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Dear Anders, > > > > Thanks for replying, even though it may seem disagreeable to you. > The > > purpose of these questions is frankly to gain confidence in your > claim to > > enlightenment (and your transmission of dhammas) or (personally) > > disregard your claim (not to discredit, but to determine if you > have gained > > insights according to what the Buddha has taught). > > > > I am one of those people who benefits from listening to the > teachings in > > the practical sense. For example, you quoted "Nissaraniya Sutta", > Means > > of Escape, when I listen to it, I become more motivated to develop > such > > qualities which I do not have. So, I think some people (definitely > myself) > > will benefit if you bear with me. > > 6006 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: Hello --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Actually, I am mistaken here (in both agreement and meaning!). The > sense object (aramana of the cittas) can be both conditioned and > unconditioned. Nibbana, an unconditioned object, can be the sense object > (aramana) of the consciousness, which is also true with the conditioned > object. If there is one thing I can ever tell you for certain (and there isn't much else), it is that Nibbana can never ever be an object of any of the senses. Where did you get that idea? 6007 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 6:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali and tipitaka and translations JOE Hi, Erik - In a message dated 7/8/01 7:51:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > Even > more important, silabbataparamasa also includes wrongly believing > that, for example, ascetic practices alone lead to liberation, or > giving up meat leads to liberation, or even giving up drugs that do > NOT lead to heedlessness or condition any of the hindrances is > necessary for wisdom, and, silabbataparamasa would also wrongly > believe that drugs MUST always act as a hindrance, totally ignoring > the intention, wisdom, and accumulations and circumstances of the > person taking them. > ================================ I agree with what you write here, especially including what you say about substances that do NOT lead to heedlessness. I would add just one caveat here: All of us, I presume, are vulnerable to our subtle desires and inclinations, and are always in danger of fooling ourselves, of being mislead by our tanha, including desires for useful and wonderful things, into misunderstanding. Thus, we must be very cautious, most vigilant, and humble enough to recognize the *possibility* of being fooled. But please note that I am NOT claiming or assuming that you are being fooled. I'm just encouraging caution. 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) 6008 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 10:44pm Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, Through the 5 sense doors (seeing, hearing, smelling, physical contact, tasting) only the 7 physical elements are known. Through the 6th sense doors, all the possible paramatha elements (realities) are known, plus the concepts. The paramatha elements include all citta (consciousness), cetasikas (mental factors), rupas (physical elements), and nibbana. What I want to know is, since you have already experience Nibbana, what experiences nibbana? You mention it is the released awareness. Is released awareness the same element as nibbana? kom --- "Anders Honore" > If there is one thing I can ever tell you for certain (and there > isn't much else), it is that Nibbana can never ever be an object of > any of the senses. Where did you get that idea? 6009 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 10:47pm Subject: Re: Pali and tipitaka and translations JOE Hi, rikpa21, --- <> wrote: > Without reference to Suttas (I have no time now), silabbataparamasa > is, most simply, confusing the letter for the spirit of the Law. Just as a footnote to your lucid explanation of the word silabbata- paramasa, some relevent references are these. The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary defines "silabbata" as "good works and ceremonial observances." For example, in the Dhammapada verses 271-272 we read: "Not only with mere morality [i.e silabbata] ... should you rest content ..." The PTS dictionary then defines "silabbata-paramasa" as "the contagion of mere rule and ritual, the infatuation of good works, the delusion that they will suffice." The dictionary gives several references, including Majjima Nikaya 64, were we read: "An untaught, orindary person ... abides with a mind enslaved by adherence to rules and observances [silabbata-paramasa-pariyutthitena cetasa viharati]." > Once I get settled into my new digs in BKK > in the next couple of weeks What are you doing in BKK? I am going there at the end of August. Derek. 6010 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 11:20pm Subject: Re: Hello --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Anders, > > Through the 5 sense doors (seeing, hearing, smelling, physical contact, > tasting) only the 7 physical elements are known. Yes. > Through the 6th sense doors, all the possible paramatha elements > (realities) are known, plus the concepts. The paramatha elements include > all citta (consciousness), cetasikas (mental factors), rupas (physical > elements), and nibbana. Let me get this straight. Through a conditioned, impermanent, and stressful faculty, the unconditioned can be discerned? Furthermore, that sixth faculty is experienced trhough the sixth sense-door consciousness, so Nibbana goes through two conditioned philters in order for the unconditioned to be manifest? > What I want to know is, since you have already experience Nibbana, what > experiences nibbana? You mention it is the released awareness. Is > released awareness the same element as nibbana? There is no one, or nothing to experience Nibbana. Nibbana *is* released awareness. 6011 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 8, 2001 11:26pm Subject: silabataparamasa Derek, Thanks for this excellent material. I am going to be in bangkok in the first week of August (and will be meeting with Erik) but plan to be back sometime in september also. If you are going to still be there I'd love to meet up . best wishes robert --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, rikpa21, > > --- <> wrote: > > Without reference to Suttas (I have no time now), > silabbataparamasa > > is, most simply, confusing the letter for the spirit of the > Law. > > Just as a footnote to your lucid explanation of the word > silabbata- > paramasa, some relevent references are these. > > The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary defines > "silabbata" > as "good works and ceremonial observances." For example, in > the > Dhammapada verses 271-272 we read: "Not only with mere > morality [i.e > silabbata] ... should you rest content ..." > > The PTS dictionary then defines "silabbata-paramasa" as "the > contagion of mere rule and ritual, the infatuation of good > works, the > delusion that they will suffice." The dictionary gives several > > references, including Majjima Nikaya 64, were we read: "An > untaught, > orindary person ... abides with a mind enslaved by adherence > to rules > and observances [silabbata-paramasa-pariyutthitena cetasa > viharati]." > > > Once I get settled into my new digs in BKK > > in the next couple of weeks > > What are you doing in BKK? I am going there at the end of > August. > > Derek. > > 6012 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 0:11am Subject: Re: Hello --- bruce wrote: > herman, you are kidding, right? robert has been making his usual calm and > rational inquiries into a situation that is most certainly not usual: not > only do we have someone claiming to this group to be at least a sotapanna, > but also someone who is proclaiming it to the world from a website....don't > you think that something like this needs to be looked into as thoroughly as > possible? what could robert have possibly said in this thread to engender > so much lobha? I honestly don't see what the big deal is. I've made it quite clear that none of the crap I might spill out should be taken for granted, especially in the light that it might not accord with the scirptures, because I simply don't rely much on them. So in terms of validity of anything I say, it should be irrelevant. In terms of your own understanding, it should also be irrelevant. How will knowing about any other's enlightenment help you to get there? I don't care about enlightenment, and I am quite comfortable saying that I don't know anything about the Dhamma, so that others won't be mislead by anyone else than themselves. The inquiries that Robert has been making has been to fashion an impermanent belief system labeled 'the Dhamma', not to know his own mind, which is all Buddhism is about. I must admit that I am a bit surprised by the amount of scriptural addiction present among some people here. I am not making any accusations here, just stating my own perception of things. Even if you were able to correctly interprete the written Dhamma 100%, it wouldn't matter one bit. knowing about the *concept* of Nibbana in detail won't do you much good, if you aren't beginning to discover the marks of existence intuitively. Concepts are needed, but one has to examine if those concepts have any practical appliance for you. If they don't, there is no reason for you to pursue them any further, as they will just add more attachments to views, rather than using them as actual tools to know their own minds. The view of enlightenment vs. actual enlightenment is analogous to a seeing a picture of the Eiffel Tower, and actually standing in front of the Eiffel Tower. If you keep walking holding the picture in front of your eyes to check it, you'll walk right past the real deal without noticing. What I am getting at, is that one should try to look aside from the pictures, and start examining what is around you, in terms of mental phenomena. What good is the Dhamma, if you cannot apply it in your own practise so that you may know your own mind? 6013 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 0:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- Anders Honore wrote: > I honestly don't see what the big deal is. I've made > it quite clear > that none of the crap I might spill out should be > taken for granted, > especially in the light that it might not accord > with the scirptures, > because I simply don't rely much on them. In his last discourse, the Buddha explicitly and unequivocally encouraged us to verify what we've heard from the Dhammavinaya. "In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve." Digha Nikaya 16 Maha-Parinibbana Sutta Last Days of the Buddha Translated from the Pali by Sister Vajira & Francis Story http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn16.html > I must admit that I am a bit surprised by the amount > of scriptural > addiction present among some people here. I am not > making any > accusations here, just stating my own perception of > things. Exactly--sorting out your own (and my own) perception of things from the teachings of the Buddha, as far as we're able to determine them, is exactly what this is about. > What good is the Dhamma, if you cannot > apply it in your > own practise so that you may know your own mind? I'd be surprised to hear anyone here dispute this. Best wishes, mike 6014 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 0:50am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honore" > > For example, this differs from the scripture because kandha of > > consciousness refers to *all* consciousness, not just the grasping > > consciousness. > > Of course there is only one consciousness (being the fith aggregate). > What I am saying is, that what *characterises* consciousness, is > dwelling/grasping at objects. All consciousness grasps at objects > ("following the drifts of signs"), whether it be mental or physical > ones. You appear to be saying that all consciousness follow signs and clings to them. Although it is true that all consciousness cognizes an object, it is not true that all consciouness clings to the object it cognizes. It is also not true that all consciousness follows a sign. It is possible for a lay person, not being enlightened, to have moments of consciousness where no clinging/grasping occurs. Our understandings differ. > Well, ultimately, it is beyond unattachment or attachment, because it > never took part in the circle of attachment. Thus, there's nothing > for it to be attached to. I believe you are implying that at the moment of your enlightenment experience, your awareness become unbounded [unconditioned], it becomes one and the same with nibbana. I think you are driving the points that at that point, "dualism betwen the subject/object ceases to exist". If you are thinking along this line, you may want to examine how Zen concept of dualism can be mapped into a theravadan system. Although Dualism can be interpretted to fit in with the Theravadan teachings, I don't think you can map this so literally. There would always remain some separation between what is cognizing, and what is being cognized, even at the point of enlightenment. The consciousness is always conditioned, even at the enlightenment moment. The object (nibbana) being cognized at enlightenment is not conditioned. What they share is the common characteristic of being anatta. > Sure, I can wait. Interesting how the translation I read didn't even > hint at the jhanas. The translations of the Pali into English are difficult and can be easily mistaken. Not only they differ from Pali in the meaning of the word (literal translations), the different translators don't use the same English words for the same Pali words. You can imagine the havoc it wreaks trying to understand the meanings of the words, leaving alone the meaning of the teaching itself. Some pointers that I can give you (keeping in mind that I am not an expert in Pali): 1) good will, compassion, appreciation, and equanimity are the 4 brahma vihara. In the scripture, when these 4 are mentioned, it more often (in my experience) refers to Jhana development than the non-jhana brahma vihara. 2) Those 4 combinations, when translated from the pali words associated with Cetovimutti, would certainly refers to jhana. Again, I will get back to you on the 5th point. > > What you are describing sounds a lot like the explanation of > Dependent- > > origination, except for the last part. The dependent origination > explains > > the third link (consciousness, vinanna) as any non-path > consciousness, not > > just grasping consciousness. > > "non-path"? You are gonna have to explain that term to me. First of all, I think we have already established the differences that you believe all consciousness, before the englightenment, are "grasping". In your understanding, there is no moment of ungrasping consciousness before englightenment. So, I think you were attempting to use the concept of Dependent Origination to explain why you say the consciousness prior to enlightenment is illusionary and not real. When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, it is considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't continue the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness accumulates causes that continues the cycles. The path consciousness certainly doesn't grasp, but it cognizes a reality as it truly is. This path consciousness *must* arise *prior* to enlightenment. > > Let me say how I understand your saying here; maybe this would help > you > > explain more: > > 1) You are talking about two types of consciousness: > > a) illusionary one and b) "release" consciousness, i.e., one > without > > grasping, without bound, and without condition. > > Yes, although intrinsically, there is only one. > > > 2) You mentioned that you have reached this level of state, i.e., > you are > > now living without the illusionary one. > > I did? I think it's important to remember that habitual tendencies > still remain, even though they have been seen through. > But even I I really did, what would that mean to you? It would mean nothing to me, because I cannot prove it one way or another. It would be beneficial for people, however, when you describe how this process works. For example, you appear to be implying that you are now living with only "unbounded" awareness which is unconditioned. Now, that is truly different from the Theravadan teaching... > > 3) The illusionary consciousness doesn't exist; they are not really > there, > > but we think they are there. They have no characteristics that > can be > > experienced. > > Well, the illusionary consciousness exists in the sense that it's > there. We just perceive it as something else than what it really is > (perceiving it as real consciousness, when it is just mental factors). This we somewhat agree, but not exactly (maybe only differences in the use of words). The consciousness exists infinitesmally briefly, with its own fundamental characteristics, but we perceive it in a distorted way because of ignorance, craving, conceits, and wrong views. > > Is the consciousness of nibbana and nibbanna itself one of the same? > > Obviously, there can be no consciousness of Nibbana, when the > consciousness characterised as dwelling on objects, is dissolved. The is another point of difference that we have established. There can be no actual knowledge of nibbana unless there is a consciousness that cognizes it, even if nibbana may be described as the disolution of all conditioned realities. If this discussion was all based in purely conceptual understanding on both your and my part, I would say to you that you are using a concept which are not mentioned in the scripture to describe some events that are referred to (but cannot be fully described) in the scripture. Although this may work, it has the inherent danger of looking at realities through a distorted glass and not even knowing it. I am presently satisfied with the results of our discussions. However, I do hope you stay around for other interesting (to me!) discussions. I am convinced that there are differences between the teachings in the theravadan traditions and the understandings that you have of realities, and therefore, I urge you to stay around long enough to learn what the differences are, and then you would at least understand what all these objections to your enlightenment (even if it is true) and your understandings of realities are all about. kom 6015 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 0:59am Subject: Self Self... Let us try and examine what it really means. I think it has been established beyond any doubt that anything that is impermanent, in short he kandhas, are categorically no self. But, in order to know what the hell we are talking, we should know just what is inferred from the word self, at the very basic, as the ground for which spiritual seekers go out to discover their true self (whether it be illusionary or not), in order that we may negate or affirm the existence of a self. Since it is established that the kandhas aren't self, we'll examine the definition based on the possibility of Nibbana being the self. There are a number of possible definitions: 1. Self is free will; the creative source. On this account there is no self. Nibbana for one, doesn't interact in any way, so this cannot be self, under this definition. 2. Self is the sense of self Under this, there is no self. Sense of self is created by perception of self, which falls under the kandha of perception. 3. Self is knowing self. Under this definition, there is no self either. For Nibbana to know Nibbana, it would have to take it as an object, and since Nibbana doesn't dwell anywhere, this cannot be the self. 4. Self is knowing what is not the self. If this were true, once Parinibbana had been completed then there would be nothing for the self, Nibbana, to stand in contradistinction to, and since self is knowing what it is not, it would dissolve since it could no longer discern what is not self. Thus, under this definition, no self either. So, if self is Nibbana, how could it possibly be defined? Since any sense or perception of self is categorically not the self, it would be futile to even talk of self. The moment we affirm a self, we are off the track, because that cannot possibly be the self! So self would have to be beyond affirmation or denial, which, at least in that regard, fits with Nibbana. One could say that self is sentience. But that would indicate someone being sentient, and once again we have the perception of self. If it should be said that there is a self, it would have to be just defined as just *this*. It's not any 'this' that you can think of, since it defies perception. It is not anything, yet not not-existent, not existent. On the very account that Nibbana *is*, this could be said to be self. yet since it is beyond perception, it would be futile to call it self, since this perception of self. On the other hand, it cannot be said to not be the self. Hence, I said in one mail, that the Buddha's silence might hint at more than just a ploy, but actually as a way of understanding self. Just this not- defining it, affirming or denying it. Nargarjuna, in Mahayana circles acknowledged by many as the "second Buddha", once said that the Buddha did teach self to those who understood the derived implication of the word. Thus this implication should be understood before any negation might take place. And the derived implication is: It is not something that can be implicated! So what is the point of discussing the existence of self or not? Just work at uprooting your own habituated beliefs of what self is. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6016 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:13am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honore" > Let me get this straight. Through a conditioned, impermanent, and > stressful faculty, the unconditioned can be discerned? Yes. Let me explain in this way. 1) The buddha separates all conditioned realities into two categories: a) Rupa - the materiality. b) Nama - the consciousness that cognizes a sense object. 2) Nibbana is categorized as an unconditioned nama, it is an element that is not rupa, but yet it doesn't cognize any sense object. We are a stream of nama and rupa, rising and falling away rapidly. When we say we "experience", it is the nama that cognizes the sense objects. There is no other thing that experiences except these conditioned realities which are rising and fallign away rapidly (conditioned, impermanent, stressful, and anatta). I repeat as before, the consciousness through the mind door (6th faculty?) can cognize all rupa (28), nama (89 cittas + 52 cetasikas + 1 nibbana), and concepts. > Furthermore, > that sixth faculty is experienced trhough the sixth sense-door > consciousness, so Nibbana goes through two conditioned philters in > order for the unconditioned to be manifest? There are a number of cittas that can cognize nibbana: two of those are magga (path at lokuttara level) and phala (result of that path) citta, both appearing in the mind door process. The unconditioned appears (and conditions) the conditioned pheonena, although the unconditioned itself is not condiioned. I do not understand what you mean by nibbana going through the mind door. Without the minddoor (the bhavanga citta before the mano-dvara- vajjana), the lokuttara magga and phala cannot arise. The minddoor clearly conditions (indirectly?) the magga and phala citta. > > What I want to know is, since you have already experience Nibbana, > what > > experiences nibbana? You mention it is the released awareness. Is > > released awareness the same element as nibbana? > > There is no one, or nothing to experience Nibbana. Nibbana *is* > released awareness. Hence, the difference in your understandings and the theravadan system both in the meanings of the words, and the meanings of the teachings (as I understand it, obviously, since I cannot be said to represent the Buddha!). kom 6017 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:26am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 6:50 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Dear Anders, > You appear to be saying that all consciousness follow signs and clings to > them. Although it is true that all consciousness cognizes an object, it is > not true that all consciouness clings to the object it cognizes. It is also > not true that all consciousness follows a sign. It is possible for a lay > person, not being enlightened, to have moments of consciousness where > no clinging/grasping occurs. Our understandings differ. How is it possible for a lay person to a have moment of absolutely no clinging or grasping? I'd say that there is still some grasping active, although at a very subtle level. > I believe you are implying that at the moment of your enlightenment > experience, your awareness become unbounded [unconditioned], it > becomes one and the same with nibbana. I think you are driving the > points that at that point, "dualism betwen the subject/object ceases to > exist". You could say that. > If you are thinking along this line, you may want to examine how Zen > concept of dualism can be mapped into a theravadan system. Although > Dualism can be interpretted to fit in with the Theravadan teachings, I > don't think you can map this so literally. There would always remain some > separation between what is cognizing, and what is being cognized, even > at the point of enlightenment. The consciousness is always conditioned, > even at the enlightenment moment. 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' S XXII.87 Established means that it is conditioned (and this discernable). Because it is unestablished, it is unconditioned. > The object (nibbana) being cognized > at enlightenment is not conditioned. What they share is the common > characteristic of being anatta. How can you cognize that which is not-cognizeable? For something to be congnizeable, it has to be conditioned, hence mara could not find the consciousness of Vakkali because it was now unconditioned, and hence it is not possible to read the mind of an arahant because there is nothing to be read. One sutta names, among others, Nibbana as the 'featureless'. > > "non-path"? You are gonna have to explain that term to me. > > First of all, I think we have already established the differences that you > believe all consciousness, before the englightenment, are "grasping". Or dwelling on some object, yes. > In > your understanding, there is no moment of ungrasping consciousness > before englightenment. So, I think you were attempting to use the > concept of Dependent Origination to explain why you say the > consciousness prior to enlightenment is illusionary and not real. > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, it is > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't continue > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. The path consciousness > certainly doesn't grasp, but it cognizes a reality as it truly is. This path > consciousness *must* arise *prior* to enlightenment. Why? > It would mean nothing to me, because I cannot prove it one way or > another. It would be beneficial for people, however, when you describe > how this process works. For example, you appear to be implying that you > are now living with only "unbounded" awareness which is unconditioned. No, that would make me an Arahant. > > Obviously, there can be no consciousness of Nibbana, when the > > consciousness characterised as dwelling on objects, is dissolved. > > The is another point of difference that we have established. There can be > no actual knowledge of nibbana unless there is a consciousness that > cognizes it, even if nibbana may be described as the disolution of all > conditioned realities. The Sutta I quoted above explicitly stated that it is because it is not established anywhere, not even "Nibbana". > I am presently satisfied with the results of our discussions. However, I > do hope you stay around for other interesting (to me!) discussions. I am > convinced that there are differences between the teachings in the > theravadan traditions and the understandings that you have of realities, I am not, but such is the difference of opinion. I know that my knowledge is incomplete, but most I don't think is contradictory. > and therefore, I urge you to stay around long enough to learn what the > differences are, and then you would at least understand what all these > objections to your enlightenment (even if it is true) and your > understandings of realities are all about. True. But as someone else asked here, how can the blind verify the light? If verification is an issue to some people here, then it would be better call upon the aid of someone who is a verified teacher, and who is (at least) a stream-entrant, if such a person is available. 6018 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:31am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: m. nease Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 6:44 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Dear Anders, > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > > > I honestly don't see what the big deal is. I've made > > it quite clear > > that none of the crap I might spill out should be > > taken for granted, > > especially in the light that it might not accord > > with the scirptures, > > because I simply don't rely much on them. > > In his last discourse, the Buddha explicitly and > unequivocally encouraged us to verify what we've heard > from the Dhammavinaya. > > "In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a > bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor > with scorn. Yup, that was my intent. > But if the sentences concerned are > traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the > Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, > this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been > well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that > community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And > in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, > second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, > are the four great references for you to preserve." Well, it all depends on interpreation, doesn't it? One interpretes a sentence to mean, one thing, another to mean something different. In the end, the only one to mislead you, is yourself. But feel free to accept or reject anything I say. > > What good is the Dhamma, if you cannot > > apply it in your > > own practise so that you may know your own mind? > > I'd be surprised to hear anyone here dispute this. Words aren't always shown in action... 6019 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:53am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > > How is it possible for a lay person to a have moment of absolutely no > clinging or grasping? I'd say that there is still some grasping active, > although at a very subtle level. At the moment that there is a penetrating knowledge of reality, there is no= observerable clinging or grasping of the reality. There is also no additio= nal accumulations of clinging or grasping. However, since the person is not an= arahant, there is still *latent* tendencies for this clinging and grasping = to arise in the future, but the latent tendency is not observable. > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > S XXII.87 I am sorry; you will need to include an HTML link for that reference. I cannot respond as I cannot find the sutta... kom 6020 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the > consciousness of > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali > the Clansman > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished > consciousness that > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > S XXII.87 > > Established means that it is conditioned (and this > discernable). Because it > is unestablished, it is unconditioned. > > > The object (nibbana) being cognized > > at enlightenment is not conditioned. What they share is the > common > > characteristic of being anatta. > > How can you cognize that which is not-cognizeable? For > something to be > congnizeable, it has to be conditioned, hence mara could not > find the > consciousness of Vakkali because it was now unconditioned, and > hence it is > not possible to read the mind of an arahant because there is > nothing to be > read. _________________ Dear Anders, Perhaps you didn't realise that Vakkali in the sutta you quote above was already dead at the time that Mara was searching for his conciousness. Upon the death of an arahant or a buddha(parinibbana) there is no more arising of any citta (consciousness). robert 6021 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:25am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:13 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Yes. Let me explain in this way. > 1) The buddha separates all conditioned realities into two categories: > a) Rupa - the materiality. > b) Nama - the consciousness that cognizes a sense object. > 2) Nibbana is categorized as an unconditioned nama, it is an element that > is not rupa, but yet it doesn't cognize any sense object. > > We are a stream of nama and rupa, rising and falling away rapidly. When > we say we "experience", it is the nama that cognizes the sense objects. > There is no other thing that experiences except these conditioned realities > which are rising and fallign away rapidly (conditioned, impermanent, > stressful, and anatta). > > I repeat as before, the consciousness through the mind door (6th faculty?) > can cognize all rupa (28), nama (89 cittas + 52 cetasikas + 1 nibbana), > and concepts. > There are a number of cittas that can cognize nibbana: two of those are > magga (path at lokuttara level) and phala (result of that path) citta, both > appearing in the mind door process. The unconditioned appears (and > conditions) the conditioned pheonena, although the unconditioned itself is > not condiioned. > > I do not understand what you mean by nibbana going through the mind > door. Without the minddoor (the bhavanga citta before the mano-dvara- > vajjana), the lokuttara magga and phala cannot arise. The minddoor > clearly conditions (indirectly?) the magga and phala citta. > Hence, the difference in your understandings and the theravadan system > both in the meanings of the words, and the meanings of the teachings (as > I understand it, obviously, since I cannot be said to represent the > Buddha!). All I have to say is that to truly know the meaning of unconditioned, means that it doesn't participate in any conditioning processes (which you seem to think it does). When you say it conditions the conditioned, that is not entirely true. Rather, the conditioned process is no longer sustained, and from a lack of clinging/sustenance, it ends. Likewise, the unconditioned can never be 'philtered' through any conditioned doors, as this would mean that it takes part in the conditioned process. I shall stand by my claim that consciousness is released, and that released consciousness, is Nibbana: ------------------- Consciousness without feature, without end, luminous all around, does not partake of the solidity of earth, the liquidity of water, the radiance of fire, the windiness of wind, the divinity of devas (and so on through a list of the various levels of godhood to) the allness of the All. M 49 ------------------- Consciousness without feature, without end luminous all around: Here water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing. Here long & short coarse & fine fair & foul name & form are all brought to an end. With the stopping of [the activity of] consciousness, each is here brought to an end. D 11 ----------------- 'Without feature', and one of the names of Nibbana is 'the featureless'. The elements (meaning conditioned phenomena) have no footing (meaning it is not conditioned). A striking resemblance that the stopping of consciousness has to Nibbana, wouldn't you say so? ------------- If a monk abandons passion for the property of form... feeling... perception... mental processes... consciousness, then owing to the abandoning of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it stands still. Owing to its stillness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he [the monk] is totally 'nibbana-ed' right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' S XXII.53 One question. 1. According to you, what happens after Parinibbana. Annihilation? 6022 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:24am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > S XXII.87 In this sutta, Vakkali has achieved pari-nibbana, the cessation of all conditions for rebirth as well as the continuance of the 5 kandhas. The buddha is just commenting that there is no rebirth for him. > > > The object (nibbana) being cognized > > at enlightenment is not conditioned. What they share is the common > > characteristic of being anatta. > > How can you cognize that which is not-cognizeable? For something to be Why would you say nibbana is not cognizable? > congnizeable, it has to be conditioned, hence mara could not find the That is different from my understanding, even something that is unreal (doesn't exist) is still cognizable. Nibbana is definitely cognizable. > consciousness of Vakkali because it was now unconditioned, and hence it is > not possible to read the mind of an arahant because there is nothing to be > read. His mind was unreadable because there was no longer any: he was dead in the most permanent sense. > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, i= t > is > > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't continue > > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness > > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. The path consciousness > > certainly doesn't grasp, but it cognizes a reality as it truly is. Th= is > path > > consciousness *must* arise *prior* to enlightenment. > > Why? Because this (non-lokkutara) path conciousness accumulates panna, seeing realities as they truly are, as elements, as impermanent, as non- lasting, as anatta. It is this path conciousness that leads to the magga and phala citta, the lokuttara path consciousness, that eliminates the latent defilement tendencies. > The Sutta I quoted above explicitly stated that it is because it is not > established anywhere, not even "Nibbana". This point has been refuted... > True. But as someone else asked here, how can the blind verify the light? If > verification is an issue to some people here, then it would be better cal= l > upon the aid of someone who is a verified teacher, and who is (at least) = a > stream-entrant, if such a person is available. Do you know, not just think or believe, of anybody who is a stream- enterer? All that is verifiable now is the dhamma arising now that the consciousness is experiecing. Does your experience match with what the Buddha has taught, or does it match what you think it should be? When this conditioned consciousness stopped, we achieve pari-nibbana and stops to exist. Like I mention to you before, my questions and your answers cannot conclusively determine whether or not you (or anybody) has achieved this state. However, my satisfaction comes from the establishment of the differences and similarities in our understanding. kom 6023 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:31am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:58 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the > > consciousness of > > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali > > the Clansman > > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished > > consciousness that > > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > > S XXII.87 > _________________ > Dear Anders, > Perhaps you didn't realise that Vakkali in the sutta you quote > above was already dead at the time that Mara was searching for > his conciousness. Upon the death of an arahant or a > buddha(parinibbana) there is no more arising of any citta > (consciousness). Perhaps you notice (but then again, this could be attributed to faulted translation) that he speaks of the unestablished consciousness in the present tense? Through unconditioned/undying ("Nibbana'ed") consciousness, he is released, and thus, no more citta. 6024 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:34am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:53 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > > How is it possible for a lay person to a have moment of absolutely no > clinging or grasping? I'd say that there is still some grasping active, > although at a very subtle level. >At the moment that there is a penetrating knowledge of reality, there is no= observerable clinging or grasping of the reality. There is also no additio= nal accumulations of clinging or grasping. However, since the person is not an= arahant, there is still *latent* tendencies for this clinging and grasping = to arise in the future, but the latent tendency is not observable. Oh, stream-entry. Then we are in agreement, that is possible. Nonetheless, that moment of no clinging causes a knowledge of the deathless as well (enlightenment). But agreed, the habitual tendencies remain. > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > S XXII.87 >I am sorry; you will need to include an HTML link for that reference. I cannot respond as I cannot find the sutta... It's a sutta extract from the book "Mind, like fire unbound." 6025 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 8:24 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello --- "Anders Honoré" > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > S XXII.87 >in this sutta, Vakkali has achieved pari-nibbana, the cessation of all conditions for rebirth as well as the continuance of the 5 kandhas. The buddha is just commenting that there is no rebirth for him. I would say he is commenting that his unbound/undying consciousness is unestablished. > How can you cognize that which is not-cognizeable? For something to be >Why would you say nibbana is not cognizable? It is signless, featureless. How can you cognize that? In order for anything conditioned to relate to something else (simple cause and effect) that also has to be conditioned, as one cannot have cause and uneffect, or uncause and effect. Hence conditioned cognising cannot cognise the unconditioned, simply because it violates the laws of cause and effect, at it's most basic level. > congnizeable, it has to be conditioned, hence mara could not find the > consciousness of Vakkali because it was now unconditioned, and hence it is > not possible to read the mind of an arahant because there is nothing to be > read. >His mind was unreadable because there was no longer any: he was dead in the most permanent sense. True, I was unaware of that. However, other suttas also state that it is not possible to read the mind of an Arahant. Th= is > path > > consciousness *must* arise *prior* to enlightenment. > > Why? >Because this (non-lokkutara) path conciousness accumulates panna, seeing realities as they truly are, as elements, as impermanent, as non- lasting, as anatta. It is this path conciousness that leads to the magga and phala citta, the lokuttara path consciousness, that eliminates the latent defilement tendencies. Do you define enlightenment as ataining to the state of arahant-ship? Then we are in agreement. If you define it as stream-entry, we are not. > The Sutta I quoted above explicitly stated that it is because it is not > established anywhere, not even "Nibbana". >This point has been refuted... I wouldn't think so... > True. But as someone else asked here, how can the blind verify the light? If > verification is an issue to some people here, then it would be better cal= l > upon the aid of someone who is a verified teacher, and who is (at least) = a > stream-entrant, if such a person is available. >Do you know, not just think or believe, of anybody who is a stream- >enterer? Yes, I have been fortunate to know a few. Only one of them are Theravadins however, and he knows even less about the scriptures than I do (next to nothing really), so I don't think he'll be much help to you. His own teacher wanted him to start teaching Theravada himself, but he has stalled so far, as he would like some time to settle in it. > All that is verifiable now is the dhamma arising now that the consciousness is experiecing. Does your experience match with what the Buddha has taught, or does it match what you think it should be? When this conditioned consciousness stopped, we achieve pari-nibbana and stops to exist. That is one of the fallacious views which the Buddha denied on the basis of annihilation. >Like I mention to you before, my questions and your answers cannot conclusively determine whether or not you (or anybody) has achieved this state. However, my satisfaction comes from the establishment of the differences and similarities in our understanding. Very well.... 6026 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 3:00am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 8:24 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello >Do you know, not just think or believe, of anybody who is a stream- enterer? All that is verifiable now is the dhamma arising now that the consciousness is experiecing. Does your experience match with what the Buddha has taught, or does it match what you think it should be? When this conditioned consciousness stopped, we achieve pari-nibbana and stops to exist. Do you want some scripture to go with that argument (I feel like a waiter)? Here goes: ------------------------------ Sariputta: How do you construe this, my friend Yamaka: Do you regard form as the Tathagata? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: ...perception...? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: ...mental processes...? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: ...consciousness...? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form? Elsewhere than form? In feeling? Elsewhere than feeling? In perception? Elsewhere than perception? In mental processes? Elsewhere than mental processes? In consciousness? Elsewhere than consciousness? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-mental processes-consciousness? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without mental processes, without consciousness? Yamaka: No, sir. Sariputta: And so, my friend Yamaka -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Master, a monk with no more mental effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'? Yamaka: Previously, friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Teaching, I have abandoned that evil supposition, and the Teaching has become clear. Sariputta: Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents, what is he on the break-up of the body, after death? Yamaka: Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form...feeling... perception...mental processes...consciousness are inconstant. That which is inconstant is stressful. That which is stressful has stopped and gone to its end.' S XXII.85 ------------- For me, this is quite clear. The kandhas disperse, but the "Nibbana'ed" undying consciousness remains (although it is not established anywhere, and thus cannot be found anywhere). 6027 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:14am Subject: To Kom (and also Robert) Dear Kom. I feel that the discussion we have has taken a wrong turn. For me at least, for Dhamma discussions to be fruitful, it is to expose attachments to concepts and help break them up. I feel that at the moment, concepts are being exposed and replaced with new ones, hence no gain in terms of liberation. The subjects we are discussing doesn't really have any practical appliance, as I think (and I get the impression you'll agree) that things such as Nibbana and so on, are hardly relevant in your own practise in terms of integrating that knowledge or actualising it. I hope you can see what I mean. Robert, although not quite as relevant, I think some traces of what I mentioned above might also apply to the discussions we have been having. Do you agree? If it is important for you to falsify or verify any "enlightenment", then I would advice you to find someone qualified to do so, and I'll be happy to comply, although such a test is irrelevant for me. I have made no claim to stream-entry, so there's nothing lost or gained from that. I practise according with what I know, and this works for me. If I later discover that what I was erring previously, then I will readily accept that. My knowledge is far from incomplete. But that knowledge cannot be expanded from the scriptures for me at least. It has to come from the inside. The scriptures can only alert me to the possibility that I am erring. then I have to set about discovering that error for myself afterwards. Let me tell you a brief little story from my own practise, about ten months ago. Back then, I used to study the scriptures (Mahayana as well as Theravada. ) and interpret them, trying to enforce an understanding of reality ( true understanding is never an act of volition) by changing my own belief system. Then one day, I woke up and realised that I was no longer seeking truth. I was seeking a belief of truth. It dawned on my that it didn't matter if I believed that "non-duality transcends Oneness" or "it's all bull". The fact is, that none of those beliefs made me any happier, none of them helped be equanimous in my daily, or further my Sati. Most importantly, it wasn't something I could use to know my own mind. So I dropped all the scriptures and all the debate of whether things were this, or that. None of it helped me cultivate my own mind. Instead, I started looking to my own mind for answers. Not to my own ideas and such. I just started observing what was happening inside my own mind without thinking "ah, this must be because of that or that". I just observed it. From that point on, I knew nothing about Buddhism. But as I observed, I gradually came to see how things worked. I didn't try to enforce it, I just observed and let cause and effect be cause and effect, without trying plaster it with my own belief system. Basically, I learned to have faith. Faith in the fact the less I knew, the more I discovered. Eventually I started reading a scripture regularly (specifically the Platform Sutra of Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch of Zen). There were tons of stuff I didn't understand, but whenever I came across such a passage I just thought to myself "well, beyond my capacity. No reason to linger on that," and I focused on what I did comprehend and could utilise in my own daily practise. Even if I did gain a minor glimpse of some new teaching from that scripture, I'd say "well, that's all I can get from that at this moment. The rest will come when it is ready to come." Basically, I allowed the teachings to enter my mind, but without any volitional action. I never tried to understand them conceptually in any way. I preferred 'not-knowing' over false knowing. In fact, not-knowing became a practise in itself, as I discovered old views and concepts arise, and let go of them as well. I hope you see the point of this story Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6028 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:35am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] To Kom (and also Robert) ----- Original Message ----- From: Anders Honoré Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 10:14 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] To Kom (and also Robert) > My knowledge is far from incomplete. Oops! That should have been "My knowledge is far from *complete*." 6029 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:37am Subject: Re: To Kom (and also Robert) Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Dear Kom. > I feel that the discussion we have has taken a wrong turn. For me at least, > for Dhamma discussions to be fruitful, it is to expose attachments to > concepts and help break them up. I feel that at the moment, concepts are > being exposed and replaced with new ones, hence no gain in terms of > liberation. The subjects we are discussing doesn't really have any practical > appliance, as I think (and I get the impression you'll agree) that things= > such as Nibbana and so on, are hardly relevant in your own practise in terms > of integrating that knowledge or actualising it. I hope you can see what = I > mean. I can see what you mean. Not doing anything for me either... kom 6030 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: Howard on anatta and rebirth --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Sorry , > I just reread the article and see right at the end that he says > Nibbana is not anatta. This contradicts the Theravada tradition. > > robert Did you read the second article? I only just read it now. It seems that me and him are in agreement after all... As are Nargajuna and Hui-neng, but these are both Mahayanists, so I'll leave them be (even though Ajahn Chah acknowledged Hui-neng's teaching as true. And he refers to Nirvana as 'self-nature'). 6031 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello . > > > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of > > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the > Clansman > > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that > > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > > S XXII.87 > > >I am sorry; you will need to include an HTML link for that reference. I > cannot respond as I cannot find the sutta... > > It's a sutta extract from the book "Mind, like fire unbound." In Bhikkhu Bodhi's new translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, "The Connected Discourses of the Buddha," the paragraph is a bit different. " That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali, wondering: "Where now has the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali been established?' However, bhikkhus, with consciousness unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbana." The term "unestablished consciousness" seems to imply some special type of consciousness while the term "consciousness unestablsihed" points to the non-arising of consciousness, which seems to me to be much more consistent with the rest of this section on the aggregates...Ray 6032 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 0:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Hi, Anders - > --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Dear Anders, > > > > Through the 5 sense doors (seeing, hearing, smelling, physical > contact, > > tasting) only the 7 physical elements are known. > > Yes. > > > Through the 6th sense doors, all the possible paramatha elements > > (realities) are known, plus the concepts. The paramatha elements > include > > all citta (consciousness), cetasikas (mental factors), rupas > (physical > > elements), and nibbana. > > Let me get this straight. Through a conditioned, impermanent, and > stressful faculty, the unconditioned can be discerned? Furthermore, > that sixth faculty is experienced trhough the sixth sense-door > consciousness, so Nibbana goes through two conditioned philters in > order for the unconditioned to be manifest? > > > What I want to know is, since you have already experience Nibbana, > what > > experiences nibbana? You mention it is the released awareness. Is > > released awareness the same element as nibbana? > > There is no one, or nothing to experience Nibbana. Nibbana *is* > released awareness. > > =============================== This is very close to the way Peter Harvey, in his book The Selfless Mind, refers to nibbana. Quoting from certain Pali suttas, he calls it "unmanifest discernment". This is also discussed in Bhikkhu Nanananda's brilliant little book The Magic of the Mind: An Exposition of the Kalakarama Sutta. The sense of it seems to me to be that vi~n~nana is the discerning or separating out of objects and their parts/aspects/factors from the field of awareness, rather like separating out shadows from within an ocean of light. The objects discerned are limiting conditions/constraints, and the entry to nibbana consists of the dropping of these constraints, leaving a shining awareness, a luminosity ranging all around, encountering nothing, unrestricted, completely free. 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) 6033 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:58am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: To Kom (and also Robert) ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 10:37 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: To Kom (and also Robert) Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Dear Kom. > I feel that the discussion we have has taken a wrong turn. For me at least, > for Dhamma discussions to be fruitful, it is to expose attachments to > concepts and help break them up. I feel that at the moment, concepts are > being exposed and replaced with new ones, hence no gain in terms of > liberation. The subjects we are discussing doesn't really have any practical > appliance, as I think (and I get the impression you'll agree) that things= > such as Nibbana and so on, are hardly relevant in your own practise in terms > of integrating that knowledge or actualising it. I hope you can see what = I > mean. -------- >I can see what you mean. Not doing anything for me either... Thanks. 6034 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:01am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > > Do you want some scripture to go with that argument (I feel like a waiter)? > Here goes: > ------------------------------ > Sariputta: How do you construe this, my friend Yamaka: Do you regard form as > the Tathagata? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: ...perception...? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: ...mental processes...? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: ...consciousness...? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form? Elsewhere than > form? In feeling? Elsewhere than feeling? In perception? Elsewhere than > perception? In mental processes? Elsewhere than mental processes? In > consciousness? Elsewhere than consciousness? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception- mental > processes-consciousness? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, > without feeling, without perception, without mental processes, without > consciousness? > Yamaka: No, sir. > Sariputta: And so, my friend Yamaka -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata > as a truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to= > declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Master, a monk with > no more mental effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, > perishes, & does not exist after death'? > Yamaka: Previously, friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil > supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Teaching, I have > abandoned that evil supposition, and the Teaching has become clear. > Sariputta: Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: > A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents, what is he on the > break-up of the body, after death? > Yamaka: Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form...feeling... perception...mental > processes...consciousness are inconstant. That which is inconstant is > stressful. That which is stressful has stopped and gone to its end.' > S XXII.85 I think the differences between our understanding are: 1) You understand that nibbana is a consciousness, and that the consciousness at enlightenment becomes one of the same with nibbana at enlightenment. Although nibbana cannot be identified as self, at some crude level, you can think of this as living on forever, but not as self, a= nd hence negating the idea of annihilationism at pari-nibbana. 2) I understand nibbana to be a non-conscious element, and it is distinct from consciousness. I understand that the 5 kandha ceases to continue, because there are no more conditions to continue. The sutta can have another interpretation which is that the Tathagata never existed as a reality because the tathagata cannot be experienced, and therefore, the tathagata as a concept cannot cease to exist because it didn't really exist= at the first place. Again, like you said, this is an exposition of understandings only. It wouldn't have an immediate impact in my daily practice... kom 6035 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:04am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Ray Hendrickson Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > . > > > > > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of > > > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the > > Clansman > > > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that > > > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > > > > It's a sutta extract from the book "Mind, like fire unbound." > > In Bhikkhu Bodhi's new translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, "The Connected > Discourses of the Buddha," the paragraph is a bit different. > > " That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the consciousness of > the clansman Vakkali, wondering: "Where now has the consciousness of the > clansman Vakkali been established?' However, bhikkhus, with consciousness > unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbana." > > The term "unestablished consciousness" seems to imply some special type of > consciousness while the term "consciousness unestablsihed" points to the > non-arising of consciousness, which seems to me to be much more consistent > with the rest of this section on the aggregates...Ray As I read it, Bodhi's translation doesn't indicate the cessation of that consciousness. To me, it indicates that it is no longer established in objects, and owing to that, non-dwelling Nibbana. But then again, I haven't read the entire Sutta, so I cannot say what the context is. 6036 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:08am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 10:51 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > > There is no one, or nothing to experience Nibbana. Nibbana *is* > > released awareness. > =============================== > This is very close to the way Peter Harvey, in his book The Selfless > Mind, refers to nibbana. Quoting from certain Pali suttas, he calls it > "unmanifest discernment". This is also discussed in Bhikkhu Nanananda's > brilliant little book The Magic of the Mind: An Exposition of the Kalakarama > Sutta. I haven't read either, unfortunately. > The sense of it seems to me to be that vi~n~nana is the discerning or > separating out of objects and their parts/aspects/factors from the field of > awareness, rather like separating out shadows from within an ocean of light. > The objects discerned are limiting conditions/constraints, and the entry to > nibbana consists of the dropping of these constraints, leaving a shining > awareness, a luminosity ranging all around, encountering nothing, > unrestricted, completely free. Yes, that is somewhat what I would say as well. > /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) I must admit, I am a huge fan of the Diamond Sutra. If there ever was anything to knock anyone who think they know off from their feet it is that Sutra. So deep, yet with many levels of understanding. 6037 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Self Hi, Anders (and all) - In a message dated 7/8/01 1:02:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > Self... Let us try and examine what it really means. I think it has been > established beyond any doubt that anything that is impermanent, in short he > kandhas, are categorically no self. But, in order to know what the hell we > are talking, we should know just what is inferred from the word self, at the > very basic, as the ground for which spiritual seekers go out to discover > their true self (whether it be illusionary or not), in order that we may > negate or affirm the existence of a self. Since it is established that the > kandhas aren't self, we'll examine the definition based on the possibility > of Nibbana being the self. There are a number of possible definitions: > > 1. Self is free will; the creative source. > On this account there is no self. Nibbana for one, doesn't interact in any > way, so this cannot be self, under this definition. > > 2. Self is the sense of self > Under this, there is no self. Sense of self is created by perception of > self, which falls under the kandha of perception. > > 3. Self is knowing self. > Under this definition, there is no self either. For Nibbana to know Nibbana, > it would have to take it as an object, and since Nibbana doesn't dwell > anywhere, this cannot be the self. > > 4. Self is knowing what is not the self. > If this were true, once Parinibbana had been completed then there would be > nothing for the self, Nibbana, to stand in contradistinction to, and since > self is knowing what it is not, it would dissolve since it could no longer > discern what is not self. Thus, under this definition, no self either. > > So, if self is Nibbana, how could it possibly be defined? Since any sense or > perception of self is categorically not the self, it would be futile to even > talk of self. The moment we affirm a self, we are off the track, because > that cannot possibly be the self! So self would have to be beyond > affirmation or denial, which, at least in that regard, fits with Nibbana. > One could say that self is sentience. But that would indicate someone being > sentient, and once again we have the perception of self. If it should be > said that there is a self, it would have to be just defined as just *this*. > It's not any 'this' that you can think of, since it defies perception. It is > not anything, yet not not-existent, not existent. On the very account that > Nibbana *is*, this could be said to be self. yet since it is beyond > perception, it would be futile to call it self, since this perception of > self. On the other hand, it cannot be said to not be the self. Hence, I said > in one mail, that the Buddha's silence might hint at more than just a ploy, > but actually as a way of understanding self. Just this not- defining it, > affirming or denying it. > Nargarjuna, in Mahayana circles acknowledged by many as the "second Buddha", > once said that the Buddha did teach self to those who understood the derived > implication of the word. Thus this implication should be understood before > any negation might take place. And the derived implication is: It is not > something that can be implicated! So what is the point of discussing the > existence of self or not? Just work at uprooting your own habituated beliefs > of what self is. > > Anders Honore > ================================ If I may add a point: A "self" of anything is a personal core/essence of that thing. Nibbana, however, just as all conditioned dhammas, is *impersonal*, and that impersonality makes it not self. Peter Harvey, in his book The Selfless Mind, points out several ways in which nibbana is like a self and several ways, including its impersonality, in which it differs from a self. (As you may find obvious, from this and other posts of mine, I really like that book! ;-) 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) 6038 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:17am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, Thanks for being so patient and thanks for introducing those suttas that you mentioned. They are very good reminders of many things I still don't know. kom 6039 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Hi, Kom - In a message dated 7/8/01 1:07:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes in part: > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, it is > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't continue > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. =============================== I am excited, Kom! Thank you for this! I have looked and looked in vain for a definition of 'path consciousness', and finally it is provided!! Now, if you can also define 'fruition consciousness' for me, I will be ecstatic!!! ;-)) 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) 6040 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:01 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > I think the differences between our understanding are: > 1) You understand that nibbana is a consciousness, and that the consciousness at enlightenment becomes one of the same with nibbana at enlightenment. Although nibbana cannot be identified as self, at some crude level, you can think of this as living on forever, but not as self, and hence negating the idea of annihilationism at pari-nibbana. Well, that's the crude exposition, but not far off. I would hesitate to say forever though. Past, present and future exist only in relation to change, and when there is no change, how can there be time? > 2) I understand nibbana to be a non-conscious element, and it is distinct from consciousness. I understand that the 5 kandha ceases to continue, because there are no more conditions to continue. The sutta can have another interpretation which is that the Tathagata never existed as a reality because the tathagata cannot be experienced, and therefore, the tathagata as a concept cannot cease to exist because it didn't really exist= at the first place. Possible. But not one I'd ever buy though. I agree with you about the five kandhas though. > Again, like you said, this is an exposition of understandings only. It > wouldn't have an immediate impact in my daily practice... It seems you are beginning to see the futility of such holding unto views that are remote from oneself. 6041 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Hi, Anders - With no offense to Kom at all - and please be assured that I mean this, Kom, I think this post oy yours, Anders, is wonderful. Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu! With metta, Howard > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > > Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:13 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > > Yes. Let me explain in this way. > > 1) The buddha separates all conditioned realities into two categories: > > a) Rupa - the materiality. > > b) Nama - the consciousness that cognizes a sense object. > > 2) Nibbana is categorized as an unconditioned nama, it is an element that > > is not rupa, but yet it doesn't cognize any sense object. > > > > We are a stream of nama and rupa, rising and falling away rapidly. When > > we say we "experience", it is the nama that cognizes the sense objects. > > There is no other thing that experiences except these conditioned > realities > > which are rising and fallign away rapidly (conditioned, impermanent, > > stressful, and anatta). > > > > I repeat as before, the consciousness through the mind door (6th faculty?) > > can cognize all rupa (28), nama (89 cittas + 52 cetasikas + 1 nibbana), > > and concepts. > > There are a number of cittas that can cognize nibbana: two of those are > > magga (path at lokuttara level) and phala (result of that path) citta, > both > > appearing in the mind door process. The unconditioned appears (and > > conditions) the conditioned pheonena, although the unconditioned itself is > > not condiioned. > > > > I do not understand what you mean by nibbana going through the mind > > door. Without the minddoor (the bhavanga citta before the mano-dvara- > > vajjana), the lokuttara magga and phala cannot arise. The minddoor > > clearly conditions (indirectly?) the magga and phala citta. > > Hence, the difference in your understandings and the theravadan system > > both in the meanings of the words, and the meanings of the teachings (as > > I understand it, obviously, since I cannot be said to represent the > > Buddha!). > > All I have to say is that to truly know the meaning of unconditioned, means > that it doesn't participate in any conditioning processes (which you seem to > think it does). When you say it conditions the conditioned, that is not > entirely true. Rather, the conditioned process is no longer sustained, and > from a lack of clinging/sustenance, it ends. Likewise, the unconditioned can > never be 'philtered' through any conditioned doors, as this would mean that > it takes part in the conditioned process. > I shall stand by my claim that consciousness is released, and that released > consciousness, is Nibbana: > ------------------- > Consciousness without feature, without end, luminous all around, does not > partake of the solidity of earth, the liquidity of water, the radiance of > fire, the windiness of wind, the divinity of devas (and so on through a list > of the various levels of godhood to) the allness of the All. > M 49 > ------------------- > Consciousness without feature, without end > luminous all around: > Here water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing. > Here long & short > coarse & fine > fair & foul > name & form > are all brought to an end. > With the stopping > of [the activity of] consciousness, > each is here brought to an end. > D 11 > ----------------- > 'Without feature', and one of the names of Nibbana is 'the featureless'. The > elements (meaning conditioned phenomena) have no footing (meaning it is not > conditioned). A striking resemblance that the stopping of consciousness has > to Nibbana, wouldn't you say so? > ------------- > If a monk abandons passion for the property of form... feeling... > perception... mental processes... consciousness, then owing to the > abandoning of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for > consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not > performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it stands still. > Owing to its stillness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not > agitated. Not agitated, he [the monk] is totally 'nibbana-ed' right within. > He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. > There is nothing further for this world.' > S XXII.53 > > One question. > 1. According to you, what happens after Parinibbana. Annihilation? > > /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) 6042 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:35am Subject: Re: Howard: Path Consciousness Dear Howard, If you were following that stream of conversation, you may have seen: --- <> wrote: > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, it is > > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't continue > > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness > > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. > =============================== > I am excited, Kom! Thank you for this! I have looked and looked in > vain for a definition of 'path consciousness', and finally it is provided!! > Now, if you can also define 'fruition consciousness' for me, I will be > ecstatic!!! ;-)) That I delimited this to be "non-lokuttara-path" consciousness. As you may also have picked up, I have not seen this defined anywhere in this particular manner either, although I have seen the explanation that the moment of satipathana (non-lokuttara path consciousness, as defined above) is not a link within the Dependent origination. For the definitions of lokkutara path consciousness, you can look at: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat8.html kom 6043 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:45am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Self ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:14 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Self > Hi, Anders (and all) - > > In a message dated 7/8/01 1:02:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > Self... Let us try and examine what it really means. I think it has been > > established beyond any doubt that anything that is impermanent, in short he > > kandhas, are categorically no self. But, in order to know what the hell we > > are talking, we should know just what is inferred from the word self, at the > > very basic, as the ground for which spiritual seekers go out to discover > > their true self (whether it be illusionary or not), in order that we may > > negate or affirm the existence of a self. Since it is established that the > > kandhas aren't self, we'll examine the definition based on the possibility > > of Nibbana being the self. There are a number of possible definitions: > > > > 1. Self is free will; the creative source. > > On this account there is no self. Nibbana for one, doesn't interact in any > > way, so this cannot be self, under this definition. > > > > 2. Self is the sense of self > > Under this, there is no self. Sense of self is created by perception of > > self, which falls under the kandha of perception. > > > > 3. Self is knowing self. > > Under this definition, there is no self either. For Nibbana to know Nibbana, > > it would have to take it as an object, and since Nibbana doesn't dwell > > anywhere, this cannot be the self. > > > > 4. Self is knowing what is not the self. > > If this were true, once Parinibbana had been completed then there would be > > nothing for the self, Nibbana, to stand in contradistinction to, and since > > self is knowing what it is not, it would dissolve since it could no longer > > discern what is not self. Thus, under this definition, no self either. > > > > So, if self is Nibbana, how could it possibly be defined? Since any sense or > > perception of self is categorically not the self, it would be futile to even > > talk of self. The moment we affirm a self, we are off the track, because > > that cannot possibly be the self! So self would have to be beyond > > affirmation or denial, which, at least in that regard, fits with Nibbana. > > One could say that self is sentience. But that would indicate someone being > > sentient, and once again we have the perception of self. If it should be > > said that there is a self, it would have to be just defined as just *this*. > > It's not any 'this' that you can think of, since it defies perception. It is > > not anything, yet not not-existent, not existent. On the very account that > > Nibbana *is*, this could be said to be self. yet since it is beyond > > perception, it would be futile to call it self, since this perception of > > self. On the other hand, it cannot be said to not be the self. Hence, I said > > in one mail, that the Buddha's silence might hint at more than just a ploy, > > but actually as a way of understanding self. Just this not- defining it, > > affirming or denying it. > > Nargarjuna, in Mahayana circles acknowledged by many as the "second Buddha", > > once said that the Buddha did teach self to those who understood the derived > > implication of the word. Thus this implication should be understood before > > any negation might take place. And the derived implication is: It is not > > something that can be implicated! So what is the point of discussing the > > existence of self or not? Just work at uprooting your own habituated beliefs > > of what self is. > > > > Anders Honore > > > ================================ > If I may add a point: A "self" of anything is a personal core/essence > of that thing. Nibbana, however, just as all conditioned dhammas, is > *impersonal*, and that impersonality makes it not self. I agree that it is impersonal, and from that point of view, it can be said to be not-self, which I think falls under the category no self on the assumption of 'sense or perception of self'. But if you read the following article: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban2.htm, it shows that the suttas do indeed point at the existence of a self (by engaging in a series of negations with regard to all conditioned existence rather than all-out denial of self), and that the only thing left un-negated is Nibbana. Again, it all boils down to the derived implication of the word 'self'. > Peter Harvey, in his > book The Selfless Mind, points out several ways in which nibbana is like a > self and several ways, including its impersonality, in which it differs from > a self. (As you may find obvious, from this and other posts of mine, I really > like that book! ;-) Haha, you are getting me curious now. I am gonna have to read that book at one point. 6044 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:46am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:17 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Dear Anders, > > Thanks for being so patient and thanks for introducing those suttas that > you mentioned. They are very good reminders of many things I still don't > know. I am always happy to be of assistance ;-) 6045 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:48am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:22 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, it is > > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't continue > > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness > > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. > =============================== > I am excited, Kom! Thank you for this! I have looked and looked in > vain for a definition of 'path consciousness', and finally it is provided!! > Now, if you can also define 'fruition consciousness' for me, I will be > ecstatic!!! ;-)) I think I can, but I'll wait and see if there are any others who have seen the word before (I haven't) and might be able to define it properly. 6046 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:46am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > It seems you are beginning to see the futility of such holding unto views= > that are remote from oneself. Not quite exactly... Otherwise, I wouldn't want to discuss all these views= , would I? I see these views as possible explanations, but am not convicted = that they are correct. I wouldn't be surprised if they are not. All but ariyans have incorrect views, so unless you can verify somehow that the speaker is at least sotapanna, they may be telling you subtly incorrect views. Only the actual enlightenment would prove things absolutely beyond doubt. And even that is (currently) a view... I see some values of having the right view in mind. Not being able to verify that completely, I do the best I can... kom 6047 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Howard: Path Consciousness Thanks very much, kom. With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/8/01 5:38:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > > Dear Howard, > > If you were following that stream of conversation, you may have seen: > > --- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=224154113112158182169218175036129208 wrote: > > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a reality as it truly is, > it > is > > > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness that doesn't > continue > > > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path consciousness > > > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. > > =============================== > > I am excited, Kom! Thank you for this! I have looked and looked in > > vain for a definition of 'path consciousness', and finally it is > provided!! > > Now, if you can also define 'fruition consciousness' for me, I will be > > ecstatic!!! ;-)) > > That I delimited this to be "non-lokuttara-path" consciousness. As you > may also have picked up, I have not seen this defined anywhere in this > particular manner either, although I have seen the explanation that the > moment of satipathana (non-lokuttara path consciousness, as defined > above) is not a link within the Dependent origination. > > For the definitions of lokkutara path consciousness, you can look at: > http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat8.html > > kom > /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) 6048 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:51am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Howard, I am still waiting to see you offending anyone... kom --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Anders - > > With no offense to Kom at all - and please be assured that I mean > this, Kom, I think this post oy yours, Anders, is wonderful. Sadhu, sadhu, > sadhu! > > With metta, > Howard 6049 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:32 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Hi, Anders - > > With no offense to Kom at all - and please be assured that I mean > this, Kom, I think this post oy yours, Anders, is wonderful. Sadhu, sadhu, > sadhu! Let me guess: It is not far off from what Peter Harvey would write in his book The Selfless Mind? :-) 6050 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 6:06am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:46 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello --- "Anders Honoré" > > It seems you are beginning to see the futility of such holding unto views > > that are remote from oneself. > Not quite exactly... Otherwise, I wouldn't want to discuss all these views, > would I? I see these views as possible explanations, but am not convicted > that they are correct. I wouldn't be surprised if they are not. All but > ariyans have incorrect views, so unless you can verify somehow that the > speaker is at least sotapanna, they may be telling you subtly incorrect > views. Only the actual enlightenment would prove things absolutely > beyond doubt. And even that is (currently) a view... Nonetheless, a useful view as it helps against being mislead by others. But how will you prevent being mislead by yourself? > I see some values of having the right view in mind. Not being able to > verify that completely, I do the best I can... I too see the value of Right View. But the Middle Way has to be remembered, and there is a difference between Right View and excess in views, a thicket of views. 6051 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 6:14am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > > Nonetheless, a useful view as it helps against being mislead by others. But > how will you prevent being mislead by yourself? There is none, except by being reminded by oneself and others these are just views, models, concepts, and not realities. Realities are rising now,= and that can be verified, understood a little bit at a time. > I too see the value of Right View. But the Middle Way has to be remembered, > and there is a difference between Right View and excess in views, a thicket > of views. Yes, the Middle Way means (in a definition I have heard) that there is an awareness and penetrating knowledge of the realities occuring now. As you have mentioned before, and I believe are known to many people in this group, that concepts don't bring on the path. Thanks for the reminder. kom 6052 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 8:18am Subject: Re: silabbataparamasa Robert, thanks for your note. I've just got back from the khao pansa ceremony at my local temple. I'm going to be in Bangkok until September 10 as I can only afford 2 weeks away from work. After looking through all the guidebooks, the 2 temples I want to try and spend some time in are Wat Mahathat and Wat Thammamongkhon. The information I have on Wat Mahathat says you just show up and inquire if you can stay for a few days. Wat Thammamongkhon is affiliated with my local temple so I'll probably see if I can call them first before I leave, So ... apart from the dates which are fixed due to flights, I haven't made any definite plans yet. How about you? Do you have plans? Derek. 6053 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 8:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Howard, Kom's right--this is excellent (I missed it at first). You're on quite a roll of late! mike --- Howard wrote: > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a > reality as it truly is, it is > > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness > that doesn't continue > > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path > consciousness > > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. 6054 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello Hi again, Anders - In a message dated 7/8/01 6:04:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Anders Honore writes: > Let me guess: It is not far off from what Peter Harvey would write in his > book The Selfless 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) 6055 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Thanks, Kom. You're very kind. With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/8/01 6:04:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Kom T writes: > Dear Howard, > > I am still waiting to see you offending anyone... > > kom > /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) 6056 From: Herman Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 10:29am Subject: Re: Hello Bruce and Robert, Where is the authority that qualifies anyone as a member of the mind police? Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition after sending a Hello. What, Anders has committed blasphemy now? And the scribes and pharisees will silence him, hey? This is from a sutta known as Matthew 22:15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. And this was the retort: Matthew 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for you neither go in yourselves, neither suffer you them that are entering to go in. No reply necessary. I am removing myself from the list and the other one between which Robert divides his life. It is getting too dark in here. Bye Herman --- bruce wrote: > herman, you are kidding, right? robert has been making his usual calm and > rational inquiries into a situation that is most certainly not usual: not > only do we have someone claiming to this group to be at least a sotapanna, > but also someone who is proclaiming it to the world from a website....don't > you think that something like this needs to be looked into as thoroughly as > possible? what could robert have possibly said in this thread to engender > so much lobha? > > bruce > 6057 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 11:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] To Kom (and also Robert)1 --- Anders Honoré wrote: > The subjects we are discussing doesn't really have > any practical > appliance, as I think (and I get the impression you'll agree) > that things > such as Nibbana and so on, are hardly relevant in your own > practise in terms > of integrating that knowledge or actualising it. > I pretty much agree - although sometimesI think it can be useful to talk about it even if we have not yet experienced it. For instance, if we say had an idea of Nibbana as union with the Infinite Brahma then perhaps our path would head in such a direction. This discusion group has been going for 18months and this is one of the first lenghthy threads about it. (I guess you meant "our own practice" when you said "hardly relevant in your own practice"?) I have made > no claim to > stream-entry, so there's nothing lost or gained from that.________ Thank you for clarifying this Anders. In your introduction you gave the url to your websites where you do claim to have some stage of enlightenment. But when I asked about alcohol consumption you candidly admitted doing so and thus had come to your own conclusion that you are not enlightened. And isn't it good that you now know this? I asked also about seeing - which you didn't reply to - because isn't it practical and useful to understand? It is happening now and I find it a most interesting dhamma to investigate directly. best wishes robert 6058 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 0:17pm Subject: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Thank you for clarifying this Anders. In your introduction you > gave the url to your websites where you do claim to have some > stage of enlightenment. But when I asked about alcohol > consumption you candidly admitted doing so and thus had come to > your own conclusion that you are not enlightened. > And isn't it good that you now know this? Hi, I'm new to this list and have very little knowledge of it or most members, so I am just jumping in to make a comment. By way of introduction, my name is Robert, I am involved in a practice which I consider to be Buddhist, but I am also influenced by Advaita Vedanta and other disciplines, so I cannot say I *am* a Buddhist. Perhaps that's unnecessary in any case. I am inspired by Buddhist teachers of various lineages, but particularly Hui-Neng, Chao-Chou and other sudden-school Ch'an and Zen masters. But I also have a strong interest and some practice in Vipassana, and regard all the teachings as significant. Now for my comment. I can understand the issue of drinking alcohol as being relevant to following precepts, but what on earth does it have to do with being enlightened? Do you really think that a Buddha would be concerned as to whether a drop of alcohol touched his lips, or that perhaps he would lose his enlightenment because of taking a drink? I don't see that following the letter of prohibitions and precepts is directly related to realization at all. If you think it is, I would be happy to hear your explanation. Robert 6059 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 1:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Sorry you feel that way, Herman, and sorry to see you go. mike --- Herman wrote: > Bruce and Robert, > > Where is the authority that qualifies anyone as a > member of the mind > police? Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition after > sending a Hello. > > What, Anders has committed blasphemy now? And the > scribes and > pharisees will silence him, hey? > > This is from a sutta known as Matthew 22:15 > Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they > might entangle him > in his talk. > > And this was the retort: Matthew 23:13 > But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! > for you shut up > the kingdom of heaven against men: for you neither > go in yourselves, > neither suffer you them that are entering to go in. > > > No reply necessary. I am removing myself from the > list and the other > one between which Robert divides his life. It is > getting too dark in > here. > > > Bye > > > Herman 6060 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup](Drinking) Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Now for my comment. I can understand the issue of drinking > alcohol as > being relevant to following precepts, but what on earth does > it have to > do with being enlightened? Do you really think that a Buddha > would be > concerned as to whether a drop of alcohol touched his lips, or > that > perhaps he would lose his enlightenment because of taking a > drink? > > I don't see that following the letter of prohibitions and > precepts is > directly related to realization at all. If you think it is, I > would be > happy to hear your explanation. > _____________ Dear Robert E. (can we call you that as I am also a Robert) Welcome to the group. The early buddhist texts are explicit that a sotapanna or any enlightened being (enlightened in the Buddha's way - it may be different for other paths) has no more conditions to break the five precepts. The way I understand this is by gradually learning to study the different moments as they happen in a day. Now for instance, there is seeing and immediately there is thinking arising about what is seen. Underlying this thinking there are different roots, states of mind, such as ignorance or understanding or desire or aversion or non-desire or non-aversion. It is not so easy to be sure of which state is arising in the moment. Is it understanding or is it ignorance at this moment? Is there subtle desire present or is there genuine detachment. Now I feel calm and relaxed but is there a refined attachment to that feeling? When I look at my desk, which has many papers scattered on it, I sense no unpleasantness but could there be a very refined aversion with an equally refined unpleasant feeling?Or is there simply no understanding of the moment - just a feeling that "I" see (desk, papers, whatever). I do find there seems to be a little more understanding of mental states than when I first learnt about buddhism . Sometimes I might think of having a drink of alcohol - but the root underlying that is not subtle at all. It is very obviously rooted in greed for: pleasant feeling, new experience, a way to forget problems, impress my friends, relax...take your pick. The more we learn about the different moments in daily life - the apparently uninteresting ones that are happening now - the more we learn about the characteritics of the roots. The roots such as greed and aversion and ignorance are not wholesome and learning about them means that there is some turning away from them. Not by forcing and setting rules but by seeing their true nature- they are ugly. One who is a sotapanna has developed profound insight into dhammas (including mindstates) and thus the degree of desire that could condition the breaking of the five precepts cannot arise. robert 6061 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 2:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup](Drinking) Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 Robert, Feel free to call me Robert E. I appreciate your explanation, and I think it is well thought out and makes a lot of sense. However, I find it hard to believe that an enlightened being, who is no longer subject to desires and defilements, since he has seen through the illusion of the separate self and the skandhas, would necessarily be averse to having a drink. Can one not have a drink without the arising of a desire to have a drink? At a certain point, to refuse to have a drink would also represent a fear, an aversion or a holding onto a view. It would be a protecting of a self which one does not want to defile. If one is attached to the precepts there can be no absolute detachment. Of course, for one attempting to discriminate all of the mind states it is wiser not to act than to act, wiser to follow the precepts than not to. But for someone who has gone past those challenges, and with the understanding that most of us are not in that position, attachment to non-attachment can be a serious impediment. Likewise, I would not disqualify someone from having achieved realization because they announce that they have sometimes had a drink. Is it not possible to have a drink without having desire for a drink? I would look further into that person's state of mind and experience of realization before discounting them on the basis of an external sign. Robert E. --------------------------------- --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > Now for my comment. I can understand the issue of drinking > > alcohol as > > being relevant to following precepts, but what on earth does > > it have to > > do with being enlightened? Do you really think that a Buddha > > would be > > concerned as to whether a drop of alcohol touched his lips, or > > that > > perhaps he would lose his enlightenment because of taking a > > drink? > > > > I don't see that following the letter of prohibitions and > > precepts is > > directly related to realization at all. If you think it is, I > > would be > > happy to hear your explanation. > > > _____________ > Dear Robert E. (can we call you that as I am also a Robert) > Welcome to the group. > The early buddhist texts are explicit that a sotapanna or any > enlightened being (enlightened in the Buddha's way - it may be > different for other paths) has no more conditions to break the > five precepts. > One who is a sotapanna has developed profound insight into > dhammas (including mindstates) and thus the degree of desire > that could condition the breaking of the five precepts cannot > arise. > robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6062 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 3:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup](Drinking) Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 dear Robert E. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Robert, > > However, I find it hard to believe that an enlightened being, > who is no longer > subject to desires and defilements, since he has seen through > the illusion of the > separate self and the skandhas, would necessarily be averse to > having a drink. > Can one not have a drink without the arising of a desire to > have a drink? _______________ I really don't see how. even when we drink a glass of water there is most often mindstate rooted in refined desire. Driking alcohol is a different matter again- nothing subtle in that desire. ______ > > At a certain point, to refuse to have a drink would also > represent a fear, an > aversion or a holding onto a view. It would be a protecting > of a self which one > does not want to defile. If one is attached to the precepts > there can be no > absolute detachment. __________ I think this applies to those like us who are not enlightened. You put it very well actuallY! Are you a friend of Eriks? (just joking -we've had a long discussion about drug use recently and Erik has put forth some slightly unconventional but well considered ideas on this) ________- Of course, for one attempting to > discriminate all of the > mind states it is wiser not to act than to act, wiser to > follow the precepts than > not to. But for someone who has gone past those challenges, > and with the > understanding that most of us are not in that position, > attachment to > non-attachment can be a serious impediment. __________ Let's go beyond a sotapanna to an arahant - just to make things stand out more. An arahant has eradicated unwholesome desire forever. Thus if we take something as basic as sex they cannot even form the desire for a woman. There could be a hundred naked 19year olds in front of them but they couldn't possibly have the least desire. The sotapanna can still have sex but not in gross unwholesome ways (such as rape),. We might think the arahant is simply attached to his state of detachment but according to the Theravada tradition all desire has being utterly rooted out - robert > > > --------------------------------- > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > > Now for my comment. I can understand the issue of > drinking > > > alcohol as > > > being relevant to following precepts, but what on earth > does > > > it have to > > > do with being enlightened? Do you really think that a > Buddha > > > would be > > > concerned as to whether a drop of alcohol touched his > lips, or > > > that > > > perhaps he would lose his enlightenment because of taking > a > > > drink? > > > > > > I don't see that following the letter of prohibitions and > > > precepts is > > > directly related to realization at all. If you think it > is, I > > > would be > > > happy to hear your explanation. > > > > > _____________ > > Dear Robert E. (can we call you that as I am also a Robert) > > Welcome to the group. > > The early buddhist texts are explicit that a sotapanna or > any > > enlightened being (enlightened in the Buddha's way - it may > be > > different for other paths) has no more conditions to break > the > > five precepts. > > > One who is a sotapanna has developed profound insight into > > dhammas (including mindstates) and thus the degree of desire > > that could condition the breaking of the five precepts > cannot > > arise. > > robert > > > ===== > Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor > THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. > homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ > commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html > profile: > http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html > "What you learn to really do becomes real" > "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" > 6063 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 3:26pm Subject: Re: Hello Dear Mike, I am not sure if you have seen Howard's wink or not, but it's there because there is no such explicit definition anywhere except in my post. The only justifications (when in doubt of your action, always search for a justification) I have are: 1) As mentioned in previous post, satipathana is not considered part of the patica-samupatha link: it doesn't cause the cycle to continue. 2) One of the definitions of Satipathana is: the path that the samasambuddha and his ariyan disciples have already walked. kom --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Howard, > > Kom's right--this is excellent (I missed it at first). > You're on quite a roll of late! > > mike > > --- Howard wrote: > > > > When there is a consciousness that cognizes a > > reality as it truly is, it is > > > considered a "path" consciousness, a consciousness > > that doesn't continue > > > the cycle of dependent origination. The non-path > > consciousness > > > accumulates causes that continues the cycles. > 6064 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 3:57pm Subject: S L O W L Y catching up...... Dear Friends, Just a quick note from a tourist office in Kandersteg at the end of our strenuous hike to say we're slowly catching up (and testing the patience of the toursit office;-)) and about to take a stack of print-outs to read together over coffee....bliss.... A big welcome to the several newbies here...we'll both slowly get back to the list proper in the next couple of wks... HERMAN, hang in there, you're a very valued member of dsg and we all need you to voice yr opinions (which i'm sure are shared by many)...;;-)) Btw, that freezing Sydney surf when we were there was nothing to a violent hail storm over a high, snowy pass here in Switz... O.K., I'm getting 'looks'...so off to enjoy the great budle of what look superficially like great posts.. Sarah 6065 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:01pm Subject: Re: Animitta Cetovimutti (was Hello) Dear Anders, I said that I would get back to you on this sutta. Here I am. The consultation was with the Thai version of Tipitaka with the commentaries translated from Thai (and I will be translating it into English). Take it as you please. I will skip the first 4, as the commentary confirms that they refer to jhana, and we already agree on those parts. Here's the translation of the 5th: Animitta Cetovimutti is powerful vipassana. The acariya who arranged Digha Nigkaya said it is sampatti with Arahat Phala. Arahat phala sampatti, the Buddha has said, has no nimitta because there is no sign, such as raga, rupa, or permanence. Here's my interpretation of the passage above. Arahat phala sampati means an arahat, who has developed jhana, is going into a jhana-like state (extended period of jhana javana with no interrupting bhavanga), except that the citta is phala (fruitation) citta (with nibbana as the cognized object) instead of jhana citta. According to the commentary and this particular interpretation of the commentary, the state can be achieved only if 1) one is an arahat 2) one has developed and achieved the first level jhana kom --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > This is the point (the sutta that you quoted) of contention that still needs > to be researched. My preliminary research (looking at the two Thai > tipitaka translations which yield the same Thai wordings ) shows the first > 5 points in the sutta to be: > 1) Metta Cetovimutti - This is clearly jhana by Metta Bhavana > 2) Karuna Cetovimutti - This is clearly jhana by Karuna Bhavana > 3) Mudita Cetovimutti - This is clearly jhana by Mudita Bhavana > 4) Upekkha cetovimutti - This is clearly jhana by Upekkha bhavana > > 5) Animitta cetovimutti (release without a sign) - This is the one at > contention. The literal translation can be what I have mentioned to you > before which is, jhana without a sign (animitta), an aramana (sense > object) of citta (consciousness) at the arupa-jhana level. I will give you a > rough idea of what the aramana of the arupa-jhana is: > > 1) 1st-level arupa jhana (akasanancayatana-jhana) having infinite space > as the sense object. > 2) 2nd-level arupa jhana (vinnanancayatana-jhana) having the 1st level > jhana citta as the sense object > 3) 3rd-level arupa jhana (akincannayatana-jhana) having nothing as the > sense object. > 4) 4th-level arupa jhana (nevasannanasannayatana-jhana) having the 3rd > level jahna citta as the sense object > > Again, as you can see, the Animitta cetovimutti can be easily interpreted > as some of the arupa-jhana sense objects because they have > characteristics of "infinity" (unbounded?) associated with them. The > arupa jhana practictioner is described to have given up the nimita of the > rupa-jhana level to reach the arupa jhana level. > > Furthermore, if you look at the sutta in its entirety, it talks about *both* > temporary release from defilements (which I interpret the first 5 to be), > and permanent release for defilements (which I interpret the last to be). > > My last hope of settling the interpretations is the attha-gatha of this sutta; > if it doesn't resolve the issue, then we live with our differences in > understanding (we may do even if there is a resolution anyway!). We will > have to wait until I get to it. 6066 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:59pm Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, While I was looking up the other sutta, I looked up the two that you posted here as well, i.e., MN49, and DN11. Although the translators agree that they both refer to nibbana, the "consciousness" aspect is controversial at best. The commentary (Buddhagosa) [from Thai] suggests it has the meaning of: Nibanna, which should be cognized. Based on the following comments of translation by Bikkhu Nanamoli and Bikkhu Bodhi, it appears that the wordings to the suttas are truly exceptional. There are no other places (according to them) where Nibbana is referred to as consciousness: These lines (which also appear as part of a full verse at DN11.85/i.223) have been a perennial challenge to Buddhist scholarship, and even Acariya Buddhaghosa seems to founder over them. MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called "consciousness" in the sense that "it can be cognized." Thsi is obviously a contrived derivation, since nowhere in the Canon is Nibbana ever described as consciousness. MA offers three explanations of the phrase sabbato pbaham: (1) completely posses of splendour (pabha); (2) possessing being (pabhutam) every where; and (3) a ford (pabham) accessible from all sides, i.e, through any fo the thri= ty- eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy. Nm, in Ms, explains that he takes pabham to be a negative present participle of pabhavati - ababham - the negative-0prefix a= dropping off in conjunction with sabbato: "The sense can be paraphrased freely by 'not predicating being in relation to "all," or 'not assuming of = "all" that it is or is not in a anbsolute sense". As an alternative translation more in keeping with MA, Maurice Walshe reenders: "... consciousness [that] is sign-less, boudnless, all-luminous (Thus Have I heard, p.179). --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:13 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > > Yes. Let me explain in this way. > > 1) The buddha separates all conditioned realities into two categories: > > a) Rupa - the materiality. > > b) Nama - the consciousness that cognizes a sense object. > > 2) Nibbana is categorized as an unconditioned nama, it is an element that > > is not rupa, but yet it doesn't cognize any sense object. > > > > We are a stream of nama and rupa, rising and falling away rapidly. When > > we say we "experience", it is the nama that cognizes the sense objects. > > There is no other thing that experiences except these conditioned > realities > > which are rising and fallign away rapidly (conditioned, impermanent, > > stressful, and anatta). > > > > I repeat as before, the consciousness through the mind door (6th faculty?) > > can cognize all rupa (28), nama (89 cittas + 52 cetasikas + 1 nibbana), > > and concepts. > > There are a number of cittas that can cognize nibbana: two of those are > > magga (path at lokuttara level) and phala (result of that path) citta, > both > > appearing in the mind door process. The unconditioned appears (and > > conditions) the conditioned pheonena, although the unconditioned itself is > > not condiioned. > > > > I do not understand what you mean by nibbana going through the mind > > door. Without the minddoor (the bhavanga citta before the mano- dvara- > > vajjana), the lokuttara magga and phala cannot arise. The minddoor > > clearly conditions (indirectly?) the magga and phala citta. > > Hence, the difference in your understandings and the theravadan system > > both in the meanings of the words, and the meanings of the teachings (as > > I understand it, obviously, since I cannot be said to represent the > > Buddha!). > > All I have to say is that to truly know the meaning of unconditioned, means > that it doesn't participate in any conditioning processes (which you seem to > think it does). When you say it conditions the conditioned, that is not > entirely true. Rather, the conditioned process is no longer sustained, an= d > from a lack of clinging/sustenance, it ends. Likewise, the unconditioned = can > never be 'philtered' through any conditioned doors, as this would mean that > it takes part in the conditioned process. > I shall stand by my claim that consciousness is released, and that released > consciousness, is Nibbana: > ------------------- > Consciousness without feature, without end, luminous all around, does not > partake of the solidity of earth, the liquidity of water, the radiance of= > fire, the windiness of wind, the divinity of devas (and so on through a l= ist > of the various levels of godhood to) the allness of the All. > M 49 > ------------------- > Consciousness without feature, without end > luminous all around: > Here water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing. > Here long & short > coarse & fine > fair & foul > name & form > are all brought to an end. > With the stopping > of [the activity of] consciousness, > each is here brought to an end. > D 11 > ----------------- > 'Without feature', and one of the names of Nibbana is 'the featureless'. = The > elements (meaning conditioned phenomena) have no footing (meaning it is not > conditioned). A striking resemblance that the stopping of consciousness has > to Nibbana, wouldn't you say so? > ------------- > If a monk abandons passion for the property of form... feeling... > perception... mental processes... consciousness, then owing to the > abandoning of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for > consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not > performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it stands sti= ll. > Owing to its stillness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is = not > agitated. Not agitated, he [the monk] is totally 'nibbana-ed' right withi= n. > He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done.= > There is nothing further for this world.' > S XXII.53 > > One question. > 1. According to you, what happens after Parinibbana. Annihilation? 6067 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:01pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] To Kom (and also Robert)1 ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 5:43 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] To Kom (and also Robert) > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > The subjects we are discussing doesn't really have > > any practical > > appliance, as I think (and I get the impression you'll agree) > > that things > > such as Nibbana and so on, are hardly relevant in your own > > practise in terms > > of integrating that knowledge or actualising it. > > > I pretty much agree - although sometimesI think it can be > useful to talk about it even if we have not yet experienced it. > For instance, if we say had an idea of Nibbana as union with the > Infinite Brahma then perhaps our path would head in such a > direction. This discusion group has been going for 18months and > this is one of the first lenghthy threads about it. (I guess you > meant "our own practice" when you said "hardly relevant in your > own practice"?) Talking about Nibbana is hardly relevant in my own practise either. > I have made > > no claim to > > stream-entry, so there's nothing lost or gained from > that.________ > > Thank you for clarifying this Anders. In your introduction you > gave the url to your websites where you do claim to have some > stage of enlightenment. But when I asked about alcohol > consumption you candidly admitted doing so and thus had come to > your own conclusion that you are not enlightened. > And isn't it good that you now know this? Hmm, I think you misunderstand. What I am saying is that I haven't come to any conclusion, about enlightenment or stream-entry. If someone wants to say "he's enlightened" because I do this or that, or say "He's not a stream-entrant" because I still consume alcohol, then let them. But I am not buying either. Please don't interprete this a not-knowing stemming from confusion. It is merely not delving into false labels which have no relevancy for me. I won't deny that I have had some insight, but I couldn't care less about what "stage" that qualifies me at. As I said, if answers are important to you, find someone qualified to give them. > I asked also about seeing - which you didn't reply to - because > isn't it practical and useful to understand? It is happening now > and I find it a most interesting dhamma to investigate directly. I am sorry, must have missed that. What was your question? Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6068 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:04pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup](Drinking) Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup](Drinking) Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 > __________ > Let's go beyond a sotapanna to an arahant - just to make things > stand out more. An arahant has eradicated unwholesome desire > forever. Thus if we take something as basic as sex they cannot > even form the desire for a woman. There could be a hundred naked > 19year olds in front of them but they couldn't possibly have the > least desire. > The sotapanna can still have sex but not in gross unwholesome > ways (such as rape),. > We might think the arahant is simply attached to his state of > detachment but according to the Theravada tradition all desire > has being utterly rooted out - Obviously, it wouldn't mean anything to the Arahant even if he did have sex. But I would say that he is aware of the causal consequences this might have, and chooses not to, in any case. 6069 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:06pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 12:14 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello >Dear Anders, >Yes, the Middle Way means (in a definition I have heard) that there is an >awareness and penetrating knowledge of the realities occuring now. As >you have mentioned before, and I believe are known to many people in >this group, that concepts don't bring on the path. > >Thanks for the reminder. 6070 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 4:09pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 9:26 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Dear Mike, > > I am not sure if you have seen Howard's wink or not, but it's there > because there is no such explicit definition anywhere except in my post. > The only justifications (when in doubt of your action, always search for a > justification) I have are: > 1) As mentioned in previous post, satipathana is not considered part of > the patica-samupatha link: it doesn't cause the cycle to continue. Hmmm, yes and no. It ends the cycle for extremely many of the factors lower down the chain of dependent co-origination. The top ones are still sustained to a minor degree, hence it is still conditioned practise. 6071 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 5:21pm Subject: The war of the suttas Dear Friends, The last two days have been interesting for me. I have recently started looking at postings to DSG and my transmissions of dhamma in general with some wary, as they often bring craving, conceits, and perhaps even wrong views! However, despite all that I learned one (of many) thing from the last 2 days of postings: that I sometimes look at a sutta and see how it can be fitted into existing beliefs/models instead of trying to understand the meaning of it, so this is just another reminder from your friend (or pseudo-enemey): When you look at a sutta, are you looking at a sutta as a guide to the dhamma / a good source of verification for your experiences, or are you looking at it to fit into your own belief / justify your experiences? I would say the second set has the danger of giving you the possibly false sense of security of knowing what you don't or having/attaining when you haven't. kom 6072 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 6:40pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The war of the suttas ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 11:21 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] The war of the suttas > Dear Friends, > > The last two days have been interesting for me. I have recently started > looking at postings to DSG and my transmissions of dhamma in general > with some wary, as they often bring craving, conceits, and perhaps even > wrong views! However, despite all that I learned one (of many) thing > from the last 2 days of postings: that I sometimes look at a sutta and see > how it can be fitted into existing beliefs/models instead of trying to > understand the meaning of it, so this is just another reminder from your > friend (or pseudo-enemey): > > When you look at a sutta, are you looking at a sutta as a guide to the > dhamma / a good source of verification for your experiences, or are you > looking at it to fit into your own belief / justify your experiences? I would > say the second set has the danger of giving you the possibly false sense of > security of knowing what you don't or having/attaining when you haven't. Sadhu! Great post, Kom. 6073 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 6:44pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 10:59 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello >Dear Anders, >While I was looking up the other sutta, I looked up the two that you posted here as well, i.e., MN49, and DN11. Although the translators agree that they both refer to nibbana, the "consciousness" aspect is controversial at best. The commentary (Buddhagosa) [from Thai] suggests it has the meaning of: Nibanna, which should be cognized. >Based on the following comments of translation by Bikkhu Nanamoli and Bikkhu Bodhi, it appears that the wordings to the suttas are truly exceptional. There are no other places (according to them) where Nibbana is referred to as consciousness: >These lines (which also appear as part of a full verse at DN11.85/i.223) have been a perennial challenge to Buddhist scholarship, and even Acariya Buddhaghosa seems to founder over them. MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called "consciousness" in the sense that "it can be cognized." Thsi is obviously a contrived derivation, since nowhere in the Canon is Nibbana ever described as consciousness. MA offers three explanations of the phrase sabbato pbaham: (1) completely posses of splendour (pabha); (2) possessing being (pabhutam) every where; and (3) a ford (pabham) accessible from all sides, i.e, through any fo the thri= ty- eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy. Nm, in Ms, explains that he takes pabham to be a negative present participle of pabhavati - ababham - the negative-0prefix a= dropping off in conjunction with sabbato: "The sense can be paraphrased freely by 'not predicating being in relation to "all," or 'not assuming of = "all" that it is or is not in a anbsolute sense". >As an alternative translation more in keeping with MA, Maurice Walshe reenders: "... consciousness [that] is sign-less, boudnless, all-luminous (Thus Have I heard, p.179). Another point for you to consider is the Pabhassara Suttas: "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements." "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." The mind is luminous, yet retains that luminosity in spite of any changing phenomena at work in the mind, meaning it is unchanging. 6074 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 7:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The war of the suttas Dear Kom, Yes this happens all the time and not only in Dhamma studies. In Science, for example, there are numerous cases of researchers who had the solutions to problems in front of them but couldn't see them because they were too intent on trying to make the evidence fit their theory, as in the famous case of James Lind searching for the cause of scurvy in 1753. However, when we are in the middle of it, our own delusion is hard to see. Ajahn Sucitto writes: There can be a lot of seeking to find stability or permanence in an idea or a system or a group or a community, a job, a position-or a meditation practice. We can try to mould ourselves upon it and then try to bend life around to fit. This is a hindrance to the path, although quite a subtle one. It's only when we realise that all security is really taking away freedom and purity of presence that reliquishment comes about.' Metta, Victoria At 09:21 AM 7/9/01 +0000, you wrote: >Dear Friends, > >The last two days have been interesting for me. I have recently started >looking at postings to DSG and my transmissions of dhamma in general >with some wary, as they often bring craving, conceits, and perhaps even >wrong views! However, despite all that I learned one (of many) thing >from the last 2 days of postings: that I sometimes look at a sutta and see >how it can be fitted into existing beliefs/models instead of trying to >understand the meaning of it, so this is just another reminder from your >friend (or pseudo-enemey): > >When you look at a sutta, are you looking at a sutta as a guide to the >dhamma / a good source of verification for your experiences, or are you >looking at it to fit into your own belief / justify your experiences? I >would >say the second set has the danger of giving you the possibly false sense of >security of knowing what you don't or having/attaining when you haven't. > >kom > 6075 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Kom, Thanks--I really didn't take this as definitive or as exactly 'scriptural'--just as an eloquent expression of a well-reasoned point. I can think of much from the tipitaka to support it (indirectly--I can't cite anything off-hand) and nothing either from the tipitaka or personal experience to contradict it so, for the time being, I think it's a very useful concept. Thanks again. mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > I am not sure if you have seen Howard's wink or not, > but it's there > because there is no such explicit definition > anywhere except in my post. 6076 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 8:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The war of the suttas Dear Kom, Unfortunately I think this latter way is the way that I usually use the suttas (mahayana in the past and theravada these days). Maybe this is inevitable for those of us still stuck with views, subtly or otherwise. As I read and re-read though, I constantly find little bits of view, often held for years suddenly debunked, generally not to return. This is one advantage, I think, of reading (and re-reading) many different suttas rather than focusing on a few that can place emphasis on one narrow perspective. Learning a little Pali has a similar effect, I think, because of new perspectives on words I've known only in English translation (often poor). Many thanks for the reminder. mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > When you look at a sutta, are you looking at a sutta > as a guide to the > dhamma / a good source of verification for your > experiences, or are you > looking at it to fit into your own belief / justify > your experiences? I would > say the second set has the danger of giving you the > possibly false sense of > security of knowing what you don't or > having/attaining when you haven't. 6077 From: Howard Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 6:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] S L O W L Y catching up...... Hi, Sarah (and Herman) - In a message dated 7/9/01 3:58:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=061166091237042154170199159248100253094145066046167121181150130127 writes: > HERMAN, hang in there, you're a very valued member of dsg and we all need you > ========================== I would like to second that, Sarah! Herman, I don't share your assessment in this matter, but if I did, I think my reaction would be to stay on the list and continue discourse with those from whom I thought I could benefit and those to whom I thought I might be of benefit. We have been in agreement at times, and not at other times. But I always consider your posts worthy of reading, and I urge you to remain. 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) 6078 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 9, 2001 11:29pm Subject: Spiritual arrogance Dear Herman, hope you are still out there? Thanks for your direct message - which has been a good condition for me to reflect. I want to apologise for any offensive behaviour to you or Anders or other members. A close friend also wrote to me today and was very kind; however the words "spiritual arrogance, overbearing, patronising" were also directed my way. I certainly have no lack of the above qualities - not to mention those in your post below. I guess these factors won't evaporate overnight but I think when friends like you are ready to say things clearly at least there is more chance of self-examination and so a moderation of behaviour. I hope you will accept this apology and stay on the list -I need you here more than anyone. thanks robert --- Herman wrote: > Bruce and Robert, > > Where is the authority that qualifies anyone as a member of > the mind > police? Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition after sending a > Hello. > > What, Anders has committed blasphemy now? And the scribes and > pharisees will silence him, hey? > > This is from a sutta known as Matthew 22:15 > Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might > entangle him > in his talk. > > And this was the retort: Matthew 23:13 > But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you > shut up > the kingdom of heaven against men: for you neither go in > yourselves, > neither suffer you them that are entering to go in. > > > No reply necessary. I am removing myself from the list and the > other > one between which Robert divides his life. It is getting too > dark in > here. > > > Bye > > > Herman > 6079 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Robert Dear Herman Carl Jung wrote once: "The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely." This disarmony between you and Herman is a great opportunity of self examination without blame or guilt for you, for him, for all of us. What is most valuable in our sharings is exactly this application of Dhamma in real, burning, paining life. There is no text that can teach us how to deal with reality, only genuine experience can grant knowledge - there is no map in this wild territory - we have to accept the risk and go ahead exploring. Please Herman don't become yourself a 'censor' abbandoning the list; manifest your viewpoint, let's discuss and clarify without conceit, without denial or suppression. Let's take this fruitful chance to investigate our minds and hearts getting insights in our realities. Let's don't hold so tight to our views, let's loosen the grasp and accept whatever comes, let's remember that 'the map is not the territory' anyway and being indignant or offended with each other just don't sort out anything and as Shakespeare said 'There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so.' Why don't just accept and let go... Love Cybele >Dear Herman, >hope you are still out there? >Thanks for your direct message - which has been a good condition >for me to reflect. >I want to apologise for any offensive behaviour to you or Anders >or other members. >A close friend also wrote to me today and was very kind; however >the words "spiritual arrogance, overbearing, patronising" were >also directed my way. I certainly have no lack of the above >qualities - not to mention those in your post below. >I guess these factors won't evaporate overnight but I think when >friends like you are ready to say things clearly at least there >is more chance of self-examination and so a moderation of >behaviour. >I hope you will accept this apology and stay on the list -I need >you here more than anyone. >thanks >robert 6080 From: Tori Korshak Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 0:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Robert, I find it hard to accept that these negative qualities are accurate in your case having been on the receiving end only of your dana and uppekha (not to mention your scholarship). However, it seems we realise that even unfairness and blame provide us with opportunities (reminds me of that bit of high Victoriana Kipling's 'If". I suspect he had exposure to Buddhism during his time in India). Do not be discouraged, my friend, (I know you are not), we value your help more than words can say. Metta, Victoria At 08:29 AM 7/9/01 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Herman, >hope you are still out there? >Thanks for your direct message - which has been a good condition >for me to reflect. >I want to apologise for any offensive behaviour to you or Anders >or other members. >A close friend also wrote to me today and was very kind; however >the words "spiritual arrogance, overbearing, patronising" were >also directed my way. I certainly have no lack of the above >qualities - not to mention those in your post below. >I guess these factors won't evaporate overnight but I think when >friends like you are ready to say things clearly at least there >is more chance of self-examination and so a moderation of >behaviour. >I hope you will accept this apology and stay on the list -I need >you here more than anyone. >thanks >robert 6081 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 1:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Hear, hear!, Tori, and nice to meet you. mike --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Dear Robert, > > I find it hard to accept that these negative > qualities are accurate in your > case having been on the receiving end only of your > dana and uppekha (not to > mention your scholarship). However, it seems we > realise that even > unfairness and blame provide us with opportunities > (reminds me of that bit > of high Victoriana Kipling's 'If". I suspect he had > exposure to Buddhism > during his time in India). Do not be discouraged, my > friend, (I know you > are not), we value your help more than words can > say. > > Metta, > Victoria 6083 From: Victor Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 2:32am Subject: Re: Howard on anatta and rebirth Hi, The Buddha did not teach "there is self" or "there is no self", for both are speculative views.* The Buddha taught: Form is not self. Feeling is not self. Perception is not self. Fabrications are not self. Consciousness is not self. Form is impermanent, what is impermanent is dukkha, what is impermanent, dukkha, subject to change is not fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self." Feeling is impermanent, what is impermanent is dukkha, what is impermanent, dukkha, subject to change is not fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self." Perception is impermanent, what is impermanent is dukkha, what is impermanent, dukkha, subject to change is not fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self." Fabrications are impermanent, what is impermanent is dukkha, what is impermanent, dukkha, subject to change is not fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self." Consciousness is impermanent, what is impermanent is dukkha, what is impermanent, dukkha, subject to change is not fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self." Form is to be seen as it actually is with right understanding thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self." Feeling is to be seen as it actually is with right understanding thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self." Perception is to be seen as it actually is with right understanding thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self." Fabrications are to be seen as they actually are with right understanding thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self." Consciousness is to be seen as it actually is with right understanding thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self."** metta, Victor *Ananda Sutta, To Ananda, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html **Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Dear Group , > > Howard wrote this on d-l and I thought it could be put in the > > dsg files as a clear and pithy explanation. > > _______ > > To certain people > > the Buddha didn't teach that there is no self so as not to > > confuse them, > > being wary of leading them to an annihilationist view. But the > > Buddha > > certainly was the teacher of 'no-self'. He did indeed say that > > all dhammas > > are anatta (not-self, impersonal, insubstantial, and without > > independent > > identity). > > Hmm, could anyone tell me how it is not annihilation to say that > there is absoluetely no self? > in my experience the Buddha did *not* teach no self. Rather, he > taught that all dhammas are annatta (just as you say above Robert). I > agree with that wholeheartedly. The entire samsaric cycle of > dependent co-origination has absolutely nothing to do with self. > Ignorance arises at first, yet there is no-one being ignorant. > However, there is one thing which is beyond becoming and cessation, > Nibbana of course, which I would say, is self. > Of course, just holding the view "I have a self, and it's unceasing > and unmoving" is another obstruction, which the Buddha warned against > often. There is a big difference between truth and concept of truth. > The latter will always be a poor imitation which, ultimately, offers > no liberation. > > Just my two cents. > Anders 6084 From: Num Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 2:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance, Hello, The war of the suttas Dear Robert, Kom, Anders, Herman and everybody After being a lurker for couple days, I found out that it's not bad at all. I am little surprised with Herman's post! May be b/c we have different idea. My idea is that in last 2-3 days, the posts about "Hello", are pretty good. Glad to see persons who are interested in same thing discussing in a proper manner. Sorry, I do not feel that Robert is offensive at all. I think Anders, Kom and Robert all have done an excellent job. If I were Anders, I would be really appreciated to all the responds. The same to Kom and Robert as well. There is a rare chance in our lives that someone are willing to give a feedback, check and counter-check, examination, reexamination and cross-examination. I feel like the discussion finally has come into the same wavelength mode of communication, even though the opinions are still somewhat different. We come from different backgrounds, different accumulation but it's possible that we are able to communicate, which starts with listening, may be better called reading on this group. After receptive process, I think, we need to clarify and verify what does other mean. I remember listening to Aj.Sujin program, she gave an analogy from tipitaka, which I cannot remember where it's from. I think the Buddha said to Ven.Anond about being a monk in his ariya-vinaya is not an easy task. The Buddha gave an analogy that the pot maker needs to hit and struck the moist clay repeatedly, strenuously to soften the clay before making a pot on the wheel. He said that he too would criticize, examine and correct his disciples repeatedly, b/c if the pot maker does not treat the clay properly, he will not be able to make a good pottery. Anders, may I say late welcome to the dsg. I appreciate your posts a lot. Hope seeing you here for a long time. Your website is interesting, I still cannot say much about it b/c it's hard for me to really understand what you mean. Again thanks Robert, Kom, Anders and other for keeping the dsg active and interesting with great discussion. Really appreciate your time, energy and effort. Herman, I think I have to say that I could not see why you think Robert is acting like an Abhidhamma police. I really value him as a great, rare dhamma friend that hard to find. Feedback and criticism, I think, is food for dhamma study. I need food for understanding to grow. Num PS. Welcome to Thailand for Robert, Robert E and Erik. Hope you guys have a nice stay and enjoy the peak of rainy season there. 6085 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 7:03am Subject: Re: Spiritual arrogance, Hello, The war of the suttas Dear Robert, Robert E, and Erik, --- Num wrote: PS. Welcome to Thailand for Robert, Robert E and Erik. Hope you guys have a > nice stay and enjoy the peak of rainy season there. If you had been (or maybe you have?) there 15 years ago, you would have been able to see boats going around in the commerical district right on the street too! kom 6086 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:46am Subject: StreamEntrance Dear friends, First I thought anders is claiming that he's a sotapanna. But after he repeatedly said that hes not claiming it or promoting it, and its not even special to him, I understood that I mistakenly thought that he was claiming the state. I thank robert and kom for the thorough( and ongoing?) investigation, for its indeed a rare thing to encounter an ariyan. There are cases in tipitaka where ariyan students learnt the dhamma from puthujjana teachers. If anyone understands what I am trying to say , he/she can see no one needs to get offended here. :o) Thanks again robert & kom Dear Anders, I think that you are telling others about your direct experiences, and trying to describe an alternate path of 'not-giving-importance-to-Tipitaka'.( I may have misunderstood) And you have repeatedly said that your understanding of dhamma is very limited. Speaking for 'myself' I think that I still need tipitaka as a reliable source and guide. :oD Regards 6087 From: Joe Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 8:15am Subject: Re: anders in the blue corner, DSG in the red Yes, I take your point. It all becomes grist for the mill. And a lot of this stuff is interesting in its own right, so that keeps one's attention to the fore. Joe --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Joe, > > Thanks for this post. I only have one comment to add. > > --- <> wrote: > > If not, perhaps my favorite Zen saying will express my frustration with > > the way these debates open and fold without anyone changing their > > positions (I'm as guilty as everyone else): > > For me, although it would be neat for people to come together and agree, > it is not truly necessary. Knowing the differences for different people and > why they think that way is often enough to close of a thread. The process > of questions/answers often gives me an opportunity to understand more, > as I suspect I will in Ander's thread. > > Furthermore, if you believe in Pacaya and conditions, both the right and > the wrong views from other people will be conditioning the future > consciousness of how we interpret things even if we briefly, and > sometimes unconsciously, consider that what they say may have some > resemblance of truth. > > kom 6088 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: silabbataparamasa Dear Derek, Really pleased to hear of you plans. I arive July 28 but leave august 4 - however it is possible I'll be back in Thailand just before you leave. Yes, from what I know of Wat mahathat they usually have rooms for farang with a genuine interest. It is in a busy part of Bangkok but the atmosphere aroud the area is rather exotic - markets and so on. It will be hot this time of the year! Here is an url that gives you the address of the Dhamma Study and Support Foundation. If you have time it would be worthwhile meeting with Acharn Sujin - I think she meets western students on wednesdays and saturdays. I'll be popping in and out of there while in Bangkok - and can easily be contacted on my email address http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=194233250056127134213056109067021253018143238218134229182055166127046249149006227237009204035181 http://www.abhidhamma.org/schedule.html best wishes robert --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Robert, thanks for your note. I've just got back from the khao > pansa > ceremony at my local temple. I'm going to be in Bangkok until > September 10 as I can only afford 2 weeks away from work. > After > looking through all the guidebooks, the 2 temples I want to > try and > spend some time in are Wat Mahathat and Wat Thammamongkhon. > The > information I have on Wat Mahathat says you just show up and > inquire > if you can stay for a few days. Wat Thammamongkhon is > affiliated with > my local temple so I'll probably see if I can call them first > before > I leave, So ... apart from the dates which are fixed due to > flights, > I haven't made any definite plans yet. > > How about you? Do you have plans? > > Derek. > 6089 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:44am Subject: (Vakkali-Ray) Dear Ray, Thanks for pointing this out and good to have you on the forum. best wishes robert --- Ray Hendrickson wrote: > . > > > > > 'That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the > consciousness of > > > Vakkali the Clansman: "Where is the consciousness of > Vakkali the > > Clansman > > > established?" But, monks, it is through unestablished > consciousness that > > > Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.' > > > S XXII.87 > > > > >I am sorry; you will need to include an HTML link for that > reference. I > > cannot respond as I cannot find the sutta... > > > > It's a sutta extract from the book "Mind, like fire > unbound." > > In Bhikkhu Bodhi's new translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, > "The Connected > Discourses of the Buddha," the paragraph is a bit different. > > " That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the > consciousness of > the clansman Vakkali, wondering: "Where now has the > consciousness of the > clansman Vakkali been established?' However, bhikkhus, with > consciousness > unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final > Nibbana." > > The term "unestablished consciousness" seems to imply some > special type of > consciousness while the term "consciousness unestablsihed" > points to the > non-arising of consciousness, which seems to me to be much > more consistent > with the rest of this section on the aggregates...Ray > 6090 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:03am Subject: Re: silabbataparamasa Robert, thanks for your good wishes, and thank you also to several other people on the list who e-mailed me privately with good information. As I mentioned to one of my correspondents, I feel like the typical Western spiritual day-tripper. But, we can do only do what's practical. All the best for your trip, Robert, Derek. 6091 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:36am Subject: Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > dear Robert E. > --- Robert Epstein wrote: Of course, for one attempting to > > discriminate all of the > > mind states it is wiser not to act than to act, wiser to > > follow the precepts than > > not to. But for someone who has gone past those challenges, > > and with the > > understanding that most of us are not in that position, > > attachment to > > non-attachment can be a serious impediment. > __________ > Let's go beyond a sotapanna to an arahant - just to make things > stand out more. An arahant has eradicated unwholesome desire > forever. Thus if we take something as basic as sex they cannot > even form the desire for a woman. There could be a hundred naked > 19year olds in front of them but they couldn't possibly have the > least desire. > The sotapanna can still have sex but not in gross unwholesome > ways (such as rape),. > We might think the arahant is simply attached to his state of > detachment but according to the Theravada tradition all desire > has being utterly rooted out - > robert Thanks for your explanation. I understand your point. I am not sure who among us have met an arahant, but you say the tradition would define him as having no desire and being incapable of desiring unwholesome objects. Therefore I guess he would be incapable of desiring or even tolerating alcohol. On the other hand, my image [which is just an image to be sure] of an enlightened one is of one who is immune to ill effects and transcendent of such rules. Perhaps that is too idealistic and I am willing to stand corrected. Yet there are many masters throughout the Buddhist tradition who behaved in unconventional ways and occasionally broke precepts if it would lead to enlightening others. Another point is the relationship of desire to action. I may have a glass of wine just to be sociable, not because I have a strong desire for it. In fact, my wife used to dislike wine, but she would occasionally take a sip just to join in with friends. I know that an arahant would probably not be worried about such gestures, but my point is just to say that one can have a bit of wine without desire or addiction. If you'll forgive me going back to a Ch'an example, Hui Neng lived with hunters in the woods for 12 years. He had vowed not to kill or eat any living beings, and he refused to hunt, but was put in charge of watching the traps. Whenever he found an animal caught in a trap, he would secretly let it go. But out of politeness to his hosts, who lived by hunting, he did not openly criticize them. He also ate only vegetables, but cooked them along with the meat when the hunters cooked their meals. Technically I guess his vegetables were defiled. Did he break the precepts or not, I wonder? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6092 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Dear Robert E., Thanks for the points. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- > > Thanks for your explanation. I understand your point. I am > not sure who among us > have met an arahant, but you say the tradition would define > him as having no > desire and being incapable of desiring unwholesome objects. > Therefore I guess he > would be incapable of desiring or even tolerating alcohol. _______ Yes he could not form the intention to drink alcohol. If a small amount of alcohol was mixed in with some medicine this would be fine as his intention is not to drink the alcohol but to take the medicine. If the medicine WAS alcohol he would not knowingly take it. _____ > > On the other hand, my image [which is just an image to be > sure] of an enlightened > one is of one who is immune to ill effects and transcendent of > such rules. > Perhaps that is too idealistic and I am willing to stand > corrected. Yet there are > many masters throughout the Buddhist tradition who behaved in > unconventional ways > and occasionally broke precepts if it would lead to > enlightening others. > __________ I think there are such instances in zen and tibetan Buddhism. Here in Japan a good friend of mine was one of the bodyguards of Chogyam trungpa and lived at Naropa for 5years. He has utter confidence in the enlightenment of Trungpa who was, according to my friend, pretty much an alcoholic (to outward appearances). My upbringing was in the Theravada tradition which has no such examples. _________ > Another point is the relationship of desire to action. I may > have a glass of wine > just to be sociable, not because I have a strong desire for > it. In fact, my wife > used to dislike wine, but she would occasionally take a sip > just to join in with > friends. I know that an arahant would probably not be worried > about such > gestures, but my point is just to say that one can have a bit > of wine without > desire or addiction. _________ yes there are certainly differences in intention and thus result. The texts say (I might dig out a reference later) that drinking a lot is very, very bad but that drinking a little is still bad. I think the wise see the danger - that a little can lead to more; and even a little clouds consciouness to a degree. The path of Dhamma is seeing into realities as they are, for which the factors of wisdom and sati (mindfulness ) must be developed- not weakened. This is not meant as a moralistic order. There was sarakani the sakkyan who left the order of monks, took to drink, became an alcoholic, and died with alcohol still on his breath; but who at the very moment he died became a sotapanna. He had confidence in the Dhamma and still went to the temple to listen to Dhamma and developed wisdom in spite of his addiction. You probably know the saying "first the man takes the drink, then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes the man" ____ > > If you'll forgive me going back to a Ch'an example, Hui Neng > lived with hunters in > the woods for 12 years. He had vowed not to kill or eat any > living beings, and he > refused to hunt, but was put in charge of watching the traps. > Whenever he found > an animal caught in a trap, he would secretly let it go. But > out of politeness to > his hosts, who lived by hunting, he did not openly criticize > them. He also ate > only vegetables, but cooked them along with the meat when the > hunters cooked their > meals. Technically I guess his vegetables were defiled. Did > he break the > precepts or not, I wonder? ___________ In this case it depends on intention. It certainly sounds like he had no intention to kill and so lived blamelessly. There is an example in the theravada of a woman who was a sotapanna(enlightened). She fell in love with a hunter and married him. She used to make his arrows for him out of her love. The Buddha was asked how this devoted follower could do such a thing. The buddha said that she had no intention to kill or to assist the killing but was only thinking of her husband (who she deeply loved). It seems almost impossible that someone could demarcate intention so much (don't try this at home) but this was a very unusual case. later her husband gained confidence and became a sotapanna and gave up hunting. robert 6093 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 0:08pm Subject: Re: Hello Dear Anders, The subtle point that I was trying to point out to you is that the 2 suttas you provided which describe nibbana as consciousness are controversial at best, even among the pali scholars. As you also may have noted, they mention that nibbana is not defined as consciousness anywhere else in the suttas. The other one related to Animitta cetovimutti is described by an ancient acariya (probably more ancient than Buddhagosa himself) to be a sampatti attainment of an Arahat which is only possible if the arahant also develops jhana. Before I comment on the sutta you mentioned last, Pabhassara (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an01-049.html), in the future, it would be helpful if you have a reference to the sutta in its entirety (except the long ones, of course!), so everybody can see and interpret the sutta for themselves. I have enclosed the sutta at the end of this message. > The mind is luminous, yet retains that luminosity in spite of any changing > phenomena at work in the mind, meaning it is unchanging. If you notice the beginning of the sutta, the mind is luminous *prior* to the enlightenment and *after* the enlightenment. Besides, I think what is still at contention is whether or not nibbana can be described as consciousness. Not whether the mind, or nibbana, is luminous or not. You know, it gave me pause to see that there are two suttas that imply nibbana can be anything close to consciousness, so I did the work to see how it was interpreted by Pali scholars. Does it give you pause to see that they mention that, possibly, only 2 suttas in all the tipitakas *may* describe nibbana as consciousness? The two versions of the Thai tipitakas I have access to in fact disregard the interpretations (nibbana as consciousness) altogether in one of the suttas. I hope you continue referencing the tipitaka to verify your experience beyond the suttas mentioned in your books. kom "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements." "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the- mill person -- there is no development of the mind." "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." 6094 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 4:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Robert, Herman, This morning I had a big fight with my wife. Not taking into consideration my own aggression, I took her behavior as an excuse to attack her religion. We did not argue on this point, but latter on while coming to work I thought about how following what I think to be the right path, inadvertently precipitates into the feeling of arrogance when confronted with other paths which I consider to be wrong. I thought further about whether it is possible to be dedicated in my studies yet at the same time not be bound by it. I decided that I would ask you Robert, about your experience when you visit Bangkok. But I imagined too that it must be a problem everyone else is facing to a little extent. And then when I arrive at my workplace, I see this post of yours. Herman, I was very glad to see you join the dhammalist, eventhough your questions have always been too 'deep' for me, I enjoyed thinking over them. Seeing that some of your questions to this list went unanswered, I even hoped that you could come to Bangkok and meet with Acharn Sujin, with the idea that she might be able to answer you. I do not think that Herman's remark to Robert was from this one incident with Anders, it must have been from other incidents too. My not finding Robert's letters to be offensive indicates for the most part that I agree with his ideas, had my views been in opposition with his, I might have percieved them to be somewhat overbearing. I am aware that I am speaking from a level of understanding very different to others and what I say may not apply. But the main point I want to point out is, none of us want to have 'wrong' view, and to this aim, agreement has the same value as disagreement. Afterall, we are not going to arrive at right view only from hearing about it, but also from knowing what is not right view. For example between Anders on the one hand and Kom and Robert on the other, it does not matter ultimately who is right or wrong. If it is Anders, I would have to change my viewpoint regarding buddhadhamma, if on the other hand it is K and R, I will feel relieved that I have already walked some distance along the correct path. Now what is more beneficial? Both or none!? Tori's quote from Acharn Succito in another post may apply, "It's only when we realise that all security is really taking away freedom and purity of presence that reliquishment comes about." But as of now I know that all I am looking for IS 'security' and I see no way out of it but only wish that studying with wise friends such as you all will help. Don't know if what I have written is pertinent or even sensible but I am posting it anyway. Sukin. Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Herman, > hope you are still out there? > Thanks for your direct message - which has been a good condition > for me to reflect. > I want to apologise for any offensive behaviour to you or Anders > or other members. > A close friend also wrote to me today and was very kind; however > the words "spiritual arrogance, overbearing, patronising" were > also directed my way. I certainly have no lack of the above > qualities - not to mention those in your post below. > I guess these factors won't evaporate overnight but I think when > friends like you are ready to say things clearly at least there > is more chance of self-examination and so a moderation of > behaviour. > I hope you will accept this apology and stay on the list -I need > you here more than anyone. > thanks > robert 6095 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 4:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Robert, Herman, > I thought further about whether it is possible to > be dedicated > in > my studies yet at the same time not be bound by it. I decided > that I would > ask > you Robert, about your experience when you visit Bangkok. But > I imagined too > that it must be a problem everyone else is facing to a little > extent. > > But as of now I know that all I am looking for IS 'security' > and I see no way > out of > it but only wish that studying with wise friends such as you > all will help. > _________________ Dear Sukin, there was so many helpful points in your post and I hope others will take them up, as well as this one. One of the dangers in learning about Dhamma is that one gets attached to some aspect of it. In the Patthana it says something to the effect that "conditioned by right view one has conceit, has grasping..." . It is almost natural for these unwholesome dhammas to arise because they are so ingrained, so tenacious that whatever we do lobha (grasping) mana, (conceit) comes in. However the DhammaVinaya has so many pointers that allow us to learn about the characteristic of lobha and mana - and so because of this when they arise they are seen directly a little more clearly. This is a gradual process but the seeing of their ugliness is an important step in itself. If we don't see the attachment to view - even to right view- then how can we ever let it go. Some people never even relaise that they have attachment to view. This is not a matter of seeing it and trying to relinquish but learning to see it again and again and again and again - at the very moments it arises. By seeing its conditioned nature this is also going together with satipatthana. It is the same with doubt. I used to dislike doubt, it conditioned an uncomfortable feeling until I realised that doubt was just another conditioned, uncontrollable dhamma: an object for sati, a chance to develop more understanding of its nature. These unwholesome dhammas lose their power over us the more we see the anattaness of them. they are not taken for self. They arise because they are conditioned to arise, how could things be any different. robert 6096 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 5:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Sukim Very insightful, much appreciation. Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu. It's all about fear and our compulsion for security. Love Cybele >Dear Robert, Herman, >This morning I had a big fight with my wife. Not taking into consideration >my own aggression, I took her behavior as an excuse to attack her religion. >We did not argue on this point, but latter on while coming to work I >thought >about how following what I think to be the right path, inadvertently >precipitates >into the feeling of arrogance when confronted with other paths which I >consider >to be wrong. I thought further about whether it is possible to be dedicated >in >my studies yet at the same time not be bound by it. I decided that I would >ask >you Robert, about your experience when you visit Bangkok. But I imagined >too >that it must be a problem everyone else is facing to a little extent. And >then when >I arrive at my workplace, I see this post of yours. >Herman, I was very glad to see you join the dhammalist, eventhough your >questions >have always been too 'deep' for me, I enjoyed thinking over them. Seeing >that > >some of your questions to this list went unanswered, I even hoped that you >could >come to Bangkok and meet with Acharn Sujin, with the idea that she might be >able to answer you. >I do not think that Herman's remark to Robert was from this one incident >with >Anders, >it must have been from other incidents too. My not finding Robert's letters >to be >offensive indicates for the most part that I agree with his ideas, had my >views been >in opposition with his, I might have percieved them to be somewhat >overbearing. I am >aware that I am speaking from a level of understanding very different to >others and >what I say may not apply. But the main point I want to point out is, none >of >us want >to have 'wrong' view, and to this aim, agreement has the same value as >disagreement. >Afterall, we are not going to arrive at right view only from hearing about >it, but also >from knowing what is not right view. For example between Anders on the one >hand >and Kom and Robert on the other, it does not matter ultimately who is right >or wrong. >If it is Anders, I would have to change my viewpoint regarding >buddhadhamma, >if on >the other hand it is K and R, I will feel relieved that I have already >walked >some distance >along the correct path. Now what is more beneficial? Both or none!? > Tori's quote from Acharn Succito in another post may apply, > "It's only when we realise that all security is really taking >away > freedom and purity of presence that reliquishment comes >about." > >But as of now I know that all I am looking for IS 'security' and I see no >way >out of >it but only wish that studying with wise friends such as you all will help. >Don't know if what I have written is pertinent or even sensible but I am >posting it >anyway. >Sukin. > > > 6097 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 5:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Tori I understand that your admiration for Robert lead you to be supportive with him , I respect it but we cannot judge Herman, we don't know about his motivations therefore we shouldn't assume that he is unfair. It's most evident that something has upset him to justify such a strong reaction and we cannot dismiss it just being partial and biased. Surely he has his onw reasons that right now are constricting him to be so severe. It's a chance to investigate mental processes as another. Robert is enough mature in his practice and insightful to face it without denial. Quite often we allow ourselves to ponder through our preferences. Robert is a very charismatic person and he seduces everybody with his charms, he is smart and fascinating. Nobody denies, I am the one of his most ardents fans but we have to be equanimous in any 'dispute'. I would like that Herman could just give himself the opportunity to clarify what has offended him so much in Robert's attitude instead of retreating in his indignation. Love and respect Cybele > >Dear Robert, > >I find it hard to accept that these negative qualities are accurate in your >case having been on the receiving end only of your dana and uppekha (not to >mention your scholarship). However, it seems we realise that even >unfairness and blame provide us with opportunities (reminds me of that bit >of high Victoriana Kipling's 'If". I suspect he had exposure to Buddhism >during his time in India). Do not be discouraged, my friend, (I know you >are not), we value your help more than words can say. > >Metta, >Victoria > 6098 From: Tori Korshak Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 5:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Cybele, Sadhu X 3 for your equanimity. Speaking from my own experience, Robert always shows restraint and adosa. What is Herman's experience? Metta, Victoria At 09:27 AM 7/10/01 +0000, you wrote: >Dear Tori > >I understand that your admiration for Robert lead you to be supportive with >him , I respect it but we cannot judge Herman, we don't know about his >motivations therefore we shouldn't assume that he is unfair. >It's most evident that something has upset him to justify such a strong >reaction and we cannot dismiss it just being partial and biased. >Surely he has his onw reasons that right now are constricting him to be so >severe. It's a chance to investigate mental processes as another. >Robert is enough mature in his practice and insightful to face it without >denial. >Quite often we allow ourselves to ponder through our preferences. >Robert is a very charismatic person and he seduces everybody with his >charms, he is smart and fascinating. >Nobody denies, I am the one of his most ardents fans but we have to be >equanimous in any 'dispute'. >I would like that Herman could just give himself the opportunity to clarify >what has offended him so much in Robert's attitude instead of retreating in >his indignation. > >Love and respect > >Cybele > 6099 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 6:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Robert, > This is not a matter of > seeing it and trying to relinquish but learning to see it again > and again and again and again - at the very moments it arises. > By seeing its conditioned nature this is also going together > with satipatthana. > It is the same with doubt. I used to dislike doubt, it > conditioned an uncomfortable feeling until I realised that doubt > was just another conditioned, uncontrollable dhamma: an object > for sati, a chance to develop more understanding of its nature. > These unwholesome dhammas lose their power over us the more we > see the anattaness of them. they are not taken for self. They > arise because they are conditioned to arise, how could things be > any different. I think this is what I need to be reminded again and again and again.... Thanks a lot Robert. Sukin. 6100 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 6:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Tori Relieved that you don't feel hostility in my words because there were none, I spoke out of detachment (wow I detached, can't barely believe...whom am I fooling?) :-) That's exactly the point - we don't know about his experience with Robert and we cannot make considerations on an issue where we don't have enough elements to evaluate. Perhaps this ever balanced and detached attitude of Robert that in my case and yours is much appreciated, in my case because counterbalance my exhuberance, is what gets on Herman's nerves as he can misread it like 'self sufficiency', being too much confident and beyond compassion. I don't know and I don't agree according with my experience but Rob's 'non involvement' attitude to keep equanimity could sound aloof or patronizing sometimes. I have learned to highly value it and that's why I am always teasing about anglosaxon coldbloodness. For me it worked perfectly, he is my opposite complementary and temperate my hot blood so he became my best dhamma friend. And if he ever start patronizing me I send him direct flight without stop to the 'buddhist hell'...I am joking! But what worked for me perhaps hurts somebody's else sensitivity. I noticed that Herman's is oversensitive to ethical questions for example. And here he felt at disadvantadge to discuss openly as everybody is supportive and very fond of Rob. I can see his embarrasement. By the way somebody has Herman's mail address, I would like to contact him and invite him to confront the situation and figure out a solution instead of giving up. Love Cybele >>Dear Cybele, > >Sadhu X 3 for your equanimity. Speaking from my own experience, Robert >always shows restraint and adosa. What is Herman's experience? > >Metta, >Victoria > 6101 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 7:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Cybele, If you don't mind me commenting; > By the way somebody has Herman's mail address, I would like to contact him > and invite him to confront the situation and figure out a solution instead > of giving up. Does Herman have to confront anything? Is there a 'situation' outside what our minds have created and holding on to? I think there are more important things that can be discussed. And if misunderstandings arise again in the future, I am sure the parties involved would have by that time learnt something from what has just happened and thus deal with it in a more constructive way. But perhaps I don't see clearly enough. Metta, Sukin. > Love > > Cybele > > >>Dear Cybele, > > > >Sadhu X 3 for your equanimity. Speaking from my own experience, Robert > >always shows restraint and adosa. What is Herman's experience? > > > >Metta, > >Victoria 6102 From: Herman Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 8:16pm Subject: Dear Group Dear Group, Unskillful words can be lethal weapons, and I'm afraid I've fired off some very heavy artillery in the last few days. I feel extremely stupid at this point of time, I sincerely hope that any scars my words have left out there in cyber space will heal quickly. I have this tendency to jump to the defense of people that I feel are under attack. I remember dear Amara had to put up with my knight in shining armour routine on occasion, and now Anders. I apologise unreservedly to the group as a whole and especially to Robert for the comments I have made in the last few days. I will lie low for a while, perhaps I will discover the secret joys of lurking :-) Thank you all for your encouragement Herman 6103 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 8:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group Dear herman, I have to confess i've been hovering near my computer for the last day hoping to hear from you. I'm so touched by your words. I think I have a bit of a missionary element in me (maybe it rubs off from my mormon friends). Consequently as soon as I see what I think is a departure from MY view of the Tipitaka I get overzealous, and want to reform everyone to my way. I forget how useful it is to be exposed to different perspectives. I'll try to be a little more understanding - and please pull me up when I inevitably stray into dogmatic and imperious speech.( can't promise it will stop me but every reminder helps a little) Great to have you back. robert --- Herman wrote: > 6104 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 8:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group Herman, really glad to know you're still with us. I hope we can look forward (when you're ready) for more of your excellent contributions. mike --- Herman wrote: > I will lie low for a while, perhaps I will discover > the secret joys > of lurking :-) 6105 From: Howard Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Hi, Robert E (and Robert K) - In a message dated 7/9/01 10:47:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Epstein writes: > If you'll forgive me going back to a Ch'an example, Hui Neng lived with > hunters in > the woods for 12 years. He had vowed not to kill or eat any living beings, > and he > refused to hunt, but was put in charge of watching the traps. Whenever he > found > an animal caught in a trap, he would secretly let it go. But out of > politeness to > his hosts, who lived by hunting, he did not openly criticize them. He also > ate > only vegetables, but cooked them along with the meat when the hunters > cooked their > meals. Technically I guess his vegetables were defiled. Did he break the > precepts or not, I wonder? > ================================ I don't eat meat, though I do eat sea creatures. I wouldn't knowingly eat vegetables prepared with meat. But, as I see it, that is because I am *only* me, at my lowly stage. In fact, I intellectually see refusing to eat vegetables cooked with meat as a kind of clinging to empty ritual. I see this, yet I am stuck. If I were "more along", I would be more like Hui Neng. As I see it, this story presents a remarkable person! 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) 6106 From: Anders Honore Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:21pm Subject: Re: StreamEntrance --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > Dear friends, > > First I thought anders is claiming that he's a sotapanna. But after he > repeatedly said that hes not claiming it or promoting it, and its not even > special to him, I understood that I mistakenly thought that he was claiming > the state. The claim to be a stream-entrant is still a view, it requires an image to say that. Of course, there is the question of the attachment to that view or not, but... > There are cases in tipitaka where ariyan students learnt the dhamma from > puthujjana teachers. If anyone understands what I am trying to say , he/she > can see no one needs to get offended here. I am sorry for my poor Pali. What is a puthujjana? > Dear Anders, > > I think that you are telling others about your direct experiences, and > trying to describe an alternate path of > 'not-giving-importance-to-Tipitaka'.( I may have misunderstood) I would say that it is the case of saying 'don't give imortance to the written word' to those whom I feel give too much importance to it. I've found them tremendously beneficial in my practise, but it is a delicate balance act. > And you have repeatedly said that your understanding of dhamma is very > limited. In terms of the formal Dhamma, yes my knowledge is very limited compared to most people around here. Anders 6107 From: Anders Honore Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: Spiritual arrogance --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > I want to apologise for any offensive behaviour to you or Anders > or other members. Personally, no offense was ever taken, simply because I found nothing for which any offense could be directed at. Nothing to apologise for regarding me. 6108 From: Anders Honore Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:36pm Subject: Re: Hello --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Anders, > Before I comment on the sutta you mentioned last, Pabhassara > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an01-049.html), in the > future, it would be helpful if you have a reference to the sutta in its > entirety (except the long ones, of course!), so everybody can see and > interpret the sutta for themselves. I have enclosed the sutta at the end of > this message. Sure. Good advice. > If you notice the beginning of the sutta, the mind is luminous *prior* to > the enlightenment and *after* the enlightenment. Exactly, or as they say in Zen: You are already a Buddha, so why seek elsewhere for it? > Besides, I think what > is still at contention is whether or not nibbana can be described as > consciousness. Not whether the mind, or nibbana, is luminous or not. > > You know, it gave me pause to see that there are two suttas that imply > nibbana can be anything close to consciousness, so I did the work to see > how it was interpreted by Pali scholars. Does it give you pause to see > that they mention that, possibly, only 2 suttas in all the tipitakas *may* > describe nibbana as consciousness? The two versions of the Thai > tipitakas I have access to in fact disregard the interpretations (nibbana as > consciousness) altogether in one of the suttas. > > I hope you continue referencing the tipitaka to verify your experience > beyond the suttas mentioned in your books. I will do so. Say, what do think about Zen in relation to Theravada? 6109 From: Alex Tran Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:37pm Subject: Re: Spiritual arrogance Dear Robert, Since reading your posts, I haven't sensed any spiritual arrogrance in you at all. All I can feel from reading yours is your sharing spirit from generosity, loving kindness, humility, wisdom, and scholarship. To sum up, I see that I have a lot to learn from you. Thank you for your help. With respect and appreciation, Alex Tran ======================================================== --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Herman, > hope you are still out there? > Thanks for your direct message - which has been a good condition > for me to reflect. > I want to apologise for any offensive behaviour to you or Anders > or other members. 6110 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: StreamEntrance Dear Anders, puthujjana means non-arian people, people who are yet to reach a stage of enlightenment. Rgds. 6111 From: Alex Tran Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: StreamEntrance --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > In terms of the formal Dhamma, yes my knowledge is very limited > compared to most people around here. > > Anders Dear Anders, I think that for an 18 year old young man, you are very mature. I'm glad that at this life time, and at such a young age, you have the fortune to walk on the Path. And I mean what I just wrote as a compliment. Keep on walking steadily. Metta, Alex Tran 6112 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 2:55am Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders --- "Anders Honore" > I will do so. > Say, what do think about Zen in relation to Theravada? I think I am not qualified to do a comparison between Zen and Theravada since I know very little of Zen except a few concepts. Since you are familiar with Zen, and are learning about Theravada, I hope you would be able to make the comparisons yourself. Believe it or not, there are enough variations among the theravadans that would keep me fully occupied for a long long while. kom 6113 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 3:01am Subject: Re: StreamEntrance Dear Anders (and Friends), Here's a page with some pali terms commonly used: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/glossary_of_pal i_terms.htm puthujjana: worldling or ordinary person, not a noble person who has attained enlightenment kom --- "Anders Honore" > > There are cases in tipitaka where ariyan students learnt the dhamma > from > > puthujjana teachers. If anyone understands what I am trying to say > , he/she > > can see no one needs to get offended here. > > I am sorry for my poor Pali. What is a puthujjana? > 6114 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Hi, Kom: The essence of (Rinzai) Zen and that of the Theravada Buddhism are exactly the same: i.e., understading (not with "self" but with sati) of this moment (e.g., seeing and a visual object) as it is. In my case, before studying the Theravada Buddhism, I had read many Zen books, especially, those written by Suzuki Daisetsu. It was only after learning the heart of the Theravade Buddhism (from late Allen, Khun Sujin, etc.), I could see that Buddhas' teaching is all about understanding "this moment" as it is (i.e., no person, no table, no sushi but the moment of seeing, that of touching, or that of smelling, being tangled(?) with each of their corresponding objects. tadao 6115 From: Alex Tran Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:36am Subject: Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance --- Robert Kirkpatrick > If we don't see the attachment to view - even to right view- > then how can we ever let it go. Some people never even relaise > that they have attachment to view. This is not a matter of > seeing it and trying to relinquish but learning to see it again > and again and again and again - at the very moments it arises. > By seeing its conditioned nature this is also going together > with satipatthana. Dear Robert and friends, When reading the above statements, I was thinking about our Lord Buddha. He continuously advocates that we need to develop Right View. It seems that the Buddha and the Arahants are living (or swimming and breathing) in Right View all of Their lives on this earth. In another word, Right View adheres to Them. Therefore, my question is why do we need to let Right View go then? Metta, Alex 6116 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:52am Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear tadao, Thank you for the explanation. kom --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Kom: > The essence of (Rinzai) Zen and that of the Theravada Buddhism are exactly > the same: i.e., understading (not with "self" but with sati) of > this moment (e.g., seeing and a visual object) as it is. > > In my case, before studying the Theravada Buddhism, I had read many > Zen books, especially, those written by Suzuki Daisetsu. It was only > after learning the heart of the Theravade Buddhism (from late Allen, > Khun Sujin, etc.), I could see that Buddhas' teaching is all about > understanding "this moment" as it is (i.e., no person, no table, > no sushi but the moment of seeing, that of touching, or > that of smelling, being tangled(?) with each of their > corresponding objects. > tadao 6117 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group Very nice, Herman. Glad you're staying on. With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/10/01 8:18:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Herman writes: > Dear Group, > > Unskillful words can be lethal weapons, and I'm afraid I've fired off > some very heavy artillery in the last few days. I feel extremely > stupid at this point of time, I sincerely hope that any scars my > words have left out there in cyber space will heal quickly. > > I have this tendency to jump to the defense of people that I feel are > under attack. I remember dear Amara had to put up with my knight in > shining armour routine on occasion, and now Anders. > > I apologise unreservedly to the group as a whole and especially to > Robert for the comments I have made in the last few days. > > I will lie low for a while, perhaps I will discover the secret joys > of lurking :-) > > Thank you all for your encouragement > > > /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) 6118 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group Dear Herman Welcome back and take it easy. ;-) Metta Cybele 6119 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 0:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Hi, Kom: I think that there are (a few) Zen sects whose founders had no proper understaning of the Dhamma. Soto Zen's founder is an example. So, every Zen is not alike. As far as I see, the founder of Rinzai Zen (i.e., Rinzai) was an enlightened one. And as an advocate of Zen, Suzuki Daisetsu also had the right understanding of the Dhamma (i.e., he knew at least what our objects of verification are). A problem with Suzuki is that he does explain the essence of the Dhamma (as clearly as, for instance, Khun Nina or Archaan Sujin does). tadao 6120 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Sukin >Dear Cybele, >If you don't mind me commenting; I don't mind. :-) > > > By the way somebody has Herman's mail address, I would like to contact >him > > and invite him to confront the situation and figure out a solution >instead > > of giving up. > >Does Herman have to confront anything? Herman does NOT have to confront anything if he choses to take such a decision and this is his kamma making and I am not bossing anybody around for sure but as a dhamma friend I could encourage him to face the issue instead of retreating in his indignation and this would be MY decision and my kamma making. >Is there a 'situation' outside what our minds have created and holding on >to? I think there are more important things that can be discussed. I disagree with you Sukin. Also this can be something that your mind have created and you are holding to. Threfore we should be not entitled to discuss anything anymore according with your view. I think that everything is subject of Dhamma and subject to Dhamma. Threfore specially the human aspects and our interaction here is a very much interesting and worthwhile and 'important thing' to be discussed. Because is very much a MIRROR of our actual practice. We can claim equanimity and relate academically to it quite a lot but is indeed in this confrontations with REAL life that our REAL pratice emerges. >And if misunderstandings arise again in the future, I am sure the parties >involved would have by that time learnt something from what has just >happened and thus deal with it in a more constructive way. That's why is worthwhile discussing it in order to clarify and develop right understanding out of it. And misunderstandings will arise again and the parties involved can learn something most out of their OWN experience because in that moment of hatred and mental confusion they are not going to refer to this interaction. When the mind is clouded by aversion you are not in a 'constructive mood'. What are we supposed to do, keep discussing 'nibbana' and enlightenment when we cannot even deal with simple emotions like this? I prefer getting real and base my knowledge on actual experience not in academic approach. Dhamma is all about real life the way I see it. >But perhaps I don't see clearly enough. Who does dear Sukin, who does? We are trying our best but not always we succeed, that's why we keep trying, to learn and improve I suppose. Metta Cybele 6121 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 8:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group - Rob Dear Robert So glad to see your thoughtfulness and capacity of getting down to earth when is necessary. Many times I told you that your commitment with the lists and the appreciation of your 'style' and helpfulness could not exactly built up modesty and detachment and instead be quite nurturing for your ego and induce self conceit. Very nice to see your openess and sincerity in your self examination. These are the moments that give me actual feedback of your practice and mine as well, the confrontation with REAL life, going far beyond academic discussions. LOve and respect Cybele > >Dear herman, >I have to confess i've been hovering near my computer for the >last day hoping to hear from you. I'm so touched by your words. >I think I have a bit of a missionary element in me (maybe it >rubs off from my mormon friends). Consequently as soon as I see >what I think is a departure from MY view of the Tipitaka I get >overzealous, and want to reform everyone to my way. I forget how >useful it is to be exposed to different perspectives. >I'll try to be a little more understanding - and please pull me >up when I inevitably stray into dogmatic and imperious speech.( >can't promise it will stop me but every reminder helps a little) >Great to have you back. >robert > 6122 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 11:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Tadao >Hi, Kom: >I think that there are (a few) Zen sects whose founders had no >proper understaning of the Dhamma. Soto Zen's founder is an example. >So, every Zen is not alike. As far as I see, the founder of Rinzai >Zen (i.e., Rinzai) was an enlightened one. And as an advocate of >Zen, Suzuki Daisetsu also had the right understanding of the Dhamma >(i.e., he knew at least what our objects of verification are). >A problem with Suzuki is that he does explain the essence of the Dhamma (as >clearly as, for instance, Khun Nina or Archaan Sujin does). tadao I am surprised that a person so impressed with clarity in the essence of teachings can declare such a thing like 'the founder of Soto Zen did not have proper undestanding of Dhamma'. Could you elaborate such affermation? I have practiced Soto Zen for many years myself and I always felt great affinity between Zen and Theravada and I don't see why in Soto Zen there is anything controversial compared with Rinzai. And in your lavish admiration of the many merits and wholesome actions of the late Suzuki perhaps you overlooked the fact that he was very much a fascist while in Japan (but then you are Japanese) and have been involved in political issues defending quite a racist attitude and this doesn't prevent me from respecting him afterwards in his diffusion of Buddhism in America. A person can do wholesome as unwholesome actions and we must be equanimous in observing it and not purely judgemental. Then let's don't talk about the Zen monks that trained the japanese soldiers instigating them in a 'wholesome war' for the sake of Japan what caused the rape of Nankin in China, one of the most appalling and cruel events in history and this is very much documented. Why are we so territorial in our beliefs? Metta Cybele 6123 From: David Blickenstaff Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 0:21pm Subject: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear Robert My sincere apologies if this is going to embarrass you, but others and I have to make this a learning experience, this is the only way, we all can benefit from your qualities. Another morsel of pure Dhamma has surfaced again in a different form. Dear group once again it pays to observe and analyze. Robert's true self has been revealed, unknowingly by him. Amazing, what was revealed in the process. If these are not the qualities of Sotapanna than this level does not, and has never, existed. This level can only be realized by others onto the receiver and never by the receiver him/her self be realized (during life). Thank you Robert for the chance to observe this first hand. I assure you of my sincerity in my words. It is a pleasure for me to be in your presence. This post does not warrant a reply from you. Much Metta to All David Blickenstaff (India) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear herman, > I have to confess i've been hovering near my computer for the > last day hoping to hear from you. I'm so touched by your words. > I think I have a bit of a missionary element in me (maybe it > rubs off from my mormon friends). Consequently as soon as I see > what I think is a departure from MY view of the Tipitaka I get > overzealous, and want to reform everyone to my way. I forget how > useful it is to be exposed to different perspectives. > I'll try to be a little more understanding - and please pull me > up when I inevitably stray into dogmatic and imperious speech.( > can't promise it will stop me but every reminder helps a little) > Great to have you back. > robert > 6124 From: Joe Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 0:45pm Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Surely anyone with even an elementary knowledge of Pali can discern whether the proper translation in 'unestablished consciousness' or 'consciousness unestablished'. Pali is very precise - almost as precise as Sanskrit or Latin - in the attributive. Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? Joe --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Ray, > Thanks for pointing this out and good to have you on the forum. > best wishes > robert 6125 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Hi, Cybele: (i) When I mention Suzuki, I only refer to his understaing of the the Buddhism. I am talking if he underdstands the essense of (all) the Buddhas' teaching or not, that is, if he understands that His teaching concerns understanding of this very moment of seeing/a visual object, etc. (ii) I have no intention of getting into discussing his political affiliation/inclination. (Although, as you do, I HATE the right wing ideology, I have no intention of mixing up the issues in hand.) (iii) When I read the Rinzai-roku, I could see that Rinzai is consistantly encouraging his diciples to SEE things as they are (or to pay their attentions to the phonomena(n) of "here and now"). Rinzai's way of teaching is very different from Gotama Buddha's. Given, partially, the historical fact that he is/was (east) Indian (in whose "genes" the notion of "logic"is embedded), the Buddha was able to explain, in a logical manner, of what kinds of the world we are living in: that is, the world of "naamas" and "ruupas", none of which can be equated to (our notions of), e.g., "a man", "a table", or "a piece of sushi". Although Gotama Buddha has taught us various things (dhammas) which may not have been "directly" related with his above view of the world, the core of his teaching deals with naamas/ruupas (the world we are in) and sati-patthaana (the way to verify/realize such a world). (iii) As I mentioned above, I see the same objective/goal of inquiry with Rinzai's words. Given that he is/was chinese, he avoids any logical/verbal way of showing his diciples the world he has/had realized. The same world/objective/, and highly likely, the same method (i.e. sati-patthaana). (iv) In my interpretation, I do not see the same kind of clear definition of the objective/goal of inquiry in Dogen's words. In other words, I do not think that he knew that the essence of the Buddhism is to realize this moment of, say, touching as it is. If my interpetation is correct, then, Dogen wasn't an enlightended one (i.e. Arakan). (v) Please understand that I am just presenting my opinion. tadao 6126 From: Joe Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 0:57pm Subject: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) As far as we can tell, the Buddha himself ate meat ... --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert E (and Robert K) - > > In a message dated 7/9/01 10:47:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > If you'll forgive me going back to a Ch'an example, Hui Neng lived with > > hunters in > > the woods for 12 years. He had vowed not to kill or eat any living beings, > > and he > > refused to hunt, but was put in charge of watching the traps. Whenever he > > found > > an animal caught in a trap, he would secretly let it go. But out of > > politeness to > > his hosts, who lived by hunting, he did not openly criticize them. He also > > ate > > only vegetables, but cooked them along with the meat when the hunters > > cooked their > > meals. Technically I guess his vegetables were defiled. Did he break the > > precepts or not, I wonder? > > > ================================ > I don't eat meat, though I do eat sea creatures. I wouldn't knowingly > eat vegetables prepared with meat. But, as I see it, that is because I am > *only* me, at my lowly stage. In fact, I intellectually see refusing to eat > vegetables cooked with meat as a kind of clinging to empty ritual. I see > this, yet I am stuck. If I were "more along", I would be more like Hui Neng. > As I see it, this story presents a remarkable person! > > 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) > 6127 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Cybele, > >Is there a 'situation' outside what our minds have created and holding on > >to? I think there are more important things that can be discussed. > > I disagree with you Sukin. > Also this can be something that your mind have created and you are holding > to. You are right, this is what I realized later in the evening. I was indeed creating a situation myself, one that I saw Herman being 'judged' by others. But as I realized later, I also saw Herman strong enough to defend himself and if he chose to say anything or remain silent who was I to come up with any clarification for him. Besides I am trying to clarify myself now aren't I, what is the motive? I guess I just reacted from my deep seated habit of siding with the minority and also from hating to see people in conflict. > Threfore we should be not entitled to discuss anything anymore according > with your view. No I do not think that. > I think that everything is subject of Dhamma and subject to Dhamma. > Threfore specially the human aspects and our interaction here is a very much > interesting and worthwhile and 'important thing' to be discussed. > Because is very much a MIRROR of our actual practice. > We can claim equanimity and relate academically to it quite a lot but is > indeed in this confrontations with REAL life that our REAL pratice emerges. This is true. > >And if misunderstandings arise again in the future, I am sure the parties > >involved would have by that time learnt something from what has just > >happened and thus deal with it in a more constructive way. > > That's why is worthwhile discussing it in order to clarify and develop right > understanding out of it. Somehow I still feel to some extent for example that, if Herman had just written and said 'sorry' without adding an explaination, it would have been enough for me. I do not think explanations are neccessarily accurate especially when it comes to hidden motives and strong feelings, discussing them might draw more on personal stories than on the actual reality. For example what I said above about my 'deep seated habit', it is just what I am telling myself, but is it accurate or is it all there is to it? Yet it might satisfy someone who reads about it and there might not be any further talk about it, and I may end up with a fixed and faulty view of myself. > And misunderstandings will arise again and the parties involved can learn > something most out of their OWN experience because in that moment of hatred > and mental confusion they are not going to refer to this interaction. > When the mind is clouded by aversion you are not in a 'constructive mood'. > What are we supposed to do, keep discussing 'nibbana' and enlightenment when > we cannot even deal with simple emotions like this? Whether discussing 'nibbana' is useful or not I do not know, but I would rather discuss something I am capable of perceiving and understand. But I also do not believe that I have to deal with emotions as such, I only need to know them when they arise, when I decide to do anything about it, it is another moment. But this is only my understanding. > I prefer getting real and base my knowledge on actual experience not in > academic approach. > Dhamma is all about real life the way I see it. Personally I wish I was more academic than I am. If I could spend more time studying the Tipitaka rather than being mindless and indulging in objects of the senses, I am certain that that would condition more mindfulness of the realities that are appearing all the time. > >But perhaps I don't see clearly enough. > > Who does dear Sukin, who does? > We are trying our best but not always we succeed, that's why we keep trying, > to learn and improve I suppose. Yes and it would be very nice if we could all help one another,as much as possible, to 'live' the 'Right View'. Metta, Sukin. 6128 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 6:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello & welcome Anders! Hi Anders, --- Anders Honoré wrote: > Hello, my name is Anders Honore. > > Perhaps this is an inappropriate time to join, as circumstances in my > current practise call for singular practise, so to speak. Nonetheless, I > would like to join and be a part of this group, once I come out of my > "solitude" (in practise only) and figured I might as well join now. I've just been catching up with all your very intersting and good-humoured posts...I'm very impressed by your consideration and sincere interest and study of the dhamma and look forward to plenty more. Anytime is very appropriate to join dsg and I'm so glad you found your way here...I think you're well out of 'solitude' now and I look forward to more discussion about current practices and also what it means to 'live alone in solitude' at this moment....! > My background: > 18 years old, have been practising Buddhism for little more than a > year-and-a-half, making progress in my own pace. Ch'an has been my primary > expedient means during that time, although Theravada has also played an > important part in my practise. That is all I can think of at the moment. If > you wanna know more, I'd just like to know where you're from and where you live...(couldn't see this at a quick look at your unusual and well-presented website...;-)) thanks again for yr contributions and joining us here, Sarah 6129 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 6:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thankyou for the welcome & welcome David Dear David, --- David Blickenstaff wrote: > Dear All > It is I again and wish to thank everyone for such a warm welcome. I > am truly grateful for the kindness shown by everyone. This is a very > nice Buddhist site and I am pleased to be here. I will let technology > take its slow efficient course this time and hope this mail gets > through. I'm glad you got the technology figured out eventually..sometimes it gives us all tests of patience when we lose our mails, or they get sent in duplicate for a starter...! I'm also glad you're enjoying what you're reading and I find your intro just as unusual and interesting as Anders'. I have access to the Internet a few times a week so please > excuse me if my replies seem to arrive rather late and off the trend > of the discussion sometimes. Any thread stays open here...no hurry at all....(this is just one example of a late reply and I hope to do a few more!) For the few that enquired, yes I was > monastic for 35yrs, I am a Layperson now. It was by personal choice I'm sure it wasn't easy either and hope you're adapting well. Whereabouts were you in robes (if you care to reply only)? I think you say later you're living in India..may I know where? > and I still follow as much monastic precepts as I am able except for > the robes and obtaining food. It has become part of my life for so > many years. There that should satisfy those that were wondering a bit > about my background. > Thanks again for this and also for your 'heart-felt' contributions to date which I've enjoyed reading. Best wishes, Sarah 6130 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 6:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Non-killing& welcome Seah Dear Seah, Always good to read useful questions like the one below. What did you think about Nina's answer which I found very helpful? (ignore this if you alr. replied to it on list) as I'm not quite up-to-date yet. If you care to tell us anymore about your interest in dhamma and where you live, I'm sure everyone would like to hear more! Glad you joined us. Sarah p.s sorry we didn't f/w the first message you sent to the dsg moderator a/c which we didn't see 'til after you re-wrote it here..at least you got the system worked out! --- Syk wrote: > A friend put to me this question: > "In Buddhism, non-killing is extended to animals, even poultry and > insects. Is this because life is precious or is it more because it > causes suffering to the victim? If it is because it causes suffering > to both the doer and the victim, which receives more harm or > suffering? > > Thanks > > Syk > 6131 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 6:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1 Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi, > I'm new to this list and have very little knowledge of it or most > members, so I am just jumping in to make a comment. > > By way of introduction, my name is Robert, I am involved in a practice > which I consider to be Buddhist, but I am also influenced by Advaita > Vedanta and other disciplines, so I cannot say I *am* a Buddhist. > Perhaps that's unnecessary in any case. You've jumped in with good questions and good comments and good food for thought...especially on the alcohol issue....yes, many different moments, different intentions...A few earlier posts on 'drinking alcohol' have been saved under 'useful posts' on the dsg homepage..you may care to look at these too. (Kom may add the link- I don't know how away from my home computer). > > I am inspired by Buddhist teachers of various lineages, but > particularly Hui-Neng, Chao-Chou and other sudden-school Ch'an and Zen > masters. But I also have a strong interest and some practice in > Vipassana, and regard all the teachings as significant. > > Now for my comment. I can understand the issue of drinking alcohol as > being relevant to following precepts, but what on earth does it have to > do with being enlightened? Do you really think that a Buddha would be > concerned as to whether a drop of alcohol touched his lips, or that > perhaps he would lose his enlightenment because of taking a drink? I'm sure he wouldn't be concerned if inadvertently this happened, but the more wisdom develops the fewer conditions there are to have any intentions to take alcohol or break other precepts..not by forcing, but naturally... I haven't drunk any alcohol for..well a very long time (and I don't remember when I last had any interest or craving for it)... a few years ago I was given a homeopathic medicine which I didn't realise was in an alcoholic solution..I drank it in one 'swig' and immediately fainted on the floor!! (and I'm just a worldling at a very beginner stage of studying the dhamma, with very little wisdom!) > > I don't see that following the letter of prohibitions and precepts is > directly related to realization at all. If you think it is, I would be > happy to hear your explanation. Greatly look f/w to more of yr comments! Not necessary to call yourself a Buddhist here either! Num mentioned something about your being in Bkk..I'm not sure if I've missed a post or if he's dreaming??? If not, where are you?? Thanks for joining us here. If you wish to know anything more about dsg or any of us, just shout..though by now, you'll have got to know quite a few people and will have found your way around. Best regards, Sarah 6132 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] other welcomes in a hurry-sorry! Derek, Glad to see you back on list ;-)) Pls be patient with us and shout when you don't agree with anything.. We just might get over to Bkk for a long w'end, last w'end in August (if you and Erik are there, that would help persuade us!). Will let you know. Erik, Very excited to here you're in or about to be in Bkk. I think all the oldies, at least, on dsg would be interested to read a kind of diary from you..especially when you have discussions with K.Sujin, Rob and others....any impressions, ideas or whatever...We'd both love to meet you and talk more..keep in touch with us all. Ken & Visakkha, As Rob mentioned, we're honoured to have you..hope you enjoy dsg and look forward to more timely quotes and comments Ray H, Very glad to see how closely you're following the discussion and appreciated yr comments on the nibbana-consciousnes thread. Look f/w to more. Where do you all live....(if you care to share..) Suan, Thanks so much for yr reply to me which I read with great interest...Michael jackson (currently taking a 'break') also lives in Canberra with his family. Victor, thanks for yr contributions too....Hope to hear a little more background about you too! We like to consider dsg as a 'growing family', but just ignore the probes if it seems too nosey! Best wishes to all..have to rush to meet my mother (a real treat for me!) rgds, Sarah --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Robert, thanks for your good wishes, and thank you also to several > other people on the list who e-mailed me privately with good > information. As I mentioned to one of my correspondents, I feel like > the typical Western spiritual day-tripper. But, we can do only do > what's practical. p.s....yes and this is daily life....the dhamma should fit in and help us with our other duties and responsibilities I feel and not hinder or take us away from them as laypeople. Have a great trip Derek and look f/w to hearing about your experiences as well. 6133 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance --- Alex Tran wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > If we don't see the attachment to view - even to right view- > > then how can we ever let it go. Some people never even > relaise > > that they have attachment to view. This is not a matter of > > seeing it and trying to relinquish but learning to see it > again > > and again and again and again - at the very moments it > arises. > > By seeing its conditioned nature this is also going together > > with satipatthana. > > Dear Robert and friends, > > When reading the above statements, I was thinking about our > Lord > Buddha. He continuously advocates that we need to develop > Right > View. It seems that the Buddha and the Arahants are living > (or > swimming and breathing) in Right View all of Their lives on > this > earth. In another word, Right View adheres to Them. > > Therefore, my question is why do we need to let Right View > go then? > > Metta, > Alex ______________ Dear Alex, it is not the right view that is to be discarded but the attachment to it. To my mormon friends attachment to their ideas, to their faith is seen as beneficial and to be cultivated. This is not so in the Dhamma because attachment is a distorting factor that clouds right vision. Some people hear this, for example the famous sutta about the raft (do we carry it around after crossing the river), and decide that they will just discard all view. Thye don't realise that view can't be discarded by decision or thinking, but only by actual clear comprehension of the dhammas that arise at the 6 doors. By this way direct insight knows things as they are. Then there is right view but it arises in association with alobha (non-attachment) unlike wrong view that always comes with lobha(attachment). Some people imagine they have no view because they have such ideas as "I don't say this is right, I don't say that is right" -they don't have opinions: but this is simply another view that is attached to. The most deeply held views are those revolving around the idea of self. Those that take concepts for being something real, and realities for self or lasting. This is quite a hard topic and otehrs may be able to put it better. There is an article by Bhikkhu bodhi that is worth reading on this: http://www.abhidhamma.org/essay25.html robert . 6134 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 4:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Hi - In a message dated 7/11/01 2:27:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Joe writes: > As far as we can tell, the Buddha himself ate meat ... > > ================================ Mmm, hmmm. Whatever was put into the bowl was dana that was gratefully accepted. I don't desist from meat-eating because of an edict from the Buddha. It's a personal choice. 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) 6135 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:09pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Kom: > The essence of (Rinzai) Zen and that of the Theravada Buddhism are exactly > the same: i.e., understading (not with "self" but with sati) of > this moment (e.g., seeing and a visual object) as it is. Well, I won't claim to be an authority on Zen either, although I know more about than Theravada. As far as Rinzai Zen is concerned (it's Japanese. I am more well-versed in the Chinese aspect of Zen: Ch'an), the most common method there is koans, rather than actual Sati. Overall Sati is more often used in Soto Zen, which grew out of the Chinese Caodong (Silent Illumination) school, which emphasises not- dwelling awareness, meaning awareness without object. > In my case, before studying the Theravada Buddhism, I had read many > Zen books, especially, those written by Suzuki Daisetsu. It was only > after learning the heart of the Theravade Buddhism (from late Allen, > Khun Sujin, etc.), I could see that Buddhas' teaching is all about > understanding "this moment" as it is (i.e., no person, no table, > no sushi but the moment of seeing, that of touching, or > that of smelling, being tangled(?) with each of their > corresponding objects. > tadao Personally, I've never been much fond of D.T. Suzuki. He complicates matters much more than is needed (not that I am necessarily for or against a simplistic approach). Ever read the Platform Sutra of Hui- neng? 6136 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:11pm Subject: Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance --- <> wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > Dear Robert and friends, > > When reading the above statements, I was thinking about our Lord > Buddha. He continuously advocates that we need to develop Right > View. It seems that the Buddha and the Arahants are living (or > swimming and breathing) in Right View all of Their lives on this > earth. In another word, Right View adheres to Them. > > Therefore, my question is why do we need to let Right View go then? Because their Right View is not bound by images/appearances. Free yourself from images, and you have true Right View. 6137 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:13pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Kom: > I think that there are (a few) Zen sects whose founders had no > proper understaning of the Dhamma. Soto Zen's founder is an example. What, Dogen? What makes you think that? 6138 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I am surprised that a person so impressed with clarity in the essence of > teachings can declare such a thing like 'the founder of Soto Zen did not > have proper undestanding of Dhamma'. > Could you elaborate such affermation? I think it is a bit unfair to evaluate Zen based on Theravadan concepts (and I do mean concepts), since they use a different approach/belief system to get to Nibbana. Personally, the more I've learned about Theravada and Mahayana, the deeper I go, the more I see how similar they really are. The only real deifference, I think is the Arhat vs. Bodhisattva debate ,and even that isn't clear. Many Zen teachers, such as Hui-neng, advocated the transcendence of all paths [meaning that one must free oneself from all views entirely). > I have practiced Soto Zen for many years myself and I always felt great > affinity between Zen and Theravada and I don't see why in Soto Zen there is > anything controversial compared with Rinzai. > And in your lavish admiration of the many merits and wholesome actions of > the late Suzuki perhaps you overlooked the fact that he was very much a > fascist while in Japan (but then you are Japanese) and have been involved in > political issues defending quite a racist attitude and this doesn't prevent > me from respecting him afterwards in his diffusion of Buddhism in America. I never liked D.T. Suzuki myself. I question his alleged enlightenment. Personally, Soto and Rinzai Zen has never really appealed to me (I'm more into the Chinese aspect), but the writings of Dogen have always struck me as deeply profound. I like him very much. > A person can do wholesome as unwholesome actions and we must be equanimous > in observing it and not purely judgemental. > Then let's don't talk about the Zen monks that trained the japanese soldiers > instigating them in a 'wholesome war' for the sake of Japan what caused the > rape of Nankin in China, one of the most appalling and cruel events in > history and this is very much documented. > Why are we so territorial in our beliefs? 6139 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:27pm Subject: Re: Hello & welcome Anders! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Hi Anders, > I've just been catching up with all your very intersting and good- humoured > posts...I'm very impressed by your consideration and sincere interest and study > of the dhamma and look forward to plenty more. Thank you. I'll be looking forward to expanding my horizon as well. > Anytime is very appropriate to join dsg and I'm so glad you found your way > here...I think you're well out of 'solitude' now and I look forward to more > discussion about current practices and also what it means to 'live alone in > solitude' at this moment....! Actually, it was my intention to wrap up the discussion I pariticipated in here and then take a break, but something Robert Esptein (also new) said to me in a private email might make me change my mind after all. Still contemplating... > I'd just like to know where you're from and where you live... (couldn't see this > at a quick look at your unusual and well-presented website...;-)) I live in Denmark, near Elsinore (of Hamlet fame). Was born there as well. BTW, I have another website, which I would consider to be better (and much bigger). It's at: hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ Especially those here who might also have an interest in Zen might find it appealing. Thanks for the welcome :-) Regards Anders 6140 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Dear Joe, >Surely anyone with even an elementary knowledge of Pali can discern >whether the proper translation in 'unestablished consciousness' >or 'consciousness unestablished'. Pali is very precise - almost as >precise as Sanskrit or Latin - in the attributive. > >Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? appati.t.t.hitena ca bhikkhave vi~n~naa.nena Vakkali kulaputto parinibbuto ti. (S iii 124 pts) For further information: commentary: appati.t.t.hitenaa ti pa.tisandhivi~n~naa.nena appati.t.thitena. appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho. (SA i 184 pts) (with the re-linking or rebirth consciousness not re-established) subcommentary: appati.t.thitenaa ti patit.tha.m alabhantena. itthambhuutalakkha.ne eta.m kara.navacana.m, anuppattidhammenaa ti attho. sati hi uppaade pati.t.thita.m naama siyaa, a.t.thakathaaya.m pana yadeva tassa vi~n~naa.nassa appati.t.thaanakaara.na.m, tadeva parinibbaanakaara.nan ti vutta.m appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti. (SA.T i 218 cscd) Best wishes, Jim 6141 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) --- Ray wrote: > Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? It's "appati.t.thitena vińńaa.nena" (SN XXII.87). This isn't one of the ones translated at Access to Insight, but the Pali is online at http://www.tipitaka.org/ Samyutta Nikaya, Khandhavagga, section 22 (Khandhasa.myutta), number 87 (Vakkali). The context is that after the liberation and death of Vakkali, the monks see a cloud of black smoke moving around. The Buddha tells the monks that this is Mara, looking for Vakkali's consciouness. But, says the Buddha, Vakkali attained final Nibbana "appati.t.thitena vińńaa.nena". appati.t.thitena = instrumental of a- (not) + appati.t.thita, which is the past participle of pati.t.thahati, meaning "to stand fast or firmly, to find a support in, to be established, to fix oneself, to be set up, to stay" (PED). Derek. 6142 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 10:11pm Subject: Re: other welcomes in a hurry-sorry! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > We just might get over to Bkk for a long w'end, last w'end in August (if you > and Erik are there, that would help persuade us!). Will let you know. Sarah, that's the weekend I plan to be at Wat Mahathat. I'll keep my eyes open for you. Best regards, Derek. 6143 From: David Blickenstaff Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 11:40pm Subject: Re: Thankyou for the welcome & welcome David Dear Sarah Thank you very much for your lovely post. Fortunately for me I now have the use of a computer almost anytime I require it. I am now staying in Soochana Bhawan, Park Road Lucknow 226001 (UP). I was a resident monk in the Burmese Buddhist Temple in Sigra, Varanasi. It is a small but lovely temple, which is divided by a road, so our sleeping quarters were on one side while the main temple was on the other. Its the only temple in India which has developed so. The people in Sigra are very kind but extremely poor. Time spent there was most interesting, many stories to tell, and a lot of Dhamma was learnt, but would take more than one lifetime to relate. It was certainly a pleasure for me to relate this to you, brought back a lifetime of memories while doing so. I appreciate your directness it is a very good quality to uphold. Much Metta to All David Blickenstaff (India) --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear David, > > --- David wrote: > Dear All > > It is I again and wish to thank everyone for such a warm welcome. I > > am truly grateful for the kindness shown by everyone. This is a very > > nice Buddhist site and I am pleased to be here. I will let technology > > take its slow efficient course this time and hope this mail gets > > through. > > I'm glad you got the technology figured out eventually..sometimes it gives us > all tests of patience when we lose our mails, or they get sent in duplicate for > a starter...! > > I'm also glad you're enjoying what you're reading and I find your intro just as > unusual and interesting as Anders'. > > I have access to the Internet a few times a week so please > > excuse me if my replies seem to arrive rather late and off the trend > > of the discussion sometimes. > > Any thread stays open here...no hurry at all....(this is just one example of a > late reply and I hope to do a few more!) > > For the few that enquired, yes I was > > monastic for 35yrs, I am a Layperson now. It was by personal choice > > I'm sure it wasn't easy either and hope you're adapting well. Whereabouts were > you in robes (if you care to reply only)? I think you say later you're living > in India..may I know where? > > > and I still follow as much monastic precepts as I am able except for > > the robes and obtaining food. It has become part of my life for so > > many years. There that should satisfy those that were wondering a bit > > about my background. > > > Thanks again for this and also for your 'heart-felt' contributions to date > which I've enjoyed reading. > > Best wishes, > Sarah > > 6144 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Thankyou for the welcome & welcome David Much mettaa back at you, too, David. I think we'll be very fortunate to have you here. mike --- David Blickenstaff wrote: > Dear Sarah > Thank you very much for your lovely post. > Fortunately for me I now > have the use of a computer almost anytime I require > it. I am now > staying in Soochana Bhawan, Park Road Lucknow 226001 > (UP). I was a > resident monk in the Burmese Buddhist Temple in > Sigra, Varanasi. It > is a small but lovely temple, which is divided by a > road, so our > sleeping quarters were on one side while the main > temple was on the > other. Its the only temple in India which has > developed so. The > people in Sigra are very kind but extremely poor. > Time spent there > was most interesting, many stories to tell, and a > lot of Dhamma was > learnt, but would take more than one lifetime to > relate. It was > certainly a pleasure for me to relate this to you, > brought back a > lifetime of memories while doing so. I appreciate > your directness it > is a very good quality to uphold. > > Much Metta to All > David Blickenstaff (India) > 6145 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 0:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance Dear Sukin >Besides I am trying to clarify myself now aren't I, what >is the motive? >I guess I just reacted from my deep seated habit of siding with the >minority >and also from hating to see people in conflict. Well we are in the very same position; indeed as you can observe from my posts on this issue I also defended Herman's right of not being judged (despite my friendship and fondness of Robert) and I felt moved to invite him to reconsider because as you I feel very unconfortable by conflictual relationships and my policy is frankness. >> > > I think that everything is subject of Dhamma and subject to Dhamma. > > Threfore specially the human aspects and our interaction here is a very >much > > interesting and worthwhile and 'important thing' to be discussed. > > Because is very much a MIRROR of our actual practice. > > We can claim equanimity and relate academically to it quite a lot but is > > indeed in this confrontations with REAL life that our REAL pratice >emerges. > >This is true. And this is beautiful and very profitable, all the rest is frame Sukin, this is the real picture in my opinion. >I do not think explanations are neccessarily accurate especially when it >comes to hidden motives and strong feelings, discussing them might draw >more on personal stories than on the actual reality. For example what I >said above about my 'deep seated habit', it is just what I am telling >myself, but is it accurate or is it all there is to it? Yet it might >satisfy someone who reads about it and there might not be any further talk >about it, and I may end up with a fixed and faulty view of myself. I agree our mind is extremely manipulative but then Sukin what is the meaning of all this Abhidhamma study if we don't apply it in observing and dealing with our mental processes? While discussing we should bear in mind that we are supposed to exercize mindfulness and respecting the guidelines of the teachings we can deepen our vision of Dhamma; otherwise would be only mumbo jumbo to show off intellectual skilfulness. Our interactions here are a true laboratory for our practice. I wrote: > > And misunderstandings will arise again and the parties involved can >learn > > something most out of their OWN experience because in that moment of >hatred > > and mental confusion they are not going to refer to this interaction. > > When the mind is clouded by aversion you are not in a 'constructive >mood'. > > What are we supposed to do, keep discussing 'nibbana' and enlightenment >when > > we cannot even deal with simple emotions like this? You replied: >Whether discussing 'nibbana' is useful or not I do not know, but I would >rather discuss something I am capable of perceiving and understand. Indeed I agree. >But I also do not believe that I have to deal with emotions as such, I only >need to know them when they arise, when I decide to do anything about it, >it is another moment. But this is only my understanding. Well let's don't slip away from the thread; what you decide about your practice and how to conduce it is your spiritual responsability and I have no right to interferre and the other way round. Everybody has their own understanding and obviously we can practice only basing on our capacity of assimilating the teachings in the present moment, otherwise we are fooling ourselves. I wrote: > > I prefer getting real and base my knowledge on actual experience not in > > academic approach. > > Dhamma is all about real life the way I see it. You replied: >Personally I wish I was more academic than I am. If I could spend more time >studying the Tipitaka rather than being mindless and indulging in objects >of the senses, I am certain that would condition more mindfulness of the >realities that are appearing all the time. Well I don't neglect or despise studying but for me Abhidhamma is in real life not in printed pages. I cannot spend my life behind a book but I can constantly practice daily awareness in the challenges of my life. My depression for example has taught me a great deal because I could keep my mind sharp observing what was going on and right understanding has arisen despite the immense grief and overwhelming emotions. > > > >But perhaps I don't see clearly enough. > > > > Who does dear Sukin, who does? > > We are trying our best but not always we succeed, that's why we keep >trying, > > to learn and improve I suppose. > >Yes and it would be very nice if we could all help one another,as much as >possible, to 'live' the 'Right View'. > >Metta, >Sukin. > Well here I am and I am always willing to share my experience in this Dhamma school of life. Metta Cybele 6146 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 0:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] other welcomes in a hurry-sorry! > Ray H, > > Very glad to see how closely you're following the discussion and appreciated yr > comments on the nibbana-consciousnes thread. Look f/w to more. > > Where do you all live....(if you care to share..) > Hi Sarah, I mostly just read, this is a wonderful group. I have leaned a great deal about applying Abhidhamma teachings,. which can be very abstract, to daily living. Sounds like a good title for a book :) To find a list where Nina Van Gorkom posts is really a wonderful find. I hope she finds a US distributor for her books soon, I just do not seem to be able to get comfortable with e-books. I live in Southern California and found Buddhism about 8 years ago in an AOL chat room. I was lucky to have made friends with someone who was very knowledgeable about Buddhism. In fact I still help with Buddhist chats on AOL, we even have a Pali Sutta Chat :) I originally read Mahayana texts and then found Thich Nhat Hanhs' Sutta translations and knew I had found a home. For the past 5 years or so I have read mostly Theravada material. It would be interesting to read about how others came to their current path :) 6147 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 1:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance Dear Alex, If I recall correctly, the Buddha somewhere defined nibbana as complete and perfected right view. Does this ring a bell with anyone? mike --- Alex Tran wrote: > When reading the above statements, I was thinking > about our Lord > Buddha. He continuously advocates that we need to > develop Right > View. It seems that the Buddha and the Arahants are > living (or > swimming and breathing) in Right View all of Their > lives on this > earth. In another word, Right View adheres to Them. > > Therefore, my question is why do we need to let > Right View go then? > > Metta, > Alex 6148 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 1:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Tadao, I was a (rather half-baked) student of Rinzai Zen for about ten years. Your understanding of Rinzai's teachings in the light of abhidhamma makes a connection between Zen and Dhammavinaya I'd never thought of and shows me Rinzai in an entirely new light. Also liked your Indian/Chinese analysis. All very interesting! Thanks very much. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Cybele: > > (i) When I mention Suzuki, I only refer to his > understaing of the > the Buddhism. I am talking if he underdstands the > essense of (all) > the Buddhas' teaching or not, that is, if he > understands that His > teaching concerns understanding of this very moment > of > seeing/a visual object, etc. > > (ii) I have no intention of getting into discussing > his political affiliation/inclination. (Although, as > you do, > I HATE the right wing ideology, I have no intention > of mixing up > the issues in hand.) > > (iii) When I read the Rinzai-roku, I could see that > Rinzai > is consistantly encouraging his diciples to SEE > things as they are > (or to pay their attentions to the phonomena(n) of > "here and now"). > Rinzai's way of teaching is very different from > Gotama Buddha's. > Given, partially, the historical fact that he is/was > (east) Indian > (in whose "genes" the notion of "logic"is embedded), > the Buddha was able to explain, in a logical manner, > of what kinds of the world we are living in: that > is, > the world of "naamas" and "ruupas", none of which > can be equated to > (our notions of), e.g., "a man", "a table", or "a > piece of sushi". > Although Gotama Buddha has taught us various things > (dhammas) > which may not have been "directly" related with his > above > view of the world, the core of his teaching deals > with naamas/ruupas > (the world we are in) and sati-patthaana > (the way to verify/realize such a world). > > (iii) As I mentioned above, I see the same > objective/goal of inquiry > with Rinzai's words. Given that he is/was chinese, > he avoids > any logical/verbal way of showing his diciples the > world he has/had > realized. The same world/objective/, and highly > likely, the same > method (i.e. sati-patthaana). > > (iv) In my interpretation, I do not see the same > kind of clear > definition of the objective/goal of inquiry in > Dogen's words. > In other words, I do not think that he knew that the > essence of > the Buddhism is to realize this moment of, say, > touching as it is. > If my interpetation is correct, then, Dogen wasn't > an enlightended one (i.e. Arakan). > > (v) Please understand that I am just presenting my > opinion. > > tadao 6149 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 1:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear David, This is very interesting! I'm curious about one point: --- David Blickenstaff wrote: > This level can only > be realized by others onto the receiver and never by > the receiver > him/her self be realized (during life). I hadn't heard this before that I can recall. Is it from the Tipitaka? Nice to hear from you again. mike 6150 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 1:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders, --- Anders Honore wrote: > As far as Rinzai Zen is > concerned (it's > Japanese. I am more well-versed in the Chinese > aspect of Zen: Ch'an), > the most common method there is koans, rather than > actual Sati 'Rinzai' is the (romanized) Japanese translation of Lin Chi, a ninth-century Chinese Ch'an master, whose teaching was characterized by a very heavy emphasis on koan (kung-an) study. He was a student of Huang Po (Obaku in Japanese). Tadao's recent post makes a very interesting connection between Lin Chi and the Dhammavinaya. Best wishes, sir, mike 6151 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 4:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Hi Tadao > >Hi, Cybele: > >(i) When I mention Suzuki, I only refer to his understaing of the >the Buddhism. I am talking if he underdstands the essense of (all) >the Buddhas' teaching or not, that is, if he understands that His >teaching concerns understanding of this very moment of >seeing/a visual object, etc. > >(ii) I have no intention of getting into discussing >his political affiliation/inclination. (Although, as you do, >I HATE the right wing ideology, I have no intention of mixing up >the issues in hand.) Well Tadao, I am so sorry but Suzuki was an scholar, a 'title' that personally I don't respect very much because I have met so many scholars that had a 'profound knowledge' of Buddhism and would lose their tempers over the menu in a restorant and have never practiced meditation what let's me a bit perplexed. However paying attention to my own prejudices there is the fact that you cannot split apart the man Suzuki, from the scholar Suzuki, from the political Suzuki; you have to consider the integrality of his being. If he preachs one thing and practices another I would dare to say that I would be slightly suspicious of the authenticity of his teachings. But then you have the right to chose as you like naturally. > >(iii) When I read the Rinzai-roku, I could see that Rinzai >is consistantly encouraging his diciples to SEE things as they are >(or to pay their attentions to the phonomena(n) of "here and now"). >Rinzai's way of teaching is very different from Gotama Buddha's. >Given, partially, the historical fact that he is/was (east) Indian >(in whose "genes" the notion of "logic"is embedded), >the Buddha was able to explain, in a logical manner, >of what kinds of the world we are living in: that is, >the world of "naamas" and "ruupas", none of which can be equated to >(our notions of), e.g., "a man", "a table", or "a piece of sushi". >Although Gotama Buddha has taught us various things (dhammas) >which may not have been "directly" related with his above >view of the world, the core of his teaching deals with naamas/ruupas >(the world we are in) and sati-patthaana >(the way to verify/realize such a world). I agree with all this about nama rupa and actuality of the present moment except for the alleged fact of 'Indian genes being embedded in the notion of logic' what having lived in India for a long time I would widely disclaim. It looks quite like an ethnocentric theory considering that you are eastern evaluating another eastern culture. A bit of stereotypical mould in what I do not believe. > >(iii) As I mentioned above, I see the same objective/goal of inquiry >with Rinzai's words. Given that he is/was chinese, he avoids >any logical/verbal way of showing his diciples the world he has/had >realized. The same world/objective/, and highly likely, the same >method (i.e. sati-patthaana). I don't discuss Rinzai as I have little experience. Again I would not explain the tendence of being pragmatic and non logical as genetical prone. This is segregational and a mental entrapment for me. Has a taste of ethnical cleansing that is not palatable to me I reckon. But then I must consider my background and my own preferences, however it doesn't convince me at all. > >(iv) In my interpretation, I do not see the same kind of clear >definition of the objective/goal of inquiry in Dogen's words. >In other words, I do not think that he knew that the essence of >the Buddhism is to realize this moment of, say, touching as it is. >If my interpetation is correct, then, Dogen wasn't >an enlightended one (i.e. Arakan). How it comes that you have the skills to interpretate the level of right understanding of Dogen so to infer if he was enlightened or not? This really puzzles me Tadao. This list is a kind of Illumination Fair, we have various scholars, an Stream Entered, a Sotopana and now you with prodigious mental clarity. I think I should unsubscribe, I cannot take all this dazzling light! :-) I am definetely feeling highly inadequate - I am only a seeker nothing more. 'To study Buddhism is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things. To be enlightened by all things is to drop off our body and mind, And to drop off the bodies and minds of others. No trace of enlightenment remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.' DOGEN > >(v) Please understand that I am just presenting my opinion. > >tadao I suppose that nobody here is claiming to declare the absolute truth but sometimes it seems that our assertiveness is very much like that. Tadao doesn't occur to you that perhaps your presented opinion is just a subjective preference your mind is holding to? Metta Cybele 6152 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 5:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders >> >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > I am surprised that a person so impressed with clarity in the >essence of > > teachings can declare such a thing like 'the founder of Soto Zen >did not > > have proper undestanding of Dhamma'. > > Could you elaborate such affermation? You replied: >I think it is a bit unfair to evaluate Zen based on Theravadan >concepts (and I do mean concepts), since they use a different >approach/belief system to get to Nibbana. Personally, the more I've >learned about Theravada and Mahayana, the deeper I go, the more I see >how similar they really are. The only real deifference, I think is >the Arhat vs. Bodhisattva debate ,and even that isn't clear. Many Zen >teachers, such as Hui-neng, advocated the transcendence of all paths >[meaning that one must free oneself from all views entirely). Good Lord, you know I agree with you, a 'stream enterer', can I live over your reflected light, second hand illumination??!!! ;-) I wrote: > > I have practiced Soto Zen for many years myself and I always felt >great > > affinity between Zen and Theravada and I don't see why in Soto Zen >there is > > anything controversial compared with Rinzai. > > And in your lavish admiration of the many merits and wholesome >actions of > > the late Suzuki perhaps you overlooked the fact that he was very >much a > > fascist while in Japan (but then you are Japanese) and have been >involved in > > political issues defending quite a racist attitude and this doesn't >prevent > > me from respecting him afterwards in his diffusion of Buddhism in >America. You replied: >I never liked D.T. Suzuki myself. I question his alleged >enlightenment. Personally, Soto and Rinzai Zen has never really >appealed to me (I'm more into the Chinese aspect), but the writings >of Dogen have always struck me as deeply profound. I like him very >much. Ahhh I am delighted!! Now that you agree with me everything is cool. Why it's so easy get along well when somebody says what you like to hear; life would be so simple if everybody agrees with me indeed. ;-) Apart jokes, I admire Dogen as well. > > > A person can do wholesome as unwholesome actions and we must be >equanimous > > in observing it and not purely judgemental. > > Then let's don't talk about the Zen monks that trained the japanese >soldiers > > instigating them in a 'wholesome war' for the sake of Japan what >caused the > > rape of Nankin in China, one of the most appalling and cruel events >in > > history and this is very much documented. > > Why are we so territorial in our beliefs? > > Goodness gracious me, a stream enter that bows to me, I am in ecstasy, pure religious frenzy. Can you accept me as your disciple? Anders I know that you are goodhumoured and don't take even yourself seriously, guess about me. Thank you for the sharing. Love Cybele 6153 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 5:06am Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear David, --- David wrote: > Another morsel of pure Dhamma has surfaced again in a different form. > Dear group once again it pays to observe and analyze. Robert's true > self has been revealed, unknowingly by him. Amazing, what was > revealed in the process. If these are not the qualities of Sotapanna > than this level does not, and has never, existed. This level can only > be realized by others onto the receiver and never by the receiver > him/her self be realized (during life). What is an exclusive quality of a sotapanna that can be observed but the person himself/herself does not know? Curious mind wants to know... Is it perhaps his illumination (as rumored somewhere else???) ;-) kom 6154 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 6:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses given by the buddha, about 'self-streamentry-check'. where one can look into (as a mirror) and self-declare that he/she is a sotapanna.(dhammadasa). Rgds 6155 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 7:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Thanks, Gayan--I'd read these before (years ago) but had forgotten all about them. That's Vol. 5 (SN.55) of the PTS Samyutta Nikaya, if anyone's interested. mike --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses > given by the buddha, about > 'self-streamentry-check'. > where one can look into (as a mirror) and > self-declare that he/she is a > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > Rgds > > > 6156 From: Alex Tran Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 8:26am Subject: Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Alex, > > If I recall correctly, the Buddha somewhere defined > nibbana as complete and perfected right view. Does > this ring a bell with anyone? > > mike Dear Mike, Robert, and Anders, Ah, there's nothing wrong with Right View. It's my not-yet enlightened citta that needs to be straightened up by panna. It's the attachment to concept, to self! Thank you. Metta, Alex 6157 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group Dear Rob Ha!!!How naughty of you! Not only mysoginist, selfish, and merciless but also overzealous. You are beyond redemption... ;-) Rob now that you have reached the 1st stage of realization how are we supposed to address you from now on? And how many times should I bow to you? Please give instructions, I am only a poor unwise woman searching for guidance. Joking with a sotapanna will condenm me to reborn in a lower realm? Love and bows Cybele > >Dear herman, >I have to confess i've been hovering near my computer for the >last day hoping to hear from you. I'm so touched by your words. >I think I have a bit of a missionary element in me (maybe it >rubs off from my mormon friends). Consequently as soon as I see >what I think is a departure from MY view of the Tipitaka I get >overzealous, and want to reform everyone to my way. I forget how >useful it is to be exposed to different perspectives. >I'll try to be a little more understanding - and please pull me >up when I inevitably stray into dogmatic and imperious speech.( >can't promise it will stop me but every reminder helps a little) >Great to have you back. >robert > >--- Herman wrote: > > 6158 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear tadao, I also much appreciated your analysis. Thanks robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Tadao, > > I was a (rather half-baked) student of Rinzai Zen for > about ten years. Your understanding of Rinzai's > teachings in the light of abhidhamma makes a > connection between Zen and Dhammavinaya I'd never > thought of and shows me Rinzai in an entirely new > light. Also liked your Indian/Chinese analysis. All > very interesting! > > Thanks very much. > > mike 6159 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 4:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Hi, Robert: (i) What kind of things do you teach at your University? (ii) Do you teach Pali? Do you have any Japanese students who are advanced in Pali? (ii) I am asking these questions because I've found my (old) Japanese translation of Visuddhimagga (from Ch. one to Ch. four). I did the translation when I was staying at the Island hermitage at Dudanduwa(?) in Sri Lanka It's very literal word-by-word, to be more precise, morpheme-by-morpheme translation. As far as I recall, I used a Pali-text in Thai script and a Pali-text in Roman alphabet (i.e., using the very copy Venerable Bhikkhu Nyanamoli(?) used for his English translation). I must also have cosulted both Thai and English transltions. If you have any students who can make use of my translation, I would like to talk with them. tadao 6160 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 0:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Tadao, I teach English plus one seminar class on world religion (for which Buddhism in daily life by Nina is the text for the large Buddhist component). My students know only a little pali but are amazingly keen to learn more! 5 of them are doing the japnese translation of buddhism in daily life - now on chapter 6. Their biggest problem with the translation is the sutta sections . I have ordered the japanese translations of the tipitaka and commenatries (70 volumes) but even once it arrives they are going to have a hard time finding the right suttas - i don't know kanji so can't help. perhaps we can fax the lists of the 70 volumes to you and you could tell us the english equivalent. Very good to hear of your Visudd. translation Anyway lets talk more off list. my email is 194233250056127134213056109067021253018143238218134229182055166127046249149006227237009204035181 best wishes robert --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Robert: > (i) What kind of things do you teach at your University? > (ii) Do you teach Pali? Do you have any Japanese students > who are advanced in Pali? > (ii) I am asking these questions because I've found my (old) > Japanese translation of Visuddhimagga (from Ch. one to > Ch. four). I did the translation when I was staying at the > Island hermitage at Dudanduwa(?) in Sri Lanka > It's very literal word-by-word, to be more precise, > morpheme-by-morpheme translation. > As far as I recall, I used a Pali-text in Thai script and > a Pali-text in Roman alphabet (i.e., using the very copy > Venerable Bhikkhu Nyanamoli(?) used for his English > translation). > I must also have cosulted both Thai and English transltions. > If you have any students who can make use of my translation, > I would like to talk with them. > tadao 6161 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 0:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Spiritual arrogance --- cybele chiodi wrote: > This disarmony between you and Herman is a great opportunity of self > examination without blame or guilt for you, for him, for all of us. > What is most valuable in our sharings is exactly this application of Dhamma > in real, burning, paining life. > There is no text that can teach us how to deal with reality, only genuine > experience can grant knowledge - there is no map in this wild territory -we > have to accept the risk and go ahead exploring. This is very good. Thanks for pointing this out. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6162 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 0:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Spiritual arrogance, Hello, The war of the suttas --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Robert, Robert E, and Erik, > > --- Num wrote: > PS. Welcome to Thailand for Robert, Robert E and Erik. Hope you guys > have a > > nice stay and enjoy the peak of rainy season there. > > If you had been (or maybe you have?) there 15 years ago, you would > have been able to see boats going around in the commerical district > right on the street too! > > kom That would be nice. I have never been to Thailand. So far my Eastern travels have been to parts of India and Nepal on two occasions. I hope I'll get to Southeast Asia one of these days. Thailand is supposed to be quite wonderful. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6163 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 1:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Cybele, Only now I am begining to understand you, and I like what I see. Nice knowing you. Sukin. cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Anders > > >> > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > I am surprised that a person so impressed with clarity in the > >essence of > > > teachings can declare such a thing like 'the founder of Soto Zen > >did not > > > have proper undestanding of Dhamma'. > > > Could you elaborate such affermation? > > You replied: > >I think it is a bit unfair to evaluate Zen based on Theravadan > >concepts (and I do mean concepts), since they use a different > >approach/belief system to get to Nibbana. Personally, the more I've > >learned about Theravada and Mahayana, the deeper I go, the more I see > >how similar they really are. The only real deifference, I think is > >the Arhat vs. Bodhisattva debate ,and even that isn't clear. Many Zen > >teachers, such as Hui-neng, advocated the transcendence of all paths > >[meaning that one must free oneself from all views entirely). > > Good Lord, you know I agree with you, a 'stream enterer', can I live over > your reflected light, second hand illumination??!!! ;-) > > I wrote: > > > I have practiced Soto Zen for many years myself and I always felt > >great > > > affinity between Zen and Theravada and I don't see why in Soto Zen > >there is > > > anything controversial compared with Rinzai. > > > And in your lavish admiration of the many merits and wholesome > >actions of > > > the late Suzuki perhaps you overlooked the fact that he was very > >much a > > > fascist while in Japan (but then you are Japanese) and have been > >involved in > > > political issues defending quite a racist attitude and this doesn't > >prevent > > > me from respecting him afterwards in his diffusion of Buddhism in > >America. > > You replied: > >I never liked D.T. Suzuki myself. I question his alleged > >enlightenment. Personally, Soto and Rinzai Zen has never really > >appealed to me (I'm more into the Chinese aspect), but the writings > >of Dogen have always struck me as deeply profound. I like him very > >much. > > Ahhh I am delighted!! Now that you agree with me everything is cool. > Why it's so easy get along well when somebody says what you like to hear; > life would be so simple if everybody agrees with me indeed. ;-) > Apart jokes, I admire Dogen as well. > > > > > > A person can do wholesome as unwholesome actions and we must be > >equanimous > > > in observing it and not purely judgemental. > > > Then let's don't talk about the Zen monks that trained the japanese > >soldiers > > > instigating them in a 'wholesome war' for the sake of Japan what > >caused the > > > rape of Nankin in China, one of the most appalling and cruel events > >in > > > history and this is very much documented. > > > Why are we so territorial in our beliefs? > > > > > > Goodness gracious me, a stream enter that bows to me, I am in ecstasy, pure > religious frenzy. > Can you accept me as your disciple? > Anders I know that you are goodhumoured and don't take even yourself > seriously, guess about me. > Thank you for the sharing. > > Love > > Cybele 6164 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 1:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Dear Robert, Thanks very much for your response. I have to say that this seems like a very nice, clear, dedicated group. I'm happy to have run into you all. I know much much less than you regarding the suttas and the proscribed path. My background is very eclectic, although lengthy and I tend to do things unofficially rather than officially. This has its limitations in terms of being part of a tradition or having a strong body of knowledge to fall back on. In other ways, however, my spiritual experiences have been very strong and clear at times. I welcome the chance to come and visit you here and learn so much with each message that I read. I am probably closest to Zen in my Buddhist experience, but also have a brief but very powerful [for me anyway] experience with being trained in Vipassana by a very unusual teacher. My knowledge is probably very basic in this regard, but when I have had the discipline to sit the basic knowledge of Vipassana has been a very clear guide for me. My readings have often been in Mahayana texts such as the Lankavatara Sutra and writings of Hui Neng, Chao Chou and zen Master Ikkyu, but I am also a great fan of Thich Nath Hanh, whose Zen is really firmly rooted in Theravada texts and traditions. Anyway, I believe that the Theravada tradition is the firm foundation on which all Buddhism rests. Every bit of knowledge I get makes me a little stronger in my pursuit, so thanks for having me as a guest. Robert, thanks for your response to my last message. There are some very good things there, and I will comment below. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Here in Japan a good friend of mine was one of the bodyguards of > Chogyam trungpa and lived at Naropa for 5years. He has utter > confidence in the enlightenment of Trungpa who was, according to > my friend, pretty much an alcoholic (to outward appearances). My > upbringing was in the Theravada tradition which has no such > examples. I was friends with some American practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism in Boston for a while, and got to briefly meet Trungpa which was quite an unusual and exciting experience. We only spoke for a moment but his refined energy was quite palpable. I find it possible to believe that he drank and was yet enlightened, although this seems contradictory. I am impressed that you are willing to consider this possibility, which seems pretty openminded to me. I am wondering what you think the effect of alcohol would be on an enlightened being? Do you think that person would still experience the effects of alcohol clouding awareness or reducing mindfulness? If the cloudiness of the mind itself has been removed, can it be re-installed? I am just wondering whether those of you who know about these things believe that there is a physical causality that affects the experience of an enlightened person, or whether they have gone beyond that and can't have their awareness affected by the conditions of the body. If they are subject to be affected by the conditions of the body, it is hard for me to say that they are beyond dependent arising and karma, for they would appear to still be affected by causal conditions, even in their inmost consciousness. If they are not affected inwardly, but some external faculties of the sense objects were clouded by the alcohol, this would not impinge on their enlightenment in any way, since they would already be functioning independently of the input of the senses, having withdrawn from such relations. If an arahant was captured by an enemy and forced to drink large quantities of alcohol against his will, what do you think would be the affect on his faculties and his inward awareness? The reason I ask all this is because I am trying to get a sense of the boundaries of what 'freedom from all conditions' the enlightened being would really have while still on this earth. > > Another point is the relationship of desire to action. I may > > have a glass of wine > > just to be sociable, not because I have a strong desire for > > it. In fact, my wife > > used to dislike wine, but she would occasionally take a sip > > just to join in with > > friends. I know that an arahant would probably not be worried > > about such > > gestures, but my point is just to say that one can have a bit > > of wine without > > desire or addiction. > _________ > yes there are certainly differences in intention and thus > result. The texts say (I might dig out a reference later) that > drinking a lot is very, very bad but that drinking a little is > still bad. I think the wise see the danger - that a little can > lead to more; and even a little clouds consciouness to a degree. Yes, for someone who is not awakened, the clouding of consciousness is a crucial issue, so I can understand that one would not want to interfere with their own progress by indulging in wine, anger, a frivolous amount of sex, or sexual relations that were not in harmony, or an unhealthy lack of sleep, or too much sleep, or the wrong sorts of disturbing foods, etc. Any of these indulgences would cloud consciousness and distract from progress on the path, which is already hard enough. > The path of Dhamma is seeing into realities as they are, for > which the factors of wisdom and sati (mindfulness ) must be > developed- not weakened. Understood. > This is not meant as a moralistic order. There was sarakani the > sakkyan who left the order of monks, took to drink, became an > alcoholic, and died with alcohol still on his breath; but who at > the very moment he died became a sotapanna. He had confidence in > the Dhamma and still went to the temple to listen to Dhamma and > developed wisdom in spite of his addiction. Thanks for that example. > You probably know the saying "first the man takes the drink, > then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes the man" > > > > If you'll forgive me going back to a Ch'an example, Hui Neng > > lived with hunters in > > the woods for 12 years. He had vowed not to kill or eat any > > living beings, and he > > refused to hunt, but was put in charge of watching the traps. > > Whenever he found > > an animal caught in a trap, he would secretly let it go. But > > out of politeness to > > his hosts, who lived by hunting, he did not openly criticize > > them. He also ate > > only vegetables, but cooked them along with the meat when the > > hunters cooked their > > meals. Technically I guess his vegetables were defiled. Did > > he break the > > precepts or not, I wonder? > ___________ > > In this case it depends on intention. It certainly sounds like > he had no intention to kill and so lived blamelessly. > There is an example in the theravada of a woman who was a > sotapanna(enlightened). She fell in love with a hunter and > married him. She used to make his arrows for him out of her > love. > The Buddha was asked how this devoted follower could do such a > thing. The buddha said that she had no intention to kill or to > assist the killing but was only thinking of her husband (who she > deeply loved). It seems almost impossible that someone could > demarcate intention so much (don't try this at home) but this > was a very unusual case. later her husband gained confidence and > became a sotapanna and gave up hunting. > robert I hope this is not an idle question, but is intention everything? If she helps to make the arrows that kill the animals, and they are indeed killed, is her hand not in the killing, and does this not affect her karma in some way? It seems that the Buddha is saying that only the intention matters. If I ignorantly kill someone because I am enjoying a song on my car radio and don't pay attention, I am responsible for being irresponsible. If the woman is so in love that she forgets the animals that will be killed, how come she has no connection to the suffering that is caused? On the other hand, there may be a connection between her love and non-judgmental attitude and her husband giving up hunting of his own accord. In that case, she has actually saved more animals in the long run than she has hurt. Hope this isn't too silly. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6165 From: Purnomo . Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 3:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fw: Purification of Mind Dera friend, Thank for your explain. with metta, purnomo >From: "Kom Tukovinit" >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fw: Purification of Mind >Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 18:23:23 -0000 > >Dear Purnomo, > >Thank you for further explaining the analogy of babies having little to >negative feelings. I would like to discuss this a little further. > >I think we should be aspired by people who have no defilement >tendencies, such as the Buddha and his disciples. Why? Then, we are >always attuned to the ultimate goal in the teachings of the Buddha: the >permanent eradication of all kilesa at all levels. Without this goal in >mind, >we can be attached to many things for examples: > >1) Nice analogy that is not completely matching the meaning of the >teachings - e.g., why are we aspired to be like those who still have all >the >conditions to be reborn in both unhappy and happy planes of existence? > >2) Nice analogy that is matching the meaning of the teachings - e.g., have >you met people who try so hard to understand the analogy even though >they might have understood the meaning (well, you have met me!). >Analogy, taken the wrong way, can be objects of craving, conceits, and >wrong views. > >3) The intellectual understandings of the dhamma - again, this is not the >goal, and can be object of craving, conceits, and wrong views. > >4) The rising of sati cognizing the realities as they truly are - again, >this is >not the goal and can be object of craving, conceits, and wrong views. > >5) The temporary cessation of defilements that may have something to do >with the sati arising - again, this is not the goal and can be object of >craving, conceits, and wrong views. > >6) The calmness and the equanimity that may have something to do with >the sati arising - again, this is not the goal and can be object of >craving, >conceits, and wrong views. > >7) The sharpness of insights - again, this is not the goal and can be >object >of craving, conceits, and wrong views. > >8) Other nimitas and signs - again, this is not the goal and can be object >of craving, conceits, and wrong views. > >There is one ultimate goal, and there is only one path getting there. I >believe it is beneficial to keep this in mind, and to understand what the >path is. > >kom > >ps: Outward appearance of a person sometimes doesn't reflect what there >true state of mind is. Have you ever met Thai people? They smile when >they are happy, when they are sad, when they are mad at you, when the >want something, when they don't know what you are talking about. Don't >be fooled by a Thai person, a baby, or even a brahma god. This sutta >(The Simile of the Saw) may apply: > >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn021.html > > > 6166 From: Purnomo . Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 4:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear freinds, I noticed that we discuss about zen and Theravada. May I take your time ? I think that Zen and Theravada is different. The great is Theravada is used Tripitaka as "path" to Nibbana. So, if we discuss of weak or strong of religion it is no use. I just to point that The Buddha learn us Samatha and Vipassana. Are those in Zen ? I think there aren't. Vipassana is only one way to Nibbana. with metta, purnomo >From: Sukinderpal Narula >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) >Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:18:36 +0700 > >Dear Cybele, >Only now I am begining to understand you, and I like what >I see. >Nice knowing you. > >Sukin. > 6167 From: Tori Korshak Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 4:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dear Group Dear Herman, Welcome back! We can all learn from each other. How is your fiancee? Metta, Victoria (Tori) At 12:16 PM 7/10/01 +0000, you wrote: >Dear Group, > >Unskillful words can be lethal weapons, and I'm afraid I've fired off >some very heavy artillery in the last few days. I feel extremely >stupid at this point of time, I sincerely hope that any scars my >words have left out there in cyber space will heal quickly. > >I have this tendency to jump to the defense of people that I feel are >under attack. I remember dear Amara had to put up with my knight in >shining armour routine on occasion, and now Anders. > >I apologise unreservedly to the group as a whole and especially to >Robert for the comments I have made in the last few days. > >I will lie low for a while, perhaps I will discover the secret joys >of lurking :-) > >Thank you all for your encouragement > > >Herman > > > 6168 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 4:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Robert, > Thanks very much for your response. I have to say that this > seems like a very > nice, clear, dedicated group. I'm happy to have run into you > all. _______ Dear Robert E. And we are certainly glad you have. I like your polite and apposite comments and questions. ----- > > Anyway, I believe that the Theravada tradition is the firm > foundation on which all > Buddhism rests. Every bit of knowledge I get makes me a > little stronger in my > pursuit, so thanks for having me as a guest. -= i agree and hope you'll be here for a long stay. > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > Here in Japan a good friend of mine was one of the > bodyguards of > > Chogyam trungpa and lived at Naropa for 5years. He has utter > > confidence in the enlightenment of Trungpa who was, > according to > > my friend, pretty much an alcoholic (to outward > appearances). My > > upbringing was in the Theravada tradition which has no such > > examples. > > I was friends with some American practitioners of Tibetan > Buddhism in Boston for a > while, and got to briefly meet Trungpa which was quite an > unusual and exciting > experience. We only spoke for a moment but his refined energy > was quite palpable. > I find it possible to believe that he drank and was yet > enlightened, although > this seems contradictory. I am impressed that you are willing > to consider this > possibility, which seems pretty openminded to me. > > I am wondering what you think the effect of alcohol would be > on an enlightened > being? Do you think that person would still experience the > effects of alcohol > clouding awareness or reducing mindfulness? If the cloudiness > of the mind itself > has been removed, can it be re-installed? I am just wondering > whether those of > you who know about these things believe that there is a > physical causality that > affects the experience of an enlightened person, or whether > they have gone beyond > that and can't have their awareness affected by the conditions > of the body. > > If they are subject to be affected by the conditions of the > body, it is hard for > me to say that they are beyond dependent arising and karma, > for they would appear > to still be affected by causal conditions, even in their > inmost consciousness. If > they are not affected inwardly, but some external faculties of > the sense objects > were clouded by the alcohol, this would not impinge on their > enlightenment in any > way, since they would already be functioning independently of > the input of the > senses, having withdrawn from such relations. If an arahant > was captured by an > enemy and forced to drink large quantities of alcohol against > his will, what do > you think would be the affect on his faculties and his inward > awareness? _________ These are good questions and ones that I can only speculate on. Erik has thought a good deal about these matters and might have something to say (but he might be on his way to Bangkok). An arahant can never have any akusala such as dosa (aversion) or lobha(craving) or delusion about the nature of existence. If alcohol was forced down him I think it would be like a poison (as it is to us). It would not cause any lobha or delusion or aversion but would be a condition for certain bodily feelings to arise. He might get sick, feel dizzy or get blurry vision or something based on this. _________ > > The reason I ask all this is because I am trying to get a > sense of the boundaries > of what 'freedom from all conditions' the enlightened being > would really have > while still on this earth. > > > > Another point is the relationship of desire to action. I > may > > > have a glass of wine > > > just to be sociable, not because I have a strong desire > for > > > it. In fact, my wife > > > used to dislike wine, but she would occasionally take a > sip > > > just to join in with > > > friends. I know that an arahant would probably not be > worried > > > about such > > > gestures, but my point is just to say that one can have a > bit > > > of wine without > > > desire or addiction. > > _________ > > yes there are certainly differences in intention and thus > > result. The texts say (I might dig out a reference later) > that > > drinking a lot is very, very bad but that drinking a little > is > > still bad. I think the wise see the danger - that a little > can > > lead to more; and even a little clouds consciouness to a > degree. > > Yes, for someone who is not awakened, the clouding of > consciousness is a crucial > issue, so I can understand that one would not want to > interfere with their own > progress by indulging in wine, anger, a frivolous amount of > sex, or sexual > relations that were not in harmony, or an unhealthy lack of > sleep, or too much > sleep, or the wrong sorts of disturbing foods, etc. Any of > these indulgences > would cloud consciousness and distract from progress on the > path, which is already > hard enough. _________ One point though - it might even be better for someone not to try to force themselves to abstain (on occasions). At least that way they can see they have unwholesome desire and can understand that they have a way to go on the spiritual path. Could be a good antidote for spiritual overestimation. _____ > > > There is an example in the theravada of a woman who was a > > sotapanna(enlightened). She fell in love with a hunter and > > married him. She used to make his arrows for him out of her > > love. > > The Buddha was asked how this devoted follower could do such > a > > thing. The buddha said that she had no intention to kill or > to > > assist the killing but was only thinking of her husband (who > she > > deeply loved). It seems almost impossible that someone could > > demarcate intention so much (don't try this at home) but > this > > was a very unusual case. later her husband gained confidence > and > > became a sotapanna and gave up hunting. > > robert > > I hope this is not an idle question, but is intention > everything? If she helps to > make the arrows that kill the animals, and they are indeed > killed, is her hand not > in the killing, and does this not affect her karma in some > way? ______ It seems that the > Buddha is saying that only the intention matters. If I > ignorantly kill someone > because I am enjoying a song on my car radio and don't pay > attention, I am > responsible for being irresponsible. _________ Yes, there is some irresonsibility here, there is lack of mindfulness. There is akusala citta (unwholesome mindstate). However, it is not considered to be killing in the buddhist sense because there is no intention to kill. I think even a sotapanna who liked music could have such an accident. If the woman is so in > love that she forgets > the animals that will be killed, how come she has no > connection to the suffering > that is caused? > > On the other hand, there may be a connection between her love > and non-judgmental > attitude and her husband giving up hunting of his own accord. > In that case, she > has actually saved more animals in the long run than she has > hurt. > > Hope this isn't too silly. ________ Not at all- very good points. This case is a rare one where only the Buddha or the person themself could really see the subtlety of the intention. I think you've hit the mark with "connection betwen her love and non-judgemental attitude". One of the things Acharn sujin sometimes says when asked about matters such as paying taxes, part of which may go towards the army etc. is that she "is not the manager of the world". That woman was a sotapanna and could never have the intention to kill . However, she was not an anagami or arahant and still had attachment to her husband. I think there are others who could add more to this. look forward to more from you Robert robert 6169 From: Herman Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 7:34pm Subject: Re: Dear Group Thank you Victoria, You are certainly right. Vicki, my fiancee, is going well. We are getting married on the 1st September. We are proving to ourselves, that given the right conditions, Brady Bunches can work. We have five boys between us. We don't have plans for a maid, or a dog, and definitely no more children. That has to be panna :-) Thank you again Tori With Metta Herman --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > Welcome back! We can all learn from each other. How is your fiancee? > > Metta, > Victoria (Tori) > 6170 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Spiritual arrogance Dear Robert E. >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > This disarmony between you and Herman is a great opportunity of self > > examination without blame or guilt for you, for him, for all of us. > > What is most valuable in our sharings is exactly this application of > >>>Dhamma in real, burning, paining life. > > There is no text that can teach us how to deal with reality, only >genuine experience can grant knowledge - there is no map in this wild >territory - we have to accept the risk and go ahead exploring. >This is very good. Thanks for pointing this out. > >Robert E. > Thanks for appreciating my sharing. I really mean it and try to keep coherent to this awareness in daily life. Love Cybele 6171 From: Ken and Visakha Kawasaki Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 0:47am Subject: Theravada in NY Dear Friends, A friend wants to meditate in New York. She is interested in Thereavada/Vipassana. She tried calling The Loka Chantha Temple & America Burma Buddhist Association but the person she got on the phone spoke little English. Does this temple have any Dhamma teaching in English? Is there any organized meditation scheduled? The Loka Chantha Temple & America Burma Buddhist Association 619 Bergen Street, New York 11238 Tel: (718) 622-8019 Tradition: Theravada, Burmese Any other suggestions? Thanks for any information. With metta, Visakha 6172 From: Anders Honore Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 9:59pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Anders, > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > > > As far as Rinzai Zen is > > concerned (it's > > Japanese. I am more well-versed in the Chinese > > aspect of Zen: Ch'an), > > the most common method there is koans, rather than > > actual Sati > > 'Rinzai' is the (romanized) Japanese translation of > Lin Chi, a ninth-century Chinese Ch'an master, whose > teaching was characterized by a very heavy emphasis on > koan (kung-an) study. He was a student of Huang Po > (Obaku in Japanese). Yes. Actually, neither Linji nor Huangpo ever taught about the use of kung-ans (and later, hua-tou), if my memory serves me correctly. I believe this was introduced by Xinghua Cunjiang, who was a student of Linji (and thus carried on his line of heritage). 6173 From: Anders Honore Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I don't discuss Rinzai as I have little experience. Well, if you wanna read some of his writings, they are available at my website: hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ > Stream Entered, a Sotopana and now you with prodigious mental clarity. > I think I should unsubscribe, I cannot take all this dazzling light! :-) > I am definetely feeling highly inadequate - I am only a seeker nothing more. Actually, I find being around assholes tremedously good practise (not that I'm implying that this is the case here. But you seem to idicate that this is all a bit too much for you). Whenever I find myself agitated over such things, I try to look at what might trigger such a reaction in me, rather than the external cause. > 'To study Buddhism is to study the self. > To study the self is to forget the self. > To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things. > To be enlightened by all things is to drop off our body and mind, > And to drop off the bodies and minds of others. > No trace of enlightenment remains, > and this no-trace continues > endlessly.' > > DOGEN What can I say: Absolutely brilliant! Dogen has a way of formulating things that just make you go 'bang' at times. 6174 From: Anders Honore Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:14pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Dear Anders > You replied: > >I think it is a bit unfair to evaluate Zen based on Theravadan > >concepts (and I do mean concepts), since they use a different > >approach/belief system to get to Nibbana. Personally, the more I've > >learned about Theravada and Mahayana, the deeper I go, the more I see > >how similar they really are. The only real deifference, I think is > >the Arhat vs. Bodhisattva debate ,and even that isn't clear. Many Zen > >teachers, such as Hui-neng, advocated the transcendence of all paths > >[meaning that one must free oneself from all views entirely). > > Good Lord, you know I agree with you, a 'stream enterer', can I live over > your reflected light, second hand illumination??!!! ;-) Hold on, let me get a candle so you can find your way. Damn, it's too dark in here. Can't find a damn thing... ;-) > You replied: > >I never liked D.T. Suzuki myself. I question his alleged > >enlightenment. Personally, Soto and Rinzai Zen has never really > >appealed to me (I'm more into the Chinese aspect), but the writings > >of Dogen have always struck me as deeply profound. I like him very > >much. > > > Ahhh I am delighted!! Now that you agree with me everything is cool. > Why it's so easy get along well when somebody says what you like to hear; > life would be so simple if everybody agrees with me indeed. ;-) > Apart jokes, I admire Dogen as well. Have you ever read the Platform Sutra of Hui-neng? If there ever was a teacher apart from the Buddha, whom I felt assured was completely enlightened, he would probably be it. > > > > > Goodness gracious me, a stream enter that bows to me, I am in ecstasy, pure > religious frenzy. > Can you accept me as your disciple? > Anders I know that you are goodhumoured and don't take even yourself > seriously, guess about me. > Thank you for the sharing. Haha, if I took myself seriously, why on earth would I write a web- journal describing what a flawed human being I am? As Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa once said: "One's own opinion is the weakest authority of all" 6175 From: Darren Goh Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: Theravada in NY Visakha, Most Theravada temples in New York only serve their particular ethnic communities. There usually offer no meditation class. The New York Insight society taught Vipassana meditation. As it's quite common that westerners "often lift Vipassana meditation out from its setting in Buddhist faith and doctrine, presenting it almost as an autonomous discipline of psychological insight and self- awareness." But it'll do if all she wants is to learn meditation. http://www.nyimc.org/ Hope this help. Sincerely, Darren --- Ken and Visakha Kawasaki wrote: > Dear Friends, > > A friend wants to meditate in New York. She is interested in > Thereavada/Vipassana. > > She tried calling The Loka Chantha Temple & America Burma Buddhist > Association but the person she got on the phone spoke little English. Does > this temple have any Dhamma teaching in English? Is there any organized > meditation scheduled? > > The Loka Chantha Temple & > America Burma Buddhist Association > 619 Bergen Street, New York 11238 > Tel: (718) 622-8019 > Tradition: Theravada, Burmese > > Any other suggestions? Thanks for any information. > > With metta, > Visakha 6176 From: Anders Honore Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:27pm Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "Purnomo ." wrote: > Dear freinds, > > I noticed that we discuss about zen and Theravada. May I take your time ? > I think that Zen and Theravada is different. The great is Theravada is used > Tripitaka as "path" to Nibbana. So, if we discuss of weak or strong of > religion it is no use. > I just to point that The Buddha learn us Samatha and Vipassana. Are those in > Zen ? I think there aren't. Vipassana is only one way to Nibbana. Hmm, I think that is perhaps a bit onesided interpretation. But yes, Vippasana and Samatha are very much a part of Zen (the Tien- t'ai "manuals for stopping and seeing" are the primary guides), although there is more of an emphasis on all-round awareness. By the way, I don't think it is true that Vippasana is the only way to Nibbana. There are suttas indicating that seated meditation is not necessarily needed to complete the path. 6177 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Sukin I am so glad that we are communicating eventually. I am prone to persist in this dialogues exactly to improve our communication skills and clarify doubts and misunderstandings. This sharings are a great, meaningful opportunity of practice of right understanding for me. A bit if goodwill, a handful of humour and let's take it easy without competitions, being honest and not conceited in our exchanges. Nice knowing you too. Btw do you live in Thailand? If so for sure we are going to meet soon, around september or so. Love Cybele > >Dear Cybele, >Only now I am begining to understand you, and I like what >I see. >Nice knowing you. > >Sukin. > 6178 From: Anders Honore Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:43pm Subject: Re: StreamEntrance --- <> wrote: > --- "Anders Honore" > wrote: > > In terms of the formal Dhamma, yes my knowledge is very limited > > compared to most people around here. > > > > Anders > > Dear Anders, > > I think that for an 18 year old young man, you are very mature. > I'm glad that at this life time, and at such a young age, you have > the fortune to walk on the Path. And I mean what I just wrote as a > compliment. > > Keep on walking steadily. It was not taken any other way :-) I've heard that so much by now, that I'd be a nervous wreck if I were to take any offence ;-) Anders 6179 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders > > > Stream Entered, a Sotapanna and now you with prodigious mental >clarity. > > I think I should unsubscribe, I cannot take all this dazzling >light! :-) > > I am definetely feeling highly inadequate - I am only a seeker >nothing more. > >Actually, I find being around assholes tremedously good practise (not >that I'm implying that this is the case here. But you seem to indicate >that this is all a bit too much for you). >Whenever I find myself agitated over such things, I try to look at >what might trigger such a reaction in me, rather than the external >cause. Me too actually. And Anders please a bit of sense of humour! I put a smile after my sentence on purpose to indicate that I was just kidding. I am not easily intimidated Anders by normal human beings or gurus and I am not at all agitated or reacting. I have met assholes as very wise people in my life and I've learned to cope with them without losing that much composure. You misread me totally this time but then you don't know me enough. You will realize very soon I hope. ;-) Don't be mislead by my passionate tones. I am a comedian. > > > 'To study Buddhism is to study the self. > > To study the self is to forget the self. > > To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things. > > To be enlightened by all things is to drop off our body and mind, > > And to drop off the bodies and minds of others. > > No trace of enlightenment remains, > > and this no-trace continues > > endlessly.' > > > > DOGEN >What can I say: Absolutely brilliant! Dogen has a way of formulating >things that just make you go 'bang' at times. > > Indeed bang, bang!!!! Love Cybele 6180 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 10:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Alex, > > If I recall correctly, the Buddha somewhere defined > nibbana as complete and perfected right view. Does > this ring a bell with anyone? > > mike Interesting. I've had a browse around but have not come up with anything. Most of the synonyms for or descriptions of nibbana are in terms that do not relate to conditioned realities (eg, the deathelss, cessation, void), but given your excellent recall of suttas I am sure the reference is there somewhere. Please let us know if you come across it anytime. Jon 6181 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: Many >Zen > > >teachers, such as Hui-neng, advocated the transcendence of all >paths > > >[meaning that one must free oneself from all views entirely). > > > > Good Lord, you know I agree with you, a 'stream enterer', can I >live over > > your reflected light, second hand illumination??!!! ;-) > >Hold on, let me get a candle so you can find your way. Damn, it's too >dark in here. Can't find a damn thing... ;-) My goodness I was searching for a guru to lean on and let him find the 'salvation' on my behalf: what a disappointment. You let me down. Now I have to give a try with the sotapanna Robert, let's see if he does better. At least he is handsome, are you handsome? This is first request for being a guru! Otherwise you are not qualified, so sorry. ;-) > > > > Ahhh I am delighted!! Now that you agree with me everything is cool. > > Why it's so easy get along well when somebody says what you like to >hear; > > life would be so simple if everybody agrees with me indeed. ;-) > > Apart jokes, I admire Dogen as well. > >Have you ever read the Platform Sutra of Hui-neng? If there ever was >a teacher apart from the Buddha, whom I felt assured was completely >enlightened, he would probably be it. > > > > Bows to him indeed. I have read it and enjoyed a lot. I don't read only Tipitaka I am afraid I am not fundamentalist. > > > > Goodness gracious me, a stream enter that bows to me, I am in >ecstasy, pure > > religious frenzy. > > Can you accept me as your disciple? > > Anders I know that you are goodhumoured and don't take even >yourself > > seriously, guess about me. > > Thank you for the sharing. > >Haha, if I took myself seriously, why on earth would I write a web- >journal describing what a flawed human being I am? As Bhadantacariya >Buddhaghosa once said: "One's own opinion is the weakest authority of >all" > Good now that I can relate to sotapanna, I feel highly flattered! ;-) Love Cybele 6182 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders > >Hmm, I think that is perhaps a bit onesided interpretation. But yes, >Vippasana and Samatha are very much a part of Zen (the Tien- >t'ai "manuals for stopping and seeing" are the primary guides), >although there is more of an emphasis on all-round awareness. By the >way, I don't think it is true that Vippasana is the only way to >Nibbana. There are suttas indicating that seated meditation is not >necessarily needed to complete the path. > What a daring affermation; in this list most of the people doesn't meditate at all, you are in good company! This is a good subject for Robert. Enjoy! Love Cybele 6183 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] other welcomes in a hurry-sorry! Dear Friends I'd like to add my welcome to Sarah's to all who have posted their first message during our absence, and many thanks to everyone for the great reading while we were away. Jon PS Robert E, someone mentioned in a post that you were also going to be in Bangkok soon, but as I read your reply to Sarah this may not be so. Perhaps the writer was getting his Roberts mixed up! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Derek, > > Glad to see you back on list ;-)) Pls be patient with us and shout when > you > don't agree with anything.. > > We just might get over to Bkk for a long w'end, last w'end in August (if > you > and Erik are there, that would help persuade us!). Will let you know. > > Erik, > > Very excited to here you're in or about to be in Bkk. > > I think all the oldies, at least, on dsg would be interested to read a > kind of > diary from you..especially when you have discussions with K.Sujin, Rob > and > others....any impressions, ideas or whatever...We'd both love to meet > you and > talk more..keep in touch with us all. > > Ken & Visakkha, > > As Rob mentioned, we're honoured to have you..hope you enjoy dsg and > look > forward to more timely quotes and comments > > Ray H, > > Very glad to see how closely you're following the discussion and > appreciated yr > comments on the nibbana-consciousnes thread. Look f/w to more. > > Where do you all live....(if you care to share..) > > Suan, > > Thanks so much for yr reply to me which I read with great > interest...Michael > jackson (currently taking a 'break') also lives in Canberra with his > family. > > Victor, > thanks for yr contributions too....Hope to hear a little more background > about > you too! We like to consider dsg as a 'growing family', but just ignore > the > probes if it seems too nosey! > > Best wishes to all..have to rush to meet my mother (a real treat for > me!) > > rgds, > Sarah > 6184 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Purnomo >So, if we discuss of weak or strong of >religion it is no use. Indeed Purnomo nobody is discussing it but about the differences and affinities on Zen and Theravada. >I just to point that The Buddha learn us Samatha and Vipassana. Are those >in >Zen ? I think there aren't. Vipassana is only one way to Nibbana. Sure they are Purnomo and before affirming hazardously things you should research much more carefully. Nyanaponika Thera, a most eminent monk and translator of the Tipitaka in many occasions for your calrification remarked that there are enormous affinities between Zen and Theravada. And in my view there is not only a way to Nibbana. And lots of people here doesn't practice formal meditation at all. Did you know it? Well folks, it seems no Nibbana for you naughty ones who doesn't practice meditation. So bad. :-( Love Cybele > >with metta, > > >purnomo > 6185 From: Victor Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:16pm Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Hi Mike, If interested, you might want to refer to Vera Sutta, Animosity http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html Metta, Victor --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear David, > > This is very interesting! I'm curious about one > point: > > --- David wrote: > > > This level can only > > be realized by others onto the receiver and never by > > the receiver > > him/her self be realized (during life). > > I hadn't heard this before that I can recall. Is it > from the Tipitaka? > > Nice to hear from you again. > > mike > 6186 From: David Blickenstaff Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:24pm Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear Gayan I am very sorry, but it is published translations like this and similar, that allow skeptics to Buddhism to have a field day with us. Firstly we must take what the Buddha has said in its totality and than apply these teachings. We cannot take bits and pieces from a host of translators, patch them together and take the resultant as Buddha's Dhamma." The only way to end this historical problem is to spend time reading the Tipitaka in full in its "Original Pali" and not translated versions, which are infact individual opinions, quite different insome cases from the original Author, the Buddha. This is if you wish to delve deep into Dhamma, otherwise if you are comfortable in just learning in general than the study of Tipitaka in Original Pali is not necessary. For deep Dhamma understanding you must be the translator yourself, then your translations will be weighted by the strength in your own belief. This will be affected, once again based on your inner likings to sections you prefer more than others. My readings (and that of my Buddhist brothers) of the Tipitaka (Pali Version) has never revealed anything to imply self-realization even remotely. There are many variants in translations of the original which unfortunately are dependent on the origin of the translator. This is not new and has been a point of contention for centuries. Much Metta to All David --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses given by the buddha, about > 'self-streamentry-check'. > where one can look into (as a mirror) and self-declare that he/she is a > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > Rgds 6187 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:50pm Subject: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Okay, Kom. I will let go of the subject of whether Nibbana is released consciousness or not now. Before that, however, I would just like you to answer one simple question. Please try to use your own understanding, rather than the scriptures. Besides, I don't think they'll be much help to you in this regard. The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? If you say nowhere, then you confirm the doctrine of annihilation, on account of that there was nothing before, and there will thus be nothing after the ending of ignorance and Samsara. If you say Nibbana, how is this possible since Nibbana is a cognisable object? How can the cognisable ever cognise something else? Patiently awaiting your answer... 6188 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 12, 2001 11:49pm Subject: Stream Entry - clarification It seems that my website caused some confusion as to the whether or not, I am a stream-entrant. So I figured I'd spell it out and make my own view clear in this regard. I have made no claim, nor will I ever, make the claim that I am a stream-entrant. As I said, I confess to consuming alcoholic substances from time to time, so on that account, anyone who feels that this "disqualifies" me, are in their right mind to do so. But, nor will you see me deny that I might be a stream-entrant. As they Diamond Sutra wisely says: "Subhuti, what do you think? The stream entrant is able to think, 'I have attained the stream entrant's reward', no?" Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Stream entrant' is the name for entering the stream and for entering nowhere else: not entering forms, sounds, odors, tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas. This is called a 'stream entrant'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Once-returner is able to think, 'I have attained the Once-returner's reward', no?" Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Once-returner' is the name for one more arrival and really is without future arrival. This is called a 'Once-returner'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Non-returner is able to think, 'I have attained the Non-returner's reward', no?" Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Non-returner' is the name for no further arrival, and really has no non-arrival. This is why he is called 'Non-returner'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Worthy (arhat) is able to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', no?" Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? Really, there is nothing called a 'Worthy'. "World Honored One, if a Worthy were to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', then it would be because of attachment to a self, a person, sentient beings, and a soul. World Honored One, the Buddha has said that I have attained the samŕdhi of non-dispute that among others is the best. It is the best because I am free of the desire to be a Worthy. I do not think, 'I am free of the desire to be a Worthy'. World Honored One, if I were to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', then the World Honored One would not have said that Subhuti is a happy woodland practitioner, because Subhuti really practices nowhere. And so he is called 'Subhuti, the happy woodland practitioner'." ------------------- So even if I were a stream-entrant, it would be erroneous to say "I am a stream-entrant," as this would still be an attachment to the image of self (I know; because I used to think I was. Big mistake! Hindered my practise a great deal). As I said, I do not care if I am stream-entrant or not, nor do I have any interest in finding out. Some may interpret this as a sign that I really am a stream-entrant. That too is an illusion! To say that someone is a stream-entrant or not, would require you to take static "snapshot" of reality an evaluate this. Already, the flux of existence has moved on, and the snapshot is no longer in accord with reality, so what is the point? Ultimately, it can never be a correct assessment. If it is really that important for anyone here to find out, then I suggest that you find someone who might be qualified to make that assessment, namely an actual stream-entrant and qualified teacher, and I will be happy to comply. For myself, such a thing has no relevancy however. Having confirmed whether I am enlightened or not, will not serve to further my own practise and progress. To those, who would like to know, I would quote the words of Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch of Zen in this regard: "If you are under delusion and cannot realize your Essence of Mind, you should seek the advice of a pious and learned friend. When your mind is enlightened, you will know the Essence of Mind [Nibbana], and then you may tread the Path the right way. Now you are under delusion, and do not know your Essence of Mind. Yet you dare to ask whether I know my Essence of Mind or not. If I do, I realize it myself, but the fact that I know it cannot help you from being under delusion. Similarly, if you know your Essence of Mind your knowing would be of no use to me. Instead of asking others, why not see it for yourself and know it for yourself?" Personally, I do not see the point of discerning such things. It has no relevancy for me; and as Hui-neng points out, it should not have any relevancy for anyone else either. Some may argue "but we should know, so that we might know whether your words are valid or not." To this, I would say, go and read the Kalama Sutta, which essentially says: "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' -- then you should abandon them. ------------------- Basically, it tells you to go from your own direct experience of the Dhamma. If you find your own direct experience of the Dhamma inadequate to answer such a question, then what is the point of lingering on it, since it has no practical application for you that might help you further your own daily practise? I think there are many people here who might find themselves violating the principles laid forth in this sutta, but again, this is not something that they should accept from my words, or even the Kalama Sutta itself! This is something they have to discover from their own personal experience. But as I said, if it is important for some people "know" (although it is a false knowing), then I will be happy to comply provided they can find someone qualified to give an answer in this regard. Regards, Anders 6189 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 0:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Robert E I found your comments on drinking and kamma interesting. > I am wondering what you think the effect of alcohol would be on an > enlightened > being? Do you think that person would still experience the effects of > alcohol > clouding awareness or reducing mindfulness? If the cloudiness of the > mind itself > has been removed, can it be re-installed? I am just wondering whether > those of > you who know about these things believe that there is a physical > causality that > affects the experience of an enlightened person, or whether they have > gone beyond > that and can't have their awareness affected by the conditions of the > body. As Robert I think said, we are in the realm of speculation here. However one thing is certain, final enlightenment is not attained until the very roots of any unwholesomeness have been removed. So for the arahant there is no longer any condition for unwholesomeness of any degree, no matter what the circumstances. This distinguishes the arahant from say the mere jhana attainer whose conduct may be perfect (he has suppressed the hindrances) but who retains the potential for unwholesome conduct as latent tendencies (anusaya). > If they are subject to be affected by the conditions of the body, it is > hard for > me to say that they are beyond dependent arising and karma, for they > would appear > to still be affected by causal conditions, even in their inmost > consciousness. The arahant still receives the results of good and bad deeds performed in the past, but there are no conditions for attachment or aversion to arise on that account. > > yes there are certainly differences in intention and thus > > result. The texts say (I might dig out a reference later) that > > drinking a lot is very, very bad but that drinking a little is > > still bad. I think the wise see the danger - that a little can > > lead to more; and even a little clouds consciouness to a degree. > > Yes, for someone who is not awakened, the clouding of consciousness is a > crucial > issue, so I can understand that one would not want to interfere with > their own > progress by indulging in wine, anger, a frivolous amount of sex, or > sexual > relations that were not in harmony, or an unhealthy lack of sleep, or > too much > sleep, or the wrong sorts of disturbing foods, etc. Any of these > indulgences > would cloud consciousness and distract from progress on the path, which > is already > hard enough. The first 4 precepts (abstention from killing, stealing, lying and sexual misconduct) are all completed unwholesome actions (akusala kamma patha) that can condition rebirth in a lower plane. It is said that such rebirth makes development of wholesomeness in the future exceedingly difficult, although not of course impossible. The taking of intoxicants, while not in itself necessarily unwholesome, reduces one's already limited sense of propriety with regard to the other 4. This I think distinguishes breaches of the 5 precepts from other conduct such as you mention that might in conventional terms be regarded as not particularly conducive to the development of wholesomeness. > I hope this is not an idle question, but is intention everything? If > she helps to > make the arrows that kill the animals, and they are indeed killed, is > her hand not > in the killing, and does this not affect her karma in some way? Another good question. Intention is what gives an act its moral flavour. So in that sense, intention is indeed everything. If there is no thought of encouraging the killing, it could not be said that the person's hand is in the killing. ('Intention' here does not however mean motive.) We can know for ourselves in our daily life anytime we do something that in conventional terms might be seen as 'encouraging unwholesomeness' in others whether the citta (moment of consciousness) accompanying that action is kusala or akusala. Jon 6190 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Anders > >Actually, I find being around assholes tremedously good practise (not > >that I'm implying that this is the case here. But you seem to indicate > >that this is all a bit too much for you). > >Whenever I find myself agitated over such things, I try to look at > >what might trigger such a reaction in me, rather than the external > >cause. > > Me too actually. > And Anders please a bit of sense of humour! > I put a smile after my sentence on purpose to indicate that I was just > kidding. > I am not easily intimidated Anders by normal human beings or gurus and I am > not at all agitated or reacting. > I have met assholes as very wise people in my life and I've learned to cope > with them without losing that much composure. > You misread me totally this time but then you don't know me enough. > You will realize very soon I hope. ;-) > Don't be mislead by my passionate tones. I am a comedian. I will try to watch out :-) > >What can I say: Absolutely brilliant! Dogen has a way of formulating > >things that just make you go 'bang' at times. > > > > > > Indeed bang, bang!!!! Aarrrrghhh 6191 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 0:12am Subject: Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Anders > > > > >Hmm, I think that is perhaps a bit onesided interpretation. But yes, > >Vippasana and Samatha are very much a part of Zen (the Tien- > >t'ai "manuals for stopping and seeing" are the primary guides), > >although there is more of an emphasis on all-round awareness. By the > >way, I don't think it is true that Vippasana is the only way to > >Nibbana. There are suttas indicating that seated meditation is not > >necessarily needed to complete the path. > > > > What a daring affermation; in this list most of the people doesn't meditate > at all, you are in good company! > This is a good subject for Robert. Enjoy! I don't mediate much myself to be honest. My emphasis is on awareness in daily life. 6192 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 0:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert dear david, There is a possibility that I have misunderstood what you said. could you pls elaborate on 'self-realisation'? what I pointed out was that one can check according to the guidelines given by the buddha, as to whether the qualities of a sotapanna are established in him/herself. regards ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 11:24 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert > Dear Gayan > I am very sorry, but it is published translations like this and > similar, that allow skeptics to Buddhism to have a field day with us. > Firstly we must take what the Buddha has said in its totality and > than apply these teachings. We cannot take bits and pieces from a > host of translators, patch them together and take the resultant as > Buddha's Dhamma." The only way to end this historical problem is to > spend time reading the Tipitaka in full in its "Original Pali" and > not translated versions, which are infact individual opinions, quite > different insome cases from the original Author, the Buddha. This is > if you wish to delve deep into Dhamma, otherwise if you are > comfortable in just learning in general than the study of Tipitaka in > Original Pali is not necessary. For deep Dhamma understanding you > must be the translator yourself, then your translations will be > weighted by the strength in your own belief. This will be affected, > once again based on your inner likings to sections you prefer more > than others. > > My readings (and that of my Buddhist brothers) of the Tipitaka (Pali > Version) has never revealed anything to imply self-realization even > remotely. There are many variants in translations of the original > which unfortunately are dependent on the origin of the translator. > This is not new and has been a point of contention for centuries. > > Much Metta to All > David > > --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses given by the > buddha, about > > 'self-streamentry-check'. > > where one can look into (as a mirror) and self-declare that he/she > is a > > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > > > Rgds > > > > > 6193 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada in NY Dear K & V, Namaste! Sorry for not being able to communicate more regularly. I am in Cleveland this week until Sunday! As for your inquiry, try these: http://www.nyimc.org/ New York Insight P.O. Box 1790, Murray Hill Station, New York, NY 10156 (917) 441-0915 Fax: (212) 979-2943 E-mail: 091028020185099132048199031248130253039230204179053123191150141050004 http://www.buddhanet.net/americas/usa_ny.htm http://seasiancrafts.com/spiritworld/links.htm#nycBuddhism When you search the Net, I suggest you good and kind folks use a search string like this: New York + Theravada + Meditation --- and use the "+" symbol in the string, as this will save time! Let me know if I can be of further help. Anumodana to you both! Love and Metta, Dhammapiyo Bhante P.S. Will contact you soon! -----Original Message----- From: Ken and Visakha Kawasaki To: Recipient list suppressed Date: Thursday, July 12, 2001 9:59 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada in NY >Dear Friends, > >A friend wants to meditate in New York. She is interested in >Thereavada/Vipassana. > >She tried calling The Loka Chantha Temple & America Burma Buddhist >Association but the person she got on the phone spoke little English. Does >this temple have any Dhamma teaching in English? Is there any organized >meditation scheduled? > >The Loka Chantha Temple & >America Burma Buddhist Association >619 Bergen Street, New York 11238 >Tel: (718) 622-8019 >Tradition: Theravada, Burmese > >Any other suggestions? Thanks for any information. > >With metta, >Visakha > 6194 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 1:07am Subject: the end to rebirth Dear Jim and all, I just wish to thank Jim for his excellent post on with commentary and subcommentary. This is really wonderful, quite clear and precise. Nina. 6195 From: Ken and Visakha Kawasaki Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada in NY Dear Bhante, Sorry to miss you ... we'll be in Cleveland (and in nearby Brownhelm where Ken grew up) next week Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Then off to Virginia and Washington DC. Safe travels! With metta, Visakha and Ken At 12:58 PM 7/12/2001 -0400, you wrote: >Dear K & V, > >Namaste! Sorry for not being able to communicate more regularly. I am in >Cleveland this week until Sunday! > >As for your inquiry, try these: > >http://www.nyimc.org/ >New York Insight >P.O. Box 1790, >Murray Hill Station, >New York, NY 10156 >(917) 441-0915 >Fax: (212) 979-2943 >E-mail: 091028020185099132048199031248130253039230204179053123191150141050004 > >http://www.buddhanet.net/americas/usa_ny.htm > >http://seasiancrafts.com/spiritworld/links.htm#nycBuddhism > >When you search the Net, I suggest you good and kind folks use a search >string like this: New York + Theravada + Meditation --- and use the "+" >symbol in the string, as this will save time! > >Let me know if I can be of further help. > >Anumodana to you both! > >Love and Metta, > >Dhammapiyo Bhante > >P.S. Will contact you soon! >-----Original Message----- >From: Ken and Visakha Kawasaki >To: Recipient list suppressed >Date: Thursday, July 12, 2001 9:59 AM >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada in NY > > 6196 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 1:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Anders > > >although there is more of an emphasis on all-round awareness. By >the > > >way, I don't think it is true that Vippasana is the only way to > > >Nibbana. There are suttas indicating that seated meditation is not > > >necessarily needed to complete the path. > > > > > > > What a daring affermation; in this list most of the people doesn't >meditate > > at all, you are in good company! > > This is a good subject for Robert. Enjoy! > >I don't mediate much myself to be honest. My emphasis is on awareness >in daily life. Ahhh, Ahh, Ahhh I caught you! ;-) But then you are a stream enterer... The emphasis of everybody must necessarily be on awareness in daily life Anders unless you seclude yourself in an Himalayan cave to practice formal meditation continuously and even so.... But do you think that formal meditation is not necessary do develop insight, considering that it was the 'magic formula' taught by the Buddha himself and it was through Satipathana that he reached enlightenment? Love Cybele 6197 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 2:44am Subject: Vipassana - In Nina's words I just read that interview with Nina vG, by Robert (k) today. Her definition of Vipassana certainly caught my eye: ---------------- Nina: Vipassana, insight, is actually Panna (wisdom) which has been developed to clearly understand realities as they are, as non-self. It is not some special practice, it is not sitting or breathing. If one wishes to induce calm by sitting one still wants to get something. There is subtle clinging which can pass unnoticed. The aim of Vipassana is to have less ignorance of realities, including our defilements, even subtle ones. Therefore it can and should be developed in daily life; any object can be an object for mindfulness and understanding. Robert: But can't sitting quietly be an assistance for mindfulness to arise? Nina: Even mindfulness is Anatta, non-self, it cannot be induced just by concentrating or trying to be calm or by sitting quietly. The conditions for mindfulness to arise are listening to the Buddha's teaching, discussing, considering and pondering over realities. And it develops by studying realities as they appear in our daily lives. Some people find it difficult to accept that one cannot force Sati to arise, and they wonder whether this means idleness. The Buddha taught us to develop all good qualities, such as generosity and metta, along with right understanding. It is understanding, actually, that should be emphasised. ------------------ That is almost exactly how my own practise developed. I never had much luck trying to just be aware of my mental formations, but rather I investigated those mental formations, and gradually learned more about what they are. It sort of just developed naturally for me (bummer if it didn't. I never had much luck trying to follow written or spoken instructions). I wouldn't say that I am surprised to find someone described such an approach to practise, but I wouldn't really have expected it either. Then again, I have never really read much about Vipassana, so I wouldn't know if this is a general layout of it. Thank you for writing this, Nina! Regards, Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6198 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 2:33am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) > >I don't mediate much myself to be honest. My emphasis is on awareness > >in daily life. > > Ahhh, Ahh, Ahhh I caught you! ;-) > But then you are a stream enterer... > The emphasis of everybody must necessarily be on awareness in daily life > Anders unless you seclude yourself in an Himalayan cave to practice formal > meditation continuously and even so.... > But do you think that formal meditation is not necessary do develop insight, > considering that it was the 'magic formula' taught by the Buddha himself and > it was through Satipathana that he reached enlightenment? I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really poor at it :-)). But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to practise. He hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. On the other hand, I know people who have meditated sincerely for 25 years, and are still as stuck as they were before (well, may be not entirely, but....). It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are incapable of being mindful, and that you are constantly being dragged around by your defilements, then meditation might be good for you, so as to loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a catalyst to foster awareness throughout your daily life. If you just sit for one hour and then go on with your normal daily activities as ignorantly as always, then it doesn't matter if you even attain the Jhanas. You will be a master of meditation, but hardly a master when it comes to Panna. On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in your daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you might not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. Expedient means, such as meditation, are purely used to counter defilements. If there's nothing to counter, why do it? A good friend of mine, also a Theravadan, has found seated meditation extremely beneficial, and has been able to use that as a catalyst for daily awareness and thus nurture Panna, which is amazingly strong in him. He has practised for some four years I think, yet if it was up to his own teacher, he would already be teacher today. He would like to continue his practise though (I think he said he'll start teaching soon, but I don't know when). He doesn't know much about concepts like Vippasana and Jhana, but the practical aspects of it, he probably knows better than anyone else I know. Regards Anders 6199 From: Alex Tran Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 2:54am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi Anders, May I join in the discussion? I know that I was born with ignorance and defilements. I don't need to know where they came from. Your question about the origin of our ignorance sounds very much like the story of the person shot by an arrow. His care provider needed to take the arrow out and attended the wound before trying to investigate the incident. With Metta, Alex > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? 6200 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:09am Subject: The meaning of Equanimity Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in indifference for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you are experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional cycle. But many people mistakenly believe that being equanimous means that you are supposed to be unaffected by your external surroundings. Thus they reject their own reactionary thoughts towards the external surroundings in order to be unaffected by it, and thus the very thing that the equanimity is supposed to counter, namely the habitual tendency towards indulgence and rejection, is actually sustained and nourished! Such people become numb automatons with no wisdom. They are essentially "wall-builders." They erect solid walls to isolate their mind-environment from the external environment, and mistake this for attainment. Yet they will never know their own minds. This is also a danger to watch out for in meditation! True equanimity means to be equanimous in the face of your own defilements, to not be dragged around by your likes and dislikes, but rather be equanimously aware of those defilements, without rejecting or indulging in those defilements, but on the other hand, if you do find yourself indulging in or rejecting your defilements, then that very indulgence/rejection is also something to be equanimous towards (since this is also part of the mind-environment), rather than rejecting it, and then be aware of the defilement that you were indulging or rejecting. To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, you have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, as they are no longer sustained. Regards, Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6201 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:14am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:54 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > Hi Anders, > > May I join in the discussion? Sure! > I know that I was born with ignorance and defilements. I don't > need to know where they came from. Your question about the origin of > our ignorance sounds very much like the story of the person shot by > an arrow. His care provider needed to take the arrow out and > attended the wound before trying to investigate the incident. I think you misunderstood my question. My question was not wherefrom, or how Ignorance arose. I don't know anything about that, and the Buddha himself said that contemplating the unimaginable beginnings of Samsara is a cause for insanity if taken to its end-conclusion. My question was, where did ignorance arise once it had arisen? Regards Anders > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire > Samsaric circle > > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did > ignorance arise? 6202 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:05am Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile I work on it myself. Thanks very much. Joe --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Dear Joe, > > >Surely anyone with even an elementary knowledge of Pali can discern > >whether the proper translation in 'unestablished consciousness' > >or 'consciousness unestablished'. Pali is very precise - almost as > >precise as Sanskrit or Latin - in the attributive. > > > >Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? > > appati.t.t.hitena ca bhikkhave vi~n~naa.nena Vakkali kulaputto parinibbuto > ti. (S iii 124 pts) > > For further information: > > commentary: > appati.t.t.hitenaa ti pa.tisandhivi~n~naa.nena appati.t.thitena. > appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho. (SA i 184 pts) > > (with the re-linking or rebirth consciousness not re-established) > > subcommentary: > appati.t.thitenaa ti patit.tha.m alabhantena. itthambhuutalakkha.ne eta.m > kara.navacana.m, anuppattidhammenaa ti attho. sati hi uppaade pati.t.thita.m > naama siyaa, a.t.thakathaaya.m pana yadeva tassa vi~n~naa.nassa > appati.t.thaanakaara.na.m, tadeva parinibbaanakaara.nan ti vutta.m > appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti. (SA.T i 218 cscd) > > Best wishes, > Jim > > 6203 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:06am Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Very interesting, thanks, Cameron. Joe --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- Ray wrote: > > Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? > > It's "appati.t.thitena vińńaa.nena" (SN XXII.87). This isn't one of > the ones translated at Access to Insight, but the Pali is online at > http://www.tipitaka.org/ Samyutta Nikaya, Khandhavagga, section 22 > (Khandhasa.myutta), number 87 (Vakkali). > > The context is that after the liberation and death of Vakkali, the > monks see a cloud of black smoke moving around. The Buddha tells the > monks that this is Mara, looking for Vakkali's consciouness. But, > says the Buddha, Vakkali attained final Nibbana "appati.t.thitena > vińńaa.nena". > > appati.t.thitena = instrumental of a- (not) + appati.t.thita, which > is the past participle of pati.t.thahati, meaning "to stand fast or > firmly, to find a support in, to be established, to fix oneself, to > be set up, to stay" (PED). > > Derek. 6204 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:32am Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear Victor, Thank you very much. The sutta is a joy to read. kom --- Victor wrote: > Hi Mike, > > If interested, you might want to refer to > Vera Sutta, Animosity > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html > > Metta, > Victor > > 6205 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:08am Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Welcome to DSG, David. I have come to the same conclusion as you have with regard to understanding the Tipitaka, and with regard to its common mistranslation and misuse by Buddhists in many traditions, including Theravada. Along these same lines of inquiry, have you reached any conclusions as to the weighting you give to each of the respective pitakas, by any chance? sadhu, Joe --- David wrote: > Dear Gayan > I am very sorry, but it is published translations like this and > similar, that allow skeptics to Buddhism to have a field day with us. > Firstly we must take what the Buddha has said in its totality and > than apply these teachings. We cannot take bits and pieces from a > host of translators, patch them together and take the resultant as > Buddha's Dhamma." The only way to end this historical problem is to > spend time reading the Tipitaka in full in its "Original Pali" and > not translated versions, which are infact individual opinions, quite > different insome cases from the original Author, the Buddha. This is > if you wish to delve deep into Dhamma, otherwise if you are > comfortable in just learning in general than the study of Tipitaka in > Original Pali is not necessary. For deep Dhamma understanding you > must be the translator yourself, then your translations will be > weighted by the strength in your own belief. This will be affected, > once again based on your inner likings to sections you prefer more > than others. > > My readings (and that of my Buddhist brothers) of the Tipitaka (Pali > Version) has never revealed anything to imply self-realization even > remotely. There are many variants in translations of the original > which unfortunately are dependent on the origin of the translator. > This is not new and has been a point of contention for centuries. > > Much Metta to All > David > > --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses given by the > buddha, about > > 'self-streamentry-check'. > > where one can look into (as a mirror) and self-declare that he/she > is a > > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > > > Rgds 6206 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:26am Subject: Re: Stream Entry - clarification > Basically, it tells you to go from your own direct experience of the Dhamma. > If you find your own direct experience of the Dhamma inadequate to answer > such a question, then what is the point of lingering on it, since it has no > practical application for you that might help you further your own daily > practise? > I think there are many people here who might find themselves violating the > principles laid forth in this sutta, but again, this is not something that > they should accept from my words, or even the Kalama Sutta itself! This is > something they have to discover from their own personal experience. There has been a fair amount of prevarication and discussion on this forum as to what the Kalama Sutta really means. I read it basically the way you do, but given the translation problem David has so well articulated, who knows? Anders, why don't you fly to Bangkok and have an interview with DSG's mentor, Ajahn Sujin. She will give you a pretty quick assessment of your understanding of Abhidhamma, as she sees it, at the very least. Or at least she used to do that sort of thing. Not as an 'evaluation' as such, but as grist for talking about Abhidhamma. Maybe the format is different these days (but they don't call it 'brain-eating' for nothing!). Of course you have no personal need for such an encounter and neither does Ajahn Sujin. But from my (rather distant) perspective, your confidence is inspiring. And so is Ajahn Sujin's. You don't find that many people in Buddhism with this kind of confidence, aside from the evangelistic types who are raising funds, building temples or just hell bent on conversion. Of course there is no final round, as people will believe what they want to believe in the end. Carry on nonetheless. Joe 6207 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 6:36am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Stream Entry - clarification ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 11:26 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Stream Entry - clarification > There has been a fair amount of prevarication and discussion on this > forum as to what the Kalama Sutta really means. I read it basically the > way you do, but given the translation problem David has so well > articulated, who knows? Well, I've found a pretty nitty-gritty translation. The URL is: http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/Knowledge.htm My knowledge of Pali is not big enough to tell whether the author knows what he is talking about, but perhaps others can. > Anders, why don't you fly to Bangkok and have an interview with DSG's > mentor, Ajahn Sujin. She will give you a pretty quick assessment of your > understanding of Abhidhamma, as she sees it, at the very least. Or at > least she used to do that sort of thing. Not as an 'evaluation' as such, > but as grist for talking about Abhidhamma. Maybe the format is different > these days (but they don't call it 'brain-eating' for nothing!). Haha, 'fly to Bangkok' sounds awfully simple. I don't think I'll have the money to go there until I finish my education (which should be one year from now). But I most likely will go to Bangkok after that. > Of course you have no personal need for such an encounter and neither > does Ajahn Sujin. But from my (rather distant) perspective, your > confidence is inspiring. And so is Ajahn Sujin's. You don't find that many > people in Buddhism with this kind of confidence, aside from the > evangelistic types who are raising funds, building temples or just hell > bent on conversion. Hmm, I think I've had that confidence right from the beginning really. I have never really had much doubt about the validity of the Dhamma, only my own interpretation of it. In another mail, I mentioned a friend of mine who would soon become a Theravada teacher himself. He recently said to me, that in his experience, the faith in the fact that one will be enlightened, is highly instrumental in the actualisation of that enlightenment. I can see his point. Your beliefs influence things, and if you believe that you are far away from enlightenment, far away is what you will be. > Of course there is no final round, as people will believe what they want > to believe in the end. That is true. And such is their freedom to do so. The point of this post is not really to say 'don't you think that!'. It's just to say, 'think what you will, but don't expect me to endorse any of it'. > Carry on nonetheless. Will do so. Thanks for your input :o) Kind regards Anders 6208 From: Num Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 2:44am Subject: Cetasikas : ? Sati (mindfulness) ? Hi Nina, Sarah&Jon and everybody. Sorry, Sarah & Jon, I think I mixed up the list of persons who are going to go Bangkok. I will be there July next year :). I am not dreaming, Sarah :). Thanks Nina for your reply. I am pretty busy and caught up with my work, my real vacation is coming in two weeks. A lot to do before I can take off. About sati (mindfulness), in satipatthana, sati is mindful of nama or rupa as it appears. I am not clear what does sati be mindful in dana, smatha or kusula moment which is not vipassana. I definitely did some wholesome deed before, but sati (as in sati-patthana) did not necessary occur at that moment, but sati cetasika had to be there, if it really kusala moment ? ________________________________________________ You wrote that :... Mindfulness 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-past from being firmly established in the object, and as a doorkeeper from guarding the door of the senses. ________________________________________________ Sati in sati-patthana has character of non floating by being mindful of paramattha-dhamma at that moment, but sati in general kusala moment does not, is this correct? So sati in satipatthana cannot have pannatti as its arammana but sati in general sobhana citta can have pannatti as arammana, right? Let me also ask about arammana of sati (in sati patthana). Sati can arise only in kusala moment but can have kusala-, akusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-citta & cetasika or rupa as arammana. I heard from a CD by Aj.Santi which given to me by Kom that sati can be mindful of past, present and even future arammana. In case of past arammana, that arammana is not sampayutta with citta, cetasika and sati at that moment but being only arammana paccaya. Just curious, so sati can be mindful of present and past kusula moment in but only past aramana in panca-dvara. I have no idea about future arammana. Is my statement valid? I am not clear about this, Always appreciate your response. Have to run. I am really mean it, Sarah. Num 6209 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance Thanks Jon, I'll see if I can come up with it. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > > > If I recall correctly, the Buddha somewhere > defined > > nibbana as complete and perfected right view. > Does > > this ring a bell with anyone? > > > > mike > > Interesting. I've had a browse around but have not > come up with anything. > Most of the synonyms for or descriptions of nibbana > are in terms that do > not relate to conditioned realities (eg, the > deathelss, cessation, void), > but given your excellent recall of suttas I am sure > the reference is there > somewhere. Please let us know if you come across it > anytime. > > Jon > > 6210 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Thanks, Victor, For reminding of this great sutta. "When, for a disciple of the noble ones, these five forms of fear & animosity are stilled; when he is endowed with these four factors of stream entry; and when, through discernment, he has rightly seen & rightly ferreted out this noble method, then if he wants he may state about himself: 'Hell is ended; animal wombs are ended; the state of the hungry shades is ended; states of deprivation, destitution, the bad bourns are ended! I am a stream-winner, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening!'" The context of this is a little unusal, the combination of these four factors of stream entry and the stilling of these five forms of fear and animosity, I don't off-hand recall encountering elsewhere. However, it does seem to state plainly that the stream-entrant can perceive his stream-entry. Thanks again. mike --- Victor wrote: > Hi Mike, > > If interested, you might want to refer to > Vera Sutta, Animosity > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html > > Metta, > Victor > > > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > Dear David, > > > > This is very interesting! I'm curious about one > > point: > > > > --- David wrote: > > > > > This level can only > > > be realized by others onto the receiver and > never by > > > the receiver > > > him/her self be realized (during life). > > > > I hadn't heard this before that I can recall. Is > it > > from the Tipitaka? > > > > Nice to hear from you again. > > > > mike 6211 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear David, The subject of poor translation has come up before. It would be most helpful if you could show us some specific examples, with the Pali, where these passages in the PTS are in error. Thanks in advance, mike --- David Blickenstaff wrote: > Dear Gayan > I am very sorry, but it is published translations > like this and > similar, that allow skeptics to Buddhism to have a > field day with us. > Firstly we must take what the Buddha has said in its > totality and > than apply these teachings. We cannot take bits and > pieces from a > host of translators, patch them together and take > the resultant as > Buddha's Dhamma." The only way to end this > historical problem is to > spend time reading the Tipitaka in full in its > "Original Pali" and > not translated versions, which are infact individual > opinions, quite > different insome cases from the original Author, the > Buddha. This is > if you wish to delve deep into Dhamma, otherwise if > you are > comfortable in just learning in general than the > study of Tipitaka in > Original Pali is not necessary. For deep Dhamma > understanding you > must be the translator yourself, then your > translations will be > weighted by the strength in your own belief. This > will be affected, > once again based on your inner likings to sections > you prefer more > than others. > > My readings (and that of my Buddhist brothers) of > the Tipitaka (Pali > Version) has never revealed anything to imply > self-realization even > remotely. There are many variants in translations of > the original > which unfortunately are dependent on the origin of > the translator. > This is not new and has been a point of contention > for centuries. > > Much Metta to All > David > > --- "Gayan Karunaratne" > wrote: > > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses > given by the > buddha, about > > 'self-streamentry-check'. > > where one can look into (as a mirror) and > self-declare that he/she > is a > > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > > > Rgds 6212 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Anders I resend to actualize what you replied to me one week ago on this issue of enlightenment claimings. And indeed even if you don't claim to be a stream enterer, you pretty much hinted it with your introduction and in your site. Let's say you invited us to discuss the issue, you enhanced this possibility, you stung our curiousity. Now apart the various discussions on how to evaluate it in order to assess the authenticity or not of your mental evolution (what personally I don't care as the results don't impinge my own research anyway), considering that you declare not being particularly interested on the fact whether or not you are a stream enterer, why then did you chose to introduce yourself in such a provocative fashion, just to create havoc? I suppose it is pertinent enquiring about your motivations. Perhaps you have a hidden agenda and secretively you are planning to brainwash all of us to become your disciples and give you half of our salaries. ;-)))) With me you are wasting your time, I am destitute and a bit difficult to persuade however. :-)))) Regards Cybele the mother goddess ;-), well I want a title myself, at least I have got a mythological prestige even if I am not a stream enterer. > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > > Dear Ander > > > > After reading your website I could come to only two conclusions >that I will > > expose with my usual straightforwardness that your advanced stage >of mental > > clarity will perfectly handle equanimously: > > > > If you are not in a mystical delusional mind state of psychotic >nature it > > seems to me that you are claiming to be enlightened. > > Could you clarify the issue for us? You replied: >I always appreciate straightforwardness. Please feel free to strike >down at anything I say. I am always interested in improving my >practise. >Well, I would be somewhat hestitant to say I am enlightened (it's >stream-entry at best), as I am unsure of what your definition of it >is, as well as the definition of stream-entry. If stream-entry is >realising that are dhammas are not-self and impermanent, and thus >realising that which not impermanent, then yes, you could say it is >stream-entry. I've noticed that I no longer sustain the fetters >accosiated with stream-entry (views of self, precepts and practises. >Any others?), so that would also match. But I think I can remember >some sutta (can't remmember which one) that mentions something about >the unwholesome deeds which a stream-entrant can never commit, and >not all of them fitted me if I remember correctly (can't remember >what they were anymore). >My own teacher has certified it, if that is any help to you. > >Personally, it doesn't matter much to me whether I am a stream- >entrant or not, or even enlightened or not. I figure I'll make it all >in due time, and thinking about it certainly won't speed up the >actualisation of it. > >Hope that clarifies. > >Regards, >Anders > 6213 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Anders Must admit that you are smart, whether you are or not a stream enterer, what doesn't matter for me anyway. The post is inspiring, I would suggest next time less 'preaching tone', we have enough of missionary like statements and we all commit this mistake on our enthusiasm, we get carried away. Can I forward your post to another list where we are discussing on this subject, would save me to say the very same things composing another mail, what is time and energy consuming. I will keep your name obviously. Let me know if you agree. Thanks Cybele Anders wrote: >Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not >having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in indifference >for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you are >experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect >countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional >cycle........ > > 6214 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:57am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Please try to use your own understanding, rather > than the scriptures. Besides, I don't think they'll be much help to you i= n > this regard. I promise not to quote any scriptures in this message. You probably have noticed that my knowledge of the scripture is spotty at best anyway. > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle > arises from is ignorance. By your response to Alex, you are not asking about the origin of ignorance. > My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? As you are well aware of, the buddha taught that all conditioned realities = arise because there are conditions for them to arise. Ignorance (moha) is such a reality. As far as beings are concerned, only an arahat has no more conditions for moha to arise in him. Moha, a mental factor (cetasika), is said to be co-arising with other realities. In order for moha to arise, there must be the following co- arising realities: 1) consciousness (citta) 2) 3 other mental factors that arise with all akusala dhamma including shamelessness (ahiri), fearlessness (anottappa), and restlessness (uddhacca). 3) Other appropriate mental factors. In the plane of existence with 5 kandhas, a consciousness and its associated mental factors must arise on a base rupa (vathu rupa): the vathu rupa acts as a support condition (nissaya pacaya) for the consciousness and the mental factors. The consciousness and the mental factors arise and fall at/on the same vathu. For moha in particular, it arises within the heart-base (hadaya vathu). By the above explanations (in the plane with 5 kandhas), it can be deduced that moha rises within the consciousness, within other mental factors besides itself, and within the heart base. While I was writing this message, it seemed to me that you wanted to ask a different question, but I think this answer fits most with the question. > If you say nowhere, then you confirm the doctrine of annihilation, on The conditions for the moha to arise is not only its co-arising realities and its vathu, it is also other dhammas that no longer exist and dhamma that didn't co-arise with the moha. > account of that there was nothing before, and there will thus be nothing > after the ending of ignorance and Samsara. A conditioned dhamma doesn't arise unless its conditioning dhammas are fully ripened. The kandhas of an arahat, after his pari-nibbana, ceases to condition additional kandhas to arise. I think we already agree on this point (you said the kandhas disperse). If you notice this description, nothing is annihilated. There are no more conditions for additional khandas that we conventionally identify as belonging to that arahat. What do I mean when I say a person ceases to exist after his pari- nibbana? I mean his aggregates (the kandhas) cease to condition additional kandhas to arise. However, if you look at this at the paramatha level, this person never exists at the first place. What do I mean when I say this person does not exist? I mean the person is a *concept* and has no fundamental characteristics (sabhava); at any point of time, only the aggregates exist for an infinitesmally small amount of time. Nibbana is a reality, an elment, a dhatu with *distinct* characteristics from all the 28 rupas, 89 citta, and 52 cetasikas. Nibbana is not counted to be part of the aggregates that we take as a person. Nibbana does *not* cognize, but *can* be cognized. Since the only realities that cognize are citta and cetasikas, the only way to verify nibbana is that it *must* be cognizable. > If you say Nibbana, how is this > possible since Nibbana is a cognisable object? Nibbana is cognizable because it has its own fundamental (paramatha) characteristics (sabhava). > How can the cognisable ever > cognise something else? Nibbana does not cognize anything, although it can be an object of cognition. A citta can cognize another citta and cetasikas, which cognize a different = object. For example, when a citta (A) sees a visible object, the citta is = cognizing that visible object. There may be another citta (B) that rises after (A) cognizing (A). (A) and (B) cognize different objects even though (B) cognizes (A). I think there are a number of people on the list who maintain the position that an unconditioned element cannot be cognized unless the element is itself conditioned. Hence, to say that an unconditioned element can be cognized is a contradiction. Although I don't believe there is a scripture that supports this position, would anyone care to explain the logics of how we can arrive at the conclusion? kom 6215 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Alex (and Anders) - In a message dated 7/12/01 3:28:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Alex Tran writes: > > Hi Anders, > > May I join in the discussion? > > I know that I was born with ignorance and defilements. I don't > need to know where they came from. Your question about the origin of > our ignorance sounds very much like the story of the person shot by > an arrow. His care provider needed to take the arrow out and > attended the wound before trying to investigate the incident. > > With Metta, > Alex > > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire > Samsaric circle > > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did > ignorance arise? > > ================================= I recall that there is a sutta in which the Buddha points out that avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, itself caused. I seem to recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have been given as the cause of ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. 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) 6216 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 9:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Howard, I'm pretty sure you're right about this, and I've read it stressed by others (that is that paticcasamuppada is continuous, without a really originating link) and believe this is correct, but I can't put my finger on the sutta. I'll keep an eye out for it. mike --- Howard wrote: > ================================= > I recall that there is a sutta in which the > Buddha points out that > avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, > itself caused. I seem to > recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have been > given as the cause of > ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. > > With metta, > Howard 6217 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 10:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] the end to rebirth Nina I think you are referring to the Pali passages that Jim posted. Would you like to share your translation (and understanding) with us? An interesting point. Jon --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jim and all, > I just wish to thank Jim for his excellent post on unestablished> with commentary and subcommentary. This is really > wonderful, > quite clear and precise. Nina. > 6218 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:07am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- Howard wrote: > I recall that there is a sutta in which the Buddha points out that > avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, itself caused. I seem to > recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have been given as the cause of > ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. Hello, Howard, Toward the end of the Saamańńaphala Sutta (DN 2) it says that avijjaa ("ignorance") *is* one of the aasava ("outflowings"). Derek. 6219 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:52am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders, I have just one or two questions in relation to your simple question. Is your question based on your own understanding only? Why do you presuppose that there is a locus for ignorance? Kind Regards Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Okay, Kom. I will let go of the subject of whether Nibbana is released > consciousness or not now. Before that, however, I would just like you to > answer one simple question. Please try to use your own understanding, rather > than the scriptures. Besides, I don't think they'll be much help to you in > this regard. > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? > > If you say nowhere, then you confirm the doctrine of annihilation, on > account of that there was nothing before, and there will thus be nothing > after the ending of ignorance and Samsara. If you say Nibbana, how is this > possible since Nibbana is a cognisable object? How can the cognisable ever > cognise something else? > > Patiently awaiting your answer... 6220 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Derek - In a message dated 7/12/01 11:10:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Derek writes: > Hello, Howard, > > Toward the end of the Saamańńaphala Sutta (DN 2) it says that avijjaa > ("ignorance") *is* one of the aasava ("outflowings"). > > Derek. > =========================== Yes, I see what you mean. There is mention of the "fermentation of ignorance". I still seem to recall, however, that elsewhere the Buddha refers to the out-flowings as the cause of ignorance. I have seen from time to time that such discrepancies occur in the suttas. It could be that the categories are not quite as hard and fast as we might expect. [Of course, I could be mistaken in recalling the asavas being given as cause of avijja.] 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) 6221 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi again, Derek - I found the following on the Access to Insight site. It is from the sutta I had in mind: Ignorance avijja The definition > "And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the > cessation of ignorance, what is the way leading to the cessation of > ignorance? Not knowing about dukkha, not knowing about the origin of dukkha > , not knowing about the cessation of dukkha, not knowing about the way > leading to the cessation of dukkha -- this is called ignorance. With the > arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance; with the cessation > of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance. The way leading to the > cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > view...right concentration." ... "And what are the taints, what is the > origin of the taints, what is the cessation of the taints, what is the way > leading to the cessation of the taints? There are three taints: the taint > of sensual desire, the taint of being and the taint of ignorance. With the > arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints. With the cessation > of ignorance there is the cessation of the taints. The way leading to the > cessation of the taints is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > view...right concentration." > >> -- MN 9 > Notice that this includes: "With the arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance; with the cessation of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance." And yet, as you point out, ignorance, itself, is given as one of the four taints. (So, it is a little confusing, unless ignorance as a taint is considered to be different in some manner from ignorance as a factor in the cycle of dependent arising.) 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) 6222 From: Victor Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 1:45pm Subject: Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance Is right view fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this I am, this is my self"? --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > --- 243082114180158116015199190036129 wrote: > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > > If we don't see the attachment to view - even to right view- > > > then how can we ever let it go. Some people never even > > relaise > > > that they have attachment to view. This is not a matter of > > > seeing it and trying to relinquish but learning to see it > > again > > > and again and again and again - at the very moments it > > arises. > > > By seeing its conditioned nature this is also going together > > > with satipatthana. > > > > Dear Robert and friends, > > > > When reading the above statements, I was thinking about our > > Lord > > Buddha. He continuously advocates that we need to develop > > Right > > View. It seems that the Buddha and the Arahants are living > > (or > > swimming and breathing) in Right View all of Their lives on > > this > > earth. In another word, Right View adheres to Them. > > > > Therefore, my question is why do we need to let Right View > > go then? > > > > Metta, > > Alex > > ______________ > Dear Alex, > it is not the right view that is to be discarded but the > attachment to it. > To my mormon friends attachment to their ideas, to their faith > is seen as beneficial and to be cultivated. This is not so in > the Dhamma because attachment is a distorting factor that clouds > right vision. > Some people hear this, for example the famous sutta about the > raft (do we carry it around after crossing the river), and > decide that they will just discard all view. Thye don't realise > that view can't be discarded by decision or thinking, but only > by actual clear comprehension of the dhammas that arise at the 6 > doors. By this way direct insight knows things as they are. > Then there is right view but it arises in association with > alobha (non-attachment) unlike wrong view that always comes with > lobha(attachment). > Some people imagine they have no view because they have such > ideas as "I don't say this is right, I don't say that is right" > -they don't have opinions: but this is simply another view that > is attached to. > The most deeply held views are those revolving around the idea > of self. Those that take concepts for being something real, and > realities for self or lasting. > This is quite a hard topic and otehrs may be able to put it > better. > There is an article by Bhikkhu bodhi that is worth reading on > this: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/essay25.html > robert > . > 6223 From: craig garner Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:28pm Subject: Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. 6224 From: kelvin liew peng chuan Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:35pm Subject: where's it frm? Dear friends in Dhamma, This may be a very silly question, but out of curiousity, may i ask where our panca sila comes from? any sutta or gatha to refer to ? thanks.MAy you be well and happy! ~ sampuna 6225 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Panca-sila - where's it frm? Kelvin Not a silly question at all. One of the suttas in which the 5 precepts are referred to is the one mentioned earlier by Victor in his post- Vera Sutta, Animosity http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html There are other more direct references than this, and I am sure others will post them. Jon --- kelvin liew peng chuan wrote: > Dear friends in Dhamma, > > This may be a very silly question, but out of curiousity, may i ask > where > our panca sila comes from? any sutta or gatha to refer to ? thanks.MAy > you > be well and happy! ~ sampuna > 6226 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) dear Robert E. I got around to looking up some details on alcohol. In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor readings PTS by nanamoli). there is a comprehensive section ion the precepts. on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved and other factors. it has many details. there is one interesting part " But unlike killing, drinking is always greatly blamable. Why? because it obstructs the ariyan Dhamma by inducing even madness in a human being". p32 "the fruits of abstaining from the opportunity for negilgence due to wine or liquor are such things as quick recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, constant establishment of mindfulness, possession of knowledge, non-stupidty, non-drivelingness,,,non-confusion, non-timorousness, non-presumption, uneviousness, truthfulness, freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom from dullness day and night, gratitude, libearlty, possesion of conscience, great understanding, rectitude of view, skill in distinguishing skill from unskill, and so on"END QUOTE. robert 6227 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:40pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:52 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Anders, >I have just one or two questions in relation to your simple question. >Is your question based on your own understanding only? Pretty much, yes. >Why do you presuppose that there is a locus for ignorance? 'locus'.... No mention of it in my dictionary. Would you care to define that word for me? 6228 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:42pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:54 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > Dear Anders > > Must admit that you are smart, whether you are or not a stream enterer, what > doesn't matter for me anyway. > The post is inspiring, I would suggest next time less 'preaching tone', we > have enough of missionary like statements and we all commit this mistake on > our enthusiasm, we get carried away. Yes, thanks for the advice. I can get a little carried away at times, yes. Need to be mindful of that. Thanks. > Can I forward your post to another list where we are discussing on this > subject, would save me to say the very same things composing another mail, > what is time and energy consuming. > I will keep your name obviously. > Let me know if you agree. Sure, go ahead. My general opinion is that once I written something, it is out of my hands. 6229 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:04pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:41 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Dear Anders > > I resend to actualize what you replied to me one week ago on this issue of > enlightenment claimings. > And indeed even if you don't claim to be a stream enterer, you pretty much > hinted it with your introduction and in your site. Well, the website was created as a way for me to be honest about my own practise, and perhaps inspire others (it seems it serves this purpose as I get a lot of feedback). Thus, it would have to include what I've discovered along the way, and that is what it presents. As I said, I'll leave it to others to try and fit it into nice categories and boxes and define what it is. This is just what I am discovered so far. I'll probably discover more later on, and I'll list that as well. > Let's say you invited us to discuss the issue, you enhanced this > possibility, you stung our curiousity. Well, Cybele, you were the one bringing it up, demanding an answer ;-) I would have been more than content if no-one bothered. > Now apart the various discussions on how to evaluate it in order to assess > the authenticity or not of your mental evolution (what personally I don't > care as the results don't impinge my own research anyway), considering that > you declare not being particularly interested on the fact whether or not you > are a stream enterer, why then did you chose to introduce yourself in such a > provocative fashion, just to create havoc? Well, foolish me thought that that original post would clarify things. I see that that specific post was more than unskilful on my part, and I apologise for any confusion it might have caused. I won't deny that I have had some insights, and as such it could perhaps be interpreted as stream-entry (which I think I failed to make clear in that original post - "interpreted"). But since some of those insights seem to conflict with the Pali Canon, I certainly won't declare them valid in any way. But as I was telling Dan Dalthorp, whom I had the pleasure of conversing with via email, my own understanding of the Pali Canon is "biased" in the sense that I am very much familiar with Mahayana (much more than Theravada) and as such I draw from those teachings as well, in terms of what is true and not true (I don't think either is false. It's just a question of seeing it properly). But it can be difficult to absorb initially from the Thervadan view-point, since they attribute different meanings to labels (not to mention invent new ones). Buddha for instance, is much more generic and basically means anyone who has completed the path, but also Nirvana itself. Anyway, my point is that the website shows what I have discovered. I have no desire myself to interpret that into any Buddhist (or non-Buddhist for that matter) context (such as stream-entry, discovering Nibbana and so on), other than my own practise, which doesn't need definitions. Perhaps I should make this entirely clear: If you must put some label on me, and try to fit your perception of me into a box, then I would advice you to put that perception into the 'crazed deluded heretic' box, and stick with the Pali Canon. Much easier that way. The Pali canon offer guarantees. I don't. > I suppose it is pertinent enquiring about your motivations. > Perhaps you have a hidden agenda and secretively you are planning to > brainwash all of us to become your disciples and give you half of our > salaries. ;-)))) Damn! Need to go find myself another egroup to overtake. > With me you are wasting your time, I am destitute and a bit difficult to > persuade however. :-)))) I'll give you a dollar if you'll convert.... 6230 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:26pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:57 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Dear Anders, >I promise not to quote any scriptures in this message. You probably have noticed that my knowledge of the scripture is spotty at best anyway. >> The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle >> arises from is ignorance. > My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? >As you are well aware of, the buddha taught that all conditioned realities = >arise because there are conditions for them to arise. Ignorance (moha) >is such a reality. As far as beings are concerned, only an arahat has no >more conditions for moha to arise in him. Well, the beginning is not different from the end. I'll explain below. >For moha in particular, it arises within the heart-base (hadaya vathu). Please define heart-base (heart-base, hsin in Chinese) generally means 'Budha-nature' or Nirvana. >While I was writing this message, it seemed to me that you wanted to ask a different question, but I think this answer fits most with the question. Yes, that is correct. My point was that the very first link of dependent co-origination, didn't just arise in a nothingness (since this would imply annihilation) and once the last link is dissolved (parinibbana), there won't just be nothingness left. >Nibbana is a reality, an elment, a dhatu with *distinct* characteristics from all the 28 rupas, 89 citta, and 52 cetasikas. Nibbana is not counted to be part of the aggregates that we take as a person. Nibbana does *not* cognize, but *can* be cognized. Since the only realities that cognize are citta and cetasikas, the only way to verify nibbana is that it *must* be cognizable. Well, as I mentioned in another post, I draw from both Mahayana and Theravada, and I don't think either is untrue. I don't think that Mahayana arose simply as a 'rebellious' way to create a new doctrine. I think it arose out of the need to emphasise parts of the Dhamma which might have been somewhat under-emphasised by the old schools at that given point in time, and thus it highlights aspects of the Dhamma which might not be very strong in the schools before it. But that is just my view. I would like to quote Bodhidharma, the first Patriarch of Zen, to show you what I've been trying to say all along: ..."This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll never find another Buddha [Nirvana]. To search for enlightenment or nirvana beyond this mind is impossible.... When the mind reaches nirvana, you don't see nirvana, because the mind is nirvana. If you see nirvana somewhere outside the mind, you're deluding yourself. 6231 From: Tori Korshak Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 6:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity >Dear Anders, Thank you. I like this very much. The cultivation of uppekha has been very important in my own practice (lots of lobha and dosa to deal with). Metta, Victoria >To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, you >have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being >dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, >being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through >equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, as >they are no longer sustained. > >Regards, >Anders Honore >************************************************* >Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ >************************************************* > 6232 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of late. What a debut! As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I would give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any difference of substance. --- Anders Honoré wrote: > Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not > having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in > indifference > for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you > are > experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect > countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional > cycle. According to the Pali texts, only panna can eradicate defilements and lead towards the end of the volitional cycle. The development of upekkha (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly abidings) is an aspect of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but in and of itself leads to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the development of high levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are reduced, but in fact the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather than removed. > To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, > you > have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being > dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, > being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through > equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, > as > they are no longer sustained. The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? Jon 6233 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:36pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning ...thanks Anders Dear Anders Thank you very much, will be very helpful. Sadhu x 3 for your generosity. :-) Regards Cybele > > Can I forward your post to another list where we are discussing on this > > subject, would save me to say the very same things composing another >mail, > > what is time and energy consuming. > > I will keep your name obviously. > > Let me know if you agree. > >Sure, go ahead. My general opinion is that once I written something, it is >out of my hands. > 6234 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) Dear Anders > > > > > Let's say you invited us to discuss the issue, you enhanced this > > possibility, you stung our curiousity. >Well, Cybele, you were the one bringing it up, demanding an answer ;-) I would have been more than content if no-one bothered. Indeed I am very nosy, always probing, probing, it's in my nature. :-) But with your exploit was difficult for us to be restrained. > >Perhaps I should make this entirely clear: If you must put some label on >me, >and try to fit your perception of me into a box, then I would advice you to >put that perception into the 'crazed deluded heretic' box, and stick with >the Pali Canon. Much easier that way. The Pali canon offer guarantees. I >don't. I don't label or enclose people in any box like perception, lucky me I am too openminded for it. But must say that this 'trademark' pleases me very much, lobha, lobha being an heretic myself! Oh pardon, there is no self...what a gaffe! > > > I suppose it is pertinent enquiring about your motivations. > > Perhaps you have a hidden agenda and secretively you are planning to > > brainwash all of us to become your disciples and give you half of our > > salaries. ;-)))) > >Damn! Need to go find myself another egroup to overtake. > > > With me you are wasting your time, I am destitute and a bit difficult to > > persuade however. :-)))) > >I'll give you a dollar if you'll convert.... Please make two and it's a deal!!! :-)))) LOve Cybele 6235 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your wavelength of communication. But reading you certainly has made me aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has been quite liberating. Thankyou and much Metta, Sukin. ps: I live in Bangkok and will definately meet you when you come. cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Sukin > > I am so glad that we are communicating eventually. > I am prone to persist in this dialogues exactly to improve our communication > skills and clarify doubts and misunderstandings. > This sharings are a great, meaningful opportunity of practice of right > understanding for me. > A bit if goodwill, a handful of humour and let's take it easy without > competitions, being honest and not conceited in our exchanges. > Nice knowing you too. > Btw do you live in Thailand? > If so for sure we are going to meet soon, around september or so. > > Love > > Cybele 6236 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Derek, I looked at this one too, and several others where ignorance is referred to as an asava. I've still been unable to find one referring to it as a cause for ignorance--I'll keep you posted. mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Howard wrote: > > I recall that there is a sutta in which the > Buddha points > out that > > avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, > itself caused. I > seem to > > recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have > been given as the > cause of > > ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. > > Hello, Howard, > > Toward the end of the Saamańńaphala Sutta (DN 2) it > says that avijjaa > ("ignorance") *is* one of the aasava > ("outflowings"). > > Derek. > 6237 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Communication skills - Sukin Dear Sukin > >Dear Cybele, >Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your wavelength >of communication. But reading you certainly has made me aware >of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow >to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has >been quite liberating. >Thankyou and much Metta, > >Sukin. >ps: I live in Bangkok and will definately meet you when you come. > I suppose that by accumulations I am very extroverted and communicative and very keen on understanding others; I am hyperempathic with life what leads me to a lot a lobha. Never mind, I cope with my lust for life. Glad to know you live in Bkk, I have a very modest room in Pratunam. Will be nice meeting you; sometimes I strive in Bangkok because of the language, I speak very little Thai and people speak very little English. Well I am learning to develop a different kind of language to communicate far beyond the possibilities of speech and much more meaningful. I get along well with Thais and Asians generally because I am a smiling person and so are they. I miss their smiles when I am in Europe. Looking forward to meet you Love Cybele 6238 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:38pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:14 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > Anders > > Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of late. > What a debut! Haha, thanks. It was actually my intention to just say hello, and then fade into the background for a while. Perhaps I'll fade later on... > As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I would > give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the > development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any > difference of substance. I think it's important not mistake the various categorisations as an actual exposition of truth. One needs to look into the causal factors that these create, rather than the labels and categories fit into, and from that determine id its valid or not. > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not > > having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in > > indifference > > for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you > > are > > experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect > > countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional > > cycle. > > According to the Pali texts, only panna can eradicate defilements and lead > towards the end of the volitional cycle. I agree. Even the attempt to be equanimous involves some sort of rejection or indulgence. But it helps to end volitional cycles at "lower" levels, so to speak. > The development of upekkha > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly abidings) is an aspect > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but in and of itself leads > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the development of high > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are reduced, but in fact > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather than removed. I am not sure about this, but isn't equanimity also part of the seven factors of awakening? Is it implied as an object of Samatha there as well? > > > > To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, > > you > > have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being > > dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, > > being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through > > equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, > > as > > they are no longer sustained. > > The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted > by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true > characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. > That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a > rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be > panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But > equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. From the view-point of Equanimity as a Samatha practise, I agree with this. Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite difficult to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in order to observe it. > How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? It is difficult to say, since the approach is very different.... 6239 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:45pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:55 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) > >Perhaps I should make this entirely clear: If you must put some label on > >me, > >and try to fit your perception of me into a box, then I would advice you to > >put that perception into the 'crazed deluded heretic' box, and stick with > >the Pali Canon. Much easier that way. The Pali canon offer guarantees. I > >don't. > > I don't label or enclose people in any box like perception, lucky me I am > too openminded for it. > But must say that this 'trademark' pleases me very much, lobha, lobha being > an heretic myself! > Oh pardon, there is no self...what a gaffe! It's all good at a conceptual level... > >I'll give you a dollar if you'll convert.... > > > Please make two and it's a deal!!! :-)))) Deal and done! (reminds me of a Simpson's episode where Homer tries to convince his family what a shrewd negotiator he is, when Bart says "I'll trade you this delicious doorknob for your crummy old doughnut." Homer says "Deal and done!") :-) 6240 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- Howard wrote: > Notice that this includes: "With the arising of the taints there is > the arising of ignorance; with the cessation of the taints there is the > cessation of ignorance." And yet, as you point out, ignorance, itself, is > given as one of the four taints. (So, it is a little confusing, unless > ignorance as a taint is considered to be different in some manner from > ignorance as a factor in the cycle of dependent arising.) Howard -- Yes, it is confusing. Actually, my personal belief is that this kind of deep knowledge can't be realized merely by thinking about it. All the many suttas that describe these higher knowledges mention them as coming about as a result of practice. That ties in nicely with the teachings of the Kaalaama Sutta (AN III.65) which several people have referred to recently. Anders -- I loved your little aside about how the Kaalaama Sutta itself is not to be relied upon, according to the Kaalaama Sutta! As far as your question about "where everything started from" is concerned, I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Derek. 6241 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 9:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Internet skills Dear group I apologyse for my duplicate messages - have no idea why is happening. I am very attentive while pressing the mouse whether to avoid it. Have no clue what is happening. Sorry be patient! Cybele 6242 From: Tori Korshak Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing equanimity helps to curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an aid to knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded by my own clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be seen clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging and develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a lot of dosa to have panna. Thank you for your help. Metta, Victoria >The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted >by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true >characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. > That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a >rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be >panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But >equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. > >How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? > >Jon > 6243 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Hi, Anders (and Jon) - In a message dated 7/13/01 9:39:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Anders Honore writes: > > Anders > > > > Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of late. > > What a debut! > > Haha, thanks. It was actually my intention to just say hello, and then fade > into the background for a while. Perhaps I'll fade later on... > > > As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I would > > give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the > > development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any > > difference of substance. > > I think it's important not mistake the various categorisations as an actual > exposition of truth. One needs to look into the causal factors that these > create, rather than the labels and categories fit into, and from that > determine id its valid or not. > > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not > > > having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in > > > indifference > > > for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you > > > are > > > experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect > > > countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional > > > cycle. > > > > According to the Pali texts, only panna can eradicate defilements and lead > > towards the end of the volitional cycle. > > I agree. Even the attempt to be equanimous involves some sort of rejection > or indulgence. But it helps to end volitional cycles at "lower" levels, so > to speak. > > > The development of upekkha > > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly abidings) is an aspect > > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but in and of itself leads > > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the development of high > > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are reduced, but in fact > > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather than removed. > > I am not sure about this, but isn't equanimity also part of the seven > factors of awakening? Is it implied as an object of Samatha there as well? > > > > > > > > To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, > > > you > > > have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being > > > dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, > > > being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through > > > equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, > > > as > > > they are no longer sustained. > > > > The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted > > by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true > > characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. > > That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a > > rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be > > panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But > > equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. > > From the view-point of Equanimity as a Samatha practise, I agree with this. > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite difficult > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in > order to observe it. > > > How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? > > It is difficult to say, since the approach is very different.... > > > ================================== The following is drawn from Wings to Awakening (from Access to Insight). I think it is relevant to this discussion. Particularly interesting to me is the distinction made between the alleged sutta-perspective and the abhidhamma-perspective. You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your main influence? The material follows: *************************************************** G. The Seven Factors of Awakening [ Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section ] [ Jump down to passages §§92-100 ] The seven factors of Awakening (bojjhanga) are closely related to the practice of the four frames of reference. The texts use two patterns to describe this relationship. The first pattern is a spiral, showing how the seven factors of Awakening build on the four frames of reference [§92]. This point is reflected in the position of mindfulness -- defined as the practice of any one of the four frames of reference -- as the first factor in the list. Discernment, in the role of the analysis of mental qualities into skillful and unskillful, builds on right mindfulness and leads to persistence, which in the form of right effort/exertion maximizes the skillful qualities and minimizes the unskillful ones. This in turn leads to four factors associated with jhana: rapture, serenity, concentration, and equanimity. Equanimity, here, is not a neutral feeling, but rather a balancing or moderation -- an evenness of mind -- with regard to any feeling or object that arises. It is identical with the equanimity in the fourth jhana [§149] and with the inherent equanimity in the fifth factor of five-factored noble concentration [§150], which can develop out of any of the four jhanas. As such it can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of non-fashioning that opens to Awakening. Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as well. Passage §96 shows how the "feeding" of the factors of Awakening is needed to "starve" the hindrances, mental qualities that have to be suppressed before mundane concentration can be attained. Passage §98 shows how the factors function in developing the four attitudes that lead to "release of awareness" -- a mundane form of release -- and indicates the highest state to which those attitudes can lead for one who has penetrated no higher, i.e., who has attained none of the transcendent levels. These passages demonstrate that the factors of Awakening can function on the level of mundane jhana in addition to the level at the verge of Awakening. Thus, equanimity as a factor of Awakening on the mundane plane can feed back into the process of meditation, providing a steady basis for more continuous mindfulness and clearer analysis of mental qualities, until all the factors of the list ripen to transcendence. ********************************************** 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) 6244 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:20pm Subject: re: Rules for Married couples. --- "craig garner" wrote: > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > Dear Craig, I am not part of the sangha, but according to the Budha teaching, anybody should strive to understand the realities as they truly are. With that, other things are (most likely) to follow, like the 5 precepts, etc. If you strictly follow the scripture in this regard in all the different ways (follow exactly what the Buddha said about what a marriage couple should do), you may not like them too much. The conventional, societal views about the interactions between the couple were different in Buddha India than they are today. kom 6245 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] re: Rules for Married couples. Dear Craig, There are a few points in the sigalovada sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn31.html robert > --- "craig garner" > wrote: > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what > kind of > rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to > marriage etc... I > have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > confusing for me, > at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right > dirrection it would > be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > 6246 From: robert Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:56pm Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing equanimity helps to > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an aid to > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded by my own > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be seen > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging and > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a lot > of dosa to have panna. ______________________________ Dear Tori, I think what really blinds you to these realities is that they are taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on this. >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends in Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her to the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. These friends then said that "this shows how much more understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the same thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only got her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no concern at all. Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she said was "they don't understand the path". You see we can't tell someones understanding by how calm they appear. I can't be surprised or even much disapointed when anger arises (in myself or others) as it seems such a natural thing. It is sankhara dhamma , conditioned phenomena, it arises because there are the right coincidence of paccaya (conditions) for this to happen. In earlier days I would have tried to do something, and felt guilty, but this is 'putting an extra head on top of the original one". I have had the benefit of knowing many different cult members. Some of them have the idea that they should always be happy - so they always act happy. or some think thye should act serious (because of dukkha) so they act serious. Actually it is not really an act as they aim towards happy feeling or serious feeling and so build up the conditions for this. Of course they don't always succeed but they head in such directions. However, to my thinking although they keep outward sila to a high degree, they don't have insight into real Dhamma. They are clinging to view and self , to virtue and ritual . (silabataparamasa). In the Brahmajala sutta (trans. Bodhi All embracing net of views p56) "It is bhikkhus only to trifling and insignificant matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a wordling would refer when speaking in praise of the Tathagata. And what are those trifling matters, those minor details of mere moral virtue?" the sutta then lists many virtues such as not killing or stealing, being chaste, no harsh speech, no idle chatter.. no meals after midday....etc. As your post indicates your friends and relatives look at your outer behaviour, they try to estimate your wisdom based on this. They don't know that only an anagami has eradicated anger forever; they don't know that someone may have suppressed lust and anger for their whole life - by true samatha - but have no insight into the true nature of dhammas; that someone else again might appear always calm but only have clinging to pleasant feeling. If they discussed much with you they would know more about your insight - then they would know that, as a disciple of the buddha, you can help them understand life in profound ways. Then they wouldn't be so concerned about slips in behaviour. maybe they would think it is natural - if they understood the conditioned nature of dhammas. robert 6247 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > > Well, the beginning is not different from the end. I'll explain below. I have actually never contemplated the beginning myself. Because of that, = only the scripture is a guide. There are other on-going thread that discusses the sutta(s?) that the Buddha mentioned that: a) Ignorance rises out of asava (a kind of tanha) b) Ignorance rises out of tanha (craving) I still don't have a clue what you are implying, but it seems we are discussing how ignorance rises out of something in the beginning of the samsaric cycle, which implies how it could end? Is this where you are leading to? (The beginning wouldn't ever be verifiable, even though the end will at least be implied by the enlightenment.) > > >For moha in particular, it arises within the heart-base (hadaya vathu). > > Please define heart-base (heart-base, hsin in Chinese) generally means > 'Budha-nature' or Nirvana. The vathu rupa, which heart-base (hadaya vathu) is, is a conditioned materiality said to be located in the middle of the heart (and somewhere else if without a heart!). It is a place of rising for many types of consciousness and mental factors. It is certainly not Nibbana. > Yes, that is correct. My point was that the very first link of dependent > co-origination, didn't just arise in a nothingness (since this would impl= y > annihilation) and once the last link is dissolved (parinibbana), there won't > just be nothingness left. I don't believe there are any scripture explaining the end of samsaric cycl= e by the process of how it comes in the beginning. There is only: without this, that can't come to be, etc (and nibbana is definitely *not* included = as a link). Even though I may be able to able to derive (if not contrive!) such a logic, I wouldn't trust it much myself. Logic (or my logical mind) = has failed to reveal the truths many many times. The buddha didn't expound the beginning much at all (even related to explaining the end), it = would only lead to more delusion to think I can explain as such. > Well, as I mentioned in another post, I draw from both Mahayana and > Theravada, and I don't think either is untrue. I don't think that Mahayan= a > arose simply as a 'rebellious' way to create a > new doctrine. I think it arose out of the need to emphasise parts of the > Dhamma which might have been somewhat under-emphasised by the old schools at > that given point in time, and thus it highlights aspects of the Dhamma which > might not be very strong in the schools before it. But that is just my view. > I would like to quote Bodhidharma, the first Patriarch of Zen, to show you > what I've been trying to say all along: > ..."This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll= > never find another Buddha [Nirvana]. To search for enlightenment or nirvana > beyond this mind is impossible.... When the mind reaches nirvana, you don't > see nirvana, because the mind is nirvana. If you see nirvana somewhere > outside the mind, you're deluding yourself. The theravadans try to stick to the original text as much as possible for knowing (or fearing, for some of us) that diverging from it will distort th= e meanings of the teachings. I am quite sure that some of the distortions introduced by different people (even in translations), intentional or not, = calling themselves Theravadan or not, with or without delusion while so doing, more often lead people to the wrong end than the right one. The Buddha dhamma is incredibly subtle, a distortion sometimes serves as a hinderance (conventional, not the 5 hinderances!) rather than an aid to the understanding, and ultimately the realization. Again, just like the concept of duality, I can somewhat map what Bodhidharma said to the Theravadan frame of references, but not completely, especially the part "the mind is nirvana." kom 6248 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity At 03:56 PM 7/13/01 +0000, you wrote: >--- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Robert, Now it's my turn to be puzzled by your post. More below. > > Dear Jon, > > > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing equanimity >helps to > > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an >aid to > > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded >by my own > > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be >seen > > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging >and > > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example who >exhibited a lot > > of dosa to have panna. >______________________________ >Dear Tori, >I think what really blinds you to these realities is that they are >taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". >I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on this. > >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends in >Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her to >the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were >running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. >These friends then said that "this shows how much more >understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the same >thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only got >her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no >concern at all. >Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she said >was "they don't understand the path". Well for example, I can relate to this. Since studying and meditating, I find that when traveling, things like delays and missed flights truly don't disturb me the way they used to. This is not pretending but a big change. Of course one doesn't like to inconvenience others who have made plans at the other end but when it can't be helped there is more acceptance and understanding that my reaction one way or the other won't change events. >You see we can't tell someones understanding by how calm they >appear. No-only one can know that for oneself-not others. >I can't be surprised or even much disapointed when anger arises >(in myself or others) as it seems such a natural thing. It is >sankhara dhamma , conditioned phenomena, it arises because there >are the right coincidence of paccaya (conditions) for this to >happen. I agree but there are fewer conditions arising now that understanding is changing. > In earlier days I would have tried to do something, and >felt guilty, but this is 'putting an extra head on top of the >original one". Yes after the fact one cannot stop the arising. Only through understanding beforehand. >I have had the benefit of knowing many different cult members. >Some of them have the idea that they should always be happy - so >they always act happy. or some think thye should act serious >(because of dukkha) so they act serious. Actually it is not >really an act as they aim towards happy feeling or serious >feeling and so build up the conditions for this. Of course they >don't always succeed but they head in such directions. However, >to my thinking although they keep outward sila to a high degree, >they don't have insight into real Dhamma. They are clinging to >view and self , to virtue and ritual . (silabataparamasa). >In the Brahmajala sutta (trans. Bodhi All embracing net of >views p56) "It is bhikkhus only to trifling and insignificant >matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a >wordling would refer when speaking in praise of the Tathagata. >And what are those trifling matters, those minor details of mere >moral virtue?" the sutta then lists many virtues such as not >killing or stealing, being chaste, no harsh speech, no idle >chatter.. no meals after midday....etc. This is not what I understand as equanimity. >As your post indicates your friends and relatives look at your >outer behaviour, My post was not intending to indicate this. Why did you think so? >they try to estimate your wisdom based on this. >They don't know that only an anagami has eradicated anger >forever; they don't know that someone may have suppressed lust >and anger for their whole life - by true samatha - but have no >insight into the true nature of dhammas; that someone else again might >appear always calm but only have clinging to pleasant feeling. >If they discussed much with you they would know more about your >insight - then they would know that, as a disciple of the >buddha, you can help them understand life in profound ways. Then >they wouldn't be so concerned about slips in behaviour. maybe >they would think it is natural - if they understood the >conditioned nature of dhammas. What? I think we're on different subjects here. I don't confuse calm with equanimity. I have always been calm but equanimity is something relatively new to me. I don't know if anyone else is trying to estimate my wisdom, but I don't think it's a high priority. >robert > >Metta, Victoria 6249 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori, I think I was unclear. From "I wrote a post to paul a while back that may have bearing on this.." All of the rest is simply a cut and paste from a post I wrote to Paul that I thought might have had some mild bearing on this. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5503 As you show it was in fact completely off the topic. sorry robert --- Tori Korshak wrote: > At 03:56 PM 7/13/01 +0000, you wrote: > >--- Tori Korshak > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Robert, > Now it's my turn to be puzzled by your post. More below. > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing > equanimity > >helps to > > > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is > that not an > >aid to > > > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not > blinded > >by my own > > > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more > likely to be > >seen > > > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon > clinging > >and > > > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example > who > >exhibited a lot > > > of dosa to have panna. > >______________________________ > >Dear Tori, > >I think what really blinds you to these realities is that > they are > >taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". > >I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on > this. > > >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends > in > >Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her > to > >the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were > >running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. > >These friends then said that "this shows how much more > >understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the > same > >thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only > got > >her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no > >concern at all. > >Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she > said > >was "they don't understand the path". > > > Well for example, I can relate to this. Since studying and > meditating, I > find that when traveling, things like delays and missed > flights truly don't > disturb me the way they used to. This is not pretending but a > big change. > Of course one doesn't like to inconvenience others who have > made plans at > the other end but when it can't be helped there is more > acceptance and > understanding that my reaction one way or the other won't > change events. > > > >You see we can't tell someones understanding by how calm they > >appear. > > No-only one can know that for oneself-not others. > > >I can't be surprised or even much disapointed when anger > arises > >(in myself or others) as it seems such a natural thing. It is > >sankhara dhamma , conditioned phenomena, it arises because > there > >are the right coincidence of paccaya (conditions) for this to > >happen. > > I agree but there are fewer conditions arising now that > understanding is > changing. > > > In earlier days I would have tried to do something, and > >felt guilty, but this is 'putting an extra head on top of the > >original one". > > Yes after the fact one cannot stop the arising. Only through > understanding > beforehand. > > >I have had the benefit of knowing many different cult > members. > >Some of them have the idea that they should always be happy - > so > >they always act happy. or some think thye should act serious > >(because of dukkha) so they act serious. Actually it is not > >really an act as they aim towards happy feeling or serious > >feeling and so build up the conditions for this. Of course > they > >don't always succeed but they head in such directions. > However, > >to my thinking although they keep outward sila to a high > degree, > >they don't have insight into real Dhamma. They are clinging > to > >view and self , to virtue and ritual . (silabataparamasa). > >In the Brahmajala sutta (trans. Bodhi All embracing net of > >views p56) "It is bhikkhus only to trifling and insignificant > >matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a > >wordling would refer when speaking in praise of the > Tathagata. > >And what are those trifling matters, those minor details of > mere > >moral virtue?" the sutta then lists many virtues such as not > >killing or stealing, being chaste, no harsh speech, no idle > >chatter.. no meals after midday....etc. > > This is not what I understand as equanimity. > > > >As your post indicates your friends and relatives look at > your > >outer behaviour, > > My post was not intending to indicate this. Why did you think > so? > > >they try to estimate your wisdom based on this. > >They don't know that only an anagami has eradicated anger > >forever; they don't know that someone may have suppressed > lust > >and anger for their whole life - by true samatha - but have > no > >insight into the true nature of dhammas; that someone else > again might > >appear always calm but only have clinging to pleasant > feeling. > >If they discussed much with you they would know more about > your > >insight - then they would know that, as a disciple of the > >buddha, you can help them understand life in profound ways. > Then > >they wouldn't be so concerned about slips in behaviour. maybe > >they would think it is natural - if they understood the > >conditioned nature of dhammas. > > What? I think we're on different subjects here. > I don't confuse calm with equanimity. I have always been calm > but > equanimity is something relatively new to me. I don't know if > anyone else > is trying to estimate my wisdom, but I don't think it's a high > priority. > > >robert > > > >Metta, > > Victoria > 6250 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > >Dear Robert, Ah now I understand. Thanks for clearing the confusion! Metta, Victoria Also thanks to Howard for helpful reference in Wings to Awakening which,coincidentally, I have been reading at the moment. It does say that equanimity is a factor on the path to Awakening. >Robert, > > Now it's my turn to be puzzled by your post. More below. > > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > > > > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing > > equanimity > > >helps to > > > > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is > > that not an > > >aid to > > > > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not > > blinded > > >by my own > > > > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more > > likely to be > > >seen > > > > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon > > clinging > > >and > > > > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example > > who > > >exhibited a lot > > > > of dosa to have panna. > > >______________________________ 6251 From: craig garner Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] re: Rules for Married couples. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:20 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] re: Rules for Married couples. > Dear kom and robert, thanks for your directions I will search around and see what else I can find on the subject. Best wishes Craig 6252 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Rob But are you not supposed to be a sotapanna? A Sotapanna can go 'off topic'? I think you are ageing that's it! ;-))))) Better you are becoming wiser and a bit messy... ;-) Love Cybele 6253 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > According to the Pali texts, only panna can > eradicate defilements and lead > towards the end of the volitional cycle. The > development of upekkha > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly > abidings) is an aspect > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but > in and of itself leads > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the > development of high > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are > reduced, but in fact > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather > than removed. Great post. I'm a great fan of equanimity too, meaning that I very much like anything which conditions it--a certain sign of akusala (the liking, I mean). I also think that everything in your post is spot on in the context of satipatthana in everyday life. > The development of panna is not contingent on, or > particularly assisted > by, developing equanimity. I guess it could be argued that upekkhaa contributes to pańńaa and to the eradication of defilements when it is a feature of some of the advanced jhana states which lead to nibbana by way of the jhanas. As I have no experience of this and don't expect to, I don't give it that much thought. Outside this (I think) very unusual context, and certainly for the purposes of most of our experience, I think your points are very well made (for what my opinion's worth). mike 6254 From: Christine Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:07am Subject: was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Hi Craig, An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: "A Happy Married Life" by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm metta, Christine --- "craig garner" wrote: > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > 6255 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:15am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Mike, Indifferent feeling (Upekkha cetasika) can arise in both wholesome and unwholesome dhamma. Equanimity (tatra-majjhattata cetasika) can rise *only* in wholesome dhamma. Equanimity implies the co-arising consciousness and mental factors must be wholesome. Equanimity, just like any other dhamma, comes in different strength. Equanimity in dana results in a giving. Equanimity in tranquil meditation results eventually in Jhana. Equanimity in satipatthana (as in a factor of englightenment) results eventually in the 8-fold paths. Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil meditation don't directly result in the 8-fold path; otherwise, even people without the teachings of Buddha would become enlightened. Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil meditation, with the concurrance of satipathana, probably support one another (I have heard TA Sujin mentioning a sutta that says any kusala "contribute"). There has been some discussions about this, although without conclusion (in my view). kom 6257 From: Joe Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 8:45am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! I believe this may be one of the issues touched upon in a book called The Problem of Mind in Buddhism. It's out of print nowadays I think, but it's basically a review of Buddhist definitions of mind and consciousness (across sects) from the perspective of modern western philosophy. The conclusion was, if I remember correctly, that neither mind nor consciousness are ever satisfactorily defined (again, from the perspective of modern logic) in Buddhist texts, and that the explanations are contradictory. Doesn't bother me, since I don't expect Buddhism to be logical or scientific. But many people do. Joe --- Howard wrote: > Hi again, Derek - > > > I found the following on the Access to Insight site. It is from the sutta > I had in mind: > > > Ignorance > > avijja > > > The definition > > > > "And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the > > cessation of ignorance, what is the way leading to the cessation of > > ignorance? Not knowing about dukkha, not knowing about the origin of dukkha > > , not knowing about the cessation of dukkha, not knowing about the way > > leading to the cessation of dukkha -- this is called ignorance. With the > > arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance; with the cessation > > of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance. The way leading to the > > cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > > view...right concentration." ... "And what are the taints, what is the > > origin of the taints, what is the cessation of the taints, what is the way > > leading to the cessation of the taints? There are three taints: the taint > > of sensual desire, the taint of being and the taint of ignorance. With the > > arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints. With the cessation > > of ignorance there is the cessation of the taints. The way leading to the > > cessation of the taints is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > > view...right concentration." > > >> -- MN 9 > > > Notice that this includes: "With the arising of the taints there is > the arising of ignorance; with the cessation of the taints there is the > cessation of ignorance." And yet, as you point out, ignorance, itself, is > given as one of the four taints. (So, it is a little confusing, unless > ignorance as a taint is considered to be different in some manner from > ignorance as a factor in the cycle of dependent arising.) > > 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) > 6258 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:56am Subject: Loving kindness for a friend >>Dear group >> >>I have a special appeal to make: I came to know this evening about a dear >>friend of mine, a commited buddhist and a lovely human being >>who has to >>undergoe by-pass surgery next week. >>He is going to be admitted in hospital on Monday and surgery is planned to >>Wednesday morning Asian time. >>I am concerned with him and wish I could be there to help. >>But I can't at least not physically. My heart sure will be there, close to >>this friend. >>I would like to make an appeal to whoever believe in the power of Metta >>and is in goodwill to concentrate on this person and send him >>healing >>vibrations of loving kindness. >>I am very grateful if you feel like collaborating in this mind-heart >>sinergy to give strenght to another human who is in a >>difficult moment >>joining this metta meditation. >>Thank you very much for your interest and consideration. >> >>Metta-Karuna >> >>Cybele >> 6259 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Kom This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant feeling attending any of them can condition so much attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned them. Have I missed anything here? mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike, > > Indifferent feeling (Upekkha cetasika) can arise in > both wholesome and > unwholesome dhamma. > > Equanimity (tatra-majjhattata cetasika) can rise > *only* in wholesome > dhamma. Equanimity implies the co-arising > consciousness and mental > factors must be wholesome. > > Equanimity, just like any other dhamma, comes in > different strength. > Equanimity in dana results in a giving. Equanimity > in tranquil meditation > results eventually in Jhana. Equanimity in > satipatthana (as in a factor of > englightenment) results eventually in the 8-fold > paths. > > Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil > meditation don't directly > result in the 8-fold path; otherwise, even people > without the teachings > of Buddha would become enlightened. > > Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil > meditation, with the > concurrance of satipathana, probably support one > another (I have heard > TA Sujin mentioning a sutta that says any kusala > "contribute"). There > has been some discussions about this, although > without conclusion (in > my view). > > kom > 6260 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Joe: "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another mind will follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same or different object (through the same or different door way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only mind/conciousness but a person who houses it. Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into the (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of mind/conciousness. tadao 6261 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Joe, >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile I work on it >myself. > >Thanks very much. > >Joe I think some of these phrases may be beyond my capability after having worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to understanding the "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the unestablished" (tappurisa compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa is the problem word which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m (cause). The Saddaniti explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti kaara.na.m" (it creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it effects, produces, yields its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? Jim >--- "Jim Anderson" >wrote: >> Dear Joe, >> >> >Surely anyone with even an elementary knowledge of Pali can >discern >> >whether the proper translation in 'unestablished consciousness' >> >or 'consciousness unestablished'. Pali is very precise - almost as >> >precise as Sanskrit or Latin - in the attributive. >> > >> >Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? >> >> appati.t.t.hitena ca bhikkhave vi~n~naa.nena Vakkali kulaputto >parinibbuto >> ti. (S iii 124 pts) >> >> For further information: >> >> commentary: >> appati.t.t.hitenaa ti pa.tisandhivi~n~naa.nena appati.t.thitena. >> appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho. (SA i 184 pts) >> >> (with the re-linking or rebirth consciousness not re-established) >> >> subcommentary: >> appati.t.thitenaa ti patit.tha.m alabhantena. itthambhuutalakkha.ne >eta.m >> kara.navacana.m, anuppattidhammenaa ti attho. sati hi uppaade >pati.t.thita.m >> naama siyaa, a.t.thakathaaya.m pana yadeva tassa vi~n~naa.nassa >> appati.t.thaanakaara.na.m, tadeva parinibbaanakaara.nan ti vutta.m >> appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti. (SA.T i 218 cscd) >> >> Best wishes, >> Jim 6262 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Jim & Joe, Glad to see some smart guys working on this--it's certainly over my head. mike --- Jim Anderson wrote: > >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile > I work on it > >myself. > > > >Thanks very much. > > > >Joe > > I think some of these phrases may be beyond my > capability after having > worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: > "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti > attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to > understanding the > "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the > unestablished" (tappurisa > compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa > is the problem word > which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m > (cause). The Saddaniti > explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti > kaara.na.m" (it > creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it > effects, produces, yields > its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? 6263 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Christine, Craig Thanks, Christine, for posting the reference to this useful guide. Craig, I think by now you will see that there are no 'rules', but there is plently of guidance. Please feel free to come back with any specific queries you may have. In my view, the most valuable support a spouse can be for his/her partner is in encouraging the continued development of understanding (this of course does not mean that the conventional courtesies and standards should not also be observed). In this respect I am the most happily married man imaginable! Jon --- Christine wrote: > > Hi Craig, > > An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: > > "A Happy Married Life" > by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm > > metta, > > Christine > --- "craig garner" wrote: > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind > of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage > etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the > right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > 6264 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom > > This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. > However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to > liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To > me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with > cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant > feeling attending any of them can condition so much > attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned > them. Have I missed anything here? > > mike I haven't seen you missing anything at all. I was just trying to add to the discussion that people sometimes confuse the different neutrality including: 1) Upekkha and Tatramajjhatta 2) Tatramajjhatta that arises with samatha, and Tatramajjhatta that arises with the satipatthana Here is a list of upekkah definition: (http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat5.html): There are 10 kinds of upekkha (indifference), namely Chalagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to the 6 arammana of the arahanta, who has eradicated all kilesa. Brahmaviharupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to all entities. Bojjhagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is one of the components that make enlightenment possible. Viriyupekkha, the viriya-cetasika which is right perseverance which is not too tense nor too lax in the development of bhavana. Sankharupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is indifferent when the realization of the tilakkhana of the sankhara-dhamma. Vedanupekkha, the vedana-cetasika that does not feel unhappy or happy. Vipassanupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is neutral in the consideration of the arammana that arises from causes and conditions. Tatramajjhattatupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika that is neutral, not biased or partial. Jhanupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the jhana which attenuates the preoccupation by other dhamma which renders the peace less steadfast. This intends especially the tatiyajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which has abandoned piti. Parisuddhupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the catutthajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which is completely peaceful and cleansed from all adversaries, without any further function to abandon the elements of jhana. 6265 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:24am Subject: Experience or attitude? Dear group I forward this reply of mine from another list to share with you. >So much of Dharma is about attitude.... Dharma is about life not about attitude regarding my personal experience. You cannot learn Dhamma if we don't apply it in our daily efforts to get insights into reality. Dhamma is about the awareness of present moment and there is no knowledge of texts that can ever teach you this if you don't open yourself mind and heart to the practice. I have met walking in this so called spiritual path plenty of people using Dhamma to shield themselves from reality rather than develop mindfulness of the very same reality. To create new, gratifying identities and roles rather than dismiss the self and look honestly in the emptiness. Aspiration and study are excellent tools but if you don't dive in the ocean you don't learn how to swim. The books and the erudition are not going to keep you afloat. Dhamma is in the alchemy of daily life, is the fire of attention warming up our existence, transforming our minds, our hearts. True compassion is not an attitude: is giving yourself without fear and in wholeheartedness. Wisdom is not an uplifting concept, wisdom is skilfulness that you build up everyday, practicing, experiencing, living the Dhamma. Mindfulness is about having the courage to investigate reality, facing it without denial, accepting whatever comes. It is not simply an attitude, is DOING IT, is commiting yourself. Dhamma is not a philosophical choice, Dhamma is experiencing our life considering it at every moment, whatsoever you do. Living Dhamma is the only way to learn authentic Dhamma in my experience. Great discourses point the way but if you don't walk the path you cannot reach there. As William Blake would say 'life delights in life' and Dhamma delights in Dhamma...practice. :-) LOve Cybele 6266 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. As well you might be! This is not an easy area to get a grasp of. As Kom mentions, there are at least 10 meanings of equanimity (these are given at Vis. IV, 156 ff.), but most commonly it is used in one of 3 ways— 1. Equanimity as indifferent or neutral feeling 2. Equanimity as one of the 4 ‘Divine Abidings’ (metta, karuna, mudita, upekkha) 3. Equanimity as one of the enlightenment factors (bojjhanga). As (1), it is the mental factor of feeling (vedana). Feeling can be either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. By the way, while unpleasant feeling occurs only with unwholesome citta (moment of consciousness), neutral feeling, like pleasant feeling, can arise with both wholesome and unwholesome cittas. As (2) and (3), it is a mental factor in its own right (or, as some call it, an ethical quality). To confuse things even further, as a mental factor it is also known also known as tatra-majjhattataa, which literally means ‘neutrality towards’ or ‘keeping in the middle of things’. This mental factor of upekkha/tatra-majjhattataa arises with all wholesome cittas. It has the characteristic of effecting the balance of consciousness and the accompanying mental factors; the function of preventing excessiveness and deficiency, or inhibiting partiality (Vis. XIV, 153). These are its general characteristic and function. However, its specific characteristic and function varies slightly depending on the exact nature and degree of the kusala citta it accompanies. As (2) in particular, it is the mental factor that accompanies citta of the level of samatha (of a particular kind). As (3), it is the mental factor that accompanies citta at a moment of satipatthana. > If developing equanimity helps to > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an aid > to > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded by my > own > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be seen > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging and > develop equanimity? I think we have to be careful here. The so-called practice of developing equanimity may in fact not be kusala of any kind at all. If it stems from a desire to have less lobha and dosa (whether because of the belief that lobha and dosa are antithetical to the development of understanding or for any other reason), it is bound to be akusala. It is just an aspect of the desire for more kusala/understanding or less akusala. I am not saying this is so in your case, but I mention it because one often finds references which seem to suggest that this is part of the way of practice taught by the Buddha. The real issue that you raise is whether lobha and dosa are a hindrance to the development of understanding. The answer is, yes and no. It is said in the texts that the hindrances (lobha and dosa of various kinds) ‘weaken insight’, and that of course is true as regards the moment at which they arise, since all unwholesome cittas are rooted in moha. But there can in the moment(s) following the lobha or dosa, or even in between moments of sustained lobha or dosa, be awareness of the characteristic of those realities, so we should not be closed to the potential for moments of awareness at such times, no matter how strong the lobha or dosa. If we have the idea that awareness is possible only, or is much more likely to arise, when lobha and dosa have been curbed or reduced, this will be an obstacle to the development of awareness at moments whenever lobha or dosa are present (and for all such moments for the rest of this lifetime, because its not going to change any time soon!) - and this is probably most of the time if only we knew it. > … I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a > lot > of dosa to have panna. I’m not sure I want to comment on this! But the key thing to remember is the observation made by Robert, that the level of a person’s calmness (or lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of understanding. This is because the function of understanding is to understand the true characteristic of the reality that presents itself at the present moment, be it a nama or rupa, and nothing more than that, while a person’s level of calm at a given moment is a reflection of a number of things including his/her accumulated wholesomeness of various kinds (including samatha) or possibly even his/her attachment to the current object. Jon 6267 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Excellent post Tadao. robert p.s I think the speed of the falling away is even faster than you mention. --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Joe: > "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the > Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view > point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can > regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada > Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may > probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another > mind will > follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same > or different object (through the same or different door > way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be > located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment > experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only > mind/conciousness > but a person who houses it. > Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in > a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into > the > (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of > mind/conciousness. > tadao > 6268 From: craig garner Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 12:41 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Hola Christina, thanks very much it looks really helpfull and detailed it will be very beneficial ! Thanks for your great help it is appreciated, with metta Craig > > Hi Craig, > > An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: > > "A Happy Married Life" > by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm > > metta, > > Christine > --- "craig garner" wrote: > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind > of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage > etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the > right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > > 6269 From: craig garner Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Dear Jon, Thanks aswell and I agree in full , I just want to be as well informed because I have failed one marriage and in this new union want to do my best in all ways possible. mucho metta Craig ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 5:19 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life > Christine, Craig > > Thanks, Christine, for posting the reference to this useful guide. > > Craig, I think by now you will see that there are no 'rules', but there is > plently of guidance. Please feel free to come back with any specific > queries you may have. > > In my view, the most valuable support a spouse can be for his/her partner > is in encouraging the continued development of understanding (this of > course does not mean that the conventional courtesies and standards should > not also be observed). In this respect I am the most happily married man > imaginable! > > Jon > > > --- Christine wrote: > > > Hi Craig, > > > > An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: > > > > "A Happy Married Life" > > by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda > > > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > --- "craig garner" wrote: > > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind > > of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage > > etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > > confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the > > right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > > > > 6270 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear group Just a minor point which probably everyone knows. Equaminity (tatramajjhattata cetasika) arises with all kusala. (there can also be a feeling of calm and indifference with akusala but this is not equanimity in the true sense) True equanimity arises with all moments of satipatthana even if the object is unpleasant such as fear or anger. This is something we may see whenever there are genuine moments of insight as there must be detachment from self and thus a high level of equanimity (for that moment or moments). Even if one doesn't want to have equanimity it would be impossible to stop it arising because it is conditioned to arise at these moments. On the other hand if one thinks that equanimity comes first and later understanding then one will miss the present moment; rather than understanding the anattaness of whatever appears, learning to study the true uncontrollabilty of dhammas, there is likely to be a perhaps hidden effort to change the present object into whatever concept one has of calm or equanimity. As insight develops it is true that equanimity also develops but as jonothon and kom pointed out there are various types of equanimity. One might try to use equanimity as a measure of progress but be developing a kind of equanimity (kusala or akusala) that is not related to satipatthana. robert 6271 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:43pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders Thanks for your reply and comments below. I think the various posts to date have covered the main points. Just one aspect of your post I would like to comment on. You said- > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite > difficult > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in > order to observe it. The object of panna of the level of satipatthana/vipassana must be a reality appearing at that moment. I am not sure how the observance of cause and effect fits into this. What you are advocating, I think, is the 'have less clinging first, then you will have more panna' approach (which is usually expressed in terms of developing samatha rather than specifically equanimity). Would you not consider the clinging to be a possible possible object for panna? Jon --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jonothan Abbott > > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:14 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > > > > Anders > > > > Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of > late. > > What a debut! > > Haha, thanks. It was actually my intention to just say hello, and then > fade > into the background for a while. Perhaps I'll fade later on... > > > As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I > would > > give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the > > development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any > > difference of substance. > > I think it's important not mistake the various categorisations as an > actual > exposition of truth. One needs to look into the causal factors that > these > create, rather than the labels and categories fit into, and from that > determine id its valid or not. > 6272 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Experience or attitude? Contextual Reply Below: -----Original Message----- From: cybele chiodi Date: Friday, July 13, 2001 11:24 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Experience or attitude? > >Dear group > >I forward this reply of mine from another list to share with you. > >>So much of Dharma is about attitude.... > > >Dharma is about life not about attitude regarding my personal experience. Here is the danger of words. Attitude is denotationally a good word but connotationally, it loses meaning. The "attitude" Dhamma practitioners must take comes from a solid foundation of sila, samadhi, and panna (pragya) --- and these are inseparables. From that point, the Four Noble Truths with Emphasis on the Noble Eightfold Path as a practice is the correct posture. >You cannot learn Dhamma if we don't apply it in our daily efforts to get >insights into reality. Before we can learn the Dhamma via the application of it in the activities of daily living, something profound must happen. We must realize that stillness, silence, and solitude are not a waste of time or of life! >Dhamma is about the awareness of present moment and there is no knowledge of >texts that can ever teach you this if you don't open yourself mind and heart >to the practice. Exactly. The emphasis must be on the experiential and does not always get even verbally approximated when one tries to share the experience, but the effect can be observed in other non-verbal behaviors. This is transformation. The Dhamma is not merely about logic and "left-brained" activities but about the experience of being --- much of that experience is receptivity. >I have met walking in this so called spiritual path plenty of people using >Dhamma to shield themselves from reality rather than develop mindfulness of >the very same reality. When the Buddha said the whole world on is on fire, He meant it. The thing is people often think the practice is merely a "fire drill". But we also have to be careful not criticize and judge others about their practices. Reality is painful. Dhamma offers not mere relief but release from dukkha and owing to tanha, a beginner clings to notions of gratification and relief. >To create new, gratifying identities and roles rather than dismiss the self >and look honestly in the emptiness. Can you clarify this above point? What is gratifying? Constructing identities as mentioned above appears to promote the atta. The Dhamma has never asked us to dispense with the notion of a "conventional" self, yet the whole of the Sasana stands or falls on the Doctrine of Anatta. While this may seem paradoxical, it is not. The convention of using "self" to communicate is not diametrically opposed to the fact that there is no soul or abiding self or peronsality. It is the verbiage that gets in the way of the practice. >Aspiration and study are excellent tools but if you don't dive in the ocean >you don't learn how to swim. That is true but without aspiration and preparation, many are afraid to take the first plunge. This reminds me of when I learned to swim. I refused to take the risk of going into some deep water! I swam in the ocean and never feared the deep water but was terrified of 12 feet of depth at the swimming pool where I had a weekly swimming class! My teacher prepared me very well, but I would not jump in the water. He let this go on for about 2 weeks and one day pushed me in. I called him a number of nasty names and was angry for being pushed in the water, but I finally swam in the deep end of the pool, passed the test, and got out of the water to castigate him even more! Of course, it did not take long to understand that the teacher was wise and very experienced. >The books and the erudition are not going to keep you afloat. And they are not going to get us to the other shore either! Wet books get heavy, and erudition would be like arguing how to go about the arranging of the deck chairs on a second sinking Titanic! >Dhamma is in the alchemy of daily life, is the fire of attention warming up >our existence, transforming our minds, our hearts. I like the above! Alchemy is a packed word though! >True compassion is not an attitude: is giving yourself without fear and in >wholeheartedness. True compassion is not even a conventional "attitude" but a learned behavior that does allow us to take a "posture" and act rightly. But compassion often is limited to the "me" --- the ego is very much involved. "What most people mean by "compassion" is: please be nice to my ego. Well, your ego is your own worst enemy, and anybody being nice to it is not being compassionate to you." - Ken Wilber >Wisdom is not an uplifting concept, wisdom is skilfulness that you build up >everyday, practicing, experiencing, living the Dhamma. Wisdom is also the letting go which is far less stressful than the clinging and grasping to what is impermanent anyway. Grasping this Dhamma wisdom and trying to cling to it would be like trying to grasp a glass of water poured into an open hand that then closes trying to hold on to every last drop. The same goes for even moments of enlightened mind. >Mindfulness is about having the courage to investigate reality, facing it >without denial, accepting whatever comes. It take real courage to practice Dhamma --- it is >the< hardest work we will ever undertake and it is a life time of work to be undertaken. And vulnerability and facing the unknown is hardly negative but a positive stimulus that calls us to Right Understanding. >It is not simply an attitude, is DOING IT, is commiting yourself. It is a universal science of living and not merely philosophy and/or religion! >Dhamma is not a philosophical choice, Dhamma is experiencing our life >considering it at every moment, whatsoever you do. >Living Dhamma is the only way to learn authentic Dhamma in my experience. >Great discourses point the way but if you don't walk the path you cannot >reach there. >As William Blake would say 'life delights in life' and Dhamma delights in >Dhamma...practice. :-) > Experience or attitude? Perhaps a bit of both. Change "attitude" to "posture"! Dhamma is the "orientation" as well as the completion. May all of us reach the Ultimate Goal of the Dhamma. >LOve > >Cybele > With Metta, Bhante D. 6273 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > According to the Pali texts, only panna can > > eradicate defilements and lead > > towards the end of the volitional cycle. The > > development of upekkha > > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly > > abidings) is an aspect > > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but > > in and of itself leads > > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the > > development of high > > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are > > reduced, but in fact > > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather > > than removed. > > Great post. I'm a great fan of equanimity too, > meaning that I very much like anything which > conditions it--a certain sign of akusala (the liking, > I mean). Yes, I know what you mean. In my case I think I like (a) the sense of keeping calm when I might otherwise react with lobha or dosa, and (b) the idea of being someone who is relatively less subject to the vagaries of pleasant and unpleasant feeling. None of this of course is kusala of any level! Jon I also think that everything in your post is > spot on in the context of satipatthana in everyday > life. > > > The development of panna is not contingent on, or > > particularly assisted > > by, developing equanimity. > > I guess it could be argued that upekkhaa contributes > to pańńaa and to the eradication of defilements when > it is a feature of some of the advanced jhana states > which lead to nibbana by way of the jhanas. As I have > no experience of this and don't expect to, I don't > give it that much thought. Outside this (I think) > very unusual context, and certainly for the purposes > of most of our experience, I think your points are > very well made (for what my opinion's worth). > > mike 6274 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 4:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear group, Here is a section from Nina van Gorkoms book The Perfections leading to enlightenment. http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm Chapter 10 is about Equanimity THE PERFECTION OF EQUANIMITY Equanimity, upekkhă, is another perfection the Bodhisatta fulfilled. Upekkhá is in this case not neutral feeling but the sobhana cetasika which is tatra—majjhattata, evenmindedness or equanimity. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) gives the following definition of equanimity: Equanimity has the characteristic of promoting the aspect of neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and repulsion; reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of their own kamma is its proximate cause. The Bodhisatta developed the perfection of equanimity together with right understanding. Through equanimity he was imperturba­ble in the face of abusive speech and wrong done to him. He was impartial even to those who wished him well and he did not expect any reward. The same commentary 2) states that equanimity is indispensable to the practice of the other perfections. We read: For without equanimity, the aspirant cannot relinquish something without making false discriminations over gifts and recipients. When there is no equanimity, he cannot purify his virtue without always thinking about the obstacles to his life and to his vital needs. Equanimity perfects the power of renunciation for by its means he overcomes discontent and de­light. It perfects the functions of all the requisites (by enabling wisdom) to examine them according to their origin. When energy is aroused to excess because it hasn’t been exa­mined with equanimity, it cannot perform its proper function of striving. Forbearance and reflective acquiescence (the modes of patience) are possible only in one possessed of equa­nimity. Because of this quality, he does not speak deceptively about beings or formations. By looking upon the vicissitudes of worldly events with an equal mind, his determination to fulfil the practices he has undertaken becomes completely unshakable. And because he is unconcerned over the wrongs done by others, he perfects the abiding in lovingkindness. Thus equanimity is indispensable to the practice of all the other perfections. We need equanimity with the other perfections. While we are generous we should also be impartial. We should not think that we should only give to this person and not to that person. Equa­nimity helps us not to be disturbed when we lose dear people or when other people hurt or harm us. We can remember that whatever happens has to happen because it has been conditioned already. When we see others suffer and we cannot do anything for them, we can remember that we all are heirs to our own kamma, that we receive the results of our own deeds. Then there can be kusala citta with equanimity instead of aversion. When other people behave badly we can realize that there are no people, only akusala dhammas which appear and that these arise according to their conditions. Then we will be more tolerant, we will not say or think, “These people are terrible’ . There are accumulations of kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas which appear in our own and other people’s behaviour. We can learn to have equanimity towards our own akusala and kusala. Instead of being disturbed by our anger, there can be right understanding which realizes anger as a conditioned năma, and at that moment the citta is kusala. Neither kusala nor akusala belongs to us. We know that the perfections have to be developed so that kusala can become ones nature, but we should not think of accumulating kusala for ourselves, there should not be clinging to “my kusala” . When kusala dhammas arise they are beneficial, they can condition the arising of kusala dhamma again in the future. The commentary states that because of equanimity towards the vicissitudes of life the Bodhisatta’s mind becomes completely unshakable in his determination to fulfil the practices he has undertaken. The vicissitudes of life are gain and loss, praise and blame, honour and dishonour, bodily ease and misery. These worldly conditions change all the time but one can face them with equanimity. If we really understand that the different si­tuations in our life are conditioned, that they are beyond con­trol, we do not prefer a particular situation to another one, we do not prefer anything else to the development of understanding of the present object. In that way the perfection of determi­nation can develop, it can eventually become unshakable. During our pilgrimage we were in many kinds of situations, some pleasant, some unpleasant. One of our friends fell on a piece of iron grill and wounded her knee so badly that it had to be stitched, but she remained calm. Another friend was robbed, she lost in the train to Bodhgaya her handbag with her money and her passport. She had aversion at first, but later on she rea­lized that one cannot change what has happened already. She said that if she would think of it again and again it would only cause her more unpleasantness. We also had many pleasant expe­riences. It was a happy occasion to be in the holy places where we could recollect the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. At times there was dana all around me. One of the last evenings in Delhi there were in front of me friends making an offering to the monks, and while I looked backwards I saw the leader of our group making a speech to the drivers in order to thank them and offering them the money we all had collected for them. Whatever situation occurs, be it pleasant or unpleasant, it is conditioned. During our journey we were often reminded, “This is a new situation and it is conditioned”. This helped me not to try to control things when the situation was not as I wanted it to be. Khun Sujin said: A new situation can be a condition for the development of satipatthana. One should be ready to accept many kinds of situations. Gain and loss. No lobha when there is gain, not too much dosa when there is loss. Each moment is in itself another situation. Awareness can arise at any time. Then there is no clinging to another situation or another object, there is no selection of objects. Khun Sujin also said that right understanding should be devel­oped in order to see that all realities are the same in the sense that they cannot stay, that they arise and fall away. In that way there will be less clinging to them. I was inclined to think that one can only learn about realities in situations when there are Dhamma discussions, and I was clinging to such situa— tions. During this journey I came to understand more that, if we do not cling to particular situations and we can see them as only năma and rupa which are conditioned, we can learn from any kind of situation. We can learn that there are năma and rupa while we are in different places such as the Thai Embassy, while we are walking in the park or having lunch with friends and eating delicious food. If we see each moment as a completely new situation which is conditioned we can be reminded to be aware of the present mo­ment, without planning or selecting objects, without thinking of the future. Näma and rupa arise because of their own conditions and we never know what kind of reality will arise next, we can­not plan anything. If we really understand this we will not be distracted from our goal, that is, the development of under­standing of this moment. Out of compassion the Bodhisatta developed all the perfections for innumerable lives. He aspired to help other beings to attain enlightenment as well. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) states that each perfection is accompanied by compassion and skilful means. The same commentary 2) explains that “skilful means” is the wisdom which makes the noble qualities of the Bodhisatta into requisites of enlightenment. When he developed these virtues he always had in mind the attainment of Buddhahood for the sake of other beings. The “great aspiration” to help other beings to attain the goal is the condition for all the perfections without exception, the same commentary states. We read about the “Great Compassion” of the Buddha in the “Path of Discrimination” (Patisambhidŕmagga, Part I, Ch 71). First all the dangers and disadvantages of the cycle of birth and death which are seen by the Buddhas are summed up, such as: Worldly life moves on. Worldly life is on the wrong road... The world has no lastingness and is 1ed on. The world has no shelter and no protector. The world has nothing of its own, it has to leave all and pass on. The world is incomplete, insatiate, and the slave of craving. Worldly life is without shelter. Worldly life is without shield. Worldly life is without refuge... Worldly life is no refuge... The world is agitated and disturbed... Worldly life is wounded by darts, pierced by many darts; there is none other than myself to draw out the darts... We then read about numerous other disadvantages of Worldly life. Only a Buddha can by his omniscience fully see the extent of the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death. This arouses his compassion so that he is determined to help other beings to attain freedom from the cycle. Further on we read: Upon the Enlightened Ones, the Blessed Ones, who see thus, “I have crossed over and the world has not crossed over; I am liberated and the world is not liberated; I am controlled and the world is uncontrolled; I am at peace and the world is not at peace; I am comforted and the world is comfortless; I am extinguished and the world is unextinguished; I, having cros­sed over, can bring across; I, being liberated, can liberate; I, being controlled, can teach control; I, being at peace, can pacify; I, being comforted, can comfort; I, being extin­guished, can teach extinguishment,” there descends the Great Compassion. This is the Perfect Ones knowledge of the attainment of the Great Compassion. he compassion of a Buddha cannot be fathomed by ordinary people, it is unequalled. Out of compassion the Buddha taught people the development of right understanding in daily life. The ultimate goal cannot be reached in one life, but even when right understanding just be­gins to develop we come to know things we did not know before. We discover many defilements and also learn to know the more subtle ones. Instead of being distressed about them there can be gratefulness to the Buddha who taught us the wisdom which can eradicate them. When we come to realize our defilements we may remember at once that this is due to the Buddha’s teachings and then there can be recollection of the qualities of the Buddha (Buddhanussati). Also a moment of gratefulness to the Buddha is a conditioned moment and it can be object of mindfulness so that it can be known as not self. We read in the “Discourse on the Simile of the Cloth”(Middle Length Sayings I, no. 7) that the Buddha speaks about the defilements of the mind which are: greed, covetousness, male­volence, anger, malice, hypocrisy, spite, envy, stinginess, deceit, treachery, obstinacy, impetuosity, arrogance, pride, conceit and indolence. When the monk knows them as they are he can get rid of them. The text states: .When, monks, the monk thinks that greed and covetousness is a defilement of the mind.. .that indolence is a defilement of the mind, and having known it thus, the defilement of the mind that is indolence is got rid of, he becomes possessed of unwa­vering confidence in the Awakened One and thinks: “Thus indeed is he the Lord, perfected, wholly self—awakened, endowed with knowledge and right conduct, well—farer, knower of the worlds, incomparable charioteer of men to be tamed, teacher of devas and mankind, the Awakened One, the Lord.” we read that some people attained arahatship by making the Recollection of the Buddha their object of meditation, but they could not attain it without developing satipatthăna in daily life. We read in the “Gradual Sayings” (Book of the Sixes, Ch III, par. 5) that the Buddha spoke to the monks about six recollections, six states of everminding. We read about the first one: Herein, monks, the ariyan disciple ever minds the Tathăgata: “He is the Exalted One.. .“ Monks, what time the ariyan dis­ciple minds the Tathagata, his heart is not lust—obsessed, nor hate—obsessed, nor obsessed by infatuation; upright in heart is he at that time, moved free, raised from greed; and this greed, monks, is a name for the fivefold sensuous pleasures. Verily, monks, by making this thought their object, some men thereby are purged. Ariyans have an unwavering confidence in the Buddha, because they have discovered the reason why the Buddha had become en­lightened: he had developed all the perfections and he had, through right understanding, realized the true nature of all realities appearing at the present moment. The ariyans proved for themselves that by following the Path the Buddha taught they could reach the goal. We may say that the perfections must be developed together with right understanding, in our daily life, but are we doers of the teachings? We need to develop all the perfections, and if one of them is lacking we cannot reach the goal. Whenever there is an opportunity for generosity we should use it in order to be less selfish. We need to develop sila, wholesomeness in action and speech, without an idea of self who could suppress akusala. We should remember that in sila is also included mindfulness of whatever appears through the six doors. We need the perfection of renunciation, renunciation from selfish clinging to sense pleasures. We should remember that all kusala dhammas are renun­ciation. We need to develop the perfection of wisdom, comprising wisdom of different levels: understanding based on listening and considering and direct understanding of realities. We need the perfection of energy so that we will not become discouraged but continue on the way, no matter what will happen. We need the perfection of patience, especially when we are in difficult situations or when other people are disagreeable to us. We should regard such circumstances as a test, an opportunity to accumu­late patience. We need truthfulness to investigate all realities of our daily life, our defilements included. The perfection of truthfulness is the sincere inclination to follow the way lead­ing to the eradication of defilements. We need determination to develop all the perfections so that eventually enlightenment can be attained. We need the perfection of mettă, so that we think more of the welfare of other people and cling less to the impor­tance of self. We need the perfection of equanimity to face the worldly conditions without being disturbed by them. Satipatthana should be developed together with all the perfections. This will help us to reduce the clinging to an idea of self who has to de­velop the perfections. All the perfections support the growth of right understanding so that it can eventually perform the function of detachment from all conditioned realities. ---------------------------------------- 6275 From: Christine Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 5:17pm Subject: Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear All, I subscribe to a number of mailing groups where discussions regarding sentience occasionally arise. (Currently one group is expressing views about vegetables and plants being different gradations of sentience.) Sometimes, the discussion gets bogged down in vegetarianism vs. meat eating, and how many sentient beings are harmed with either form of food production. That is not what I would like your thoughts on..... My question is "Is there any way that I can help a non-human sentient being towards (sooner than otherwise) having a better rebirth? If the scriptures don't rule it in, do they rule it out?" I have a companion animal - Rusty the Dhamma Dog. He is a Great Dane/Alsatian cross-breed, and came to us as a stray (just for one night, then if we don't find the owner, he goes to the pound, O.K.? Yes, Mum) seven years ago. But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of The Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into the house, into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems affected in some way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted area at any other time. This has only started over the last three months. He is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. On another list in a discussion ranging over Impermanence and Anatta, the idea that some beings have memories carried over from a past life was raised. Is it possible that hearing the cadence of chants could be helpful in some way to him, even though he doesn't process the language? What about seeing statues of the Buddha? Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left have any ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in Buddhist countries about this? Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have a rebirth as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have wondered about this before...... Regards, Christine (slightly embarrassed, and slightly garbled.) 6276 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:11pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders, In view of the fact that we are dealing with your understanding of ignorance only, it would be appropriate that you describe what you understand ignorance to be. Try to not refer to the scriptures. Use your own experience. In view of the fact that I attended a gymnasium in Holland, I find it hard to believe that you, who attends a gymnasium in Denmark, does not possess a dictionary in which the term "locus" is defined. However, this link should help you. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary A helpful hint, your question was: Where did ignorance arise? Still play any role playing games? Kind Regards Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <180015253121038031172218004036129208> > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:52 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > > > >Anders, > >I have just one or two questions in relation to your simple question. > >Is your question based on your own understanding only? > > Pretty much, yes. > > >Why do you presuppose that there is a locus for ignorance? > > 'locus'.... No mention of it in my dictionary. Would you care to define that > word for me? 6277 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, Thank you! Can you give an example of being aware of upekkha arising in your own life? Metta, Victoria At 11:56 PM 7/13/01 -0700, you wrote: >Dear group >Just a minor point which probably everyone knows. Equaminity >(tatramajjhattata cetasika) arises with all kusala. (there can >also be a feeling of calm and indifference with akusala but this >is not equanimity in the true sense) > >True equanimity arises with all moments of satipatthana even if >the object is unpleasant such as fear or anger. This is >something we may see whenever there are genuine moments of >insight as there must be detachment from self and thus a high >level of equanimity (for that moment or moments). Even if one >doesn't want to have equanimity it would be impossible to stop >it arising because it is conditioned to arise at these moments. >On the other hand if one thinks that equanimity comes first and >later understanding then one will miss the present moment; >rather than understanding the anattaness of whatever appears, >learning to study the true uncontrollabilty of dhammas, there is >likely to be a perhaps hidden effort to change the present >object into whatever concept one has of calm or equanimity. > >As insight develops it is true that equanimity also develops but >as jonothon and kom pointed out there are various types of >equanimity. One might try to use equanimity as a measure of >progress but be developing a kind of equanimity (kusala or >akusala) that is not related to satipatthana. >robert > > > 6278 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity At 01:42 PM 7/14/01 +0800, you wrote: Dear Jon, Thank you very much for your informative reply. Where does the practitioner go from here? It is a bit discouraging to think one can't cultivate uppekha because it might be akusala. Is it also true that one could display gross dosa and still be experiencing uppekha? I would be unconvinced. Many thanks. Metta, Victoria >I'm not sure I want to comment on this! But the key thing to remember is >the observation made by Robert, that the level of a person's calmness (or >lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of understanding. This is >because the function of understanding is to understand the true >characteristic of the reality that presents itself at the present moment, >be it a nama or rupa, and nothing more than that, while a person's level >of calm at a given moment is a reflection of a number of things including >his/her accumulated wholesomeness of various kinds (including samatha) or >possibly even his/her attachment to the current object. > >Jon > 6279 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:08pm Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, Thank you for this. It explains much. It leads me to this question. I understand that this question may be seen as being provocative, but I do not have this intention. I am not so much concerned with the moral overtones that my question could generate. My question is, and I ask it completely without bias, does the the self-immolation of Thich Quang Duc, June 11, 1963, in Saigon, Vietnam bear witness to the equanimity described in the source you quote? My feeling is that it does, but I want to test this. I don't expect you to know this monks state of mind when this event occured, but from all accounts the man mentally prepared for this event weeks before, sat down in the square, was doused with petrol by his associates and set on fire. He died , from what was visible, in complete tranquility. Only a few months later, the Catholic based government, which had set about to subtly repress Buddhism, and which had not altered it's intended course despite months of intensive lobbying from Buddhist quarters , including Thich Quang Duc, was overthrown. Thank you Robert and anyone else for your considered input. Herman --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > Dear group, > Here is a section from Nina van Gorkoms book The Perfections > leading to enlightenment. > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm > Chapter 10 is about Equanimity > > > THE PERFECTION OF EQUANIMITY > Equanimity, upekkhă, is another perfection the Bodhisatta > fulfilled. Upekkhá is in this case not neutral feeling but the > sobhana cetasika which is tatra—majjhattata, evenmindedness or > equanimity. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) gives the > following definition of equanimity: > > Equanimity has the characteristic of promoting the aspect of > neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its > manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and repulsion; > reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of > their own kamma is its proximate cause. > > The Bodhisatta developed the perfection of equanimity together > with right understanding. Through equanimity he was > imperturba­ble in the face of abusive speech and wrong done to > him. He was impartial even to those who wished him well and he > did not expect any reward. > > The same commentary 2) states that equanimity is indispensable > to the practice of the other perfections. We read: > > For without equanimity, the aspirant cannot relinquish something > without making false discriminations over gifts and recipients. > When there is no equanimity, he cannot purify his virtue without > always thinking about the obstacles to his life and to his vital > needs. Equanimity perfects the power of renunciation for by its > means he overcomes discontent and de­light. It perfects the > functions of all the requisites (by enabling wisdom) to examine > them according to their origin. When energy is aroused to excess > because it hasn't been exa­mined with equanimity, it cannot > perform its proper function of striving. Forbearance and > reflective acquiescence (the modes of patience) are possible > only in one possessed of equa­nimity. Because of this quality, > he does not speak deceptively about beings or formations. By > looking upon the vicissitudes of worldly events with an equal > mind, his determination to fulfil the practices he has > undertaken becomes completely unshakable. And because he is > unconcerned over the wrongs done by others, he perfects the > abiding in lovingkindness. Thus equanimity is indispensable to > the practice of all the other perfections. > > We need equanimity with the other perfections. While we are > generous we should also be impartial. We should not think that > we should only give to this person and not to that person. > Equa­nimity helps us not to be disturbed when we lose dear > people or when other people hurt or harm us. We can remember > that whatever happens has to happen because it has been > conditioned already. When we see others suffer and we cannot do > anything for them, we can remember that we all are heirs to our > own kamma, that we receive the results of our own deeds. Then > there can be kusala citta with equanimity instead of aversion. > When other people > behave badly we can realize that there are no people, only > akusala dhammas which appear and that these arise according to > their conditions. Then we will be more tolerant, we will not say > or think, "These people are terrible' . There are accumulations > of kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas which appear in our own > and other people's behaviour. We can learn to have equanimity > towards our own akusala and kusala. Instead of being disturbed > by our anger, there can be right understanding which realizes > anger as a conditioned năma, and at that moment the citta is > kusala. Neither kusala nor akusala belongs to us. We know that > the perfections have to be developed so that kusala can become > ones nature, but we should not think of accumulating kusala for > ourselves, there should not be clinging to "my kusala" . When > kusala dhammas arise they are beneficial, they can condition the > arising of kusala dhamma again in the future. > > The commentary states that because of equanimity towards the > vicissitudes of life the Bodhisatta's mind becomes completely > unshakable in his determination to fulfil the practices he has > undertaken. The vicissitudes of life are gain and loss, praise > and blame, honour and dishonour, bodily ease and misery. These > worldly conditions change all the time but one can face them > with equanimity. If we really understand that the different > si­tuations in our life are conditioned, that they are beyond > con­trol, we do not prefer a particular situation to another > one, we do not prefer anything else to the development of > understanding of the present object. In that way the perfection > of determi­nation can develop, it can eventually become > unshakable. > > During our pilgrimage we were in many kinds of situations, some > pleasant, some unpleasant. One of our friends fell on a piece of > iron grill and wounded her knee so badly that it had to be > stitched, but she remained calm. Another friend was robbed, she > lost in the train to Bodhgaya her handbag with her money and her > passport. She had aversion at first, but later on she rea­lized > that one cannot change what has happened already. She said that > if she would think of it again and again it would only cause her > more unpleasantness. We also had many pleasant expe­riences. It > was a happy occasion to be in the holy places where we could > recollect the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. At times there > was dana all around me. One of the last evenings in Delhi there > were in front of me friends making an offering to the monks, and > while I looked backwards I saw the leader of our group making a > speech to the drivers in order to thank them and offering them > the money we all had collected for them. > > Whatever situation occurs, be it pleasant or unpleasant, it is > conditioned. During our journey we were often reminded, "This is > a new situation and it is conditioned". This helped me not to > try to control things when the situation was not as I wanted it > to be. Khun Sujin said: > > A new situation can be a condition for the development of > satipatthana. One should be ready to accept many kinds of > situations. Gain and loss. No lobha when there is gain, not too > much dosa when there is loss. Each moment is in itself another > situation. Awareness can arise at any time. Then there is no > clinging to another situation or another object, there is no > selection of objects. > > Khun Sujin also said that right understanding should be > devel­oped in order to see that all realities are the same in > the sense that they cannot stay, that they arise and fall away. > In that way there will be less clinging to them. I was inclined > to think that one can only learn about realities in situations > when there are Dhamma discussions, and I was clinging to such > situa— tions. During this journey I came to understand more > that, if we do not cling to particular situations and we can see > them as only năma and rupa which are conditioned, we can learn > from any kind of situation. We can learn that there are năma and > rupa while we are in different places such as the Thai Embassy, > while we are walking in the park or having lunch with friends > and eating delicious food. > > If we see each moment as a completely new situation which is > conditioned we can be reminded to be aware of the present > mo­ment, without planning or selecting objects, without thinking > of the future. Näma and rupa arise because of their own > conditions and we never know what kind of reality will arise > next, we can­not plan anything. If we really understand this we > will not be distracted from our goal, that is, the development > of under­standing of this moment. > > Out of compassion the Bodhisatta developed all the perfections > for innumerable lives. He aspired to help other beings to attain > enlightenment as well. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) > states that each perfection is accompanied by compassion and > skilful means. The same commentary 2) explains that "skilful > means" is the wisdom which makes the noble qualities of the > Bodhisatta into requisites of enlightenment. When he developed > these virtues he always had in mind the attainment of Buddhahood > for the sake of other beings. The "great aspiration" to help > other beings to attain the goal is the condition for all the > perfections without exception, the same commentary states. > > We read about the "Great Compassion" of the Buddha in the "Path > of Discrimination" (Patisambhidŕmagga, Part I, Ch 71). First all > the dangers and disadvantages of the cycle of birth and death > which are seen by the Buddhas are summed up, such as: > > Worldly life moves on. > > Worldly life is on the wrong road... > > The world has no lastingness and is 1ed on. > > The world has no shelter and no protector. > > The world has nothing of its own, it has to leave all and > > pass on. > > The world is incomplete, insatiate, and the slave of > > craving. > > Worldly life is without shelter. > > Worldly life is without shield. > > Worldly life is without refuge... > > Worldly life is no refuge... > > The world is agitated and disturbed... > > Worldly life is wounded by darts, pierced by many darts; > > there is none other than myself to draw out the darts... > > > > We then read about numerous other disadvantages of Worldly > life. Only a Buddha can by his omniscience fully see the extent > of the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death. This > arouses his compassion so that he is determined to help other > beings to attain freedom from the cycle. Further on we read: > > Upon the Enlightened Ones, the Blessed Ones, who see thus, "I > have crossed over and the world has not crossed over; I am > liberated and the world is not liberated; I am controlled and > the world is uncontrolled; I am at peace and the world is not at > peace; I am comforted and the world is comfortless; I am > extinguished and the world is unextinguished; I, having cros­sed > over, can bring across; I, being liberated, can liberate; I, > being controlled, can teach control; I, being at peace, can > pacify; I, being comforted, can comfort; I, being extin­guished, > can teach extinguishment," there descends the Great Compassion. > > This is the Perfect Ones knowledge of the attainment of the > Great Compassion. > > he compassion of a Buddha cannot be fathomed by ordinary > people, it is unequalled. > > Out of compassion the Buddha taught people the development of > right understanding in daily life. The ultimate goal cannot be > reached in one life, but even when right understanding just > be­gins to develop we come to know things we did not know > before. We discover many defilements and also learn to know the > more subtle ones. Instead of being distressed about them there > can be gratefulness to the Buddha who taught us the wisdom which > can eradicate them. When we come to realize our defilements we > may remember at once that this is due to the Buddha's teachings > and then there can be recollection of the qualities of the > Buddha (Buddhanussati). Also a moment of gratefulness to the > Buddha is a conditioned moment and it can be object of > mindfulness so that it can be known as not self. > > We read in the "Discourse on the Simile of the Cloth"(Middle > Length Sayings I, no. 7) that the Buddha speaks about the > defilements of the mind which are: greed, covetousness, > male­volence, anger, malice, hypocrisy, spite, envy, stinginess, > deceit, treachery, obstinacy, impetuosity, arrogance, pride, > conceit and indolence. When the monk knows them as they are he > can get rid of them. The text states: > > > > .When, monks, the monk thinks that greed and covetousness is a > defilement of the mind.. .that indolence is a defilement of the > mind, and having known it thus, the defilement of the mind that > is indolence is got rid of, he becomes possessed of unwa­vering > confidence in the Awakened One and thinks: "Thus indeed is he > the Lord, perfected, wholly self—awakened, endowed with > knowledge and right conduct, well—farer, knower of the worlds, > incomparable charioteer of men to be tamed, teacher of devas and > mankind, the Awakened One, the Lord." > > we read that some people attained arahatship by making the > Recollection of the Buddha their object of meditation, but they > could not attain it without developing satipatthăna in daily > life. > > We read in the "Gradual Sayings" (Book of the Sixes, Ch III, > par. 5) that the Buddha spoke to the monks about six > recollections, six states of everminding. We read about the > first one: > > Herein, monks, the ariyan disciple ever minds the Tathăgata: > > "He is the Exalted One.. ." Monks, what time the ariyan > dis­ciple minds the Tathagata, his heart is not lust—obsessed, > nor hate—obsessed, nor obsessed by infatuation; upright in heart > is he at that time, moved free, raised from greed; and this > greed, monks, is a name for the fivefold sensuous pleasures. > Verily, monks, by making this thought their object, some men > thereby are purged. > > Ariyans have an unwavering confidence in the Buddha, because > they have discovered the reason why the Buddha had become > en­lightened: he had developed all the perfections and he had, > through right understanding, realized the true nature of all > realities appearing at the present moment. The ariyans proved > for themselves that by following the Path the Buddha taught they > could reach the goal. > > We may say that the perfections must be developed together with > right understanding, in our daily life, but are we doers of the > teachings? We need to develop all the perfections, and if one of > them is lacking we cannot reach the goal. Whenever there is an > opportunity for generosity we should use it in order to be less > selfish. We need to develop sila, wholesomeness in action and > speech, without an idea of self who could suppress akusala. We > should remember that in sila is also included mindfulness of > whatever appears through the six doors. We need the perfection > of renunciation, renunciation from selfish clinging to sense > pleasures. We should remember that all kusala dhammas are > renun­ciation. We need to develop the perfection of wisdom, > comprising wisdom of different levels: understanding based on > listening and considering and direct understanding of realities. > We need the perfection of energy so that we will not become > discouraged but continue on the way, no matter what will happen. > We need the perfection of patience, especially when we are in > difficult situations or when other people are disagreeable to > us. We should regard such circumstances as a test, an > opportunity to accumu­late patience. We need truthfulness to > investigate all realities of our daily life, our defilements > included. The perfection of truthfulness is the sincere > inclination to follow the way lead­ing to the eradication of > defilements. We need determination to develop all the > perfections so that eventually enlightenment can be attained. We > need the perfection of mettă, so that we think more of the > welfare of other people and cling less to the impor­tance of > self. We need the perfection of equanimity to face the worldly > conditions without being disturbed by them. Satipatthana should > be developed together with all the perfections. This will help > us to reduce the clinging to an idea of self who has to de­velop > the perfections. All the perfections support the growth of right > understanding so that it can eventually perform the function of > detachment from all conditioned realities. > ---------------------------------------- > 6280 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:35pm Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Hi all, Can't someone translate the Tipitaka into Latin? Then at least I could verify the translations :-) Just as an aside, these days we all hear the difference between New York English, Californian English, English English, South African English, New Zealand English, Australian English, Hong Kong English, Indian English etc. All these Englishes have one taste, but nobody knows what it's root sounded like. Metta Herman --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jim & Joe, > > Glad to see some smart guys working on this--it's > certainly over my head. > > mike > > --- Jim Anderson wrote: > > > >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile > > I work on it > > >myself. > > > > > >Thanks very much. > > > > > >Joe > > > > I think some of these phrases may be beyond my > > capability after having > > worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: > > "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti > > attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to > > understanding the > > "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the > > unestablished" (tappurisa > > compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa > > is the problem word > > which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m > > (cause). The Saddaniti > > explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti > > kaara.na.m" (it > > creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it > > effects, produces, yields > > its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? > > 6281 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 8:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Dear Herman, If you know latin - especially the grammar- you have a good basis for learning pali as the pali grammar books in English seem to be written by scholars with a background in latin. I don't any latin and have a big problem figuring out what they mean by substantive and nominative etc. Pali is an inflected language like latin. The world sure needs more people who know Pali... robert --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Can't someone translate the Tipitaka into Latin? Then at least > I > could verify the translations :-) > > Just as an aside, these days we all hear the difference > between New > York English, Californian English, English English, South > African > English, New Zealand English, Australian English, Hong Kong > English, > Indian English etc. > > All these Englishes have one taste, but nobody knows what it's > root > sounded like. > > > Metta > > Herman > > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Jim & Joe, > > > > Glad to see some smart guys working on this--it's > > certainly over my head. > > > > mike > > > > --- Jim Anderson wrote: > > > > > >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile > > > I work on it > > > >myself. > > > > > > > >Thanks very much. > > > > > > > >Joe > > > > > > I think some of these phrases may be beyond my > > > capability after having > > > worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: > > > "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti > > > attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to > > > understanding the > > > "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the > > > unestablished" (tappurisa > > > compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa > > > is the problem word > > > which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m > > > (cause). The Saddaniti > > > explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti > > > kaara.na.m" (it > > > creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it > > > effects, produces, yields > > > its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? > 6282 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:05pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! LOCUS Dear Herman Sorry if I interfere but apart the fact that I tried to access your link and couldn't, I find that you are a bit 'over the top' with Anders now. All that mumbo jumbo about gymnasium is quite strained to fits the subject. However as my Latin is a lot better than my Pali I translate 'locus'. LOCUS: It's a technical term meaning a particular position, point, or place. From the Latin 'place'. In mathematics is a curve or other figure formed by all the points satisfying a particular condition. Hope this clarifies. Metta CYbele >From: Herman >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 10:11:37 -0000 > >Anders, > >In view of the fact that we are dealing with your understanding of >ignorance only, it would be appropriate that you describe what you >understand ignorance to be. Try to not refer to the scriptures. Use >your own experience. > >In view of the fact that I attended a gymnasium in Holland, I find it >hard to believe that you, who attends a gymnasium in Denmark, does >not possess a dictionary in which the term "locus" is defined. >However, this link should help you. > >http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary > >A helpful hint, your question was: Where did ignorance arise? > >Still play any role playing games? > >Kind Regards > > >Herman > 6283 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori, Is that a challenge! I guess there is more equanimity in my life than before but I don't like to admit it! (well actually I do, but that is conceit). I might start thinking I really know something based on this unreliable indicator. basically because there is more insight into anatta and conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and effect- whenever something untoward happens it is natural that reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection always comes with equanimity. Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition equanimity - the more we understand them the more this factor is developed. However, by conditions, until one is very advanced a coincidence of causes may come about where strong anger or fear arise. Did you read the examples I gave of the sotapannas who were distressed and crying after the death of their relations? robert --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Robert, > Thank you! Can you give an example of being aware of upekkha > arising in > your own life? > > Metta, > Victoria > > > At 11:56 PM 7/13/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Dear group > >Just a minor point which probably everyone knows. Equaminity > >(tatramajjhattata cetasika) arises with all kusala. (there > can > >also be a feeling of calm and indifference with akusala but > this > >is not equanimity in the true sense) > > > >True equanimity arises with all moments of satipatthana even > if > >the object is unpleasant such as fear or anger. This is > >something we may see whenever there are genuine moments of > >insight as there must be detachment from self and thus a high > >level of equanimity (for that moment or moments). Even if one > >doesn't want to have equanimity it would be impossible to > stop > >it arising because it is conditioned to arise at these > moments. > >On the other hand if one thinks that equanimity comes first > and > >later understanding then one will miss the present moment; > >rather than understanding the anattaness of whatever appears, > >learning to study the true uncontrollabilty of dhammas, there > is > >likely to be a perhaps hidden effort to change the present > >object into whatever concept one has of calm or equanimity. > > > >As insight develops it is true that equanimity also develops > but > >as jonothon and kom pointed out there are various types of > >equanimity. One might try to use equanimity as a measure of > >progress but be developing a kind of equanimity (kusala or > >akusala) that is not related to satipatthana. > >robert > > > 6284 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori Dear Robert >> >Dear Robert, >Thank you! Can you give an example of being aware of upekkha arising in >your own life? > >Metta, >Victoria I loved it Tori!!! After the long, detailed academic exposition of Robert you asked him the very core of the meaning of equanimity - experience! Very tricky. Robert your 'disciples' are revolting against you! ;-)))) Metta Cybele 6285 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine >Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left have any >ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in Buddhist >countries about this? From what I have observed in Southeast Asia, the monks don't care even for the material condition of this animals, you can guess the spiritual one. There are plenty od stray dogs and cats that find 'hospitality' in the monasteries and normally thay are not rejected or ill treated but if there is laypeople to feed them ok, if not they starve all the same but most they have many diseases that go on not cured and they suffer a lot. In my opinion this is a wrong understanding of compassion - I would rather eliminate this animals in such awful conditions than let than survive without proper attending their needs. >Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have a rebirth >as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have wondered >about this before...... I would suppose that when one reach the human being form should not reborn in a lower realm anymore but seems that is possible if you accumulate akusala or unwholesome deeds. But the Tipitaka experts here can clarify you a lot better than me. Metta Cybele 6286 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Thank you very much for your informative reply. Where does the > practitioner > go from here? It is a bit discouraging to think one can't cultivate > uppekha > because it might be akusala. …. You are not the first to have made the observation that my posts are discouraging, so I must face up to the fact that it must be so! My apologies, Tori, if I have cast too negative a light on things -- this certainly was not intended. On the positive side, I think I indicated that it is not in fact necessary to cultivate upekkha in order to develop understanding. The realities arising and presenting themselves at this very moment are suitable objects for study by awareness, if only we realised it. It needs only some understanding at an intellectual level of what the development of awareness involves and particularly what can be its object for the right conditions to be present. There is no other obstacle, except of course our abysmal lack of accumulated awareness and panna, to starting now. On the question of cultivating upekkha, I think I indicated only that one must be truly honest with oneself lest the wrong kind of reality be developed. As I understand it, the cultivation of any wholesome quality/reality begins with (a) understanding as much as possible about the reality intellectually and (b) recognising it when it arises, normally and naturally, in our daily life. It is this recognition, coupled with the appreciation of the wholesomeness of the moment when it arises, that is a condition for the further arising of the same quality in the future, rather than any idea that we should have or would like to have more of it. Does this make sense to you? > …. Is it also true that one could display > gross > dosa and still be experiencing uppekha? I would be unconvinced. I think I said that awareness could arise even during periods of sustained lobha or dosa. If that did in fact happen, then those particular moments arising in amongst all the akusala would be accompanied by the mental factor of upekkha, although we may not necessarily be aware of that characteristic. It helps I think to realise that even during periods of sustained akusala there is not just the lobha or dosa arising, despite our perception to the contrary. There are the usual moments of the 5 sense-door impression -- seeing, hearing, experiences through the body-sense etc -- and the thinking that analyses those objects and forms them into the concepts by which the world is known to us. All this is going on at the same time also, and these moments may not be the least bit coloured by the persistent lobha or dosa. Really, there's nothing to be discouraged about! Jon 6287 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thank you for this. It explains much. > > It leads me to this question. I understand that this question > may be > seen as being provocative, but I do not have this intention. I > am not > so much concerned with the moral overtones that my question > could > generate. > > My question is, and I ask it completely without bias, does the > the > self-immolation of Thich Quang Duc, June 11, 1963, in Saigon, > Vietnam > bear witness to the equanimity described in the source you > quote? > > My feeling is that it does, but I want to test this. I don't > expect > you to know this monks state of mind when this event occured, > but > from all accounts the man mentally prepared for this event > weeks > before, sat down in the square, was doused with petrol by his > associates and set on fire. He died , from what was visible, > in > complete tranquility. > > Only a few months later, the Catholic based government, which > had set > about to subtly repress Buddhism, and which had not altered > it's > intended course despite months of intensive lobbying from > Buddhist > quarters , including Thich Quang Duc, was overthrown. > > Thank you Robert and anyone else for your considered input. > > Herman > > > > _______________ Dear Herman. Actually I have wondered from time to time over this matter myself. The same act by the falun gong members recently made me think again. In the end I don't think we can know whether either the falung gong or the monk had kusala citta at those times and thus the type of kusala equanimity described in the texts. People can apparently endure pain with a sort of self-hypnotic concentration that is not genuine kusala. From a very cursory reading of the type of meditation that falung gong do I wonder if this was their experience. On the other hand I feel the monk was a different matter - he had years of training and study of Dhamma and would have known a fair amount about kusala and akusala - it may be he had at least some level of genuine equanimity. This is just my pure speculation. I would be interested in other comments also. robert 6288 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert (and Tadao) - In a message dated 7/14/01 3:23:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > Excellent post Tadao. > robert > p.s I think the speed of the falling away is even faster than > you mention. > --- ppp wrote: > > Hi, Joe: > > "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the > > Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view > > point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can > > regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada > > Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may > > probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another > > mind will > > follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same > > or different object (through the same or different door > > way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be > > located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment > > experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only > > mind/conciousness > > but a person who houses it. > > Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in > > a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into > > the > > (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of > > mind/conciousness. > > tadao > ============================= I agree, Robert. Tadao has made an important point. If I might add on just one element: While it is the case that there is no continual "mind", it is also the case according to Theravada that there are no gaps between cittas, because of the latent, bhavanga cittas. So, the stream of cittas is gapless and, thus, lends itself to being referred to as "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) 6289 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon & Tori, Hope you don't mind my butting in: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Tori Korshak wrote: > … I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a > lot > of dosa to have panna. I’m not sure I want to comment on this! But the key thing to remember is the observation made by Robert, that the level of a person’s calmness (or lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of understanding. A monk can have excellent view and very little pańńaa because of having experienced little deep insight. As has been repeatedly pointed out recently (I think everyone's in agreement on this), conceptual understanding isn't pańńaa. If his sila is really excellent you might not even be aware of a lot of accumulated dosa, lobha and moha because sati, hiri and ottapa will prevent their verbal, physical and in some cases even mental manifestations. So I think he can still be an excellent and worthy monk, striving rightly and preserving the Dhammavinaya even without a lot of pańńaa. Well, just my two cents' worth on behalf of the bhikkhus... mike 6290 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Quite right Howard. One of the reasons it is so hard to perceive the arising and falling away is because of this gaplessness. The Abhidhamma points to the many different types of cittas and so the apparent substantiality of 'mind' is shown to be an illusion - and there are then powerful conditions being laid for direct insight into this. robert --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Tadao) - > > In a message dated 7/14/01 3:23:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > Excellent post Tadao. > > robert > > p.s I think the speed of the falling away is even faster > than > > you mention. > 6291 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity At 09:36 PM 7/14/01 +0800, you wrote: >Tori > >Really, there's nothing to be discouraged about! > >Jon Dear Jon, No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed to the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? Metta, Victoria 6292 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:22pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon Perfectly pertinent I think (as usual). One point: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Would you not > consider the clinging to be a possible > object for panna? Since I don't think clinging (upaadaana?) can arise simultaneously with pańńaa, then exactly what is it that pańńaa takes as an object? Is it the recollection or recognition of clinging? If so, can recollection or recognition be a foundation of mindfulness? (I'm assuming that what can be an object of pańńaa can be an object of satipatthana). Thanks in advance. mike 6293 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, Many thanks. >Dear Tori, >Is that a challenge! >I guess there is more equanimity in my life than before but I >don't like to admit it! (well actually I do, but that is >conceit) No I don't think it is if you are just being honest but I know what you mean because anything one says about oneself is likely to be debated. > I might start thinking I really know something based >on this unreliable indicator. >basically because there is more insight into anatta and >conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes >life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and effect- >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection >always comes with equanimity. Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking space. >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition >equanimity - the more we understand them and put them into practice? > the more this factor is >developed. However, by conditions, until one is very advanced a >coincidence of causes may come about where strong anger or fear >arise. Did you read the examples I gave of the sotapannas who >were distressed and crying after the death of their relations? Sorry I think I missed it but I get the point. >robert If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two imposters just the same... Metta, Victoria 6294 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > In my case I think I > like (a) the sense of > keeping calm when I might otherwise react with lobha > or dosa, and (b) the > idea of being someone who is relatively less subject > to the vagaries of > pleasant and unpleasant feeling. > > None of this of course is kusala of any level! Exactly--what a pity! mike 6295 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine, --- Christine wrote: But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of The Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into the house, into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems affected in some way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted area at any other time. This has only started over the last three months. He is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. Interesting! Reminds me of Robert's story of the 500 bats--as I don't have the reference, I'll defer to Robert. mike 6296 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori > >Tori > > > >Really, there's nothing to be discouraged about! > > > >Jon > >Dear Jon, >No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference >between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed to >the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? > >Metta, >Victoria Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu!!!!!! No comments to be added. Metta Cybele 6297 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori, --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > > I might start thinking I really know something based > >on this unreliable indicator. > >basically because there is more insight into anatta and > >conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes > >life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is > >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and > effect- > >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that > >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection > >always comes with equanimity. > > Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking space. _________ tell us about your consideration here. It can help others. ------------ > >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > >equanimity - the more we understand them > > and put them into practice? _______ I often here this type of comment about putting them into practice. It seems that this is what we should do. To me though it seems that understanding itself arises and does its duty according to its nature. Rather than putting anything into practice what is most helpful is if 'I' get out of the way. If someone abuses me, for example, if there is any understanding then there is no bad feeling or wish to react. It could be a condition for immediate thinking about kamma and vipaka in which case there is the level of equanimity of that level. Or there might be satipatthana, of some degree, which knows sound as sound - as simply a dhamma. Then there is no reaction, and also no thinking about putting anything into practice. Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that time I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and seeing and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown because she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not to let the other party know). robert 6298 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Kipling Dear Tori >> >No I don't think it is if you are just being honest but I know what you >mean because anything one says about oneself is likely to be debated. So we continue to discuss Dhamma and never relate it to our experience? So sad... >>Rob: > >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > >equanimity - the more we understand them Tori: >and put them into practice? So smart this woman; Tori prepare your ribcage to a tight hug at the first opportunity. Rob: > > the more this factor is > >developed. However, by conditions, until one is very advanced a > >coincidence of causes may come about where strong anger or fear > >arise. Did you read the examples I gave of the sotapannas who > >were distressed and crying after the death of their relations? > Tori: >Sorry I think I missed it but I get the point. > >If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two imposters >just the same... > Now Tori not to be barely provocative, but let's examine this writer that you seem so fond of - Rudyard Kipling. Personally I felt in his books an immense love for India and a very deep understanding of the India culture. Nonetheless Kipling was what we could stereotype as a 'bastard colonialist', he always had heavily opposed against Indian independence. All his understanding and love of India would not allow him to perceive the imperious need for self governement and sovranity of his fellows Indians because he was not at all equanimous in his judgements; he was inclined to paternalistic viewsa bout India and he was absolutely convinbced that the presence of British in India was actually right and fair. He could not see the opression and the injustice. He was too conditioned by his own culture and his love of India that lead him to a 'possessive attitude'. He had both kusala and akusala thoughts and deeds regarding the very same subject. Metta Cybele 6299 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > (When there is equanimity in such > situations try not to > let the other party know). Ha! Words to live by...People can really take offense, for example, when you don't share their rage over social injustice. Oh well... mike 6300 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Mike Dear Mike Tori wrote: > > … I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited >a lot of dosa to have panna. > >I’m not sure I want to comment on this! But the key >thing to remember is >the observation made by Robert, that the level of a >person’s calmness (or >lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of >understanding. Ok till here I can relate. Let's use real, pertinent examples? I am a bit fed up of academic abstractions. I find Bhante Dhammapyio for example not exactly a model of calm and 'let it be' attitude but nevertheless he is very wise. When he retains opportune he doesn't miss kicking derrieres to wake us up from our delusions, including myself. I commited the mistake of reacting immediately myself to his imposing tones ( bhante don't eat me up, you know I love you dearly!) misreading his great capacity for compassion and his insightful view of things. But as indeed he showed wisdom, I could reconsider my position very fast. And I must admit that he is quite attentive lately and doesn't sound anymore 'bossy'. ;-) >As has been repeatedly pointed out recently (I think >everyone's in agreement on this), conceptual >understanding isn't pańńaa. It seems most obvious indeed. >If his sila is really >excellent you might not even be aware of a lot of >accumulated dosa, lobha and moha because sati, hiri >and ottapa will prevent their verbal, physical and in >some cases even mental manifestations. So I think he >can still be an excellent and worthy monk, striving >rightly and preserving the Dhammavinaya even without a >lot of pańńaa. Yes but you are depicting a monk who anyway has an excellent sila what prevents his aversion, craving, and delusion to fully manifest. What I understood Tori meant is a monk who has manifested a lot of dosa and therefore becomes incongruent with wisdom, because his aversion doesn't allow him to have a penetrative view of reality and without insight there is no wisdom I suppose. The monk is the very model of the Buddha's teachings and accomplishments for the laypeople, the embodiment of Sangha and if he becomes too wordly, meaning delusional and angered it is indeed quite difficult to trust such a person to give you spiritual advice. Personally I don't trust advice from U Pandita himself because he is such a swollenhead, proud, unsympathetic monk that I don't care about his advices. His arrogance precedes him. And my past accumulations led me to be quite responsive to arrogant behavior. The same doesn't happens with Ajahn Sucitto or Sumedho for example, I feel them quite reliable. And many others for that matter. Metta Cybele 6301 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Mike Rob: >> > (When there is equanimity in such > > situations try not to > > let the other party know). Mike: >Ha! Words to live by...People can really take offense, >for example, when you don't share their rage over >social injustice. Oh well... > >mike Well Mike perhaps is not because we don't share their rage but simply because we don't show sympathy for their plight what can be demoralising. Have you thought of it? Metta Cybele 6302 From: Victor Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:51am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity > Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that time > I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and seeing > and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still > comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. > However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown because > she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of > remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not to > let the other party know). Perhaps it is possible that apathy to other's feeling is sometimes mistaken for equanimity here? Metta, Victor 6303 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:23am Subject: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders Dear group Anders wrote: > > >I don't meditate much myself to be honest. My emphasis is on awareness >in daily life. Cybele: > > The emphasis of everybody must necessarily be on awareness in daily life >Anders unless you seclude yourself in an Himalayan cave to practice formal >meditation continuously and even so.... > > But do you think that formal meditation is not necessary do develop >insight, considering that it was the 'magic formula' taught by the Buddha >himself and it was through Satipathana that he reached enlightenment? Anders: >I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, >I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make >the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really >poor at it :-)). What does it means 'prepared to do the effort'? Meditation is an essential mental training and important part of the Buddhist tradition, as studying and listening to Dhamma. According with the original texts. >But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to practise. He >hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. Well but we are not Hui-neng or have his past accumulations. Unless you are talking only ofr yourself. What I am not going to evaluate or prove right or wrong but I am talking generally. >On the other hand, I know people who have meditated sincerely for 25 years, >and are still as stuck as they were before (well, may be not entirely, >but....). Well this should not be our concern. I refer to my own experience naturally but the fact of being stuck is due to a wrong effort not necessarily to the technique itself. Or to our past accumulations. >It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are >incapable of being mindful, and that you are constantly being dragged >around by your defilements, then meditation might be good for you, so as to >loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a catalyst >to foster awareness throughout your daily life. Well this is the purpose - purification of the mind. And who is not constantly dragged around by defilements? Who can say earnestly that is fair to skip this mental training and not doubt that one is misled by preferences and self conceit? >If you just sit for one hour and then go on with your normal daily >activities as ignorantly as always, then it doesn't matter if you even >attain the Jhanas. You will be a master of meditation, but hardly a master >when it comes to Panna. Well we are considering that one pays attention to daily awareness and not shielding himself behind anything whatsoever - meditation or study or hedonism. And Jhanas are not the goal in Vipassana. We don't practice Samatha to attain Jhanas, we practice Vipassana to develop insight. >On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in your >daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you might >not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. Who can affirm such a thing considering that we are immersed in delusion? Who can be sure of mental health, spiritual health? With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation of the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily meditation in formal terms. >Expedient means, such as meditation, are purely used to counter >defilements. If there's nothing to counter, why do it? Expedient means Anders? Meditation is taught everywhere as the core of Buddhist teachings indeed. Naturally I am talking about Buddhism not other approaches that might interest you. >A good friend of mine, also a Theravadan, has found seated meditation >extremely beneficial, and has been able to use that as a catalyst for daily >awareness and thus nurture Panna, which is amazingly strong in him. That is all the point indeed. I just speak about Theravada tradition and Vipassana. What is written in Satipathana Sutta as Buddha's original teaching is unequivocable in my understanding. The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the most famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? Quotating for further discussion and reference: 'This is the only way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four Foundations of Mindfulness.' Metta Cybele 6304 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Kipling At 03:56 PM 7/14/01 +0000, you wrote: >Dear Cybele, I'm not fond of Kipling's work especially nor even this poem but it does contain a nugget of Buddhist thought which comes back to me sometimes in regards to equanimity so I use it with ambivalence! Metta, Victoria >Now Tori not to be barely provocative, but let's examine this writer that >you seem so fond of - Rudyard Kipling. >Personally I felt in his books an immense love for India and a very deep >understanding of the India culture. >Nonetheless Kipling was what we could stereotype as a 'bastard colonialist', >he always had heavily opposed against Indian independence. >All his understanding and love of India would not allow him to perceive the >imperious need for self governement and sovranity of his fellows Indians >because he was not at all equanimous in his judgements; he was inclined to >paternalistic viewsa bout India and he was absolutely convinbced that the >presence of British in India was actually right and fair. He could not see >the opression and the injustice. >He was too conditioned by his own culture and his love of India that lead >him to a 'possessive attitude'. >He had both kusala and akusala thoughts and deeds regarding the very same >subject. > >Metta > >Cybele 6305 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all directed as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. In fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's. When we move with the speed of mind that we do, this medium and its deceptiveness can lead to heedlessness and one can very easily hurt another with words -- especially when people are so attached to them. Not everyone is capable of letting words go... tanha for words... After taking time to reflect and being "silent" on this list and some others, it becomes apparent that sometimes we need to take a long, hard look at the verbolatry that can be made to appear so sincere, so right, so true -- when in fact, the contradictions not only of terms of Dhamma, but of the very Dhamma Itself appear most readily. As far as "butt kicking" is concerned: I am really interested in seeing others manage their own kicks to their derrieres! I have to watch my own derriere and keep it on the cushion more and more! I can only recommend that others do the same. Practice is where it is at... not in chatter. When it comes to Dhamma, my sometimes perhaps, imposing tones are not what matters. Often, some people just cannot handle the truth and subvert it into an emotional reaction, railing against the person who expresses it and projecting their own difficulties. In this case, "I" hardly matters. I am not here to have go around after go around. Sometimes, too, no matter what peripheral words we use to deliver the truth with, it can still be hard for another to realize. The advice of the Blessed One was to avoid extremism and fanaticism, and to be especially careful of holding views. Look at what people write --- it is forensic. We do not retract the written word as easily as vocalized speech. The two are entirely different in many respects. What I cannot sometimes feel at ease with is the way the simple Dhamma and its practice gets turned into something complex and seemingly out of reach for so many. While we have this luxury, I am reminded of the illiterate people I have met in Asia who practice Dhamma and meditate and "get it". They may not be so erudite but they practice, and practice well. They literally shine light and live the Dhamma which is observed in their daily lives and actions. I wonder what they would offer concerning all the words floating around made to look so important? I wonder if some of us could be open to the advice of an illiterate dirt farmer or a housewife with zero formal education? Let's just face the facts, a lion's roar does not exactly fit in with the New Age "fluff" and the subversion of the Dhamma we can readily see for ourselves. A small point here is that there is no such thing as "modernizing" the Dhamma. It is not something to be bought and sold like a commodity and, in fact, it is "big business" today. If we are to have a great capacity for compassion, then it has to begin with ourselves, yes, but in fact, too, it is always other directed when it is real compassion. And that may seem paradoxical but in fact it tells us how deeply interconnected we actually all are. Something that would help here: Let us not be so concerned that we are offended, but more concerned that we offend! Enough words. I would rather leave us with one for practice and with its full implications: Metta, Bhante D. 6306 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Mike >Dear Cybele, >Yes but you are depicting a monk who anyway has an excellent sila what >prevents his aversion, craving, and delusion to fully manifest. >What I understood Tori meant is a monk who has manifested a lot of dosa and >therefore becomes incongruent with wisdom, because his aversion doesn't >allow him to have a penetrative view of reality and without insight there is >no wisdom I suppose. >The monk is the very model of the Buddha's teachings and accomplishments for >the laypeople, the embodiment of Sangha and if he becomes too wordly, >meaning delusional and angered it is indeed quite difficult to trust such a >person to give you spiritual advice. Yes this is what I meant. >Personally I don't trust advice from U Pandita himself because he is such a >swollenhead, proud, unsympathetic monk that I don't care about his advices. >His arrogance precedes him. >And my past accumulations led me to be quite responsive to arrogant >behavior. >The same doesn't happens with Ajahn Sucitto or Sumedho for example, I feel >them quite reliable. >And many others for that matter. > >Metta > >Cybele > >Many thanks. Metta, Victoria 6307 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Kipling Dear Tori > >Dear Cybele, > >I'm not fond of Kipling's work especially nor even this poem but it does >contain a nugget of Buddhist thought which comes back to me sometimes in >regards to equanimity so I use it with ambivalence! > >Metta, >Victoria This is the famous anglosaxon humour that I cannot get always. :-) However I wanted to illustrate my thought about the subject and Kipling served its purpose. No time or energy wasted. Fair enough. ;-) See you tomorrow at Sarah's mother place in Sussex. Love Cybele > > >Now Tori not to be barely provocative, but let's examine this writer that > >you seem so fond of - Rudyard Kipling. > >Personally I felt in his books an immense love for India and a very deep > >understanding of the India culture. > >Nonetheless Kipling was what we could stereotype as a 'bastard >colonialist', > >he always had heavily opposed against Indian independence. > >All his understanding and love of India would not allow him to perceive >the > >imperious need for self governement and sovranity of his fellows Indians > >because he was not at all equanimous in his judgements; he was inclined >to > >paternalistic viewsa bout India and he was absolutely convinbced that the > >presence of British in India was actually right and fair. He could not >see > >the opression and the injustice. > >He was too conditioned by his own culture and his love of India that lead > >him to a 'possessive attitude'. > >He had both kusala and akusala thoughts and deeds regarding the very same > >subject. > > > >Metta > > > >Cybele > 6308 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:06am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Cybele, I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the most > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and Vipassana the same way. If I read what Nina is saying right, Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is currently arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when Satipathana is rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing your eyes, and observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a retreat. Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that they are denying the development of wisdom. Your intellectualizing-male friend, kom 6309 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:14am Subject: Equanimity and Bhante Dear Bhante So nice your straightforwardeness, much appreciation! I can't take it all and respect you honesty. First place I did not declare that you are 'nervy' or anything like that but you are not conventionally the classic 'calm almost aphatic', meaning by this aloof, Theravada monk. This I wanted to enhance. As you can see you immediately <> to my remarks and took charge of the situation in order to clarify and to express your viewpoint. This is what I appreciate and at the beginning would let me perplexed as my experience with monks, whether easterners as westerners was much more familiar with extremes of aloofness or arrogance than your assertive tones. Translating or they ignore you or they 'preach' you. And I am talking about real life not virtual exchanges. I send this right away and after will continue the discussion of this subject. Metta Cybele >>It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all >>directed >as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. >In >fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! > >This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the >inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's...... 6310 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >Dear Cybele, > >I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure >how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). If I ever manage to wind up you and Robert I will feel very powerful indeed!!! ;-) I should be so lucky! Kom I am very glad that you replied and will be my pleasure discuss this issue that for me is quite valuable with a person like you with sense and sensibility. Love Cybele > >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the >most > > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? > >But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no >challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. > >If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not >everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and >Vipassana the same way. If I read what Nina is saying right, >Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is >currently >arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when Satipathana is >rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing your eyes, and >observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a retreat. > >Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical >example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is >about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices >Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising >nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. > >Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what >Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some >people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that >they are denying the development of wisdom. > >Your intellectualizing-male friend, > >kom > > > 6311 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante - correction >From: "cybele chiodi" >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante >Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:14:56 -0000 > > >Dear Bhante > >So nice your straightforwardeness, much appreciation! >I can't take it all and respect you honesty. I meant I CAN take it all. Sorry bhante! Cybele 6312 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity At 08:43 AM 7/14/01 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Robert, > >--- > > > > > I might start thinking I really know something based > > >on this unreliable indicator. > > >basically because there is more insight into anatta and > > >conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes > > >life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is > > >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and > > effect- > > >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that > > >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection > > >always comes with equanimity. > > > > Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking space. Just as you say-seeing the transaction as kamma and vipaka, equanimity arose. >_________ >tell us about your consideration here. It can help others. Just as you say-seeing the transaction as kamma and vipaka, equanimity arose. >------------ > > > >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > > >equanimity - the more we understand them > > > > and put them into practice? >_______ >I often here this type of comment about putting them into >practice. It seems that this is what we should do. To me though >it seems that understanding itself arises and does its duty >according to its nature. Rather than putting anything into >practice what is most helpful is if 'I' get out of the way. >If someone abuses me, for example, if there is any understanding >then there is no bad feeling or wish to react. >It could be a condition for immediate thinking about kamma and >vipaka in which case there is the level of equanimity of that >level. Or there might be satipatthana, of some degree, which >knows sound as sound - as simply a dhamma. Then there is no >reaction, and also no thinking about putting anything into >practice. >Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that time >I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and seeing >and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still >comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. >However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown because >she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of >remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not to >let the other party know). Ha! This is very funny ,but I have also seen it defuse situations. When there is little reaction, they can cool off quickly too as long as equanimity is not (or is not perceived as ) indifference. >robert Metta, Victoria 6313 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 3:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >>Dear Cybele, > >I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure >how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). Highly contagious; you will end up dancing the salsa in a buddhist temple! ;-) >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the >most famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for >the practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? Kom: >But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no >challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. > >If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not >everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and >Vipassana the same way. That's the crucial point that I want to clarify!!! To me and not only, to lots of scholars and practitioners, the interpretation of Satipathana can be only one and all attempts to disclose other meanings are subverting the so called original tradition. >If I read what Nina is saying right, >Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is >currently arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when >Satipathana is rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing >your eyes, and observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a >retreat. I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it seems to me just logical. The practice must be a continuum. But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice whatsoever. > >Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical >example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is >about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices >Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising >nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. I am perfectly aware that Robert doesn't practice formal meditation anymore Kom. It doesn't disturb me that much indeed. And I am not inferring in anybody's personal choices or considerations. I most value and everybody knows by now - spiritual independence. What I want to assess is the actual interpretation of the Satipathana Sutta. You know very well that very few Dhamma teachers (laymen or monastics) ever dare to dismiss the formal practice whether enhancing or not the direct observation of reality, nama rupa. This is my query. And I am voicinbg out the perplexities of quite a lot of members of this list as well. > >Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what >Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some >people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that >they are denying the development of wisdom. I never thought or hinted so. I am only and earnestly as in my habitual pattern trying to research on this issue that most interest me. I suffered from clinical depression, a terrible crisis quite recently (and you well know) yet I could realize myself that even in such particular conditions I was able to observe the arising and characteristics of phenomena and develop right understanding of my own suffering. This doesn't solve my question however. Unlike you I ma trying to convey what Satipathana is. :-) > >Your intellectualizing-male friend, > >kom > Your hotblooded/passionate female friend. ;-) Love Cybele 6314 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 3:43am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, You definitely peaked my interest. --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a means > of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it > seems to me just logical. > The practice must be a continuum. > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice whatsoever. What do you mean by formal practice? When people say they want to follow a practice, I often interpret that they mean following some set of taught behaviors and paying attention to certain objects. I have attended two different "types" of retreats, each of which the teachers mentioned that the practices were in fact taken from the Satipathanna sutta. Both of them have these components: 1) Sitting cross-legged, and "bind" one's attention to the breathing. At this point, although other objects may arise, one "acknowledges" it and then lets it go, and goes back to paying attention to breathing. 2) Walking slowly and paying attention to certain things. 3) Doing some thing else, but paying attention to certain things. 4) No talking during such retreat. kom 6315 From: John Palmer Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:09am Subject: A lurker surfaces (again)..... Hello everybody, Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the urge to participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' as my friend Cybele would say :-) A few of you may know me from my recent 'de-lurking' in Dhamma-List in which case I apologise for the repetition. My name is John Palmer and I'm based in Romford, not far from London. I'm 39 and having been practising for around 4 years, my interest having been stirred up by a course at the Buddhist Society here. I'm very much a beginner and am sensitive to the advanced level of dialogue in this group - I will try and make sure my posts are suitable for this audience. I am just beginning to study Abhidhamma via Nina van Gorkom's books and various web resources as mentioned here. I'd like to thank you all for helping inspire me to deepen my practice and take the jump into attempting to learn Abhidhamma - the wisdom of the contributions here is very evident. With Metta John 6316 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante Dear Cybele, You are welcome. One thing I have had over the years is a good sense of humor. I think that the Blessed One probably had a very good one, too. The important thing is for us to be honest --- but not hurt others with words --- even when truthful. The other day I met two young men who were preaching Islam to me. I listened. And having had perhaps a bit more on the ball in terms of theological background, and having studied Islam and the Koran, I could have been critical and made them look like fools, but what would this serve? In the end, I was told by one of the young men that it was my "type of person" that Islam badly needed! Why? Because when we live the Holy Life it shows. No need to have any pride and no need to be ostentatious or to ostracize! I know you did not make a declaration that I was nervy! LOL!!! But what is interesting is how you mentioned I was not the ""conventionally the classic 'calm almost [apathetic], meaning by this aloof, Theravada monk." Isn't interesting how stereotypes prevail? Being gentle is not to be so aloof, and aloofness is detachment not lethargy and apathy. And another thing, too, is that the Sangha is not a heard of sheep or cattle. I do not see myself as <> to your remarks as much as trying to respond! And it is not a matter of taking charge, either, as much as it is a matter of "response-ability" read: "responsibility". As long as we know about volition and know that the how of living is not as important when we have a why to live, then we can see how communication will eventually develop and be enhanced to facilitate a common experiential ground to share in to practice in --- and it is hardly confining, but most liberating. Again, I think taking time to observe rather to always jump to the keyboard (and this is not to accuse anyone in particular) to give a view allows us the pausing or spacing that is necessary to be sure one is practicing sati as much as is possible. Often times, people do not intend to be akusala but they end up in that situation. Why? They lose skillfulness and get pulled into the very things they really do not want to be pulled into. Again, lobha, dosa, moha, avijja and tanha. So often we have the map and the directions but we end up getting lost from reading the signs and following directions on the road. And these days, it seems to me, that people choose the fast lane and speed. Speed kills. There is nothing I know of in the Tipitaka that says one has to practice in the ways we see practice being carried out today. Expecting that the Dhamma is to fit into a life-style and must change in conform to meet the times is not Right View. It is we, with out life-styles, and all the things that go with them, and with all the New Age "stuff" that needs to conform to the Dhamma. I close with these wonderful teachings: Letting Go "We" are like a tree. "Attachment" is like vines. If we feel desire for sights, they'll wind around our eyes. If we feel desire for sounds, they'll wind around our ears, and so forth. When we're all tangled up like this, we'll have to die. Some people don't let themselves die naturally. They take their attachments and tie up their own throats. * The world is like red ants that crawl along vines. If we cut away the vines that entangle our tree, the ants won't be able to get to it. * We have to cut away whatever we can. If the mind is long, make it short. If it's short, make it round. If it's round, make it smooth. If it's smooth, make it shine. That way it can roll around without getting stuck on anything, and can gain release from all suffering and stress. * Suffering comes from "having." This is why people in the world are suffering so. If they have five, they want to increase it to ten. Once they have ten they think they'll be able to relax. But when they actually get ten, they then increase it to 100. And then they have to keep looking for more all the time, for fear that they'll lose what they have. Only when they stop breathing will they stop looking for more. This is why we're taught that having is suffering. And this is why the Buddha arranged not to have anything at all. He said, "Physical form, feeling, perception, thought-formations, and consciousness are not mine. The senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste, feeling, and ideation are not mine." When nothing was his, how could anyone take anything away from him? Who could come and oppress him? If people give us things, we say that we "get," that we "have." If they take them away, we say that we "lose." But when there's nothing to own, there's no having or losing. And when that's the case, where will there be any suffering? * Nibbana is the end of all having and lacking. * If we don't know how to let go, we're going to suffer. Suppose that we're carrying something in our hand. If we don't let it go and put it down, we won't be able to take hold of anything better than what we've got. This is why the Buddha taught us to let go. For one thing, our hand won't get sweaty from carrying things around. Secondly, we can take what we've put down, turn it over, and look at it from every side to see what it really is. Say that we're holding a knife tight in our fist. We can't look at it to see what kind of knife it is. But if we open our fist and put the knife down, we can then look at it carefully to see whether it's made from steel, wood, horn, or ivory, whether it's well-made or not, and what uses it's good for. * To hold onto the body is to hold onto old kamma. To let go of the body is to let go of old kamma. And when we can let go in this way, there will be no more kamma in the body. It's the same as with a piece of property. If we take possession of it, with a deed and the boundary staked out, there tend to be problems with trespassing, swindling, boundary disputes, and cases in court. But if we don't take possession of it, and simply let it be public property, there will be no troubles or quarrels. This way the heart can be at its ease. * If the heart gets caught up on anything, it's got to be bad. If you can see being born and not being born as equal, being sick and not being sick as equal, dying and not dying as equal, as having the same price, then the mind can relax and not be caught up on anything at all. * In the first stage we let go of evil and start doing good. In the second stage we let go of evil and some forms of good. In the third stage we let go of everything good and evil, because everything is fashioned by nature and thus undependable. We do good but we're not attached to it. When you let go, you have to do it intelligently, and not in a ruinous way -- i.e., by not doing good. You can't hold on even to your opinions, much less to material things. When you do good, you do it for the sake of the living beings of the world, for your children and grandchildren. You do everything in the best way possible, but you're not attached to it, because you know that all things fashioned are inconstant. This way your heart can be clear and bright like a jewel. If you get caught up on praise or blame, you're foolish. It's like drinking other people's saliva. When you act rightly, there are people who will say that you're right and those who will say that you're wrong. When you act wrong, there are people who will say that you're wrong and those who will say that you're right. There's nothing constant about good or evil, right or wrong. * Evil comes from good, and good from evil. For example, when we eat rice we say it's delicious, but then as it goes down through the body it turns into something just the opposite. Thieves come from rich people. If people didn't have possessions and treasures, where would there be any thieves to steal from them? The Buddha saw that evil isn't something you can depend upon. Good isn't something you can depend upon. That's why he let go of both good and evil by not connecting their wires into his heart. He gained release from all good and evil and so transcended all the affairs of the world (loka-dhamma). That was how he entered the highest happiness. * The power of good and evil is like a magnet that pulls the mind to do good or evil and then be born in good or evil places in line with its pull. If we do good or evil, it's as if we leave magnets behind in the world. Those magnets will pull our minds to their level. People who aren't intelligent enough to know how to avoid or extract themselves from the power of good and evil are sure to be pulled along by the force field of these magnets. They'll have to keep swimming around in the world of rebirth. This is why wise people try to find a way to cut the force field so that they can escape its power and float free. In other words, they do good and cut the force field. They do things that may not be good, and they cut the force field. They don't let these things connect. In other words, they don't get attached to the things they've done. They don't keep fondling them. This is what it means to be discerning: knowing how to cut the force fields of the world. * The mind is neither good nor evil, but it's what knows good and knows evil. It's what does good and does evil. And it's what lets go of good and lets go of evil. * It's not the case that things will progress if we cling to them, or deteriorate if we let them go. * Attachment is like a bridge. If there's no bridge, who's going to walk across it? There's just this side of the river and the other side. The eye exists, so it can see both sides, but there's no connection. The mind that isn't caught up on its preoccupations is like a lotus leaf in the water. The water can't seep into the leaf. It simply rolls around as a bead across the surface. There's awareness, but no attachment. * Awareness without attachment is like electricity without a wire. There's just brightness. When there's no wire, no one can get electrocuted. Or you could say that it's like a flame that doesn't need a lamp. No wick gets used up, no oil gets consumed, and yet there's light. * If we separate the body and the mind from each other, our ordinary awareness disappears, but that doesn't mean that awareness is annihilated. It's still there, but it's a special awareness that doesn't have to depend on the body or mind. It's the same as when we separate the wax of a candle from its wick: The flame disappears, but the fire potential isn't annihilated. Whether or not there's fuel, it exists in the world by its very nature. This is the awareness of nibbana. * Arahants can speak and act, but they don't speak or act the way ordinary people do. They know how to separate things. Like a person speaking over the radio: Even though we may hit the radio, it doesn't reach the person speaking. * The experience of release has no sense of "before" or "after," or even any "present." * When the heart is empty, it feels light and free, with no preoccupations at all. Like a bird: Even though it has feet, it doesn't leave any tracks in the air. In the same way, when the mind is empty, even if people criticize you there's no writing in the air. Nothing gets stuck in the heart. * Tranquillity meditation means to keep the mind quiet in craving. Insight meditation means knowing both the mind with craving and the mind without craving. Knowing perceptions of past and future for what they are is intuitive knowledge. This kind of knowledge isn't stuck on any perceptions at all. This is called the skill of release. It's not stuck on the mind with craving or the mind without craving. It's like writing letters in the air. The air doesn't get used up, the writing doesn't require any effort, and you can't read what it says at all. Whether you write good or bad things, you can't read what they say. The air is there, but as for shapes in the air, there are none. from: The Skill of Release Teachings of Ajaan Lee Dhammadharo (Phra Suddhidhammaransi Gambhiramedhacariya) Compiled and Translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu Copyright © 1995, 1999 Metta Forest Monastery For free distribution only. You may reprint this work for free distribution. You may re-format and redistribute this work for use on computers and computer networks provided that you charge no fees for its distribution or use. Otherwise, all rights reserved. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/lee/skillof.html#letting With Maha Metta, Bhante D. 6317 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... -----Original Message----- From: John Palmer Date: Saturday, July 14, 2001 4:09 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... >Hello everybody, > >Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the urge to >participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' as my friend >Cybele would say :-) > >A few of you may know me from my recent 'de-lurking' in Dhamma-List in which >case I apologise for the repetition. > >My name is John Palmer and I'm based in Romford, not far from London. I'm 39 >and having been practising for around 4 years, my interest having been >stirred up by a course at the Buddhist Society here. > >I'm very much a beginner We are all beginners here... no matter how many years we have been practicing... the trick though is to stay a beginner! ;-) 6318 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 5:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom > >Dear Cybele, > >You definitely peaked my interest. Ha, ha!!! I've hooked you! ;-) > "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a >means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > >The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it >seems to me just logical. > > The practice must be a continuum. > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice >whatsoever. Kom: >What do you mean by formal practice? When people say they want to >follow a practice, I often interpret that they mean following some set of >taught behaviors and paying attention to certain objects. The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the Buddha himself not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist philosophy. I quote from the Satipathana Sutta literally and you can verify the authenticity of my words on the Maha-Satipathana-Sutta being the 22nd Text of the Collection of Long Discourses of the Buddha (Digha- Nikaya, as you I read the texts even if I am not a fundamentalist. "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four Foundations of Mindfulness." "What are the Four? Herein (in this teaching) a monk dwells practising body-contemplation on the body, ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, having overcome covetousness and grief concerning the world: he dwells practising feeling-contemplation on feelings, ardent, etc, etc: he dwells practising mind-contemplation on the mind, ardent, etc...: He dwells practising mind-object-contemplation on mind-objects aredent, clearly......" "The contemplation of the Body Mindfulness of Breathing And how , monks does a monk dwell practising body-contemplation on the body? Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness alert. Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as you can notice the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' as a fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the reality of body, feelings, mind, mental contents. I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the source of the so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop insight contained in the Satipathana Sutta. Metta Cybele 6319 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert: As for the speed of falling, my guess is it is around 10 to 15 milliseconds. If you have 100 millisecconds, you can access to the meanining of a (familiar) word stored in your brain. If a word is ambigous (e.g. bank (a river back, and financial bank)), both of its meanings are accessed within the first 50 milliseconds of its presentation, and then a processor (human) chooses the contextually correct meaning in the next 50 milliseconds. Subliminall stimuli can be created if their presentation last less than 50 milliseconds. In other words, whithin such a short period of time, we start dwelling on the world of concepts. So, those who have keen pa~~nnaa should be able to "see" (in a figurative use) the world whose arising and falling should be far shorter than 50 milliseconds. However, if (perceptual) phenomena arise and fall as quickly as you've suggested, how would it be possible to "perceive" objects. So my guess on the time of arising/falling of objects is far shorter than 50 milliseconds but not as short as, say, a few milliseconds. Sorry, it's my pure guss. tadao 6320 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 6:37am Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > If you know latin - especially the grammar- you have a good > basis for learning pali Robert, I have 4 years of high-school Latin and 2 years of university Sanskrit and it's still an effort to learn Pali! Best regards, Derek. 6321 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 6:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Dear Derek Dear group >--- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > If you know latin - especially the grammar- you have a good > > basis for learning pali > >Robert, > >I have 4 years of high-school Latin and 2 years of university >Sanskrit and it's still an effort to learn Pali! > >Best regards, > >Derek. Sadhu x 3 dhammafriend for remarking this fact. Indeed everytime I see the Pali abstrusities non translated in this as in others lists I wonder if the language agreed to discuss the subjects is actually English or if we are supposed to learn Pali before subscribing. Metta Cybele 6322 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 7:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Rob --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > dear Robert E. > I got around to looking up some details on alcohol. > In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor > readings PTS by nanamoli). > there is a comprehensive section ion the precepts. > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > and other factors. it has many details. > there is one interesting part " But unlike killing, drinking is > always greatly blamable. Why? because it obstructs the ariyan > Dhamma by inducing even madness in a human being". Thanks for this sobering reminder. Jon > p32 "the fruits of abstaining from the opportunity for > negilgence due to wine or liquor are such things as quick > recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, > constant establishment of mindfulness, possession of knowledge, > non-stupidty, non-drivelingness,,,non-confusion, > non-timorousness, non-presumption, uneviousness, truthfulness, > freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom > from dullness day and night, gratitude, libearlty, possesion of > conscience, great understanding, rectitude of view, skill in > distinguishing skill from unskill, and so on"END QUOTE. > > robert > 6323 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Hi, Derek: You have a very good language background. You can start reading a Pali text, placing the text and its translation side-by-side. I am familar with Pali (because I was a Buddhist monk in South-east Asia having spent 12 hours a day reading its texts for the duratin of several years. Spendijng just two months in May and June, I've picked up Sanskrit and teaching it right now as a university credit summer course. (I have 45 students with various language/linguistic background.) Those who know Pali CANNOT read Sanskrit straighforwardly. However, those who know Sanskrit SHOULDN'T have much problem in reading Pali. I strongly encourage you to start reading Pali texts. Don't start with Pali grammar, but start reading the Pali texts. tadao 6324 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 8:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Bhante > >It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all directed >as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. >In fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! Ha! Great Bhante and BTW even if you criticize me I can survive: despite the stereotype I am capable of keeping very cool and accepting situations without making fuss. And if I make fuss I can observe it and reconsider. ;-) However even if will be misread as criticism directed to me, no matter in the least. Fire up bhante! :-))) >This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the >inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's. When we move >with the speed of mind that we do, this medium and its deceptiveness can >lead to heedlessness and one can very easily hurt another with words -- >especially when people are so attached to them. Not everyone is capable of >letting words go... tanha for words... Bhante you touched a subject very dear to me. Practitioners are so prone to observe 'emotional attachments' and refrain from them, like escaping the devil and also blame easily who is ardent and hotblooded as not adequate or enough evolved in the practice but then they are so attached and clinging to their own ideas, conceptual knowledge and intellectual skills and cleverness. What changes - attachment is attachment whether it refers to feelings, to sex, or to ideas. > >After taking time to reflect and being "silent" on this list and some >others, it becomes apparent that sometimes we need to take a long, hard >look at the verbolatry that can be made to appear so sincere, so right, so >true -- when in fact, the contradictions not only of terms of Dhamma, but >of the very Dhamma Itself appear most readily. Verbolatry...bhante I like it too much, very smart! Wait that I must take the cushion to protect my derriere! ;-) Cool bhante, cool! :-) > >The advice of the Blessed One was to avoid extremism and fanaticism, and to >be especially careful of holding views. Look at what people write --- it is >forensic. We do not retract the written word as easily as vocalized >speech.The two are entirely different in many respects. > >What I cannot sometimes feel at ease with is the way the simple Dhamma and >its practice gets turned into something complex and seemingly out of reach >for so many. While we have this luxury, I am reminded of the illiterate >people I have met in Asia who practice Dhamma and meditate and "get it". >They may not be so erudite but they practice, and practice well. They >literally shine light and live the Dhamma which is observed in their daily >lives and actions. I wonder what they would offer concerning all the words >floating around made to look so important? I wonder if some of us could be >open to the advice of an illiterate dirt farmer or a housewife with zero >formal education? Dear Bhante, see I told you were wise without being all holy and serene/detached fashion. Yes the lion's roar; I really appreciate very much! Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu!!!!! I was missing you in the lists, welcome back. In all earnest. The friend I recently introduced you is highly impressed; good bhante you are increasing my own prestige with him, hehehehe!!!Joking! ;-) Metta and a hug Cybele 6325 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante Dear Bhante > >Dear Cybele, > >You are welcome. > >One thing I have had over the years is a good sense of humor. I think that >the Blessed One probably had a very good one, too. Suppose so, who takes oneself too seriously cannot be very smart indeed let alone enlightened. > >The important thing is for us to be honest --- but not hurt others with >words --- even when truthful. Hope my being straightforward haven't hurt you, if so I was unskilful because it was not my intention at all. I most value our friendship and you know that I am very fond of you. If I did hurt your feelings I apologyse, it was out of clumsiness not hostility for sure. > >The other day I met two young men who were preaching Islam to me. I >listened. And having had perhaps a bit more on the ball in terms of >theological background, and having studied Islam and the Koran, I could >have been critical and made them look like fools, but what would this >serve? In the end, I was told by one of the young men that it was my "type >of person" that Islam badly needed! Why? Because when we live the Holy Life >it shows. >No need to have any pride and no need to be ostentatious or to ostracize! Please Bhante, don't convert to Islam I beg you!!!! :-) > >I know you did not make a declaration that I was nervy! LOL!!! > >But what is interesting is how you mentioned I was not the ""conventionally >the classic 'calm almost [apathetic], meaning by >this aloof, Theravada monk." > >Isn't interesting how stereotypes prevail? Being gentle is not to be so >aloof, and aloofness is detachment not lethargy and apathy. And another >thing, too, is that the Sangha is not a heard of sheep or cattle. Stereotypes originate somehow in genuine patterns of behaviour after used as term of reference and generalization. But let it be bhante...I have met enough monks and I can discern the gentle, detached one from the aphatetic, indifferent. By the way thanks for the grammar correction, with this lists I will finish to master this language one day... :-) > >I do not see myself as <> to your remarks as much as trying to >respond! Indeed that's why I used that signs to distinguish the word. I mean, you are quite immediate in your responses. You don't retreat in social conveniences to be accomodating. And it is not a matter of taking charge, either, as much as it is a >matter of "response-ability" read: "responsibility". bhante, the lecture.... dosa, dosa arising! ;-) > >As long as we know about volition and know that the how of living is not as >important when we have a why to live, then we can see how communication >will eventually develop and be enhanced to facilitate a common experiential >ground to share in to practice in --- and it is hardly confining, but most >liberating. Agree without strain. > >Again, I think taking time to observe rather to always jump to the keyboard >(and this is not to accuse anyone in particular) to give a view allows us >the pausing or spacing that is necessary to be sure one is practicing sati >as much as is possible. Bhante you replied to me minutes after I sent the message, confess, don't cheat!!! ;-) You are impulsive as I am. A lot more wise but full of ardour the same! Consider that for me being impulsive is not exactly a flaw. I am almost sleeping on the key board by the way but wanted to reply your mail, now I have to give up. I appreciate a lot the text you sent; can I forward it in another list for the benefit of other practitioners? Love, respect, bows and a big ethereal hug Cybele > 6326 From: gayan Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Yeppers! Always a good reminder... Always sobering..... ALWAYS..... rgds gayan --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > dear > Robert E. > > I got around to looking up some details on alcohol. > > In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor > > readings PTS by nanamoli). > > there is a comprehensive section ion the precepts. > > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > > and other factors. it has many details. > > there is one interesting part " But unlike killing, drinking is > > always greatly blamable. Why? because it obstructs the ariyan > > Dhamma by inducing even madness in a human being". > > Thanks for this sobering reminder. > > Jon > > > p32 "the fruits of abstaining from the opportunity for > > negilgence due to wine or liquor are such things as quick > > recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, > > constant establishment of mindfulness, possession of knowledge, > > non-stupidty, non-drivelingness,,,non-confusion, > > non-timorousness, non-presumption, uneviousness, truthfulness, > > freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom > > from dullness day and night, gratitude, libearlty, possesion of > > conscience, great understanding, rectitude of view, skill in > > distinguishing skill from unskill, and so on"END QUOTE. > > > > robert > > 6327 From: gayan Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:23pm Subject: Re: Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear christine, The answer to your question is a 'YES'. Of course we can help, (and thereby helping ourselves) Sooner or later you will be able to read the story of the brahmin named todeyya. ( A dog is being helped by a human who happened to be the son of the dog's previous human life). And of course there are many stories where non-humans were attracted to the chantings and dhamma preachings, and that causing a better rebirth for them. Commenting for the last part of your post... Of course every being(god,brahma,human etc..) faces the danger of being re-born in lower realms(animals, hell states etc..)unless he/she has attained at least the state of stream-entry. regards gayan --- Christine wrote: > Dear All, > > I subscribe to a number of mailing groups where discussions regarding > sentience occasionally arise. (Currently one group is expressing > views about vegetables and plants being different gradations of > sentience.) Sometimes, the discussion gets bogged down in > vegetarianism vs. meat eating, and how many sentient beings are > harmed with either form of food production. > That is not what I would like your thoughts on..... > > My question is "Is there any way that I can help a non-human > sentient being towards (sooner than otherwise) having a better > rebirth? If the scriptures don't rule it in, do they rule it out?" > > I have a companion animal - Rusty the Dhamma Dog. He is a Great > Dane/Alsatian cross-breed, and came to us as a stray (just for one > night, then if we don't find the owner, he goes to the pound, O.K.? > Yes, Mum) seven years ago. > But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of The > Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into the house, > into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems affected in some > way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted area at > any other time. This has only started over the last three months. He > is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. > > On another list in a discussion ranging over Impermanence and Anatta, > the idea that some beings have memories carried over from a past life > was raised. > Is it possible that hearing the cadence of chants could be helpful in > some way to him, even though he doesn't process the language? > What about seeing statues of the Buddha? > Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left have any > ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in Buddhist > countries about this? > Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have a rebirth > as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have wondered > about this before...... > > Regards, > > Christine > (slightly embarrassed, and slightly garbled.) 6328 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Mike Thanks, I do understand your perspective. mike --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > >Dear Cybele, > > > > >Yes but you are depicting a monk who anyway has an > excellent sila what > >prevents his aversion, craving, and delusion to > fully manifest. > >What I understood Tori meant is a monk who has > manifested a lot of dosa and > >therefore becomes incongruent with wisdom, because > his aversion doesn't > >allow him to have a penetrative view of reality and > without insight there is > >no wisdom I suppose. > >The monk is the very model of the Buddha's > teachings and accomplishments for > >the laypeople, the embodiment of Sangha and if he > becomes too wordly, > >meaning delusional and angered it is indeed quite > difficult to trust such a > >person to give you spiritual advice. > > Yes this is what I meant. > > >Personally I don't trust advice from U Pandita > himself because he is such a > >swollenhead, proud, unsympathetic monk that I don't > care about his advices. > >His arrogance precedes him. > >And my past accumulations led me to be quite > responsive to arrogant > >behavior. > >The same doesn't happens with Ajahn Sucitto or > Sumedho for example, I feel > >them quite reliable. > >And many others for that matter. > > > >Metta > > > >Cybele > > > >Many thanks. > > Metta, > Victoria > 6329 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Dear John, Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other people just as curious about it as you. No question is too basic; as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. best wishes robert --- John Palmer wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > urge to > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > as my friend > Cybele would say :-) > > 6330 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:57pm Subject: putting into practice)wasThe meaning of Equanimity --- Tori Korshak wrote: >Robert: . Even just because it > is > > > >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and > > > effect- > > > >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that > > > >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of > reflection > > > >always comes with equanimity. ________ > > > > > > Victoria:Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking > space. > > > >_________ > >tell us about your consideration here. It can help others. _______ > > Victoria: Just as you say-seeing the transaction as kamma and vipaka, > equanimity arose. > > > >------------ > > > Robert:Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > > > >equanimity - the more we understand them ____________ Victoria: and put them into practice? > >_______ Robert: I often here this type of comment about putting them into > >practice. It seems that this is what we should do. To me > though > >it seems that understanding itself arises and does its duty > >according to its nature. Rather than putting anything into > >practice what is most helpful is if 'I' get out of the way. > >If someone abuses me, for example, if there is any > understanding > >then there is no bad feeling or wish to react. > >It could be a condition for immediate thinking about kamma > and > >vipaka in which case there is the level of equanimity of that > >level. Or there might be satipatthana, of some degree, which > >knows sound as sound - as simply a dhamma. Then there is no > >reaction, and also no thinking about putting anything into > >practice. > >Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that > time > >I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and > seeing > >and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still > >comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. > >However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown > because > >she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of > >remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not > to > >let the other party know). _________ > >Victoria: Ha! This is very funny ,but I have also seen it defuse > situations. When > there is little reaction, they can cool off quickly too as > long as > equanimity is not (or is not perceived as ) indifference. _________ Right. The benefits carry on too. In past times I had a strong tendency to feel slighted when criticised. So in the case above if there had been no right awareness I probably would have gone the rest of the day thinking "why blame me. I do my best, can't she see how busy I am ......." : just increasing dosa (aversion) and delusion. As it was I rectified the problem happily and had no resentment to my boss; and too continued the day learning a little more about nama (mental phenomena) and rupa(physical phenonemena). I think that is why Acharn sujin says a moment of awareness (of satipatthana) is the most valuable thing. robert 6331 From: Alex Tran Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > My question was, where did ignorance arise once it had arisen? Dear Anders, Is it right that everything happens because of conditions? Ignorance arises because of many different causes, but the most important one is because of the lack of panna (wisdom). Perhaps, your question is more philosophical than I understand it? Metta, AT 6332 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine, Just to add to what Mike and gayan said. There are a number of examples in the tetxs of animals listening to Dhamma. A frog listened to the Buddha - he only knew "this is good" was stepped on and squashed and immediately born in a deva realm. he reflected and saw the cause for his heavenly rebirth- he then went and listened to the Buddha more and became a sotapanna on the same day. In the time of Kassapa Buddha 500 bats lived in a cave which was the home of 2 monks who used to discuss Abhidhamma. They couldn't comprehend the meaning but simply knew "this is good" and so strained their little bat-ears, while hanging by their little batwings, to listen again and again to the discussions. They were reborn in a deva realm and carried on from birth to birth in human and deva worlds until the time of this Buddha where they became monks and students of sariputta. They listened to him teach Abhidhamma and all became arahats. It should be remembered that these bats and the frog had all being human in past lives before they took relinking as bat or frog. And so they had developed understanding and other parami during these times . Now they were animal but their accumulations of merit continued to grow. Howvwer, this is fairly rare - it seems that generally animals don't have many opportunties to make merit (until they take birth as human or deva again). robert --- gayan wrote: > Dear christine, > > The answer to your question is a 'YES'. > Of course we can help, (and thereby helping ourselves) > > Sooner or later you will be able to read the story of the > brahmin > named todeyya. ( A dog is being helped by a human who happened > to be > the son of the dog's previous human life). > > And of course there are many stories where non-humans were > attracted > to the chantings and dhamma preachings, and that causing a > better > rebirth for them. > > Commenting for the last part of your post... > Of course every being(god,brahma,human etc..) faces the danger > of > being re-born in lower realms(animals, hell states > etc..)unless > he/she has attained at least the state of stream-entry. > > regards > gayan > > > > > > --- Christine wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > I subscribe to a number of mailing groups where discussions > regarding > > sentience occasionally arise. (Currently one group is > expressing > > views about vegetables and plants being different gradations > of > > sentience.) Sometimes, the discussion gets bogged down in > > vegetarianism vs. meat eating, and how many sentient beings > are > > harmed with either form of food production. > > That is not what I would like your thoughts on..... > > > > My question is "Is there any way that I can help a > non-human > > sentient being towards (sooner than otherwise) having a > better > > rebirth? If the scriptures don't rule it in, do they rule it > out?" > > > > I have a companion animal - Rusty the Dhamma Dog. He is a > Great > > Dane/Alsatian cross-breed, and came to us as a stray (just > for one > > night, then if we don't find the owner, he goes to the > pound, O.K.? > > Yes, Mum) seven years ago. > > But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of > The > > Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into > the > house, > > into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems > affected in > some > > way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted > area > at > > any other time. This has only started over the last three > months. > He > > is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. > > > > On another list in a discussion ranging over Impermanence > and > Anatta, > > the idea that some beings have memories carried over from a > past > life > > was raised. > > Is it possible that hearing the cadence of chants could be > helpful > in > > some way to him, even though he doesn't process the > language? > > What about seeing statues of the Buddha? > > Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left > have > any > > ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in > Buddhist > > countries about this? > > Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have > a > rebirth > > as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have > wondered > > about this before...... > > > > Regards, > > > > Christine > > (slightly embarrassed, and slightly garbled.) > 6333 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:25pm Subject: Pali was: (Vakkali-Ray) Great you are making the effort anyway Derek. We need more accurate translations, more commentarial translations. Meeting Jim Anderson has refired my interest in the study of Pali. best wishes robert > > I have 4 years of high-school Latin and 2 years of university > Sanskrit and it's still an effort to learn Pali! > > Best regards, > > Derek. > 6334 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 3:24pm Subject: Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear tadao, The Burmese teacher Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society)Book of elements) xxvii writes "The elements..arise and cease within a very short time. In the wink of an eye or a flash of lightning the mental elemnts arise and cease a trillion times.`This is just an estimate . the subcommentary takes an even higher figure....." Like many Burmese scholars he doesn't give a reference, except to mention the Anguttara Nikaya, but perhaps Jim or other Pali scholars can find the commentary and Tika where he takes this from. Kom wrote #5838 According to Parichet VI, which discusses the citta > vithi processes, > before a process (3) can arise, there must be > "thousands" of (1), and (2) > processes already taken place repeatedly. By this > description, we can > deduce that, it is not enough for a single rupa (17 > moments of cittas) to > condition the cittas to start experiencing pannati. > It must > take "thousands" of panja-dvara-javana-vithi and > mano-dvara-javana > vithi, which actually experience poramatha aramana, > for the citta to > start "organizing" and "arranging" the sense objects > into a concept. We see that while we have an idea of the great speed of change it is actually much faster. So I think even one syllable of a word is experienced by many cittas arising in processes. robert --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Robert: > As for the speed of falling, my guess is it is around 10 to 15 > milliseconds. If you have 100 millisecconds, you can access to > the > meanining of a (familiar) word stored in your brain. If a word > is > ambigous (e.g. bank (a river back, and financial bank)), both > of its > meanings are accessed within the first 50 milliseconds of its > presentation, and then a processor (human) chooses the > contextually > correct meaning in the next 50 milliseconds. > Subliminall stimuli can be created if their presentation > last less than 50 milliseconds. In other words, whithin such a > short period of time, we start dwelling on the world of > concepts. > So, those who have keen pa~~nnaa should be able to "see" (in a > figurative > use) the world whose arising and falling should be far shorter > than 50 milliseconds. However, if (perceptual) phenomena arise > and > fall as quickly as you've suggested, how would it be possible > to "perceive" objects. So my guess on the time of > arising/falling > of objects is far shorter than 50 milliseconds but not as > short as, say, > a few milliseconds. Sorry, it's my pure guss. tadao > 6335 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... John Welcome from me, too. Looking forward to seeing your contributions on the list. Do feel free to make any comments or ask any questions. Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear John, > Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the > Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and > dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. > Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder > about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other > people just as curious about it as you. No question is too > basic; > as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. > best wishes > robert > --- John Palmer wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > > urge to > > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > > as my friend > > Cybele would say :-) > > > > > 6336 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 5:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele and others, Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply to (some by you, some by Anders, and otehrs) but don't have enough time. Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal meditation though. You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None of these require a special posture to develop. As we read Samyutta Nikaya (translated as Kindred Sayings, P.T.S.) Salayatana Vagga And how monks is a monk composed?* Herein, monks, in his going forth and in his returning a monk acts composedly. In looking in front and looking behind, he acts composedly. In wearing his robe and bearing outer robe and bowl, in eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting he acts composedly. In easing himself, in going, standing, sitting, sleeping, waking, in speaking and keeping silence he acts composedly. Thus, monks, is a monk composed. * composed; in Pali language, sati sampajanna- mindfulness and understanding Make no mistake, if someone wishes to develop mindfulness of breathing he is going to have to be involved in some serious formal meditation. The texts note that this is a difficult subject, not suited for all. In early years I did try this practice and in fact apparently did have some rather exciting periods of concentration. I also developed a lot of attachment to the concentration. I don't say that it can't be developed by others but for myself it seems the objects of the 6 doors are appropriate and beneficial (along with the ways of samatha I just mentioned). I also find the study of the teachings a very strong condition for understanding. On the other hand I know a person or two who are knowledgeable about Dhamma but who seem to have no grasp of the nature of this moment. Sometimes I think the best one could do for them is to lock then in a cave for a year - make them bring to mind their learning for its proper use. Abhidhamma can be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. It is good to be reminded of that danger robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal > practice > >whatsoever. > > Kom: > >What do you mean by formal practice? When people say they > want to > >follow a practice, I often interpret that they mean following > some set of > >taught behaviors and paying attention to certain objects. > > The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the > Buddha himself > not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist > philosophy. > I quote from the Satipathana Sutta literally and you can > verify the > authenticity of my words on the Maha-Satipathana-Sutta being > the 22nd Text > of the Collection of Long Discourses of the Buddha (Digha- > Nikaya, as you I > read the texts even if I am not a fundamentalist. > > "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, > for the > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of > pain and grief, > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, > namely the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness." > > "What are the Four? Herein (in this teaching) a monk dwells > practising > body-contemplation on the body, ardent, clearly comprehending > and mindful, > having overcome covetousness and grief concerning the world: > he dwells > practising feeling-contemplation on feelings, ardent, etc, > etc: > he dwells practising mind-contemplation on the mind, ardent, > etc...: > He dwells practising mind-object-contemplation on mind-objects > aredent, > clearly......" > > "The contemplation of the Body > > Mindfulness of Breathing > And how , monks does a monk dwell practising > body-contemplation on the body? > Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot > of a tree, or > to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body > erect and his > mindfulness alert. > Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." > > > Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as > you can notice > the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' > as a > fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the > reality of > body, feelings, mind, mental contents. > > I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the > source of the > so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop > insight > contained in the Satipathana Sutta. > > Metta > > Cybele > > 6337 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori > Dear Jon, > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference > between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed > to > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? 'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap fits, I'll just have to wear it! But I think this is really another form of the 'intellectual approach vs. practical approach' argument that is often made. Rather than labelling it as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful to consider exactly what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri Sutta (MN 70) [passage A below], the Buddha explained that the development of the path is gradual and involves in succession listening to someone knowledgeable in the teachings, considering what one has heard, understanding that fully at an intellectual level ("gaining a reflective acceptance") and applying what one has understood. So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is at best only a part of the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual progress" teaching, each stage of which has its prerequisites and conditions. Nor is this series of gradual steps a once-and-for-all thing. It continues to be the way of progress until final enlightenment. Even the sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and considering [passage B below, same sutta]. Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. Listening, discussing, considering is forever a necessary part of the path. Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan and Rosanne) enjoy your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be there! Jon A. MLDB translation (p. 582) 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress. 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." B. MLDB translation (p. 580) 11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work to do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more work to so with diligence. 12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants ... and are completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work to do with diligence. They have done their work with diligence; they are no more capable of being negligent. 13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds have not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme security from bondage, that they still have work to do with diligence." 6338 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 6:43pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Since I don't think clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > simultaneously with pańńaa, then exactly what is it > that pańńaa takes as an object? Is it the > recollection or recognition of clinging? Yes, it is as you conjecture, according to my understanding (but I cannot recall where I got this from -- I will let you know if I find a reference any time). Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama that has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the citta that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise simultaneously. However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each kind of citta). The same would apply also where the object of the sati/panna is a rupa and the sati/panna arises not in the same sense-door process but in a mind-door process following it. > If so, can > recollection or recognition be a foundation of > mindfulness? . You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of sati/panna is always a reality and never a concept. The reality that has just fallen away is not regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it has to do with the image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert may be able to elaborate on the finer details of this. Jon 6339 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 7:02pm Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Will be most grateful if they do. I was having this conversation with K. Num the other day about "past" and "present" realities that are objects of satipathanna. As "present" is not actually present, but it is more like as if it hadn't fallen away, i.e., there is no way at the beginning level to actually verify that the object of satipathanna has already fallen way, except from the understandings of how things work. On the other hand, A. Santi mentioned in his Pacaya conversation series that past paramatha dhamma, not only its associated concept, can also be an aramana. This twisted question then arises, if Satipatthana is to know the paramatha dhamma as it actually is, can such "recollected" paramatha dhamma be also the object of satipathanna. kom --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of sati/panna is always a > reality and never a concept. The reality that has just fallen away is not > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it has to do with the > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert may be able to > elaborate on the finer details of this. > > Jon 6340 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, Before we discuss this sutta more (Maha-Satipatthana: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html), let me ask you a few sets of questions: Set 1: Robert, our favorite dhamma friend ========================== 1) Does his recent answer about how "he" practices certify that his practice is formal? He did go to some quiet place, he did contemplate the objects of tranquil meditations, he did walk around (not sure how slowly he walked!), but he did *not* mention that he sat cross-legged and observed the breath. Set 2: Adjuncts of formal practice that is not part of Satipatthana sutta ============================================ 2) As I mentioned my experience in the retreats, they had these components: a) Sitting cross-legged, and "bind" one's attention to the breathing. At this point, although other objects may arise, one "acknowledges" it and then lets it go, and goes back to paying attention to breathing. b) Walking slowly and paying attention to certain things. c) Doing some thing else, but paying attention to certain things. d) No talking during such retreat. a) and c) appear to be in the sutta. b) is in the sutta but there is nowhere that says that one has to walk *slowly*. There is nothing related to d). In the above 4 behaviors, what do you take as the procedures/steps (besides sitting cross-legged and observing the breath) that are necessary to be certified a formal practice? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a OK. Formal practice doesn't mean going to a retreat. > >means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > > >The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it > >seems to me just logical. > > > The practice must be a continuum. > > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice > >whatsoever. OK. We need to apply formal practice in our daily life. > The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the Buddha himself > not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist philosophy. By Buddhist philosophy, do you mean the teachings related to the Abhidhamma, or are you just strictly referring to how people in this group go about discussing the phenomena? Do you consider the Abhidhamma to be the teachings of the Buddha? > "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness." OK. The Buddha says the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthana) is the only path. > "The contemplation of the Body > > Mindfulness of Breathing > And how , monks does a monk dwell practising body-contemplation on the body? > Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or > to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body erect and his > mindfulness alert. > Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." > > Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as you can notice > the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' as a > fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the reality of > body, feelings, mind, mental contents. Do you consider the sutta to be step-by-step instructions or do you consider it to be general guidance, i.e., that all the steps in the sutta need to be done for the practice to be considered formal? Do you consider some of the steps to be pre-requisite to others, i.e, since step (a) is mentioned before step (b), and therefore, (a) has to be done before (b). > > I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the source of the > so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop insight > contained in the Satipathana Sutta. > I will be awaiting your further explanation of what you consider formal, and additional explanations of the Maha-Satipatthana sutta. As you may have noticed, as soon as you start sprinkling some of the intellectualization into this interaction, your intellectualizing male friends start to follow you like herds ;-). By my estimate, by the time you are finished explaining this sutta, you will be the most popular hot-blooded female in the group. I hope you don't mind this so much... kom 6341 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 8:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity (Howard) Howard Many thanks for posting this material, and my apologies for taking some time to get back to you on it. > The following is drawn from Wings to Awakening (from Access to > Insight). I think it is relevant to this discussion. Indeed. But I did not find it particularly easy to follow. Specifically, I got stuck at the point where the author says-- "As such it [equanimity as one of the factors of Awakening (bojjhanga)] can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of non-fashioning that opens to Awakening." What is your take on this passage? > Particularly interesting > to me is the distinction made between the alleged sutta-perspective and > the abhidhamma-perspective. Yes. The passage in question reads (continuing from the passage quoted above)-- "Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as well." It is perhaps unfortunate that the author gives no Abhidhamma reference to check. Again I am puzzled by the terminology. Eg. 'transcendent' as meaning or connoting 'coming into play as one reaches the point of Awakening (where no temporal feedback [??] is possible)'. This makes it difficult for me to say much, unless you can elucidate. Sorry that I cannot contribute anything meaningful at this stage. > You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your > main influence? Never really thought of it in those terms. Over the years I have come to realise that the suttas need a knowledge of the Abhidhamma to be understood correctly. But I have never seen myself as a student of the Abhidhamma as such; I just consult one or 2 standard references as and when I want to check something. Jon *************************************************** G. The Seven Factors of Awakening [ Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section ] [ Jump down to passages §§92-100 ] The seven factors of Awakening (bojjhanga) are closely related to the practice of the four frames of reference. The texts use two patterns to describe this relationship. The first pattern is a spiral, showing how the seven factors of Awakening build on the four frames of reference [§92]. This point is reflected in the position of mindfulness -- defined as the practice of any one of the four frames of reference -- as the first factor in the list. Discernment, in the role of the analysis of mental qualities into skillful and unskillful, builds on right mindfulness and leads to persistence, which in the form of right effort/exertion maximizes the skillful qualities and minimizes the unskillful ones. This in turn leads to four factors associated with jhana: rapture, serenity, concentration, and equanimity. Equanimity, here, is not a neutral feeling, but rather a balancing or moderation -- an evenness of mind -- with regard to any feeling or object that arises. It is identical with the equanimity in the fourth jhana [§149] and with the inherent equanimity in the fifth factor of five-factored noble concentration [§150], which can develop out of any of the four jhanas. As such it can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of non-fashioning that opens to Awakening. Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as well. Passage §96 shows how the "feeding" of the factors of Awakening is needed to "starve" the hindrances, mental qualities that have to be suppressed before mundane concentration can be attained. Passage §98 shows how the factors function in developing the four attitudes that lead to "release of awareness" -- a mundane form of release -- and indicates the highest state to which those attitudes can lead for one who has penetrated no higher, i.e., who has attained none of the transcendent levels. These passages demonstrate that the factors of Awakening can function on the level of mundane jhana in addition to the level at the verge of Awakening. Thus, equanimity as a factor of Awakening on the mundane plane can feed back into the process of meditation, providing a steady basis for more continuous mindfulness and clearer analysis of mental qualities, until all the factors of the list ripen to transcendence. ********************************************** 6342 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: . Nibbbana op 13-07-2001 15:12 schreef Derek Cameron op Derek: I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There > is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- > conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- > being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from > what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is > a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, > therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, > made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Dear Derek and all, I am glad you brought up this important text. I have noticed that people might think that nibbana is citta, or even right view which is panna cetasika. In that case nibbana would be conditioned, and there would not be the third noble Truth, no cessation of dukkha. Dukkha is the arising and falling away of conditioned dhammas. Citta experiences an object, it is conditioned by object-condition and several other conditions. Cetasika is conditioned by citta and several other conditions. When the Buddha was the Bodhisatta Sumedha he made the quest for the unconditioned, that which is not dukkha. See the Chronicle of the Buddhas (Buddhava'msa), Sumedha: < Sitting in seclusion I thought thus then:" Again-becoming is dukkha, also the breaking up of the physical frame. Liable to birth, liable to ageing, liable to disease am I then; I will seek the peace that is unageing, undying, secure." In the first book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics) Nibbana is referred to as the unconditioned element, asankhata dhatu (See Appendix II) and it is nama or arupa( non rupa), but it is different from conditioned nama, it does not experience an object. Realities are either nama or rupa, and since nibbana is not rupa it is classified as nama. Kom has explained very clearly about the classification of the four paramattha dhammas. We read in the Atthasalini, Expositor (II, Book II, Part II, Suttanta Couplets, 392) an explanation of nama. Nama is derived from namati, bending towards an object, and it can also be a name. Citta and cetasika bend towards an object, experience an object. And also: they cause one another to bend on to the object: "The four khandhas are name (nama) in the sense of bending, for they bend towards the object. In the sense of causing to bend all (of the foregoing, namely nibbana and the four nama khandhas) are "name" (nama). For the four khandhas cause one another to bend on to the object; and nibbana bends faultless dhammas on to itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of the object." Thus, nibbana does not bend towards an object, it does not experience an object, but, it is predominant object condition for the lokuttara cittas that experience it, it bends them towards itself in that way. Buddhists take their refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the ariyan Sangha. At this moment we do not know what nibbana is like, and it makes no sense to speculate about it. We have confidence that there is a Path leading to the end of dukkha, and that there are people who have realised the third noble Truth by following this Path. We have to learn what dukkha is, the impermanence of nama and rupa. This can only be realized if we study now what nama is and what rupa is, so that their characteristics can be clearly distinguished, there is no other way. I liked what Robert said about awareness, even of attachment to right view, being aware again and again and again of the object at the very moment it appears, so that we come to know its true nature. Nina. 6343 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Sati op 13-07-2001 00:44 schreef Num op Num:> > > About sati (mindfulness), in satipatthana, sati is mindful of nama or rupa as > it appears. I am not clear what does sati be mindful in dana, smatha or > kusula moment which is not vipassana. I definitely did some wholesome deed > before, but sati (as in sati-patthana) did not necessary occur at that > moment, but sati cetasika had to be there, if it really kusala moment ? > Dear Num, when you performed a deed of generosity sure there was sati, since it arises with each kusala citta. Sati was non-forgetful of kusala, did not waste the opportunity for kusala. We may waste many opportunities for kusala, not giving help when help was needed, but when sati arises, it does not waste the opportunity for kusala. But there are many levels of sati, since there are many levels of kusala. >Num: You wrote that :... Mindfulness 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 doorkeeper from guarding the door of the senses. > ______________________________________________ > > Sati in sati-patthana has character of non floating by being mindful of > paramattha-dhamma at that moment, but sati in general kusala moment does not, > is this correct? So sati in satipatthana cannot have pannatti as its > arammana but sati in general sobhana citta can have pannatti as arammana, > right? Nina: yes, that is right. Nama and rupa are the objects of sati of satipatthana. >Num: Let me also ask about arammana of sati (in sati patthana). Sati can arise > only in kusala moment but can have kusala-, akusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-citta & > cetasika or rupa as arammana. I heard from a CD by Aj.Santi which given to > me by Kom that sati can be mindful of past, present and even future arammana. > In case of past arammana, that arammana is not sampayutta with citta, > cetasika and sati at that moment but being only arammana paccaya. Just > curious, so sati can be mindful of present and past kusula moment in but only > past aramana in panca-dvara. I have no idea about future arammana. Is my > statement valid? I am not clear about this, >Nina: This is not clear to me. When sati is mindful of seeing, seeing has fallen away, but when it has just fallen away, its characteristic can be realized as a nama. The same for dosa that can be object of awareness. The question is, how far past is past. But sati that is mindful of a nama or rupa is not arising together with that nama or rupa, not sampayutta, it arises in a following process. Sampayutta refers only to citta and cetasikas arising together. Sati is also used in the sense of recollection of what is past, even past lives. In fact there are many aspects of sati, referred to in the co. to the Milinda Panha. You may reflect with sati on the past, and at that moment there can be the realization that it is nama that reflects. So many different cittas, very intricate. I have not heard that tape, therefore this is not clear to me. Rupa of the past and rupa of the future can be objects, though. Lets be aware of what appears now. I quote Acharn Sujin, from the conversations in Cambodia: < The development of satipaěěhĺna is the development of pańńĺ, and there should not be an idea of self who intends to do something particular in order to induce pańńĺ. Then there is no sati which is aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that naturally arises and appears at this moment because of the appropriate conditions. Someone who does not have understanding of satipaěěhĺna may ask, while he is seeing naturally, what he should do in order to have sati. It is not the right practice if someone wishes to do something particular in order to have sati, because nobody can cause the arising of any reality. People can listen to the Dhamma, they can investigate, consider and understand what they hear, so that they will know that the dhamma appearing at this moment is real, and that it appears through one doorway at a time. Therefore, it is necessary to have more understanding about the realities appearing one at a time through each of the doorways. At this moment, for example, an object is appearing through the eyes and thus, it can be seen. However, if there is no citta, no reality or element that experiences something, thus, a reality which sees the object that appears, that object cannot appear. If someone sees naturally but he does not realize the distinction between the characteristic of the object that appears and the reality that sees, vipassanĺ, insight, is not being developed. Therefore, the only thing people can do is listening to the Dhamma so that they understand correctly that seeing at this moment is only a kind of reality, a dhamma. One should listen, investigate and consider what one hears, so that one can gradually understand that there are only realities, no self. Dhammas are real, they are beyond control, they arise naturally because of their appropriate conditions. When you are listening at this moment, sati arises, but it may not yet be satipaěěhĺna. It may be sati of the level of listening and considering, but in that way there will gradually be more understanding.> Best wishes, Nina. 6344 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] putting into practice)wasThe meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > In past times I > had a strong > tendency to feel slighted when criticised. So in the > case above > if there had been no right awareness I probably > would have gone > the rest of the day thinking "why blame me. I do my > best, can't > she see how busy I am ......." : just increasing > dosa (aversion) > and delusion. This really reminded me of Ven. Thanissaro's notes to Sakkapańhasutta, with some interesting links: 1. Complication = papańca. The tendency of the mind to proliferate issues from the sense of "self." This term can also be translated as self-reflexive thinking, reification, falsification, distortion, elaboration, or exaggeration. In the discourses, it is frequently used in analyses of the psychology of conflict. The categories of complication stem from the self-reflexive thought, "I am the thinker," (see Sn IV.14), and include the categories of inappropriate attention (see MN 2): being/not-being, me/not-me, mine/not-mine, doer/done-to. The perceptions of complication include such thoughts as "This is me. This is mine. This is my self." These perceptions and categories turn back on the person who allows them to proliferate, giving rise to internal conflict & strife, which then expand outward. For more on these terms, see MN 18. [Go back] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html#n1 mike 6345 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Jon, This is really excellent--I think you should add it to the files for future reference. I'm certainly adding your quotations to my own 'toolbox'. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Tori > > > Dear Jon, > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a > world of difference > > between the conceptualising that men feel so > comfortable with as opposed > > to > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to > grips with? > > 'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap > fits, I'll just have to > wear it! > > But I think this is really another form of the > 'intellectual approach vs. > practical approach' argument that is often made. > Rather than labelling it > as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful > to consider exactly > what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri > Sutta (MN 70) [passage A > below], the Buddha explained that the development of > the path is gradual > and involves in succession listening to someone > knowledgeable in the > teachings, considering what one has heard, > understanding that fully at an > intellectual level ("gaining a reflective > acceptance") and applying what > one has understood. > > So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is > at best only a part of > the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual > progress" teaching, > each stage of which has its prerequisites and > conditions. > > Nor is this series of gradual steps a > once-and-for-all thing. It > continues to be the way of progress until final > enlightenment. Even the > sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and > considering [passage B below, > same sutta]. > > Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. > Listening, discussing, > considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > > Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan > and Rosanne) enjoy > your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be > there! > > Jon > > A. > MLDB translation (p. 582) > 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is > achieved all at once. > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by > gradual training, by > gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > 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." > > B. > MLDB translation (p. 580) > 11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that > they still have work to > do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus > that they have no more > work to so with diligence. > > 12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are > arahants ... and are > completely liberated through final knowledge, that > they still have work to > do with diligence. They have done their work with > diligence; they are > no more capable of being negligent. > > 13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher > training, whose minds have > not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring > to the supreme > security from bondage, that they still have work to > do with diligence." > > > > 6346 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:06am Subject: How We Can Help Advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine How are you? I agree with what Mike, Gayan and Robert said. I just want to add a few points from another perspective. It seems that animals respond, and are sensitive, to human attitudes and behaviors. If we treat them with healthy minds and behaviors, they can understand and simulate them. This is a clue to how we can help advance them. If we could help them generate healthy minds (kusala cittani) and behaviors in them, they could accumulate good deeds. When they die with these good deeds (kusala kamma), they could have a very high chance of being reborn in higher lifeforms. Healthy minds and good deeds, regardless of the sources from which they come, will culminate in better results and better life- froms. Hope this helps satisfy your curiosity. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Christine, > Just to add to what Mike and gayan said. > There are a number of examples in the tetxs of animals listening > to Dhamma. A frog listened to the Buddha - he only knew "this is > good" was stepped on and squashed and immediately born in a deva > realm. he reflected and saw the cause for his heavenly rebirth- > he then went and listened to the Buddha more and became a > sotapanna on the same day. > In the time of Kassapa Buddha 500 bats lived in a cave which was > the home of 2 monks who used to discuss Abhidhamma. They > couldn't comprehend the meaning but simply knew "this is good" > and so strained their little bat-ears, while hanging by their > little batwings, to listen again and again to the discussions. > They were reborn in a deva realm and carried on from birth to > birth in human and deva worlds until the time of this Buddha > where they became monks and students of sariputta. They listened > to him teach Abhidhamma and all became arahats. > It should be remembered that these bats and the frog had all > being human in past lives before they took relinking as bat or > frog. And so they had developed understanding and other parami > during these times . Now they were animal but their > accumulations of merit continued to grow. > Howvwer, this is fairly rare - it seems that generally animals > don't have many opportunties to make merit (until they take > birth as human or deva again). > robert > --- 243059114056127132062026203056129208071 wrote: > > Dear christine, > > > > The answer to your question is a 'YES'. > > Of course we can help, (and thereby helping ourselves) > > > > Sooner or later you will be able to read the story of the > > brahmin > > named todeyya. ( A dog is being helped by a human who happened > > to be > > the son of the dog's previous human life). > > > > And of course there are many stories where non-humans were > > attracted > > to the chantings and dhamma preachings, and that causing a > > better > > rebirth for them. > > > > Commenting for the last part of your post... > > Of course every being(god,brahma,human etc..) faces the danger > > of > > being re-born in lower realms(animals, hell states > > etc..)unless > > he/she has attained at least the state of stream-entry. > > > > regards > > gayan > > > > > 6347 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:28am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Thanks, Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of > sati/panna is always a > reality and never a concept. Right-- > The reality that has > just fallen away is not > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it > has to do with the > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert > may be able to > elaborate on the finer details of this. I hope so--this seems a crucial point to me as a demarcation between what can and can't condition insight. mike 6348 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 8:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Eq... Hi, Kom - In a message dated 7/15/01 7:03:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Kom T writes: > On the other hand, A. Santi mentioned in his Pacaya conversation series > that past paramatha dhamma, not only its associated concept, can also be > an aramana. This twisted question then arises, if Satipatthana is to know > the paramatha dhamma as it actually is, can such "recollected" paramatha > dhamma be also the object of satipathanna. > ========================== This sounds illogical to me. While a *memory* of the basic dhamma may be available, and the *concept* which generalizes it, neither of these is the original dhamma. This sounds to me more like a Sarvastivadin view, a kind of eternalist view, than a Theravadin one. (BTW, the Sarvastivadin school, with its "all exists" view, is the main school which the Tibetan Buddhists (if not others) have in mind when they use the disparaging term 'hinayana'.) 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) 6349 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/01 7:06:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama that > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the citta > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise simultaneously. > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of > each kind of citta). > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem to imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen object,and not the no-longer-existing object, itself. Also, when you say "However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each kind of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the object occurs. In yet another mind moment? The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more problems seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana finds difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some level of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, separate, discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, the notion of 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for the express purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising with the discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't adopt that, but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a "film-frame" view similar to that of Hume so many years later.] --------------------------------------------------------------- > The same would apply also where the object of the sati/panna is a rupa and > the sati/panna arises not in the same sense-door process but in a > mind-door process following it. > > > If so, can > > recollection or recognition be a foundation of > > mindfulness? . > > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of sati/panna is always a > reality and never a concept. The reality that has just fallen away is not > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it has to do with the > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert may be able to > elaborate on the finer details of this. > > =========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 6350 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 10:48pm Subject: Some Additional Thoughts on: Reply to: Sati/panna and its object Hi again, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/01 1:17:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, I quoted you: > > >> Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama that >> has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the citta >> that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise simultaneously. >> However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as >> if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear >> to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of >> each kind of citta). >> and then I replied: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem to > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen object, and > not the no-longer-existing object, itself. Also, when you say "However, so > rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the > awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be > occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each kind > of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the > simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the object > occurs. In yet another mind moment? > The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of > ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more > problems seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana > finds difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some > level of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, > separate, discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, > the notion of 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for > the express purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising > with the discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't > adopt that, but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a > "film-frame" view similar to that of Hume so many years later.] > --------------------------------------------------------------- > The following also occurs to me: Nina has written in "Cetasikas" that "There is only one citta at a time, cognizing one object, and each citta is accompanied by several cetasikas which also experience the same object, but which each perform their own function while they assist the citta in cognizing that object. They arise and fall away together with the citta." Moreover, sati is one of the cetasikas. Thus, the object of sati, when it occurs, is the very same object as the citta along with which which that instance of sati occurs. So, if the object of mindfulness is a mental one, it is the very same one that the citta discerns. If the object is a *previous* entire citta or any cetasika of such a citta, then, indeed, that is actually no longer existent, and, thus, the actual object can only be a memory. A citta, then, can never take itself, or any aspect of itself, as object. But at any given time, there is only one citta. All past cittas are gone. So a mental object, an object of the mind door, is never available for direct observation. In that case, why call such objects ultimate realities? In fact, what leads us to think there even are such things, inasmuch as they are not directly observable? Do you see that there are some difficulties here? 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) 6351 From: Larry Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 2:56am Subject: pali/abhidhamma question Greetings, I posted the following question, slightly expanded here, to another group and someone sent me here. I think what I am looking for is a commentary that would elaborate on the particular passage in question although another sutta reference would be interesting, if there is one: This is about the Mahasatipatthana Sutta. I was reading Nyanaponika Thera's "The Heart Of Buddhist Meditation" the other day and was struck by a passage towards the end in the section on the cause of suffering in the Four Noble Truths in the mindfulness of mind objects section. It runs, slightly abridged, thus: "But where does this craving arise and take root? Wherever in the world there are delightful and pleasurable things, there this craving arises and takes root. Eye, ear, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises and takes root. Visual forms, sounds, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises and takes root. Eye consciousness, ear consciousness ... (the corresponding sixfold) contact--the feeling born of that sixfold contact--the sixfold will (for visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold craving--the sixfold thought-conception (concerning visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold discursive thought: these are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving takes root." Apologies for the abridgement. I was wondering if anyone can tell me where I might find more on this sequence (sense, sense object, sense consciousness, contact, feeling, will, craving, concept, discursive thought). Can this tell us something about the 12 links of dependent arising? I'm particularly interested in how "will" arises between feeling and craving and the development of concept and discursive thought after craving is also interesting. What does "will (for visual forms)" mean in this cntext? Also what is the pali for "will" in this text and is it related to "sankhara". Maurice Walshe's and Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translations each differ in significant ways. Is there an "orthodox" version? thanks for any help, Larry 6352 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity (Howard) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/01 8:53:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > Many thanks for posting this material, and my apologies for taking some > time to get back to you on it. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly no apology at all called for! -------------------------------------------------- > > > The following is drawn from Wings to Awakening (from Access to > > Insight). I think it is relevant to this discussion. > > Indeed. But I did not find it particularly easy to follow. Specifically, > I got stuck at the point where the author says-- > > "As such it [equanimity as one of the factors of Awakening (bojjhanga)] > can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of > mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even > more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to > spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of > non-fashioning that opens to Awakening." > > What is your take on this passage? > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I suppose it has more poetry than precision! ;-)) I think that the point is that the non-reactivity fostered by equanimity at the level of the 4th jhana results in greater clarity and enhanced mindfulness. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Particularly interesting > > to me is the distinction made between the alleged sutta-perspective and > > the abhidhamma-perspective. > > Yes. The passage in question reads (continuing from the passage quoted > above)-- > > "Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back > into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of > Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play > only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback > would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of > Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as > well." > > It is perhaps unfortunate that the author gives no Abhidhamma reference to > check. Again I am puzzled by the terminology. Eg. 'transcendent' as > meaning or connoting 'coming into play as one reaches the point of > Awakening (where no temporal feedback [??] is possible)'. This makes it > difficult for me to say much, unless you can elucidate. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might be saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from the Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that level. Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something about which I have no idea. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sorry that I cannot contribute anything meaningful at this stage. > > > You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your > > main influence? > > Never really thought of it in those terms. Over the years I have come to > realise that the suttas need a knowledge of the Abhidhamma to be > understood correctly. But I have never seen myself as a student of the > Abhidhamma as such; I just consult one or 2 standard references as and > when I want to check something. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, you certainly seem to have learned one helluva lot from those two references! ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 6353 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 5:35am Subject: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear group Today despite the unpredictable English weather, we had a nice, inviting Sunday and I went to meet Sarah who is visiting her mother in Sussex and to catch up with other English and not only members of the list that came over as well. Let me tell you first thing how cute is this countryside place where Sarah's mother, by the way a delightful lady, who prepared us an exquisite afternoon tea with sandwiches and cakes (lobha, lobha, lobha!!!!). Good gracious the village looks like a description from the pages of one of Jane Austen's books, very picturesque, in this quiet, beautiful, typical English countryside with these very nice cottages. The atmosphere in Sarah's mother's house was so intimate and hospitable. I felt so literary!!! Sarah has been a perfect hostess, very warm and friendly. We linked up together with John Palmer, Tori and son Alex (very interesting guy ;-), Alan Weller (Zolag's webmaster), a nice American couple, and a couple of friends, expats from Hong Kong also interested in Buddhism. We spent some time enjoying the beautiful garden of Kate, Sarah's mother and afterwards being the weather a bit unstable (what a novelty in England!) we moved inside in this cozy living room and had our tea, me a coffee naturally, with this delicious home-made cakes, hhmmmm and we chatted pleasantly about Dhamma, about our cyber friends, about our trips, Khun Sujin, Sarah's hippie period, my eternal post hippie period, etc, etc. Sarah accompanied us for a short walk in the village and I saw the most graceful 'post office' I have ever seen in my life, so cute. It was a wonderful afternoon, I enjoyed so much meeting in real life with Sarah and re-uniting with other friends I have met previously through Sarah in London, apart Tori that was an off list friend of mine already. But so strange and comforting I felt like we had already confidence after so many sharings in the list. I wish to thank you Sarah again for such a pleasant afternoon and your warm hospitality (my regards to your mother, she has been so kind with me) and I hope that we can link up again in Hong Kong and/or Bangkok, once I return to Asia by choice or because John has kicked me out of his house by exhaustion, poor man after all he is not a sotapanna and coping with me is a demanding task. But you are accumulating many merits, John, consider this perspective!!! Don't desist! Perhaps I should move in with Anders or Robert, they are well equipped to stand up to me! ;-) Love Cybele 6354 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 10:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert: Obviously, naaamas fall away faster than ruupas since a ruupa can be an object of (at least) sevaral cittas. Hence, you may be right. Araising and falling of phenomenan could be much shorter than 10 or 15 milliseconds. But a thing which lasts only 10 or so milliseconds is beyond our ordinary comprehension. Hopefully, our sati can one day become sharp enough to expericne such an event. tadao 6355 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 6:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Tadao, Since hearing of all this I've always assumed that (assuming it's all true), sati, as a naama, arises and subsides as quickly as other naamas, so experiences them already and needn't become sharper in the future. If this is correct, ordinary comprehension comprehends sati in the same way that it comprehends, say, dosa--that is, a concept is formed and recognized retrospectively from a very great many series of naamas in rapid succession (very similar because of very similar conditions). So if this is true, ordinary comprehension does comprehend these maybe in the way that it comprehends sound vibrations or light waves also too rapid and brief to comprehend (singly)--that is, as notes or chords, or colors. This still doesn't explain, though, how after they've subsided from the other sense-doors, these ruupas (in the latter examples) are comprehended, even instantaneously, through the mind-door--unless as recollections, concepts. Immensely glad to have you on this list. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Robert: > Obviously, naaamas fall away faster than ruupas > since > a ruupa can be an object of (at least) sevaral > cittas. Hence, you > may be right. Araising and falling of phenomenan > could be much shorter > than 10 or 15 milliseconds. But a thing which lasts > only > 10 or so milliseconds is beyond our ordinary > comprehension. > Hopefully, our sati can one day become sharp enough > to expericne > such an event. tadao 6356 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 6:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Dear Mike, Just as Jon said. The object of satipatthana , if it is nama, has always just passed away but because of the incredible speed of the arise and fall we still call it insighting the present moment. Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and this includes grasping(upadana). robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of > > sati/panna is always a > > reality and never a concept. > > Right-- > > > The reality that has > > just fallen away is not > > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it > > has to do with the > > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert > > may be able to > > elaborate on the finer details of this. > > I hope so--this seems a crucial point to me as a > demarcation between what can and can't condition > insight. > > mike > > 6357 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 6:37am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Mike, > Just as Jon said. The object of satipatthana , if it > is nama, > has always just passed away but because of the > incredible speed > of the arise and fall we still call it insighting > the present > moment. Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > this > includes grasping(upadana). Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. Why do you mention upaadaana in particular? Thanks (again) in advance, mike 6358 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Mike: Sorry Mike, I cannot answer you last question now. I have to think about it carefully. But the notion of speed doesn't possbily mean anything when a sanmaa sati sees a thing as it is. Possibly, "how fast or how slow" is an argument based on our/putujana's speculation, and when a sati sees a thing, the notion of time doesn't play any role. Currently, many physists have been working on to synthsize a few independent theories which work beaufitully only they are applied independently: to name a few, quantam(?spelling?) theory, and Enstain's(?spelling?) theory. These theories are based on the assumption that we live in the 4-D world (i.e. 3-D + time). A/the latest theory is that our world is more like 12 dimentional (11 spacial dimentions + a time dimention). If it is the case, then,the notion of "time" has less significance than we give a credit to. For Arahatas, I guess, the question of "how fast or how slow" may possibly mean nothing. And if you put the very question to Archaan Sujin, she would probably say as follows: without worrying about how fast naamas and ruupas arise and fall away, why do you not develop the right understanding so that (it is not self but) sati will see things as they are. Also we have to remember that the first satage of pa~~nnaa doesn't see the arising and falling away of things, but can (only) see that naamas and ruupas differ from each other. tadao 6359 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 7:23am Subject: Re: pali/abhidhamma question Larry, The word that Nyanapoinka Thera translates as "will" is sańcetanaa. As you know, Maurice Walshe renders it as "volition" and Thanissaro Bhikkhu has "intention." The other translation I have is the VRI one where it's translated as "mental reaction." The PED defines it as "though, cogitation, perception, intention." It would be interesting to know what the commentaries day. Derek. 6361 From: Larry Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:32pm Subject: Re: pali/abhidhamma question Sorry about that last message, here it is again: Derek wrote: Larry, The word that Nyanapoinka Thera translates as "will" is sańcetanaa. As you know, Maurice Walshe renders it as "volition" and Thanissaro Bhikkhu has "intention." The other translation I have is the VRI one where it's translated as "mental reaction." The PED defines it as "though, cogitation, perception, intention." It would be interesting to know what the commentaries day. Derek. ------------------ Thanks Derek, I wonder if sancetanaa is a synonym with sankhara? Larry 6362 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 2:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Thank you, cybele. A very nice description, it sounds like everyone was thoroughly decent, nice chaps. Splendid. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > 6363 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 4:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, We really missed you! It was wonderful all meeting up at Sarah's mother's charming rose-covered cottage. Even the weather held and we were able to sit in the garden (for a while). I see what you mean about aspects of the Path (my comments were meant to be light-hearted, not personal remarks, and also inquiries into stereotypes). Yes of course both intellectual effort is required as well as application, otherwise why am I reading all these books? I suppose it is finding the balance (the middle way?) that is always a challenge. Thank you for the Sutta reference-very helpful. Metta, Victoria At 04:53 PM 7/15/01 +0800, you wrote: >Tori > > > Dear Jon, > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference > > between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed > > to > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? > >'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap fits, I'll just have to >wear it! > >But I think this is really another form of the 'intellectual approach vs. >practical approach' argument that is often made. Rather than labelling it >as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful to consider exactly >what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri Sutta (MN 70) [passage A >below], the Buddha explained that the development of the path is gradual >and involves in succession listening to someone knowledgeable in the >teachings, considering what one has heard, understanding that fully at an >intellectual level ("gaining a reflective acceptance") and applying what >one has understood. > >So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is at best only a part of >the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual progress" teaching, >each stage of which has its prerequisites and conditions. > >Nor is this series of gradual steps a once-and-for-all thing. It >continues to be the way of progress until final enlightenment. Even the >sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and considering [passage B below, >same sutta]. > >Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. Listening, discussing, >considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > >Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan and Rosanne) enjoy >your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be there! > >Jon > >A. >MLDB translation (p. 582) >22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by >gradual practice, by gradual progress. > >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." > >B. >MLDB translation (p. 580) >11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work to >do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more >work to so with diligence. > >12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants ... and are >completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work to >do with diligence. They have done their work with diligence; they are >no more capable of being negligent. > >13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds have >not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme >security from bondage, that they still have work to do with diligence." > > 6364 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 5:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Dear Jon, > > We really missed you! It was wonderful all meeting up at Sarah's > mother's > charming rose-covered cottage. Even the weather held and we were able to > > sit in the garden (for a while). I'm glad it worked out well. > I see what you mean about aspects of the Path (my comments were meant to > be > light-hearted, not personal remarks, and also inquiries into > stereotypes). And that's exactly how they came across (I think Sarah may have misinterpreted my brief telephone report on the ongoing posts - she is not able to get access on a daily basis). > Yes of course both intellectual effort is required as well as > application, > otherwise why am I reading all these books? I suppose it is finding the > balance (the middle way?) that is always a challenge. That about sums it up! > Thank you for the Sutta reference-very helpful. > > Metta, > Victoria You're welcome, Tori. Jon > At 04:53 PM 7/15/01 +0800, you wrote: > >Tori > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of > difference > > > between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as > opposed > > > to > > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? > > > >'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap fits, I'll just have > to > >wear it! > > > >But I think this is really another form of the 'intellectual approach > vs. > >practical approach' argument that is often made. Rather than labelling > it > >as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful to consider exactly > >what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri Sutta (MN 70) [passage > A > >below], the Buddha explained that the development of the path is > gradual > >and involves in succession listening to someone knowledgeable in the > >teachings, considering what one has heard, understanding that fully at > an > >intellectual level ("gaining a reflective acceptance") and applying > what > >one has understood. > > > >So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is at best only a part > of > >the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual progress" teaching, > >each stage of which has its prerequisites and conditions. > > > >Nor is this series of gradual steps a once-and-for-all thing. It > >continues to be the way of progress until final enlightenment. Even > the > >sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and considering [passage B > below, > >same sutta]. > > > >Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. Listening, > discussing, > >considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > > > >Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan and Rosanne) enjoy > >your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be there! > > > >Jon > > > >A. > >MLDB translation (p. 582) > >22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at > once. > > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by > >gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > > >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." > > > >B. > >MLDB translation (p. 580) > >11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work > to > >do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more > >work to so with diligence. > > > >12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants ... and are > >completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work > to > >do with diligence. They have done their work with diligence; they > are > >no more capable of being negligent. > > > >13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds > have > >not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme > >security from bondage, that they still have work to do with diligence." > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > 6365 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 8:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Robert AAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!(I am shouting...) You are a desperate case of chronic anglosaxon fever! :-)))))) After all my enthusiastic description of a lovely afternoon with Sarah and all the dhamma friends you comment..."sounds like everyone was thoroughly decent, nice chaps." SOL!! - I just invented this new code that is for [shouting out loud] and time to time I will apply with you from now on! ;-))))) Apart jokes Rob, people was lovely and I most enjoyed meeting everybody, the sense of togetherness, the warmth of Sarah and her mother (by the way Jon, Sarah's mother while chatting in the kitchen with me, commented 'did you meet Jon? Very nice chap, really nice!' - seems your prestige is going up in Sussex!). Hope we will promote more meetings when it is possible. Love Cybele 6366 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 8:47pm Subject: Re: pali/abhidhamma question > I wonder if sańcetanaa is a synonym with sankhaara? Larry, What an interesting question. I've never thought about it before. Here's my attempt at an answer. Yes, sańcetanaa is derived from the prefix sa.m + cetanaa. The prefix is an intensifier. It emphasizes the active (i.e., volitional) aspect of cetanaa -- mental reactions as actions, the mental equivalent of physical kamma. Sankhaara varies in meaning depending on the context. In the context of dependent origination sankhaara comes between ignorance (avijjaa) and consciousness (vińńaa.na). So here it is a kind of mental predisposition or tendency. I think it was Baba Hari Das who once said: "When a pick-pocket looks at a saint, he sees only pockets." In other words, our mental predispositions influence what perceive. However, in other contexts (e.g. the five aggregates), the meaning of sankhaara seems to be broader, and includes the manifestation of these tendencies in actual mental contents. It's sometimes translated as "volitional formations." So, the short answer is -- yes, I think sańcetanaa and sankhaara are very closely related, if not synonyms. But perhaps someone else has a better answer than me? Derek. 6367 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 9:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: pali/abhidhamma question Thanks for this Derek, I don't know much about the difference between cetana and sancetana but this link gives an explanation of cetana that is worth reading too: http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas6.html robert --- Derek Cameron wrote: > > I wonder if sańcetanaa is a synonym with sankhaara? > > Larry, > > What an interesting question. I've never thought about it > before. > Here's my attempt at an answer. > > 6368 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 9:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Cybele, Really your report was much appreciated and I read it with joy and interest. I'll try to give as nice a one when I get to bangkok; unfortunately no doubt with typical anglosaxon impassivity. I too like it if we have more face to face meetings. much thanks robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert > > AAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!(I am shouting...) > You are a desperate case of chronic anglosaxon fever! :-)))))) > After all my enthusiastic description of a lovely afternoon > with Sarah and > all the dhamma friends you comment..."sounds like everyone was > thoroughly > decent, nice chaps." > !). > Hope we will promote more meetings when it is possible. > > 6369 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Robert and Cybele, We can't help it that we have these Anglo-Saxon accumulations! By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of control with their emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! Metta, Victoria At 06:40 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: >Cybele, >Really your report was much appreciated and I read it with joy >and interest. I'll try to give as nice a one when I get to >bangkok; unfortunately no doubt with typical anglosaxon >impassivity. I too like it if we have more face to face >meetings. >much thanks >robert >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Robert > > > > AAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!(I am shouting...) > > You are a desperate case of chronic anglosaxon fever! :-)))))) > > After all my enthusiastic description of a lovely afternoon > > with Sarah and > > all the dhamma friends you comment..."sounds like everyone was > > thoroughly > > decent, nice chaps." > > !). > > Hope we will promote more meetings when it is possible. > > > > 6370 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Tori and Robert > >Robert and Cybele, > >We can't help it that we have these Anglo-Saxon accumulations! Indeed as I can't help but being an 'ebullient' Latin. But actually my best friends are all anglosaxons! ;-) Suppose because hot and cool together result in 'warm', the Middle WAY!!! >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of control with their >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. LOve Cybele > >Metta, >Victoria > > >At 06:40 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Cybele, > >Really your report was much appreciated and I read it with joy > >and interest. I'll try to give as nice a one when I get to > >bangkok; unfortunately no doubt with typical anglosaxon > >impassivity. I too like it if we have more face to face > >meetings. > >much thanks > >robert 6371 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > control with their > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. > Ha ha, very quick Cybele 6372 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:43pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > > this > > includes grasping(upadana). > > Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. Why do > you mention upaadaana in particular? > > Thanks (again) in advance, Just referring back to your earlier point: "Since I don't think clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > simultaneously with pańńaa," ________ On this issue to when we talk about moments we should rememeber the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya (proximity condition)and other conditions. The present moment is conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not to mention other conditions) . It is not that when we talk about moments arising and passing away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can sound that way but this is not what is meant in the Abhidhamma). This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book of the Abhidhamma. best wishes robert > 6373 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Rob > >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > > control with their > > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. >Ha ha, very quick Cybele Can't lose a chance you know! ;-) Love Cybele 6374 From: Num Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 7:19pm Subject: Abhidhamma translation(Thai) by Archan Somporn Dear DSG members, http://www.rajabhat.ac.th/budd/index.htm K.Amara has asked me to forward this link to dsg members, but the bottom-line is it is in Thai. It's a translation and commentary of Abhidhamma in Pali and Thai by Archan Somporn in Acrobat Reader format. Best wishes, Num _________________________________________________________ > Khun Pracheun at the foundation has just told me that Acharn Somporn's > son has collected all of his father's translations and added them to > an educational site, at this URL: > > > Anumodana in your studies, > > Amara > > > All the articles and books in the light green window are Thai > translations mainly of the Abhidhamma, plus related commentaries. The > last article in the box, (no. 3) is the abhidhamma handbook called > 'dhammapadasangaha', as I read it. > > A. 6375 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:59pm Subject: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Dear Larry Bidd How are you? In an effort to answer your questions, first I went to Mahasatipatthana Suttam in Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya, and then its commentary which asked me to go to Samudaya Sacca section in Vissudhimagga, which asked me to go to Paticcasamuppada section. Most of your questions are answered in Section 587 in Visuddhimagga under Pannyabhuminiddeso. First, Pali term for "will" is sancetana in Mahasatipatthana, which becomes sankhara in Paticcasamuppada. Both are then described as merely cetana as found in Abhidhamma. As Buddhaghosa put it, "te sabbepi lokiyakusalaakusalacetanamattameva honti". "All those are merely the worldly, healthy and unhealthy cetanas." So there is a definite connection between sancetana in Mahasatipatthana Suttam and sankhara in the 12 links of dependent arising. You asked: "I'm particularly interested in how "will" arises between feeling and craving and the development of concept and discursive thought after craving is also interesting." According to Dhammasangani, those mental components arise simulataneouly. However, in Paticcasamuppada, some of them may act as conditions for others of them. But, even there, which follows which depends on circumstances. You should consult Section 582 in Visuddhimagga under Pannyabhuminiddeso for detailed discussion. You asked: "What does "will (for visual forms)" mean in this cntext?" I think you are asking how "will" can participate in visual consciousness. If it were the case, we can witness translation of cetana as "will", "intention" and the like is not adequate, even misleading. The best way is to go to Atthasalini and read thoroughly how Buddhaghosa defined cetana and his similies for cetana. The more I read Atthalini, the more I get the impression that cetana could mean mobilisation. This is my preferred rendering - particularly in this context. Well, mobilisation (cetana) in visual consciousness should now make sense better than will or intention. Visual consciousness needs mobilisation which could facilitate better focus so as to get a clear sight. I hope this message gives you very orthodox Theravada answers for your questions. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Larry wrote: > Greetings, > > I posted the following question, slightly expanded here, to another > group and someone sent me here. I think what I am looking for is a > commentary that would elaborate on the particular passage in question > although another sutta reference would be interesting, if there is one: > > This is about the Mahasatipatthana Sutta. I was reading Nyanaponika > Thera's "The Heart Of Buddhist Meditation" the other day and was struck > by a passage towards the end in the section on the cause of suffering in > the Four Noble Truths in the mindfulness of mind objects section. It > runs, slightly abridged, thus: > > "But where does this craving arise and take root? Wherever in the world > there are delightful and pleasurable things, there this craving arises > and takes root. > Eye, ear, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises > and takes root. > Visual forms, sounds, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this > craving arises and takes root. > Eye consciousness, ear consciousness ... (the corresponding sixfold) > contact--the feeling born of that sixfold contact--the sixfold will (for > visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold craving--the sixfold thought- conception > (concerning visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold discursive thought: these > are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving takes root." > Apologies for the abridgement. I was wondering if anyone can tell me > where I might find more on this sequence (sense, sense object, sense > consciousness, contact, feeling, will, craving, concept, discursive > thought). Can this tell us something about the 12 links of dependent > arising? I'm particularly interested in how "will" arises between > feeling and craving and the development of concept and discursive > thought after craving is also interesting. What does "will (for visual > forms)" mean in this cntext? Also what is the pali for "will" in this > text and is it related to "sankhara". Maurice Walshe's and Thanissaro > Bhikkhu's translations each differ in significant ways. Is there an > "orthodox" version? > > thanks for any help, Larry 6376 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Robert and all > >Dear Cybele and others, >Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply >to (some by you, some by Anders, and others) but don't have >enough time. You don't have much time for me, I feel rejected! :-(((( I am a fragile, defenceless woman and you ill treat me...hehehehehehe >Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent >a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at >at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive >to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal >meditation though. I call formal meditation when we reckon a precise intention to practice a kind of mental training in order to sharpen our mind and increase the skills of awareness to support right understanding of reality, deepening the knowledge of your mental processes (in my case using the four foundations of mindfulness as a tool) to refine our capacity of getting insights into the phenomena, observing their arising and passing away, characteristics, etc without being entangled but maintaining as much as possible detachment avoiding strain or 'control' and using the breath just as an anchor to grasp and return when you stray from concentration and paying attention to don't cling to anything. But observing without being judgemental body, sensations, mind and mental contents (hindrances) with a penetrative view accepting whatever comes and acknowledging it. The penetrative view is developed through bare attention, manasikara as a device to reach an stage where you practice Sukkha-Vipassana or bare insight meditation. The mental training aims to develop concentration and insight and the calmness is a by product of this skill of recognizing and coping with reality not using conceptual thought that can be deceptive and lead to mental proliferation or papanca. That it is what I call Vipassana meditation and what I practice in order to be grounded in reality and foster awareness. I am not interested in absorptions or raptures of any kind, I had far enough Samatha when I used to practice yoga meditation in India (serious stuff, better remark because yoga is becoming very much synonimous of easy new age commodities). >You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the >satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a >special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is >not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that >death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types >of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None >of these require a special posture to develop. It's not a question of posture in the physical sense as much as a question of mental posture, meaning a natural purposelfulness. The physical posture just helps to keep the body and mind stable in order to 'facilitate' this contemplation of the chosen objects. But you can do it whether standing, sitting, walking or lying down. Death and metta are included in Vipassana, on feelings, mind and mental contents observation when it arises and is dhammavicaya - investigation of the Dhamma all the same. Regarding the quiet place, is also only an option of appropriate conditions for the mental training whether to avoid distractions but is not compulsory. Where could we find an actual quiet place in our usual urban environments so noisy and disrupting - the noise and disruption are only more subjects to observe. Living in Asia, particularly in India I have developed a high tolerance to noise. I can't realize the difference on your objects of contemplation - it must be necessarily all included in body, sensations, mind, mental objects field and the aim is to infer in Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. Mind you I practice Vipassana not Anapanasati. Anyway Rob what is Dhamma above all: wholesome 'appreciation' of Buddha's teachings through proper investigation of Mind-objects(mental contents) and Phenomena(bodily and mental processes). Kayanupassana Vedananupassana Cittanupassana Dhammanupassana If this is not nama rupa for you... We must not overlook that Buddha himself declared Satipatthana as Ekayano maggo - the sole and only WAY to deliverance being the direct or straight path. And formal meditation is included in the instructions in the Satipatthana Sutta. Sound and clear: don't suppose it's my imagination. Am I deluded on this issue? It is what I aim to clarify. Love Cybele 6377 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Robert and all > >Dear Cybele and others, >Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply >to (some by you, some by Anders, and others) but don't have >enough time. You don't have much time for me, I feel rejected! :-(((( I am a fragile, defenceless woman and you ill treat me...hehehehehehe >Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent >a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at >at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive >to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal >meditation though. I call formal meditation when we reckon a precise intention to practice a kind of mental training in order to sharpen our mind and increase the skills of awareness to support right understanding of reality, deepening the knowledge of your mental processes (in my case using the four foundations of mindfulness as a tool) to refine our capacity of getting insights into the phenomena, observing their arising and passing away, characteristics, etc without being entangled but maintaining as much as possible detachment avoiding strain or 'control' and using the breath just as an anchor to grasp and return when you stray from concentration and paying attention to don't cling to anything. But observing without being judgemental body, sensations, mind and mental contents (hindrances) with a penetrative view accepting whatever comes and acknowledging it. The penetrative view is developed through bare attention, manasikara as a device to reach an stage where you practice Sukkha-Vipassana or bare insight meditation. The mental training aims to develop concentration and insight and the calmness is a by product of this skill of recognizing and coping with reality not using conceptual thought that can be deceptive and lead to mental proliferation or papanca. That it is what I call Vipassana meditation and what I practice in order to be grounded in reality and foster awareness. I am not interested in absorptions or raptures of any kind, I had far enough Samatha when I used to practice yoga meditation in India (serious stuff, better remark because yoga is becoming very much synonimous of easy new age commodities). >You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the >satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a >special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is >not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that >death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types >of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None >of these require a special posture to develop. It's not a question of posture in the physical sense as much as a question of mental posture, meaning a natural purposelfulness. The physical posture just helps to keep the body and mind stable in order to 'facilitate' this contemplation of the chosen objects. But you can do it whether standing, sitting, walking or lying down. Death and metta are included in Vipassana, on feelings, mind and mental contents observation when it arises and is dhammavicaya - investigation of the Dhamma all the same. Regarding the quiet place, is also only an option of appropriate conditions for the mental training whether to avoid distractions but is not compulsory. Where could we find an actual quiet place in our usual urban environments so noisy and disrupting - the noise and disruption are only more subjects to observe. Living in Asia, particularly in India I have developed a high tolerance to noise. I can't realize the difference on your objects of contemplation - it must be necessarily all included in body, sensations, mind, mental objects field and the aim is to infer in Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. Mind you I practice Vipassana not Anapanasati. Anyway Rob what is Dhamma above all: wholesome 'appreciation' of Buddha's teachings through proper investigation of Mind-objects(mental contents) and Phenomena(bodily and mental processes). Kayanupassana Vedananupassana Cittanupassana Dhammanupassana If this is not nama rupa for you... We must not overlook that Buddha himself declared Satipatthana as Ekayano maggo - the sole and only WAY to deliverance being the direct or straight path. And formal meditation is included in the instructions in the Satipatthana Sutta. Sound and clear: don't suppose it's my imagination. Am I deluded on this issue? It is what I aim to clarify. Love Cybele 6378 From: Joe Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! This theory, too, was addressed in the book I referred to, which examined Theravada as thoroughly or even more thoroughly than others (although of course even Theravada is hardly unitary in such conceptions). As I recall the conclusions were the same, ie the mind- moments, citta, whatever you choose to call it, were considered ill- defined by the standards of modern western logic/philsophy/science. Again, this is not something I find to be a problem but it bothers some rationalists. Joe --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Joe: > "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the > Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view > point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can > regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada > Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may > probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another mind will > follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same > or different object (through the same or different door > way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be > located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment > experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only mind/conciousness > but a person who houses it. > Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in > a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into the > (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of mind/conciousness. > tadao 6379 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:42am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Thansk, Robert, Thanks, I'd already forgotten. Maybe it's thinking of them as 'discrete little packages' that's my problem. 'Proximity condition' could certainly be key in this regard. I'd be interested to hear anything from the Patthana if you can find the time. I see that Wisdom Books has a two-volume translation for Ł66.95 at http://www.wisdombooks.org/abhid.html --are you familiar with this, or aware of any others? Thanks again, mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > > > this > > > includes grasping(upadana). > > > > Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. > Why do > > you mention upaadaana in particular? > > > > Thanks (again) in advance, > > Just referring back to your earlier point: "Since I > don't think > clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > > > simultaneously with pańńaa," > ________ > On this issue to when we talk about moments we > should rememeber > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > (proximity > condition)and other conditions. The present moment > is > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this > condition (not to > mention other conditions) . > It is not that when we talk about moments arising > and passing > away that they are totally discrete little packages > (it can > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > Abhidhamma). > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the > last book of > the Abhidhamma. > best wishes > robert > > 6380 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Cybele, It seems we are pretty much in agreement. One aspect of the four foundations of mindfulness that should be well reflected on is that if it is the correct awareness it is grinding away the sense of self. In the satipatthana sutta:"Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati "When he is going (a bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.')" The commentary: "In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness." ENDQUOTE Even we feel non-judgemental but there can still be a veiled idea that "I" am having bare awareness. I think we shouldn't underestimate the importance of learning about the deep aspects of the Dhamma . By this I mean knowing about the khandas (five aggregates) or other classifications of realities- and other teachings. We are used to taking what are only momentary phenomena as a whole and so we confuse concept and reality. Right awareness is supported by these details. Sati is a conditioned phenomena and sati of the eightfold path, which is satipatthana, arises only through the right conditions (see, for instance, the kitagiri sutta that jon mentioned yesterday)- it cannot arise simply because we intend to have it. robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert and all > > > > >Dear Cybele and others, > >Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to > reply > >to (some by you, some by Anders, and others) but don't have > >enough time. > > > You don't have much time for me, I feel rejected! :-(((( > I am a fragile, defenceless woman and you ill treat > me...hehehehehehe > > > >Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I > spent > >a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and > at > >at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place > conducive > >to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it > formal > >meditation though. > > > I call formal meditation when we reckon a precise intention to > practice a > kind of mental training in order to sharpen our mind and > increase the skills > of awareness to support right understanding of reality, > deepening the > knowledge of your mental processes (in my case using the four > foundations of > mindfulness as a tool) to refine our capacity of getting > insights into the > phenomena, observing their arising and passing away, > characteristics, etc > without being entangled but maintaining as much as possible > detachment > avoiding strain or 'control' and using the breath just as an > anchor to grasp > and return when you stray from concentration and paying > attention to don't > cling to anything. > But observing without being judgemental body, sensations, mind > and mental > contents (hindrances) with a penetrative view accepting > whatever comes and > acknowledging it. > The penetrative view is developed through bare attention, > manasikara as a > device to reach an stage where you practice Sukkha-Vipassana > or bare insight > meditation. > The mental training aims to develop concentration and insight > and the > calmness is a by product of this skill of recognizing and > coping with > reality not using conceptual thought that can be deceptive and > lead to > mental proliferation or papanca. > That it is what I call Vipassana meditation and what I > practice in order to > be grounded in reality and foster awareness. > I am not interested in absorptions or raptures of any kind, I > had far enough > Samatha when I used to practice yoga meditation in India > (serious stuff, > better remark because yoga is becoming very much synonimous of > easy new age > commodities). > > > >You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the > >satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a > >special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this > is > >not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that > >death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the > types > >of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. > None > >of these require a special posture to develop. > > > It's not a question of posture in the physical sense as much > as a question > of mental posture, meaning a natural purposelfulness. > The physical posture just helps to keep the body and mind > stable in order to > 'facilitate' this contemplation of the chosen objects. > But you can do it whether standing, sitting, walking or lying > down. > Death and metta are included in Vipassana, on feelings, mind > and mental > contents observation when it arises and is dhammavicaya - > investigation of > the Dhamma all the same. > Regarding the quiet place, is also only an option of > appropriate conditions > for the mental training whether to avoid distractions but is > not compulsory. > Where could we find an actual quiet place in our usual urban > environments so > noisy and disrupting - the noise and disruption are only more > subjects to > observe. > Living in Asia, particularly in India I have developed a high > tolerance to > noise. > > I can't realize the difference on your objects of > contemplation - it must be > necessarily all included in body, sensations, mind, mental > objects field and > the aim is to infer in Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. > Mind you I practice Vipassana not Anapanasati. > Anyway Rob what is Dhamma above all: wholesome 'appreciation' > of Buddha's > teachings through proper investigation of Mind-objects(mental > contents) and Phenomena(bodily and mental processes). > Kayanupassana > Vedananupassana > Cittanupassana > Dhammanupassana > If this is not nama rupa for you... > > We must not overlook that Buddha himself declared Satipatthana > as Ekayano > maggo - the sole and only WAY to deliverance being the direct > or straight > path. > And formal meditation is included in the instructions in the > Satipatthana > Sutta. > Sound and clear: don't suppose it's my imagination. > Am I deluded on this issue? It is what I aim to clarify. > > Love > > Cybele > 6381 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:59am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very good they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the Patthana) She writes very clearly but I remember the first time I read this book was on a plane leaving Thailand 10 years ago. I read the whole thing and understood preety much nothing (so I know how those bats felt). I kept on rereading it along with Narada's translation and it became clearer. The Patthana is as close as one gets to knocking out the perception of self without actual direct experience. And of course it naturally encourages more direct investigation. Actually, I remember back in triple gem days one of your first letters to me asked if I could write a little more about the Patthana (not a common request- hence my recall). Thanks for the reminder and I will try to flavour some future posts with it. robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thansk, Robert, > > Thanks, I'd already forgotten. Maybe it's thinking of > them as 'discrete little packages' that's my problem. > 'Proximity condition' could certainly be key in this > regard. > > I'd be interested to hear anything from the Patthana > if you can find the time. I see that Wisdom Books has > a two-volume translation for Ł66.95 at > > http://www.wisdombooks.org/abhid.html > > --are you familiar with this, or aware of any others? > > Thanks again, > > mike > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > > Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > > > > this > > > > includes grasping(upadana). > > > > > > Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. > > Why do > > > you mention upaadaana in particular? > > > > > > Thanks (again) in advance, > > > > Just referring back to your earlier point: "Since I > > don't think > > clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > > > > > simultaneously with pańńaa," > > ________ > > On this issue to when we talk about moments we > > should rememeber > > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > > (proximity > > condition)and other conditions. The present moment > > is > > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this > > condition (not to > > mention other conditions) . > > It is not that when we talk about moments arising > > and passing > > away that they are totally discrete little packages > > (it can > > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > > Abhidhamma). > > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the > > last book of > > the Abhidhamma. > > best wishes > > robert > > > 6382 From: Num Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 1:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Sati Dear Nina and all, Thanks for your comments and sorry for the unclear message. I re- listened to Aj.Santi CD again. There is no date mentioned on the CD, so I could not tell when was the talk but it's about Patthana. Let me summarized again, Arammana-paccaya for citta and cetasika can be past, present, future or even kala-vimutti (pannatti and nibbhana) arammana. He said that all five khandhas can be past-, present- and future arammana-paccaya for the PRESENT citta. He said that the future khandha can be arammana for present citta in case of anakataga-nana. For sati, from my understanding can be mindful to the "just fallen away" reality which being function as arammana paccaya for the citta and cetasikas which sati co-arises at that moment. The arammana of citta and cetasika as I mentioned can be kala dependent (past, present and future) or kala-vimutti. But sati can mindful to citta or cetasika (nama) of the previous citta and cetasikas which just has fallen away and now function as arammana- paccaya for present mindful citta, no longer as a sampayutta-paccaya. In case of rupa, which lasts longer that citta and cetasika. It can be atthi-paccaya as well as arammana-paccaya for sati. Please do comment and correct me at any points. I am not clear about it. It's hard to ask and explain a question by writing. Thanks for your reminding about sati by Archan Sujin, from the conversation in Cambodia. I will keep on studying. Appreciate, Num 6383 From: John Palmer Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:11am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Dear Robert, Thanks for the warm welcome... I am starting to work through Abhidhamma in Daily Life with Cybele tonight. This should be interesting :-) If my brain doesn't explode overnight I hope to start posting the odd question.... Metta John -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Dear John, Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other people just as curious about it as you. No question is too basic; as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. best wishes robert --- John Palmer wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > urge to > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > as my friend > Cybele would say :-) > > 6384 From: Num Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Hi Derek, Larry and Suan: Please pardon me, I think I have never said proper hello to you before. So this time I did. If you can look at Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part II in Chapter 12 at: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat2citta12.html Here is a short cut and paste from the chapter. ______________________________________________ “The word sankhara in the Tipitaka has several meanings comprising 1 sankhara-dhamma. 2 sankhara-khandha. 3 abhisankhara. 4 asankharika and sasankharika. Sankhara-dhamma is the reality that arises because of paccaya or conditions composing it. When it arises it falls away.Sankhara-dhamma are not permanent. They arise only the shortest instant and then fall away completely. Sankhara-dhamma are namely citta, cetasika and rupa.” Abhisankrara is cetana cetasika and here is the explanation. ….“The meaning of sankhara-dhamma is more comprehensive than sankhara-khandha because citta, cetasika and rupa are all sankhara- dhamma while only the 50 cetasika are sankhara-khandha. And out of the 50 cetasika, which are sankhara-khandha, only cetana-cetasika is abhisankhara. In the paticcasamuppada, avijja is paccaya for sankhara, sankhara is paccaya for vinnana etc. Sankhara in the paticcasamuppada means cetana-cetasika, which is abhisankhara, the supreme composing reality, or kusala-kamma, or akusala-kamma which would result in vipaka-citta and -cetasika. Even though other cetasika also condition citta to arise such as phassa-cetasika. Without phassa-cetasika, which is a reality that comes into contact with arammana, there can be no citta that sees, hears, smells, tastes, knows bodysense contact or thinks. But phassa-cetasika is still not abhisankhara because it only comes into contact with arammana and then is gone. “ ….. Num 6385 From: John Palmer Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:19am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Jon, Thanks for the welcome. Lovely to meet Sarah and the crew yesterday.......they are such welcoming people. I'm starting to go full steam ahead with Abhdidhamma in Daily Life. I may be gone some time .....:-) Regards John -----Original Message----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: 15 July 2001 10:11 Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... John Welcome from me, too. Looking forward to seeing your contributions on the list. Do feel free to make any comments or ask any questions. Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear John, > Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the > Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and > dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. > Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder > about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other > people just as curious about it as you. No question is too > basic; > as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. > best wishes > robert > --- John Palmer wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > > urge to > > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > > as my friend > > Cybele would say :-) > > 6386 From: John Palmer Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:25am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness for a friend Dear Cybele, I will of course join you in sending Metta to our Dhamma-friend tomorrow. I hope anyone else meditating tomorrow will do so too - this person has given so much of their life to transmission of the Dhamma. Metta John -----Original Message----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: 14 July 2001 02:56 Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness for a friend >>Dear group >> >>I have a special appeal to make: I came to know this evening about a dear >>friend of mine, a commited buddhist and a lovely human being >>who has to >>undergoe by-pass surgery next week. >>He is going to be admitted in hospital on Monday and surgery is planned to >>Wednesday morning Asian time. >>I am concerned with him and wish I could be there to help. >>But I can't at least not physically. My heart sure will be there, close to >>this friend. >>I would like to make an appeal to whoever believe in the power of Metta >>and is in goodwill to concentrate on this person and send him >>healing >>vibrations of loving kindness. >>I am very grateful if you feel like collaborating in this mind-heart >>sinergy to give strenght to another human who is in a >>difficult moment >>joining this metta meditation. >>Thank you very much for your interest and consideration. >> >>Metta-Karuna >> >>Cybele >> 6387 From: Ken Howard Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:27am Subject: Hello dsg Hello DhammaStudyGroup My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who has been lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight months. In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous twenty- six years as a Dhamma student. I am posting this message, partly to say thank you for your invaluable guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an absolute pleasure. Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in it. Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions beyond our control. One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from Nina; Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers before him had also taught. [end quote] Returning to the subject of lurking, it was Sukin who inspired me to post this late introductory message when she wrote; Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your wavelength of communication. But reading you certainly has made me aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has been quite liberating. [end quote] Where you may be quite slow, Sukin, I am very slow - I have been all my life and it makes me reluctant to join in conversations. So many times I have read a reply to a dsg post and thought, "Oh, is that what s/he meant! Am I glad no one will see the reply I had in mind!" Thank you for the inspiration to come out, if only briefly. Kind regards to all, Ken 6388 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 7:52am Subject: Samatha-Vipassana Dear group On this thread on meditation I find interesting to consider this short text. >source: Access to Insight >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an02-029.html > >Anguttara Nikaya II.29 > >Vijja-bhagiya Sutta > >A Share in Clear Knowing >Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. >For free distribution only. >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >"These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? >Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). > >"When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The >mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what >purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned. > >"When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? >Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, >what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned." > 6389 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 8:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Congratulations on finding and appreciating these fine folks, Ken--I feel just the same way. If you're as slow you say you are, we may be in direct competition for 'Slowest'--I'll try to be a good sport. I'm also a great fan of Sukin's posts--who, by the way, is a He (this was pointed out to me after one of MY first posts...) mike --- Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old > Australian who has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or > eight months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my > previous twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. > > I am posting this message, partly to say thank you > for your invaluable > guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. > > > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six > years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let > alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, > along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a > difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. > > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct > approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another > course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take > refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a > matter for conditions > beyond our control. > > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in > a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly > mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching > of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what > other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] > > Returning to the subject of lurking, it was Sukin > who inspired me to > post this late introductory message when she wrote; > > Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have > 'arrived' at your > wavelength of communication. But reading you > certainly has made me > aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By > accumulations I am quite slow > to understanding others, but now I know in part, > why. And it has been > quite liberating. [end quote] > > Where you may be quite slow, Sukin, I am very slow > - I have been all > my life and it makes me reluctant to join in > conversations. So many > times I have read a reply to a dsg post and thought, > "Oh, is that > what s/he meant! Am I glad no one will see the reply > I had in > mind!" > > Thank you for the inspiration to come out, if only > briefly. > > Kind regards to all, > Ken > > 6390 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 1:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Mike: I've read your last question carefully, and I can tell you that I am not the right person to answer your question. You should direct the question to Nina. She is able to answer your question from the viewpoint of Abidhamma. Although to study things from the Abhidhammic viewpoint differ, in nature, from the actual experiences; at least, it provides us with theoretical/ intellectual grasp of the issue in hand. (I've forgot so many things about Abhidhmma and have to stduy it again.) tadao 6391 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:32am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada dear Rob >>Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very good >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free >download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the >Patthana) Sweetheart, I think you got confused here - Ven. Narada Thera is from Sri Lanka and a great scholar who wrote 'Buddha and his teachings'. The burmese you are referring is U Narada, the one who made the translation of the Patthana. Please don't disappoint me, you must be without any flaw! You are aging Rob...better you start with ginseng! ;-) Love Cybele 6392 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:45am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected layBurmese are given. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > dear Rob > > >>Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very > good > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free > >download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the > >Patthana) > > Sweetheart, I think you got confused here - Ven. Narada Thera > is from Sri > Lanka and a great scholar who wrote 'Buddha and his > teachings'. > The burmese you are referring is U Narada, the one who made > the translation > of the Patthana. > Please don't disappoint me, you must be without any flaw! > You are aging Rob...better you start with ginseng! ;-) > > Love > > Cybele > 6393 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Your laudable introduction only leaves me to say welcome and hope to hear more from you Ken. kind regards robert --- Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who > has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight > months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous > twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. > 6394 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >Dear Cybele, > >Before we discuss this sutta more (Maha-Satipatthana: >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html), let me ask you a >few sets of questions: > >Set 1: Robert, our favorite dhamma friend >========================== >1) Does his recent answer about how "he" practices certify that his >practice is formal? He did go to some quiet place, he did contemplate the >objects of tranquil meditations, he did walk around (not sure how slowly >he walked!), but he did *not* mention that he sat cross-legged and >observed the breath. Suppose my previous post to Rob and you answer the question. But no I suppose he doesn't practice what is called an orthodox practice of meditation. Lord Buddha, listen to me, I will become dogmatic and fundamentalist going on like this.....;-) > >Set 2: Adjuncts of formal practice that is not part of Satipatthana sutta >============================================ >2) As I mentioned my experience in the retreats, they had these >components: > >a) Sitting cross-legged, and "bind" one's attention to the breathing. At >this point, although other objects may arise, one "acknowledges" it and >then lets it go, and goes back to paying attention to breathing. >b) Walking slowly and paying attention to certain things. >c) Doing some thing else, but paying attention to certain things. >d) No talking during such retreat. Your description is altogether vague dear Kom but I love you the same because you are 'listening to me' and not dismissing right away even if you are not keen on meditation. This is an enquiring mind and not being dogmatic. I appreciate very much. Paying attention to certain things as you describe is not very 'informative' for me. The instructions are very much precise. >a) and c) appear to be in the sutta. Indeed. b) is in the sutta but there is nowhere that says that one has to walk *slowly*. Walking slowly is merely a reccomendation in order to slow down mental proliferation and fostering a keen, attentive observation of the movements that you could perhaps miss if walking at a normal pace. When your mind is trained you can meditate while walking normally. Just a strategy to help. There is nothing related to d). The Noble Silence is there to avoid the increasing of conceptual thought. All the idea Kom is exactly slow down and observe in bare attention without interferring and not elaborating. If you talk, you cannot avoid elaborating and conceptual thought is stimulated. The goal is simply allow your mental contents to emerge and they cannot emerge if you keep talking because you are not aware, you are producing multiplicity, papanca, mental proliferation. It's just an obvious choice. Personally being as you can imagine a very talkative person, discovering the silence was almost overwhelming intense for me; I enjoyed too much after an initial perplexity and aversion. I was actually 'listening' to my mental and bodily processes, I was paying real attention, I was penetrating that reality, exploring a new, fascinating territory. And breaking down all stereotypes; I am so vital and dynamic but I could handle silence and passivity, I could surrender and not cling to my mental habits and emotional patterns. It was a wonderful experience my first Vipassana retreat. > >In the above 4 behaviors, what do you take as the procedures/steps >(besides sitting cross-legged and observing the breath) that are necessary >to be certified a formal practice? I am not distributing certificates Kom, you have to ask Rob, he is the stream enterer not me. :-) Anyway also this you can get in my sharing of the practice in the previous mail. I use the four foundations of mindfulness as described in the sutta: Body Sensations/feelings Mind Mental contents Love Cybele > >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as >a > >OK. Formal practice doesn't mean going to a retreat. > > > >means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > > > >The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily >awareness it > > >seems to me just logical. > > > > The practice must be a continuum. > > > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice > > >whatsoever. > >OK. We need to apply formal practice in our daily life. > > > The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the Buddha >himself > > not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist philosophy. > >By Buddhist philosophy, do you mean the teachings related to the >Abhidhamma, or are you just strictly referring to how people in this group >go about discussing the phenomena? Do you consider the Abhidhamma >to be the teachings of the Buddha? > > > "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the > > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and >grief, > > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the >Four > > Foundations of Mindfulness." > >OK. The Buddha says the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthana) is >the only path. > > > "The contemplation of the Body > > > > Mindfulness of Breathing > > And how , monks does a monk dwell practising body-contemplation on >the body? > > Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, >or > > to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body erect and his > > mindfulness alert. > > Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." > > > > Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as you can >notice > > the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' as a > > fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the reality >of > > body, feelings, mind, mental contents. > >Do you consider the sutta to be step-by-step instructions or do you >consider it to be general guidance, i.e., that all the steps in the sutta >need >to be done for the practice to be considered formal? Do you consider >some of the steps to be pre-requisite to others, i.e, since step (a) is >mentioned before step (b), and therefore, (a) has to be done before (b). > > > > > I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the source of >the > > so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop insight > > contained in the Satipathana Sutta. > > > >I will be awaiting your further explanation of what you consider formal, >and additional explanations of the Maha-Satipatthana sutta. > >As you may have noticed, as soon as you start sprinkling some of the >intellectualization into this interaction, your intellectualizing male >friends >start to follow you like herds ;-). By my estimate, by the time you are >finished explaining this sutta, you will be the most popular hot-blooded >female in the group. I hope you don't mind this so much... > >kom > > 6395 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 2:53am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Rob: Just for your inforamtion, Ven. Naarada Thera had been an abbot of Vajira Aaraama in Columbo/Sri Lanka for a long time. A small stature (i.e. height) but had a very pretty/Boddhisatva like face. (I stayed at the temple for 10 months when he was still alive.) tadao 6396 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Dear Rob > Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be >referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected layBurmese >are given. This I know Rob I have been doing the apparently 'useless' formal meditation in both Sri Lanka and Burma but the monk you are referring who is : Narada Thera from Sri Lanka or U Narada from Burma who translated the Patthana? You wrote: I have both volumes - and very good > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). This I pointed out because if you use Thera for U Narada can be confusing being the Narada Thera from Sri Lanka quite notorious. Then you are not aging and I am nit-picking, do you prefer like this? I apologyse if I gave the impression of being pedantic, it was not my intention. Cybele >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > dear Rob > > > > >>Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very > > good > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > > I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free > > >download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the > > >Patthana) > > > > Sweetheart, I think you got confused here - Ven. Narada Thera > > is from Sri > > Lanka and a great scholar who wrote 'Buddha and his > > teachings'. > > The burmese you are referring is U Narada, the one who made > > the translation > > of the Patthana. > > Please don't disappoint me, you must be without any flaw! > > You are aging Rob...better you start with ginseng! ;-) > > > > Love > > > > Cybele > > > 6397 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:10am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Dear Tadao > >Rob: >Just for your inforamtion, Ven. Naarada Thera had been an >abbot of Vajira Aaraama in Columbo/Sri Lanka for a long time. >A small stature (i.e. height) but had a very pretty/Boddhisatva like >face. (I stayed at the temple for 10 months when he was still alive.) >tadao > Now I am confused, the Narada Thera that I am referring and is well know is the Sri Lanka one. But Narada Thera and U Narada are the same person with different titles or indeed two different persons? Cybele 6398 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:13am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Ahh. The monk who did the Patthana trans. is U Narada of Burma (not Narada thera- my alzheimers is really kicking in these days). Why was the sri lankan Narada notorious? robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Rob > > > > Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be > >referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected > layBurmese > >are given. > > This I know Rob I have been doing the apparently 'useless' > formal meditation > in both Sri Lanka and Burma but the monk you are referring who > is : Narada > Thera from Sri Lanka or U Narada from Burma who translated the > Patthana? > > You wrote: > I have both volumes - and very good > > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > This I pointed out because if you use Thera for U Narada can > be confusing > being the Narada Thera from Sri Lanka quite notorious. > > Then you are not aging and I am nit-picking, do you prefer > like this? > I apologyse if I gave the impression of being pedantic, it was > not my > intention. > > Cybele > > 6399 From: Howard Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Robert - In a message dated 7/16/01 11:21:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > On this issue to when we talk about moments we should rememeber > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya (proximity > condition)and other conditions. The present moment is > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not to > mention other conditions) . > It is not that when we talk about moments arising and passing > away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the Abhidhamma). > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book of > the Abhidhamma. > best wishes > ============================ Yes, I understand that preceding cittas condition the current citta in various ways, and the various cetasikas within a given citta bear relations to each other. But there still is exactly one citta at any time, with "sharp boundaries" so-to-speak; that is, a citta wouldn'y be modeled by, say, a fuzzy interval, would it? (Or would it?) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 6400 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Dear Rob > >Ahh. The monk who did the Patthana trans. is U Narada of Burma >(not Narada thera- my alzheimers is really kicking in these >days). >Why was the sri lankan Narada notorious? >robert AHHH, now you really got a profound insight here! Precocious senility and imperious tones with me and I even felt guilty! Lord Buddha, I am being brainwashed!! Help!!! Indeed I already ordered in Amazon the book you suggested me about mind control, I am worried... Narada Thera from Sri Lanka is considered a great scholar and he wrote many books but his "Buddha and his Teachings" a huge volume considered a basic and valuable introduction to the fundamental principles of Buddhism. It's a kind of 'Bible' and he is very well considered in Sri Lanka and in Asia generally. He was an excellent teacher it seems. Love and take care, at your age you must be attentive ;-) Cybele >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Rob > > > > > > > Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be > > >referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected > > layBurmese > > >are given. > > > > This I know Rob I have been doing the apparently 'useless' > > formal meditation > > in both Sri Lanka and Burma but the monk you are referring who > > is : Narada > > Thera from Sri Lanka or U Narada from Burma who translated the > > Patthana? > > > > You wrote: > > I have both volumes - and very good > > > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > > > This I pointed out because if you use Thera for U Narada can > > be confusing > > being the Narada Thera from Sri Lanka quite notorious. > > > > Then you are not aging and I am nit-picking, do you prefer > > like this? > > I apologyse if I gave the impression of being pedantic, it was > > not my > > intention. > > > > Cybele > > 6401 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Tadao and Mike (and Howard) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Mike: > I've read your last question carefully, and I can tell you > that I am not the right person to answer your question. > You should direct the question to Nina. She is able to > answer your question from the viewpoint of Abidhamma. > Although to study things from the Abhidhammic viewpoint > differ, in nature, from the actual experiences; > at least, it provides us with theoretical/ > intellectual grasp of the issue in hand. > (I've forgot so many things about Abhidhmma and have > to stduy it again.) > tadao I believe the question of Mike's you refer to is the same question as Mike, Howard and I have been discussing. I think Nina has already given some comments on this, in her recent post to Num (she may well be able to add more, though). I re-post here the relevant part of that message-- "When sati is mindful of seeing, seeing has fallen away, but when it has just fallen away, its characteristic can be realized as a nama. The same for dosa that can be object of awareness. The question is, how far past is past. But sati that is mindful of a nama or rupa is not arising together with that nama or rupa, not sampayutta, it arises in a following process. Sampayutta refers only to citta and cetasikas arising together. "Sati is also used in the sense of recollection of what is past, even past lives. In fact there are many aspects of sati, referred to in the co. to the Milinda Panha. You may reflect with sati on the past, and at that moment there can be the realization that it is nama that reflects. So many different cittas, very intricate." Nina then goes on to remind us that the purpose of studying and discussing all these areas is to support the study of the reality appearing at the present moment. This is something it is very easy to forget, especially if we are having difficulty accepting something intellectually - it can so easily distract us from the real task. I have re-posted this part of her message below. Jon [From message #6343 in the archives] Lets be aware of what appears now. I quote Acharn Sujin, from the conversations in Cambodia: < The development of satipaěěhĺna is the development of pańńĺ, and there should not be an idea of self who intends to do something particular in order to induce pańńĺ. Then there is no sati which is aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that naturally arises and appears at this moment because of the appropriate conditions. Someone who does not have understanding of satipaěěhĺna may ask, while he is seeing naturally, what he should do in order to have sati. It is not the right practice if someone wishes to do something particular in order to have sati, because nobody can cause the arising of any reality. People can listen to the Dhamma, they can investigate, consider and understand what they hear, so that they will know that the dhamma appearing at this moment is real, and that it appears through one doorway at a time. Therefore, it is necessary to have more understanding about the realities appearing one at a time through each of the doorways. At this moment, for example, an object is appearing through the eyes and thus, it can be seen. However, if there is no citta, no reality or element that experiences something, thus, a reality which sees the object that appears, that object cannot appear. If someone sees naturally but he does not realize the distinction between the characteristic of the object that appears and the reality that sees, vipassanĺ, insight, is not being developed. Therefore, the only thing people can do is listening to the Dhamma so that they understand correctly that seeing at this moment is only a kind of reality, a dhamma. One should listen, investigate and consider what one hears, so that one can gradually understand that there are only realities, no self. Dhammas are real, they are beyond control, they arise naturally because of their appropriate conditions.> 6402 From: Larry Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:15am Subject: Re: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Dear Suan Lu Zaw, Fantastic!!! A thousand thank you's for your wonderful research. There is much to study in your message so I don't have anything to add right now except thanks again. Larry Biddinger 6403 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 4:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! HI, Jonothan: Thank you very much for citing the previoiusly posted passage by Khun Nina and the passage by Khun Sujin. Khun Nina's comment is right on the issue (although I do not understand how/why the recollection of far past can be regarded as a type of sati). In my view, sati should be defined in its narrowest sense. tadao 6404 From: Larry Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:48am Subject: Re: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Dear Num, thank you for your reply. My knowledge of Pali has only been picked up in bits and pieces from reading translations so it's going to take awhile to sort it out. My interest in sankhara is that it seems to be a key concept, not well understood. So far to me it almost has the sense of "to cognitively grasp", but that doesn't quite fit. As "intention" seemingly it conditions kamma and if paticcasamupada=kamma, perhaps it could be said that sankhara conditions every aspect of paticcasamuppada since dukkha is conditioned by delusion and delusion is conceptual or perhaps concept itself. Paticcasamuppada is all dukkha (tanha), right? Well enough babblng for one night, thanks again. Larry 6405 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Howard, A very good question. 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 other wise 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. Someone might hear this and think they will try to "observe" this matter, but it cannot be comprehended by such a method. It is all happening so fast and the very idea of observing is caught up with subtle self view. In a similar vein some people think they observe rise and fall but before ther can be true insight into rise and fall there must be the understanding that clearly distinguishes nama from rupa. Sujin stresses that there must be firm understanding that knows anatta at the intellectual level before deeper insight can arise. Otherwise one will have the idea that sati and panna can be manufactured by will; not seeing the real conditions for these factors; not seeing that they are simply conditioned phenomena (not self). The cittas in the sense door and minddoor processes arise in strict order. Why? Because that is the nature, the law. Each citta is different from the last but it is intimately conditioned by the other cittas in the same process. It is an extreme to think that each citta is its own little package- it is another extreme to think they are blended together in any way. These matters are the way they are; and the Abhidhamma explains it as accurately as it is possible to be put into words. Only a Surpreme Buddha - a SammaSammBuddha- could convey this knowledge. Even a Pacceka Buddha who is enlightened by himself could not elucidate this so that others could understand. robert --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 7/16/01 11:21:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > On this issue to when we talk about moments we should > rememeber > > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > (proximity > > condition)and other conditions. The present moment is > > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not > to > > mention other conditions) . > > It is not that when we talk about moments arising and > passing > > away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can > > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > Abhidhamma). > > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book > of > > the Abhidhamma. > > best wishes > > > ============================ > Yes, I understand that preceding cittas condition the > current citta in > various ways, and the various cetasikas within a given citta > bear relations > to each other. But there still is exactly one citta at any > time, with "sharp > boundaries" so-to-speak; that is, a citta wouldn'y be modeled > by, say, a > fuzzy interval, would it? (Or would it?) > > With metta, > Howard > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at > dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a > flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) > 6406 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 1:28pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Suppose my previous post to Rob and you answer the question. > But no I suppose he doesn't practice what is called an orthodox practice of > meditation. > Lord Buddha, listen to me, I will become dogmatic and fundamentalist going > on like this.....;-) OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your own practice including: 1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts 2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to keenly observe the movement. > I use the four foundations of mindfulness as described in the sutta: > > Body > Sensations/feelings > Mind > Mental contents I have a set of questions following from this. Set 1: Using the whole sutta ================== Maha-satipatthana sutta also mentions other related samatha objects including bodies, corpses and bones. Do you use all such tools? If not, then my question is, since not the entire sutta is followed in both yours and Robert's cases, how can I demarcate what is "formal" and what is "informal". In Robert's case, he is not using the sitting down as a tool, in your case, you may not be using other mentioned tools in the sutta. Hence, if I take the definition that one must peruse the entire sutta, then neither your nor Robert's practice is formal. Set 2: Observing the body movement and posture =============================== When I was going through such a retreat, I could never figure out how one observes the "sitting" posture. I ended up observing the hardness appearing on the other parts of the body as the observation object. Since you mention observing body movement, what is observed when the body moves? Do you envisioning the body moving? What are the differences between having "standing", "sitting", or "walking" as the observation object, and having "hardness" as the observation object? Set 3: Using techniques not in the sutta ========================= I think we have come to an agreement that slow walking and silence are not explicitly in the maha-satipatthana sutta. In fact, I don't know of any sutta that the buddha mentioned doing things slowly to be helpful to developing the path or developing sati. The Buddha mentioned that he has completely laid out all that are helpful in reaching the path. How come doing things slowly is not explicitly mentioned? The noble silence is indeed praised by the Buddha. But, as far as I know, it is said in the context of being superior alternative to speeches that are not useful, not referring to dhamma, not referring to vinnaya, not leading toward nibbana. Again, I don't know of any sutta that even discourages such useful speeches. At least one sutta refers to hearing the Buddha dhamma's as being a pre-requisite to insights. Since during such a retreat, all speeches are virtually prohibited (they kick you out if you talk too much!). How come is a useful speech (or reading) prohibited in such a practice, but not by Buddha? Set 4: The purpose of dhamma and Satipatthana ============================== I thought the Buddha's dhamma and Satipatthana's purpose is so one can know the realities (dhamma) as they truly are. If you agree with this, how come Robert's practice, which also leads to knowing the realities as they truly are, are not as useful as a "formal" practice? Because he doesn't employ tools that would "accelerate" his practice or "sharpen" his insights? What do you think of the view that one can use drug to sharpen one's insight also? This is also not in the sutta, but there are definitely personal anecdotes of how this is helpful to sharpen one's insights? This is somewhat of an extreme comparison, but I am just wondering how far one pursues the objective of having more, better, or sharper insights by following other people advice about how to have them? kom 6407 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 2:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Mike I'm glad you found it useful. Sarah is the keeper of the files, so it depends if it passes her critical scrutiny (having your endorsement will be a plus ;-) ). Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > This is really excellent--I think you should add it to > the files for future reference. I'm certainly adding > your quotations to my own 'toolbox'. > > mike > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Tori > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a > > world of difference > > > between the conceptualising that men feel so > > comfortable with as opposed > > > to > > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to > > grips with? > > > > 'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap > > fits, I'll just have to > > wear it! > > > > But I think this is really another form of the > > 'intellectual approach vs. > > practical approach' argument that is often made. > > Rather than labelling it > > as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful > > to consider exactly > > what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri > > Sutta (MN 70) [passage A > > below], the Buddha explained that the development of > > the path is gradual > > and involves in succession listening to someone > > knowledgeable in the > > teachings, considering what one has heard, > > understanding that fully at an > > intellectual level ("gaining a reflective > > acceptance") and applying what > > one has understood. > > > > So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is > > at best only a part of > > the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual > > progress" teaching, > > each stage of which has its prerequisites and > > conditions. > > > > Nor is this series of gradual steps a > > once-and-for-all thing. It > > continues to be the way of progress until final > > enlightenment. Even the > > sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and > > considering [passage B below, > > same sutta]. > > > > Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. > > Listening, discussing, > > considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > > > > Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan > > and Rosanne) enjoy > > your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be > > there! > > > > Jon > > > > A. > > MLDB translation (p. 582) > > 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is > > achieved all at once. > > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by > > gradual training, by > > gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > > > 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." > > > > B. > > MLDB translation (p. 580) > > 11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that > > they still have work to > > do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus > > that they have no more > > work to so with diligence. > > > > 12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are > > arahants ... and are > > completely liberated through final knowledge, that > > they still have work to > > do with diligence. They have done their work with > > diligence; they are > > no more capable of being negligent. > > > > 13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher > > training, whose minds have > > not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring > > to the supreme > > security from bondage, that they still have work to > > do with diligence." > > > > 6408 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Howard --- Howard wrote: > > Jon: > > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama > that > > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the > citta > > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise > simultaneously. > > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is > as > > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object > appear > > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments > of > > each kind of citta). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem > to > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen > object,and not > the no-longer-existing object, itself. Yes, this is exactly as I understand it. I think the term "image" rather than "memory" is used. Does this present any obstacle? > Also, when you say "However, so rapid > is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the > awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be > occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each > kind > of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the > simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the > object > occurs. In yet another mind moment? Again, yes (as I understand it). There are so many different 'streams' of mind moments going on apparently simultaneously but in fact each being a succession of discrete mind moments arising repeatedly but not consecutively. For example, seeing, hearing, making sense of (conceptualising) what is being seen and heard, thinking about it, bodily movement 'commands', speech 'commands', other thoughts and feelings etc. So there is presumably room for other 'streams' also. > The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of > ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more > problems > seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana finds > difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some > level > of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, separate, > discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, the > notion of > 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for the express > > purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising with the > > discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't adopt > that, > but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a "film-frame" view > > similar to that of Hume so many years later.] > --------------------------------------------------------------- I understand that the whole of the so-called 'cognative series' (citta-viithi) is unknown as such in the Pitakas although, according to Nanamoli, a nucleus of it, based on certain sutta-pitaka material, appears in the abhidhamma-pitaka (Vis IV, n.13). I'm sorry but I am not familiar with the other schools of thought you mention, nor with any discussion on the circumstances in which the commentarial material came to be. My initial observation on this issue would be that the writings on bhavanga have a similar pedigree to other authoratitive Theravadin writings which seem to be well supported by the texts and which purport to be received Theravadin wisdom rather than any individual's personal view. Jon 6409 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some Additional Thoughts on: Reply to: Sati/panna and its object Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi again, Jon - > The following also occurs to me: Nina has written in "Cetasikas" > that > > "There is only one citta at a time, cognizing one object, and each citta > is > accompanied by several cetasikas which also experience the same object, > but > which each perform their own function while they assist the citta in > cognizing that object. They arise and fall away together with the > citta." > > Moreover, sati is one of the cetasikas. Thus, the object of > sati, > when it occurs, is the very same object as the citta along with which > which > that instance of sati occurs. So, if the object of mindfulness is a > mental > one, it is the very same one that the citta discerns. If the object is a > > *previous* entire citta or any cetasika of such a citta, then, indeed, > that > is actually no longer existent, and, thus, the actual object can only be > a memory. I am not sure exactly in what terms the commentarial writings describe the object. We are talking about the moment following the falling away of the object. Whether it is regarded as a memory or image already I do not know (despite what I said in my previous post!). > A citta, then, can never take itself, or any aspect of itself, > as > object. But at any given time, there is only one citta. All past cittas > are > gone. So a mental object, an object of the mind door, is never available > for > direct observation. In that case, why call such objects ultimate > realities? We call things ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) because they have an intrinsic nature (sabhava) capable of being experienced by panna. > In fact, what leads us to think there even are such things, inasmuch as > they > are not directly observable? Do you see that there are some difficulties > here? I do not see any difficulties from the point of view of the task of the present moment. Nor particularly from a conceptual viewopint, but then I have not given this area the kind of in-depth scrutiny that you obviously have, Howard. Please feel free to expand further. Jon 6410 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex At 07:30 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > > control with their > > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. > > >Ha ha, very quick Cybele Yes I think so-maybe why there is so much alcoholism in northern countries. Metta, Victoria 6411 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 4:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > (by the way Jon, > Sarah's mother while chatting in the kitchen with me, > commented 'did you meet Jon? Very nice chap, really nice!' - > seems your prestige is going up in Sussex!). Thanks, Cybele. Must invite her to join the list - I need all the support I can get! Jon 6412 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Dear Ken, Big welcome from me. Really liked your introduction (including the part you mistake me for a 'she'). Another confirmation to my view that I am in the right group of kalyanimitr(s). May all grow in wisdom(especially me). Sukin. Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. > > I am posting this message, partly to say thank you for your invaluable > guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. > > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. > > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions > beyond our control. > > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] > > Returning to the subject of lurking, it was Sukin who inspired me to > post this late introductory message when she wrote; > > Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your > wavelength of communication. But reading you certainly has made me > aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow > to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has been > quite liberating. [end quote] > > Where you may be quite slow, Sukin, I am very slow - I have been all > my life and it makes me reluctant to join in conversations. So many > times I have read a reply to a dsg post and thought, "Oh, is that > what s/he meant! Am I glad no one will see the reply I had in > mind!" > > Thank you for the inspiration to come out, if only briefly. > > Kind regards to all, > Ken 6413 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 7:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Tori Indeed and this recent discussion on alcohol was pretty interesting for me because living here I observed how people can be totally numbed by drinking alcohol. It's quite depressing sometimes. LOve Cybele > >At 07:30 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: > > >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > > > control with their > > > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > > > > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. > > > > >Ha ha, very quick Cybele > >Yes I think so-maybe why there is so much alcoholism in northern countries. >Metta, >Victoria > 6414 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 8:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >Dear Cybele, > >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > Suppose my previous post to Rob and you answer the question. > > But no I suppose he doesn't practice what is called an orthodox practice >of meditation. > > Lord Buddha, listen to me, I will become dogmatic and fundamentalist >going on like this.....;-) > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your >own practice including: >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to >keenly observe the movement. Not precisely Kom, you are misreading what I said. Let me try and explain more carefully. What I call formal practice is using a determined period of time every day to dedicate to a specific mental training, not by chance the very same one Buddha himself experimented to attain enlightenment. It seems here that we are overlooking the very fact that meditation is the Buddha's way; not casually he is rafigurated sitting cross legged and engaged in meditation. What you attempt to do is creating a bit of mental space through the mental silence whether to work out this awareness exercize as for the body fitness you practice gymnastics or a sport. Let's say that Vipassana meditation is for the mental health, the tool to exercize is awareness and the formal practice aim to strenghten this very same capacity of insight into the reality of phenomena. Helps to sharpen the mind, heighten the penetrative view that will eventually lead to a clear comprehension and refines sensitivity. My query is to assess if the simple observation and investigation of reality as most of you seems to practice retaining it is the right concentration that will conduce to right understanding leading to right mindfulness is enough to justify neglecting formal meditation as a mental training. It is the Buddha's way and continues being taught as the Buddha's way everywhere. What I am trying to understand is if effectively we can renunciate meditation withour 'regrets', meaning without being arrogant to think that we can do better without the Buddha's method and we can develop wisdom only through this investigation of namarupa that very often trespass in conceptual thought. What we are taught is that the very philosophy and psychology contained in the Abhidhamma is applied while you meditate using Satipathana as a reference. We are taught to practice daily awareness as a continuum but perform the formal practice as a mental training and that meditation is the Buddha's Way of Mindfulness. I send this by now. And will continue replying. Metta Cybele 6415 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Ken Welcome from me, too. We are glad to have you with us. --- Ken Howard wrote: > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. Yes, abhidhamma can even be fun, once you start making the connections to real life. Ken, I like what you say below-- > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions > beyond our control. This last sentence of yours shows I think true saddha -- the confidence (based, perhaps, on experience) that the right cause properly developed will bring the right result, even though that result may not be immediately apparent to us. Very much how I see things, too. Now, if only we had he patience to live it out! > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] Yes, this is a real gem. Looking forward to seeing your posts. Jon 6416 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:07pm Subject: Erik in bangkok Dear Group, Just got an email from Erik. He is now in bangkok, has moved into an apartment, and sounds great. We are going to meet once I arrive on saturday week. robert 6417 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Rob > >Dear Cybele, >It seems we are pretty much in agreement. >One aspect of the four foundations of mindfulness that should be >well reflected on is that if it is the correct awareness it is >grinding away the sense of self. I understand what you mean but in meditation is very much stressed the concept of 'Upadana-kkhanda'- the five aggregates of clinging, what conventionally is called 'personality' or self. We are warned to don't refer to a self experiencing anything. There is only bare attention acting out this investigation. >Even we feel non-judgemental but there can still be a veiled >idea that "I" am having bare awareness. I think we shouldn't >underestimate the importance of learning about the deep aspects >of the Dhamma . By this I mean knowing about the khandas (five >aggregates) or other classifications of realities- and other >teachings. We are used to taking what are only momentary >phenomena as a whole and so we confuse concept and reality. >Right awareness is supported by these details. Indeed but this is the purpose of meditation, through this dispassionate observation of the four foundations of mindfulness one develop this awareness that will lead to realize there is no self, all phenomena are impermanent and unsatisfactory. And realize it not conceptually but as actual knowledge, clear comprehension of the characteristics of all phenomena. >Sati is a conditioned phenomena and sati of the eightfold path, >which is satipatthana, arises only through the right conditions >(see, for instance, the kitagiri sutta that jon mentioned >yesterday)- it cannot arise simply because we intend to have it. There is no forcefulness in meditation at all. We are there witnessing whatever arises and paying attention; slowing down to allow this detailed observation and enforcing concentration and fostering awareness in the sense of sharpening the mind to perceive it. I know that sati only arise if there are the right conditions but if you don't apply and commit yourself to listen and study Dhamma you are not exactly collaborating to promote this right conditions. I don't see any incompatibility between this assertion and the practice of meditation. Rob as I wrote in the post to Kom; what I am trying to assess is the Buddha's way was traditionally taught as meditation; how can we overlook this very fact in the buddhist teachings. This I would like you explain me straightforwardly. it seems that people here considers meditation not necessary at all and this clashes with the original teaching in my understanding. I am not a person who hold a radical position as you well know, I am simply enquiring not criticizing or challenging anybody in this issue. I feel a bit perplexed and want to clarify. Bhavana is usually trasllated as meditation. You speak about Sati but what we are taught by monks and layteachers is that mindfulness cannot occur if you don't train your mind practicing meditation quite strictly. Is most evident that here nobody or mostly you don't agree with this view. Explain me in an articulate way your position. This is my query. Love Cybele 6418 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 --- cybele chiodi wrote: > . > Bhavana is usually trasllated as meditation. > You speak about Sati but what we are taught by monks and > layteachers is that > mindfulness cannot occur if you don't train your mind > practicing meditation > quite strictly. > Is most evident that here nobody or mostly you don't agree > with this view. > Explain me in an articulate way your position. > This is my query. > > Love > > Cybele > ____________ Dear Cybele, before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a private note to me about how last night you were explaining Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. best wishes robert 6419 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Rob >Make no mistake, if someone wishes to develop mindfulness of >breathing he is going to have to be involved in some serious >formal meditation. The texts note that this is a difficult >subject, not suited for all. In early years I did try this >practice and in fact apparently did have some rather exciting >periods of concentration. I also developed a lot of attachment >to the concentration. I don't say that it can't be developed by >others but for myself it seems the objects of the 6 doors are >appropriate and beneficial (along with the ways of samatha I >just mentioned). Well Robert we misunderstood each other here. I don't practice Anapanasati as I told you but Vipassana and then I don't fear nimitta and attachment to 'pleasant sensations', I practice insight meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and concentration purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. I like straightforwardness and Vipassana suits me a lot. It was because of this kind of meditation that I discovered Dhamma and became a buddhist. I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. I don't find meditation and Abhidhamma study not compatible, I think that one enforce another; that's why often I say Abhidhamma is like a dynamic meditation and I mean it. >I also find the study of the teachings a very strong condition >for understanding. Me too. If you don't intellectualize what happens quite often if we don't watch out. >On the other hand I know a person or two who >are knowledgeable about Dhamma but who seem to have no grasp of >the nature of this moment. Sometimes I think the best one could >do for them is to lock then in a cave for a year - make them >bring to mind their learning for its proper use. Indeed that's what I think meditation can prevent! People churning over intellectual knowledge when they are totally ignorant of their own minds and hearts. They are only 'parroting' the teachings, they don't enquiry or question, their minds are dull. >Abhidhamma can >be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual >happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. It >is good to be reminded of that danger >robert I agree and that's why I think that the study should be tempered with meditation. Love Cybele 6420 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity (Howard) Howard --- Howard wrote: >> Jon said: > > I got stuck at the point where the author says-- > > > > "As such it [equanimity as one of the factors of Awakening > (bojjhanga)] > > can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of > > mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for > even > > more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to > > spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of > > non-fashioning that opens to Awakening." > > > > What is your take on this passage? > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, I suppose it has more poetry than precision! ;-)) I think > that > the point is that the non-reactivity fostered by equanimity at the level > of > the 4th jhana results in greater clarity and enhanced mindfulness. > ------------------------------------------------------------- He seems to be saying that equanimity leads to either one thing ('greater mastery of meditaion') or another ('a state of non-fashioniung'). Presumably these would be references to samatha and vipassana? I would feel happier looking at particular sutta references. > >. Again I am puzzled by the terminology. Eg. 'transcendent' as > > meaning or connoting 'coming into play as one reaches the point of > > Awakening (where no temporal feedback [??] is possible)'. This makes > it > > difficult for me to say much, unless you can elucidate. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am > certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might > be > saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from > the > Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that > level. > Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something > about > which I have no idea. > ------------------------------------------------------------ As far as I understand the Abhidhamma, this is not so. But it is not clear that that is indeed what he is saying. > > > You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your > > > main influence? > > > > Never really thought of it in those terms. Over the years I have come > to > > realise that the suttas need a knowledge of the Abhidhamma to be > > understood correctly. But I have never seen myself as a student of > the > > Abhidhamma as such; I just consult one or 2 standard references as > and > > when I want to check something. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, you certainly seem to have learned one helluva lot from > those > two references! ;-)) > --------------------------------------------------------- It's kind of you to say so, but it's really all relative. Compared to how the Abhidhamma is studied in Buddhist countries, I know hardly anything. But then, I don't think I would get far studying it in a formal way, as a series of lists etc. I have been very fortunate in having attended discussions with and listened to talks of Khun Sujin for many years now, and to have been reading Nina's books and other writings over the same period. This has given me an insight into the Abhidhamma without having to actually study it as such. It is to these 2 people that I owe all I know. The referral to texts for the purpose of posting to this list is something relatively recent for me, prompted by a wish to cite authority for any proposition I give, as far as possible. Of course, this has led to further 'discoveries' and interesting references, and so it goes on. Jon 6421 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik in bangkok Rob (and Erik) This whole thing about Erik and Bangkok comes as a surprise to me. Have I missed some posts on it while I was away? (I remember only a passing mention about it from Erik) Erik Congratulations on the move. I am sure you will find your visit/stay an interesting one. Do keep us posted on any useful dhamma chats or insights! Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Group, > Just got an email from Erik. He is now in bangkok, has moved > into an apartment, and sounds great. > We are going to meet once I arrive on saturday week. > robert > 6422 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:24pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: > >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath > >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your > >own practice including: > >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts > >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to > >keenly observe the movement. > > Not precisely Kom, you are misreading what I said. > Let me try and explain more carefully. > What I call formal practice is using a determined period of time every day > to dedicate to a specific mental training, not by chance the very same one > Buddha himself experimented to attain enlightenment. I am sorry I jumped to the conclusion before you explained this point! (hope you didn't get too frustrated yet) OK. Robert's practice is unorthodox because he is aware of the different realities arising throughout the day, but a) he does *not* dedicate a specific time of the day to practicing mindfulness b) does not sit cross-legged and meditates, even though the sutta explicitly says that this part of the practice. > It seems here that we are overlooking the very fact that meditation is the > Buddha's way; not casually he is rafigurated sitting cross legged and > engaged in meditation. Although I have no doubt that the Buddha became enlightened while he was sitting cross-legged, I have some reservation about having to sit cross-legged in order to develop the wisdom knowing the realities as they currently arise. Here are some points that cross through my mind: a) Not all the disciples became enlightened when they are sitting cross- legged. For some of them, it is not obvious that they do any sort of samatha meditation at all. However, I have high confidence that most of them think of the buddha, his purity, his wisdom, his loving-kindness, in parts of their days, especially while they are "observing" realities as they are. Buddha's qualities can definitely be the object of samatha meditations. b) I believe the buddha did mention that any level of kusala contributes/supports enlightenment. He encouraged us to develop all levels of kusala: dana, sila, samatha bhavana, and most importantly satipathanna. c) I have no doubt that samatha meditation, if done with Samma Samathi, does contribute to the development of wisdom. > What you attempt to do is creating a bit of mental space through the mental > silence whether to work out this awareness exercize as for the body fitness > you practice gymnastics or a sport. > Let's say that Vipassana meditation is for the mental health, the tool to > exercize is awareness and the formal practice aim to strenghten this very > same capacity of insight into the reality of phenomena. > Helps to sharpen the mind, heighten the penetrative view that will > eventually lead to a clear comprehension and refines sensitivity. What I have doubts with are the techniques advocated by the different meditation schools. As I mention in the previous message, some of the practices are not supported very well by the teachings except in some specific circumstances. (see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6406 about about doing things slowly and complete silence). I don't believe doing things slowly really help with insights or with the arising of kusala. Not only it is not supported by the sutta, it doesn't make any sense to me why it should. I do believe any kind of kusala helps with developing wisdom. What I am saying is that although these meditation schools teach something that on the surface look very much like something lifted from Satipatthana sutta, one has to be careful about what is being really taught. Some of these stuffs (as I mentioned) don't make any sense (to me.) Because of these, the other things that are taught are somewhat thrown into doubts in my mind whether or not the person teaching some of these practices are really transmitting the Buddha's dhamma, or are just pointing out some quick ways toward the possibly micha enlightenment. Just like any other teachings taught by anybody (meditation masters, A. Sujin, Robert, Jon, Sarah, etc.), we should be able to verify (up to a certain point), and should verify, that it is the teaching of the buddha. Otherwise, with the subtlety of the dhammas, and with the micha-ditthi that we have accumulated for endless aeons, I think we would be more prone toward doing/learning the wrong things than the right. > My query is to assess if the simple observation and investigation of reality > as most of you seems to practice retaining it is the right concentration > that will conduce to right understanding leading to right mindfulness is > enough to justify neglecting formal meditation as a mental training. If one knows how to develop samatha meditation the right way, I don't believe one should neglect developing it. However, I don't believe simply following the techniques taught by the meditation schools necessarily will bring one the right concentration unless one understands the differences between the wrong concentration (micha-samathi) and the right concentration (samma samathi). > It is the Buddha's way and continues being taught as the Buddha's way > everywhere. > What I am trying to understand is if effectively we can renunciate > meditation withour 'regrets', meaning without being arrogant to think that I, for one, do not renunciate samma samathi. I just haven't had the opportunity to run into a teacher, in whom I have confidence that he is teaching the Buddha's dhamma, who teaches samatha meditation. > we can do better without the Buddha's method and we can develop wisdom only > through this investigation of namarupa that very often trespass in > conceptual thought. > What we are taught is that the very philosophy and psychology contained in > the Abhidhamma is applied while you meditate using Satipathana as a > reference. > We are taught to practice daily awareness as a continuum but perform the > formal practice as a mental training and that meditation is the Buddha's Way > of Mindfulness. > I personally don't think of the Buddha's teachings as fixed set of method that will get one to become enlightened, but rather the teachings that will bring about knowing the realities as they are. He teaches the different conditions which will influence the development of wisdom. Knowing that, I am content to say if I adopt more and more of the Buddha's teachings into the daily life, as I start seeing the values of them, and as long as there are some development of wisdom, I am satisfied that at least I am walking on the right path. My walking may not be very fast, but I totally expect this, as how fast I walk is conditioned by how much wisdom I have accumulated, and not really how fast I *want* to walk. I think our differences are becoming clearer, don't you think? Thanks for giving me all the pointers. kom 6423 From: Tori Korshak Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Cybele wrote: as I wrote in the post to Kom; what I am trying to assess is the Buddha's way was traditionally taught as meditation; how can we overlook this very fact in the buddhist teachings. Yes and he never stopped meditating until parinibbana so shouldn't we do the same? Metta, Victoria 6424 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: Erik in bangkok --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob (and Erik) > This whole thing about Erik and Bangkok comes as a surprise to me. It came as quite a surprise to me as well, given only two weeks ago I had no inkling I'd be writing this message from my new apartment and new computer in BKK! So rest easy Jon, it wasn't a lack of mindfulness on your part. Imagine what a surprise it is to find out you have literally one day to clear out of your old place and move a hemisphere away, with one bag on your back, half filled with Dhamma books, the rest with the bare minimum of clothing to wear for a few days before having to start completely over again. I can barely stop laughing at the absurdity and beauty of it all! 6425 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Tori Thanks for the support, I was feeling a bit lonely. ;-) Metta Cybele > >Cybele wrote: >as I wrote in the post to Kom; what I am trying to assess is if the >Buddha's way was traditionally taught as meditation; how can we overlook >this very fact in the buddhist teachings. > > >Yes and he never stopped meditating until parinibbana so shouldn't we do >the same? > >Metta, >Victoria > > 6426 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:14pm Subject: sharing abhidhamma in daily life >Dear Cybele, >before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a >private note to me about how last night you were explaining >Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. >best wishes >robert > Dear Rob Yes I am very keen on sharing this experience, was very profound to me. Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation and before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he had some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain with my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I would try to explain the passage. What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate the obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading and concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to feel myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded way. This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying to communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in the meanwhile. It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping John to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a very curious and relaxed manner. I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I felt like while talking I was sharpening my mind. Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can penetrate together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each other. His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind was very allert indeed. Well there it is Rob; looking forward for your comments. :-) Please be merciless, don't destroy brutally my dear illusions...joking! Cybele 6427 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom, >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your >own practice including: >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to >keenly observe the movement. The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) as follows: "Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. I.B. Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to the Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). Best wishes, Jim 6428 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Erik in bangkok Dear Erik >Imagine what a surprise it is to find out >you have literally one day to clear out of your old place and move a >hemisphere away, with one bag on your back, half filled with Dhamma >books, the rest with the bare minimum of clothing to wear for a few >days before having to start completely over again. I can barely stop >laughing at the absurdity and beauty of it all! > I am enjoying too!!! Next time I go to Bangkok I can have hospitality!!! ;-) Best regards to you and hope you will enjoy this bizarre town. Glad to see you settled and enthusiastic. Love Cybele 6429 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 0:23am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Jim, --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Dear Kom, > > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: > >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath > >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your > >own practice including: > >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts > >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to > >keenly observe the movement. > > The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) > as follows: > > "Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, > should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of > wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. I.B. > Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to the > Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe > silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the > Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). > Thank you so much for pointing this out. kom 6430 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: : Sati of past object? op 16-07-2001 19:03 schreef Num op Num: > Arammana-paccaya for citta and cetasika can be past, > present, future or even kala-vimutti (pannatti and nibbhana) > arammana. He said that all five khandhas can be past-, present- and > future arammana-paccaya for the PRESENT citta. He said that the > future khandha can be arammana for present citta in case of > anakataga-nana. Nina: let me just translate future khandha as object for those who have specific knowledge of the future (anagata ~naana). It is clear, also past colour or sound, etc. can be objects of citta. Some people think that when a past object is remembered the object is a concept, I used to think this. A specific odour now makes us remember an odour we smelled in the past. There are stories an account of such an odor, stories of the source of that smell, etc. but there is also the rupa odor of the past that can be remembered. ( the church bell ringing in someone's childhood, a story, but also that sound is remembered. No churchbell if there was no sound) Acharn Sujin says: if there are no paramattha dhammas can there be the concept of a person? Num: For sati, from my understanding can be mindful to the > "just fallen away" reality which being function as arammana > paccaya for the citta and cetasikas which sati co-arises at that > moment. > The arammana of citta and cetasika as I mentioned can be > kala dependent (past, present and future) or kala-vimutti. But sati > can mindful to citta or cetasika (nama) of the previous citta and > cetasikas which just has fallen away and now function as arammana- > paccaya for present mindful citta, no longer as a sampayutta-paccaya. Nina: as mentioned before, sati is mindful of what has just fallen away, but we cannot count how long, it all occurs so rapidly. The main thing: what characteristic appears now? Seeing? Sound? No need to think of how many moments ago it fell away, it presents itself, does it not? No need to think of it. Num: In case of rupa, which lasts longer that citta and cetasika. It > can be atthi-paccaya (presence condition) as well as arammana-paccaya, object condiiton, for sati. > Nina: Your question amounts to whether there can be sati of satipatthana in the sense-door process of cittas experiencing that rupa. There are many sense-door processes and mind-door processes succeeding one another. When sati of satipatthana has been developed, can one stop awareness from arising in a sense-door process? But vipassana ~naana that clearly distinguishes nama from rupa, the first stage of tender insight, has to arise in a mind-door process. But at this moment the first duty is being aware of characteristics that present themselves. Realizing nama and rupa as conditioned realities is the second stage of tender insight. It may make things complicated if we try to pinpoint what type of condition there is for a particular reality. It is useful to read about conditions, it helps us to see that realities are beyond control. It may not be so useful if we try to fit in our knowledge of conditions, while we are beginning to be mindful of realities. In Cambodia,and also before and after, Acharn Sujin repeated often, as I have mentioned already, that we should know our own limitations. She did so when people were so keen about knowing conditions and dependent origination. She was really concerned that people would overreach. I quote from Conversations in Cambodia, where it was discussed that one rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. This is a comparison, and we should not count. End quote. Nina. 6431 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Enlightenment factors lokiya and lokuttara. op 15-07-2001 21:07 schreef Howard op Howard: -about the seven factors of enlightenments (wings to awakening) > Howard: > Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am > certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might be > saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from the > Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that level. > Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something about > which I have no idea. Nina: In Cambodia someone asked Acharn Sujin about the bodhipakkhiya dhammas (factors pertaining to enlightenment) whether they are lokuttara, supramundane or lokiya, mundane. The answer: they can be mundane and supramundane. These factors have to be developed so that enlightenment can be attained. They are first mundane. The factors mentioned here as wings to awakening, are confidence, energy, sati, concentration and pa~n~naa. They are also sometimes translated as the five "spiritual faculties" or indriyas. Acharn Sujin said that only when satipatthana arises, sati and the other factors of confidence etc. are indriyas. Nina. 6432 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:28am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some Additional Thoughts on: Reply to: Sati/panna and ... Hi, Jon - Thanks much for your reply. I have nothing further to add on the topic right now, but something may occur to me later on. Again, thanks! With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/17/01 4:48:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi again, Jon - > > > The following also occurs to me: Nina has written in "Cetasikas" > > that > > > > "There is only one citta at a time, cognizing one object, and each citta > > is > > accompanied by several cetasikas which also experience the same object, > > but > > which each perform their own function while they assist the citta in > > cognizing that object. They arise and fall away together with the > > citta." > > > > Moreover, sati is one of the cetasikas. Thus, the object of > > sati, > > when it occurs, is the very same object as the citta along with which > > which > > that instance of sati occurs. So, if the object of mindfulness is a > > mental > > one, it is the very same one that the citta discerns. If the object is a > > > > *previous* entire citta or any cetasika of such a citta, then, indeed, > > that > > is actually no longer existent, and, thus, the actual object can only be > > a memory. > > I am not sure exactly in what terms the commentarial writings describe the > object. We are talking about the moment following the falling away of the > object. Whether it is regarded as a memory or image already I do not know > (despite what I said in my previous post!). > > > A citta, then, can never take itself, or any aspect of itself, > > as > > object. But at any given time, there is only one citta. All past cittas > > are > > gone. So a mental object, an object of the mind door, is never available > > for > > direct observation. In that case, why call such objects ultimate > > realities? > > We call things ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) because they have > an intrinsic nature (sabhava) capable of being experienced by panna. > > > In fact, what leads us to think there even are such things, inasmuch as > > they > > are not directly observable? Do you see that there are some difficulties > > here? > > I do not see any difficulties from the point of view of the task of the > present moment. Nor particularly from a conceptual viewopint, but then I > have not given this area the kind of in-depth scrutiny that you obviously > have, Howard. Please feel free to expand further. > > Jon > > /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) 6433 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Enlightenment factors lokiya and lokuttara. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/17/01 1:30:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Nina van Gorkom writes: > op 15-07-2001 21:07 schreef Howard op Howard: > -about the seven factors of enlightenments (wings to awakening) > > Howard: > > Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am > > certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might be > > saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from the > > Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that level. > > Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something > about > > which I have no idea. > > Nina: In Cambodia someone asked Acharn Sujin about the bodhipakkhiya dhammas > (factors pertaining to enlightenment) whether they are lokuttara, > supramundane or lokiya, mundane. The answer: they can be mundane and > supramundane. These factors have to be developed so that enlightenment can > be attained. They are first mundane. The factors mentioned here as wings to > awakening, are confidence, energy, sati, concentration and pa~n~naa. They > are also sometimes translated as the five "spiritual faculties" or indriyas. > Acharn Sujin said that only when satipatthana arises, sati and the other > factors of confidence etc. are indriyas. Nina. > > ================================== Thank you very much for this information. It makes eminent sense to me! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 6434 From: Num Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 2:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question > "intention" seemingly it conditions kamma and if paticcasamupada=kamma, > perhaps it could be said that sankhara conditions every aspect of > paticcasamuppada since dukkha is conditioned by delusion and delusion is > conceptual or perhaps concept itself. Paticcasamuppada is all dukkha > (tanha), right? Hi Larry, My understanding about Paticcasamuppada is limited. I am going to try to explain some from my understanding. Please take it with wise, careful and critical attention. Paticcasamuppada explains about chain or process continuation by proximate and supportive causes. Avijja in the dependent origination is Moha cetasika (ignorance or delusion, opposite of panna or understanding). Sankhara as I mentioned is a cetana cetasika (volition or will) which will bring an effect (vipaka--> vinnana, nama-rupa, salayatana?, phassa and vedana) in the future. Tanha means wanting to have, (object is not there yet), (sensual, self-existense, self-anihilation), upadan means grasping and not letting it go by having tanha as a proximate cause. Bhapa is also a result, Chati is a continuation and chara and morana is an association and a result of chati. Dukkha can mean unpleasant bodily sensation as in vedana (feeling) or mean intrinsic conflictual/changing property of sankhara as in anicca-dukkha-anatta. So I think in Paticcasamuppada mentions both meaning of dhukka. I think to cease the cycle is to no stop moha (ignorance) with understanding (panna). With no more moha, the cycle will stop, that is probably reaching nibbhana stage, I guess. So again, understanding (panna) is the key. I think other dsg members can give you better and more concised explanation than me. DSG members, please do not hesitate to jump in to add, to correct and comment. Num 6435 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 6:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Jim > >The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) >as follows: > >"Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, >should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of >wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. >I.B.Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to >the Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe >silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the >Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). This is most curious as in the Theravada tradition during retreats the observance of the Noble Silence is compulsory and highlighted as a indispensable tool for the practice (I mean during retreats only). Whether the teachers are monastics or laymen; in eastern as in western countries. Could you share with us a resume of this several pages leading up to the disclosure of the motivation for this rule? I would most appreciate. "When a man knows the solitude of silence, and feels the joy of quietness, he is free from fear and sin and he feels the joy of Dhamma." The Dhammapada, verse 205 Thanks Best wishes Cybele 6436 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Erik in bangkok Thanks, Erik, and good luck with the settling in. I do hope we can meet on our (Sarah and my) next visit to Bkk. Jon --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Rob (and Erik) > > This whole thing about Erik and Bangkok comes as a surprise to me. > > It came as quite a surprise to me as well, given only two weeks ago I > had no inkling I'd be writing this message from my new apartment and > new computer in BKK! So rest easy Jon, it wasn't a lack of > mindfulness on your part. Imagine what a surprise it is to find out > you have literally one day to clear out of your old place and move a > hemisphere away, with one bag on your back, half filled with Dhamma > books, the rest with the bare minimum of clothing to wear for a few > days before having to start completely over again. I can barely stop > laughing at the absurdity and beauty of it all! > > 6437 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Robert - As usual, you give a very clear, and *very helpful* reply! In a message dated 7/17/01 12:16:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert writes: > Dear Howard, > A very good question. 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. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. Between the active cittas there are the latent, bhavanga cittas. As I have read, a bhavanga citta is likened to a spider sitting in the center of his web (latent discernment waiting to "pounce"), waiting for a stimulus (phassa) to scurry after prey (to discern the next object and become active discernment instead of latent discernment). One question that occurs to me is what is the object for a bhavanga citta? It is so that every citta has an object, right? In the case of a bhavanga citta is it a replication of the object of the preceding active citta? I seem to recall reading that rebirth consciousness is a bhavanga citta, and that its object is the "same" as that of the citta at the time of death. By analogy, this would suggest that *any* bhavanga citta might take as object the "same" object as the preceding active citta. Or is there no object for a bhavanga citta, but just a "waiting" for an object? ----------------------------------------------------------- > 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 other wise 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. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I have a bit if a problem here. How can there be observation of a bhavanga citta, or of any citta for that matter, even by a Buddha? The citta has its own object. There cannot be a simultaneous second citta which has the first citta as *it's* object, because there is only one citta at a time. Moreover, the first citta, having its own object cannot also have a *second* object which is the citta, itself! Thus, no citta is ever an object! (However, the *memory* of a citta could be.) ------------------------------------------------------ > 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. > Someone might hear this and think they will try to "observe" > this matter, but it cannot be comprehended by such a method. It > is all happening so fast and the very idea of observing is > caught up with subtle self view. In a similar vein some people > think they observe rise and fall but before ther can be true > insight into rise and fall there must be the understanding that > clearly distinguishes nama from rupa. > Sujin stresses that there must be firm understanding that knows > anatta at the intellectual level before deeper insight can > arise. Otherwise one will have the idea that sati and panna can > be manufactured by will; not seeing the real conditions for > these factors; not seeing that they are simply conditioned > phenomena (not self). > The cittas in the sense door and minddoor processes arise in > strict order. Why? Because that is the nature, the law. > Each citta is different from the last but it is intimately > conditioned by the other cittas in the same process. It is an > extreme to think that each citta is its own little package- it > is another extreme to think they are blended together in any > way. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What you say in the last two sentences is, on my opinion, very important! This goes a long way towards ameliorating the "atomistic view" by showing that even though the various cittas occur during discrete time units, they are interdependent, they are connected by conditionality!! ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > These matters are the way they are; and the Abhidhamma explains > it as accurately as it is possible to be put into words. Only a > Surpreme Buddha - a SammaSammBuddha- could convey this > knowledge. Even a Pacceka Buddha who is enlightened by himself > could not elucidate this so that others could understand. > robert > > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 7/16/01 11:21:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > Robert writes: > > > > > > > On this issue to when we talk about moments we should > > rememeber > > > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > > (proximity > > > condition)and other conditions. The present moment is > > > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not > > to > > > mention other conditions) . > > > It is not that when we talk about moments arising and > > passing > > > away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can > > > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > > Abhidhamma). > > > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book > > of > > > the Abhidhamma. > > > best wishes > > > > > ============================ > > Yes, I understand that preceding cittas condition the > > current citta in > > various ways, and the various cetasikas within a given citta > > bear relations > > to each other. But there still is exactly one citta at any > > time, with "sharp > > boundaries" so-to-speak; that is, a citta wouldn'y be modeled > > by, say, a > > fuzzy interval, would it? (Or would it?) > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > > ================================= Thanks much, 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) 6438 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Robert: Your message to Horward is very well written (i.e. the right on the issue and very well explained). tadao 6439 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi, Jim: Is your passage taken from the Paatimokkha? Is is one of the paaciitiyaa? I am wondering if you can cite the original pali passge for me (since I do not remeber that such a offence was included as one of the wrong-doings.) Thank you in advance, tadao (Obviously, I do not have a copy of Paatimokkha booklet.) 6440 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Sorry I haven't been able to come back to this group for a few days. I just wanted you to know that I intend to keep dropping in when I can. Thanks for your responses to the Hui Neng story. Very interesting. Robert E. --------------- --- Joe wrote: > As far as we can tell, the Buddha himself ate meat ... ... > > ================================ > > I don't eat meat, though I do eat sea creatures. I wouldn't > knowingly > > eat vegetables prepared with meat. But, as I see it, that is > because I am > > *only* me, at my lowly stage. ...If I were "more along", I would be more like > Hui Neng. > > As I see it, this story presents a remarkable person! > > > > With metta, > > Howard ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6441 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Cybele, > > > >Is there a 'situation' outside what our minds have created and holding on > > >to? I think there are more important things that can be discussed. > > > > I disagree with you Sukin. > > Also this can be something that your mind have created and you are holding > > to. > > You are right, this is what I realized later in the evening. I was indeed > creating > a situation myself, one that I saw Herman being 'judged' by others. But as I > realized later, I also saw Herman strong enough to defend himself and if he > chose to say anything or remain silent who was I to come up with any > clarification for him. Besides I am trying to clarify myself now aren't I, what > is the motive? Just want you to know that it is very inspiring to see you all taking the rare step of actually stepping back and looking at your own experience and motives in a conflict situation, something that seems to be lacking on the Buddhist newsgroups, for instance. It is this kind of awareness that represents actual practice, in my view. I do not know the sutras and scriptures very well, except for a few, but I am happy to recognize real practice when I see it. Robert --------------------------- ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6442 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > it is not the right view that is to be discarded but the > attachment to it. This is so smart. A most important distinction. > The most deeply held views are those revolving around the idea > of self. Those that take concepts for being something real, and > realities for self or lasting. This is very clear and goes to the heart of obstructive views. Thank you. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6443 From: Ken Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:53am Subject: Re: Hello dsg Dear Mike, Robert, Sukin, Jon, Thank you all for your kind words and also, Mike, for your empathy and, Sukin, for your forbearance. I must say, I did not mean to so vividly illustrate my confession to being slow-witted and prone to egg on the face. What I wanted to get across was my gratitude for all I have learned / am learning from your discussions and my apologies for not joining in. I should have added that it is a rare priviledge to experience the company, albeit as a lurker, of such wise, warm-hearted people (meaning dsg members as a whole). This is getting sentimental and not Dhamma-related so let's leave it at that. Kind regards Ken --- "m. nease" wrote: > Congratulations on finding and appreciating these fine > folks, Ken--I feel just the same way. If you're as > slow you say you are, we may be in direct competition > for 'Slowest'--I'll try to be a good sport. > > I'm also a great fan of Sukin's posts--who, by the > way, is a He (this was pointed out to me after one of > MY first posts...) > > mike > 6444 From: Num Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: : Sati of past object? > > Butsawong: No, not at the same time. > Sujin: In between the time we see and hear there are rúpas that arose and > fell away. The citta that sees and the citta that hears are more than > seventeen moments of citta apart from each other. Therefore, the development > of pańńĺ is not counting moments of citta. The first stage of pańńĺ that > should be developed is pańńa that clearly distinguishes the difference > between nĺma dhamma and rúpa dhamma. It should know that rúpa dhamma does > not know anything at all, and that nĺma dhamma is completely different from > rúpa, not mixed with it in any way.> Dear Nina, Thanks for your reply and comments. I like Archarn Sujun's quote that you have pasted. Always good to have a gentle reminder. Appreciate your input. I will ask you somemore. Dhamma studying is not easy. Num 6445 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, >This is most curious as in the Theravada tradition during retreats the >observance of the Noble Silence is compulsory and highlighted as a >indispensable tool for the practice (I mean during retreats only). >Whether the teachers are monastics or laymen; in eastern as in western >countries. The Pali phrase for 'Noble Silence' is 'ariyo tu.nhiibhaavo'. For 'observance of silence' it's 'muugabbata'. (muuga = dumb + vata = observance or practice). It's the same 'vata' as in 'siilabbataparaamaasa'. I checked a few commentaries and the Noble Silence refers to 2nd jhana or higher and also when one takes up a meditation subject (one of the 40). However, in a group retreat situation, I think the silence rule should be examined as to whether it comes within range of the rule the Buddha made. >Could you share with us a resume of this several pages leading up to the >disclosure of the motivation for this rule? Yes. I will try to put together a summary with quotes within the next day or so and post when done. The translation of Dhp 205 that you quote below differs significantly from Narada's translation which begins with "Having tasted the flavour of supreme detachment . . .". At first I thought you gave the wrong verse number. Best wishes, Jim >I would most appreciate. > >"When a man knows the solitude of silence, >and feels the joy of quietness, >he is free from fear and sin >and he feels the joy of Dhamma." > >The Dhammapada, verse 205 > >Thanks > >Best wishes > >Cybele 6446 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Tadao, >Hi, Jim: >Is your passage taken from the Paatimokkha? >Is is one of the paaciitiyaa? I am wondering if >you can cite the original pali passge for me >(since I do not remeber that such a offence >was included as one of the wrong-doings.) >Thank you in advance, tadao >(Obviously, I do not have a copy of Paatimokkha >booklet.) It isn't from the Patimokkha. It's from the 4th khandhaka of the Mahaavagga (Vinayapi.taka). The original Pali passage is: "na bhikkhave muugabbata.m titthiyasamaadaana.m samaadiyitabba.m. yo samaadiyeyya, aapatti dukka.tassa." (Vin i 159 pts). The Mahavagga and the Cullavagga contain a vast number of dukka.ta offences not found in the Patimokkha. Best wishes, Jim 6447 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 9:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/18/01 12:35:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > > > Jon: > > > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama > > that > > > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the > > citta > > > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise > > simultaneously. > > > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is > > as > > > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object > > appear > > > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments > > of > > > each kind of citta). > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem > > to > > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the > > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen > > object,and not > > the no-longer-existing object, itself. > > Yes, this is exactly as I understand it. I think the term "image" rather > than "memory" is used. Does this present any obstacle? ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, no obstacle at all. (Unless, of course 'image' is used in preference to 'memory' to avoid seeing that it is a memory!) ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Also, when you say "However, so rapid > > is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the > > awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be > > occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each > > kind > > of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the > > simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the > > object > > occurs. In yet another mind moment? > > Again, yes (as I understand it). There are so many different 'streams' of > mind moments going on apparently simultaneously but in fact each being a > succession of discrete mind moments arising repeatedly but not > consecutively. For example, seeing, hearing, making sense of > (conceptualising) what is being seen and heard, thinking about it, bodily > movement 'commands', speech 'commands', other thoughts and feelings etc. > So there is presumably room for other 'streams' also. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Excellent answer! Thank you. I find this very helpful!! ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of > > ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more > > problems > > seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana finds > > difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some > > level > > of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, separate, > > discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, the > > notion of > > 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for the express > > > > purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising with the > > > > discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't adopt > > that, > > but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a "film-frame" view > > > > similar to that of Hume so many years later.] > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > I understand that the whole of the so-called 'cognative series' > (citta-viithi) is unknown as such in the Pitakas although, according to > Nanamoli, a nucleus of it, based on certain sutta-pitaka material, appears > in the abhidhamma-pitaka (Vis IV, n.13). I'm sorry but I am not familiar > with the other schools of thought you mention, nor with any discussion on > the circumstances in which the commentarial material came to be. > > My initial observation on this issue would be that the writings on > bhavanga have a similar pedigree to other authoratitive Theravadin > writings which seem to be well supported by the texts and which purport to > be received Theravadin wisdom rather than any individual's personal view. > > Jon > ============================== Thanks for this wonderful reply, 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) 6448 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 4:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Howard, Thanks for the nice response. --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > > Dear Howard, > >Robert: A very good question. 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. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay. Between the active cittas there are the latent, > bhavanga cittas. > As I have read, a bhavanga citta is likened to a spider > sitting in the center > of his web (latent discernment waiting to "pounce"), waiting > for a stimulus > (phassa) to scurry after prey (to discern the next object and > become active > discernment instead of latent discernment). _______ Robert:I haven't read this. _________ One question that > occurs to me is > what is the object for a bhavanga citta? It is so that every > citta has an > object, right? In the case of a bhavanga citta is it a > replication of the > object of the preceding active citta? I seem to recall > reading that rebirth > consciousness is a bhavanga citta, and that its object is the > "same" as that > of the citta at the time of death. By analogy, this would > suggest that *any* > bhavanga citta might take as object the "same" object as the > preceding active > citta. Or is there no object for a bhavanga citta, but just a > "waiting" for > an object? > ----------------------------------------------------------- The bhavanga cittas are the same type of citta as rebirth consciousness (patisandhi citta). It is vipaka citta (result of kamma ) and has as its object that same object that appeared shortly before death in the previous life. We are human now so that object must have been a wholesome one. It does not take as object the preceding active citta: it always has the same object which conditioned rebirth. _______ > > > 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 other wise 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. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I have a bit if a problem here. How can there be > observation of a > bhavanga citta, or of any citta for that matter, even by a > Buddha? The citta > has its own object. There cannot be a simultaneous second > citta which has the > first citta as *it's* object, because there is only one citta > at a time. > Moreover, the first citta, having its own object cannot also > have a *second* > object which is the citta, itself! Thus, no citta is ever an > object! > (However, the *memory* of a citta could be.) > ------------------------------------------------------ robert: I think we make assumptions about what panna (wisdom)can know and how it knows it. Panna is not us and doesn't see things because of our will or because we think it should know something. There are different tyes and levels of panna and panna of satipatthana understands paramatha dhammas as they are. As we have said panna arises in a process and understands preceeding processes but it is happening all so fast. 'Observation' is a word that has certain connotations and we may have an idea of how we think panna performs its function. But this is conceptualising. What we can see, directly, is that panna does understand, it does comprehend dhammas . -------------------- > > 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. > > Someone might hear this and think they will try to "observe" > > this matter, but it cannot be comprehended by such a method. > It > > is all happening so fast and the very idea of observing is > > caught up with subtle self view. In a similar vein some > people > > think they observe rise and fall but before ther can be true > > insight into rise and fall there must be the understanding > that > > clearly distinguishes nama from rupa. > > Sujin stresses that there must be firm understanding that > knows > > anatta at the intellectual level before deeper insight can > > arise. Otherwise one will have the idea that sati and panna > can > > be manufactured by will; not seeing the real conditions for > > these factors; not seeing that they are simply conditioned > > phenomena (not self). > > The cittas in the sense door and minddoor processes arise in > > strict order. Why? Because that is the nature, the law. > > Each citta is different from the last but it is intimately > > conditioned by the other cittas in the same process. It is > an > > extreme to think that each citta is its own little package- > it > > is another extreme to think they are blended together in any > > way. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > What you say in the last two sentences is, on my > opinion, very > important! This goes a long way towards ameliorating the > "atomistic view" by > showing that even though the various cittas occur during > discrete time units, > they are interdependent, they are connected by > conditionality!! > -----------------------------------------------------------------Yes, exactly. __________________> robert 6449 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 5:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Cybele, I thought others might remark on your post. It is a confirmation of my own experience. Here are some scriptual references that show that what you saw is just as the Buddha said: Kindred sayings on the limb of wisdom IV On Hindrances (viii) restraint and Hindrance "At the time, monks, when the Ariyan disciple makes the Dhamma his object, gives attention to it, with all his mind considers it, with ready ear listens to the Dhamma, at such a time the five hindrances exist not in him, at such times these seven limbs of wisdom ( mindfulness, dhamma-vicaya - investigation, effort, piti, tranquility, concentration, equanimity)go to fulfilment". The Digha Nikaya DN 33 explains the different ways that wisdom is fulfilled and vimutti (liberation) attained(this is a summary, a little imprecise. I don't have the actual translation in front of me) 1. when a Master or a reverend fellow disciple teaches the Dhamma to a brother.[he listens]...... 2. while he himself teaching others the Dhamma in detail . . . 3. when he is reciting the doctrines of the Dhamma in detail . . . 4. when he applies his thought to the Dhamma . . . 5. when he has well grasped some given clue (nimitta) to concentration, has well applied his understanding, has well thought it out, has well penetrated it by intuition (pa~n~naa) . . . _______ robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Rob > > Yes I am very keen on sharing this experience, was very > profound to me. > > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for > meditation and > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our > views. > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to > him and he had > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try > and explain with > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me > and I would > try to explain the passage. > What I started experiencing was that more and more I > concentrated on > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to > elucidate the > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was > reading and > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I > got this > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to > intellectualize to feel > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very > openminded way. > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while > explaining, trying to > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots > of new > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had > rippen in the > meanwhile. > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because > helping John > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own > understanding in a very > curious and relaxed manner. > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was > acute; I felt > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we > can penetrate > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, > helping each > other. > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and > my mind was > very allert indeed. > Well there it is Rob; looking forward for your comments. :-) > Please be merciless, don't destroy brutally my dear > illusions...joking! > > Cybele > 6450 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Thank you Jim. I look forward for yoiur post. And by the way, I prefer the Narada translation as well. I am fond of Narada. But in that case seemed pertinent use this one. ;-) Love Cybele >> >Yes. I will try to put together a summary with quotes within the next day >or >so and post when done. The translation of Dhp 205 that you quote below >differs significantly from Narada's translation which begins with "Having >tasted the flavour of supreme detachment . . .". At first I thought you >gave >the wrong verse number. > >Best wishes, >Jim > > >I would most appreciate. > > > >"When a man knows the solitude of silence, > >and feels the joy of quietness, > >he is free from fear and sin > >and he feels the joy of Dhamma." > > > >The Dhammapada, verse 205 > > > >Thanks > > > >Best wishes > > > >Cybele > 6451 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Rob You told me that you have posted a reply to me but is never arrived on my account, must be delayed. Could you send it privately and I forward into the account, otherwise it will take a long time to reach. Thank you Cybele >> >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > >. > > Bhavana is usually translated as meditation. > > You speak about Sati but what we are taught by monks and > > layteachers is that > > mindfulness cannot occur if you don't train your mind > > practicing meditation > > quite strictly. > > Is most evident that here nobody or mostly you don't agree > > with this view. > > Explain me in an articulate way your position. > > This is my query. > > > > Love > > > > Cybele > > ____________ >Dear Cybele, >before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a >private note to me about how last night you were explaining >Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. >best wishes >robert > > 6452 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Cybele First, congratulations on your and John's kusala in reading and discussing together. This sort of thing can be very useful for helping both one's own understanding and the other person's. I think your choice of ADL as a text is an excellent one - so much meat there to consider. > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation > and > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he > had > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain > with > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I > would > try to explain the passage. > What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate > the > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading > and > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to > feel > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded > way. > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying > to > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in > the > meanwhile. > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping > John > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a > very > curious and relaxed manner. > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I > felt > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) I wouldn't want to say it was or wasn't awareness -- only you could know that. And you could only know by having a good understanding about awareness at an intellectual level -- its characteristic and function, what can be its object etc. That's why it is important to have studied these things -- so that if it arises it can be recognised. Otherwise one is left wondering about the nature of the moment (and perhaps clinging to the experience afterwards). The interesting thing to me is that this experience which you think may have been kusala involving awareness at a certain level (let's assume it was, for the purpose of this discussion!) happened without your intention to 'practice' or to have any awareness at that moment.. But because you have read a lot of dhamma over the years and considered it at length and critically, and because the right kind of reflection was being conditioned by the discussion of the useful text, the conditions were ripe and so it happened. At that moment the effort was right, without your having to 'have effort' in the conventional sense. This is how awareness can arise naturally, without one's intending to have it. > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can > penetrate > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each > > other. > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind > was > very allert indeed. Good luck with your further studies together. But don't expect a repeat experience! As Ken indicated, if we develop the right conditions we can have confidence that the appropriate result will follow, but we have no way of knowing when or in what circumstances that will be. Jon 6453 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 9:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Howard --- Howard wrote: > > > > Jon: > > > > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a > nama > > > that > > > > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the > > > citta > > > > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise > > > simultaneously. > > > > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance > is > > > as > > > > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its > object > > > appear > > > > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of > moments > > > of > > > > each kind of citta). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would > seem > > > to > > > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be > the > > > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen > > > object,and not > > > the no-longer-existing object, itself. >> > > Jon: > > Yes, this is exactly as I understand it. I think the term "image" > rather > > than "memory" is used. Does this present any obstacle? > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No, no obstacle at all. (Unless, of course 'image' is used in > preference to 'memory' to avoid seeing that it is a memory!) > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sorry, but I didn't make myself clear. I meant, does the explanation, ie. that the nama that is the object of awarenss has actually just fallen away, does that present any obstacle. I can tell you have given a lot of thought to this area, and I hope I am not just creating more confusion! Sorry about the ambiguity. (As I said in a subsequent post, I am not sure exactly what term is used to describe the just-fallen-away reality.) Jon 6454 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 9:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Joe I am just getting around to one or two posts that were sent during my recent time away. I was interested in this question. --- Joe wrote: > Jon > >In my view, we are not > > in the realm of precepts/sila here, but in the realm of right or > wrong > > view. > > This is exactly what I was thinking. > >> Jon: > >That is, what is the development of the path as taught by the > > Buddha? Just because certain substances give experiences that > > (subjectively) appear to match descriptions found in the texts this > does > > nothing to indicate that this is an alternative or supplementary > form of > > practice. > > As I have said elsewhere, the same could be said of any activity or > > practice. Sure, there are lots of techniques that when practised > can > be > > interpreted as bringing signs of progress on the path, but if the > practice > > is not correct from the beginning the result will not be the > development > > of the path taught by the Buddha. > Joe: > Can't wisdom arise during any activity, assuming right view is > present? Is this the same thing, would you say, as saying that awareness or wisdom may take any reality as its object and may arise at any time? That is certainly so, I believe. However, since awareness and right view/wisdom are conditioned realities, there is no way of knowing when they will arise or in what circumstances. Any idea, for example, that one can 'apply' right view to an activity or situation is mistaken (I am not suggesting this is what you are saying, Joe, but it is an idea that one comes across from time to time). Even more mistaken is the idea that one can do anything as long as it's done with right view. That idea implies a strong notion of control over the arising of right view. Jon 6455 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]drugs) Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Erik, New flat, new computer (with internet access, I presume). Sounds good! In a not too distant post you said-- > It is very important to recall that there are many many strategies > out there, from the emptiness strategy to the one of watching the > arising and passing away of dhammas, even koan practice. Very > different approaches. There is no "one size fits all" approach to the > Dharma, never has been, never will be. …. There are indeed many stategies out there claiming to support the path - far more than the few you have mentioned. Erik, I would be interested to know how you would say one should determine whether a given strategy does in fact support the path. Presumably this would not be a purely subjective thing. What criteria should be applied? Jon 6456 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 4:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: : Sati of past object? To Khun Nina: How have you been? With respect to your converstion with Khun Num, you make an excllent arugment on how we should study the Abhidhamma. Many people who have studied the Abhidhamma extensively tend to become overly zellous (?spelling?) to constrast every experience of theirs with the pieces of information they've acquired in the Abhidhamma. It would be nice if our own intelecual understanding of the Abhidhamma is mapped into our understanding of the realities in the one-to-one fashion. Unfortunately, our pannaa does not grow as quickly as we would like it to. Being reminded by such a phrase as "Kantiyo paramag na vijjati" (there is nothing superior than patience), we should, as Khun Sujin reminds as time and again, develop the right understanding so that, not the self but, sati can start seeing things as they are. I've neglected the study of Dhamma for a long long time, but there are many (Pali) phrases which I would never forget, and, which remind me how lucky I am for having encountered the Buddhas' teaching in this life. Due simply to various "conditions" (including this Internet link as one of them, I am here again, resuming my study of Dhamma. Best Wishes, tadao 6458 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:42am Subject: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life hi cybelle this is just great to hear, all your study sounds as though it is paying off, although i would also add to jon's note about paccaya that perhaps your years of sitting meditation played a part too, especially if while sitting you were able to accurately notice realities as they appeared....that is what you do (or rather what you intend to do) when you practice "formally", am i right cybelle? -- of course whether noticing arises or not doesn't depend on the intention for it to arise....although i must admit i find that dedicating time every day to cultivation works much better for me than only waiting to notice throughout the day, with the result that the more regularly i sit, the more i seem to remember to note during non-sitting times...i wonder if that is perhaps because formal practice time doesn't demand conceptualization/papanca.... and a solid "yes" to the idea of the breath-as-anchor for the four foundations -- rings true with the Anapanasati Sutta.... i'm interested in hearing more about your sitting practice, as i'm certainly going to be continuing mine :-) hi jon and nina apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly busy!) though i have been lurking all along... i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the Dhamma simply another way of saying "noting realities as they ppear at the six doors"? for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps a better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling self wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... just some recent mental notes... bruce ps: i'll be in bkk 26 july -14 aug if anyone would like to get together... At 20:44 2001/07/18 +0800, you wrote: > Cybele > > First, congratulations on your and John's kusala in reading and discussing > together. This sort of thing can be very useful for helping both one's > own understanding and the other person's. I think your choice of ADL as a > text is an excellent one - so much meat there to consider. > > > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation > > and > > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. > > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he > > had > > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain > > with > > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I > > would > > try to explain the passage. > > What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on > > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate > > the > > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading > > and > > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this > > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to > > feel > > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded > > way. > > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying > > to > > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new > > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in > > the > > meanwhile. > > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping > > John > > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a > > very > > curious and relaxed manner. > > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I > > felt > > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) > > I wouldn't want to say it was or wasn't awareness -- only you could know > that. And you could only know by having a good understanding about > awareness at an intellectual level -- its characteristic and function, > what can be its object etc. That's why it is important to have studied > these things -- so that if it arises it can be recognised. Otherwise one > is left wondering about the nature of the moment (and perhaps clinging to > the experience afterwards). > > The interesting thing to me is that this experience which you think may > have been kusala involving awareness at a certain level (let's assume it > was, for the purpose of this discussion!) happened without your intention > to 'practice' or to have any awareness at that moment.. But because you > have read a lot of dhamma over the years and considered it at length and > critically, and because the right kind of reflection was being conditioned > by the discussion of the useful text, the conditions were ripe and so it > happened. At that moment the effort was right, without your having to > 'have effort' in the conventional sense. > > This is how awareness can arise naturally, without one's intending to have > it. > > > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can > > penetrate > > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each > > > > other. > > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind > > was > > very allert indeed. > > Good luck with your further studies together. But don't expect a repeat > experience! As Ken indicated, if we develop the right conditions we can > have confidence that the appropriate result will follow, but we have no > way of knowing when or in what circumstances that will be. > > Jon > 6459 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:42am Subject: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear everybody I just got it from a friend and I thought of sharing with you as we are or were discussing on the subject of meditation. No offense meant, just a viewpoint. > >An intellectual Buddhist once asked the Ajahn Chah an annoying >intellectual question, quoting all sorts of sutras and so forth. Ajahn Chah >asked her about her daily practice and she admitted that she had no >practice, but rather she spent much time analyzing sutras. Chah >replied, "Madame, you are the farmer who, each morning, goes out to >the chicken coop and collects the chicken shit instead of the eggs." > Love Cybele 6460 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:36am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante ----- Original Message ----- From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 10:04 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante > Dear Cybele, > > You are welcome. > > One thing I have had over the years is a good sense of humor. I think that > the Blessed One probably had a very good one, too. > > The important thing is for us to be honest --- but not hurt others with > words --- even when truthful. > > The other day I met two young men who were preaching Islam to me. I > listened. And having had perhaps a bit more on the ball in terms of > theological background, and having studied Islam and the Koran, I could have > been critical and made them look like fools, but what would this serve? In > the end, I was told by one of the young men that it was my "type of person" > that Islam badly needed! Why? Because when we live the Holy Life it shows. > No need to have any pride and no need to be ostentatious or to ostracize! > > I know you did not make a declaration that I was nervy! LOL!!! > > But what is interesting is how you mentioned I was not the ""conventionally > the classic 'calm almost [apathetic], meaning by > this aloof, Theravada monk." > > Isn't interesting how stereotypes prevail? Being gentle is not to be so > aloof, and aloofness is detachment not lethargy and apathy. And another > thing, too, is that the Sangha is not a heard of sheep or cattle. > > I do not see myself as <> to your remarks as much as trying to > respond! And it is not a matter of taking charge, either, as much as it is a > matter of "response-ability" read: "responsibility". > > As long as we know about volition and know that the how of living is not as > important when we have a why to live, then we can see how communication will > eventually develop and be enhanced to facilitate a common experiential > ground to share in to practice in --- and it is hardly confining, but most > liberating. > > Again, I think taking time to observe rather to always jump to the keyboard > (and this is not to accuse anyone in particular) to give a view allows us > the pausing or spacing that is necessary to be sure one is practicing sati > as much as is possible. > > Often times, people do not intend to be akusala but they end up in that > situation. Why? They lose skillfulness and get pulled into the very things > they really do not want to be pulled into. Again, lobha, dosa, moha, avijja > and tanha. > > So often we have the map and the directions but we end up getting lost from > reading the signs and following directions on the road. And these days, it > seems to me, that people choose the fast lane and speed. Speed kills. There > is nothing I know of in the Tipitaka that says one has to practice in the > ways we see practice being carried out today. > > Expecting that the Dhamma is to fit into a life-style and must change in > conform to meet the times is not Right View. It is we, with out life-styles, > and all the things that go with them, and with all the New Age "stuff" that > needs to conform to the Dhamma. Sadhu! That's very good. Thank you very much for writing this. > If we separate the body and the mind from each other, our ordinary awareness > disappears, but that doesn't mean that awareness is annihilated. It's still > there, but it's a special awareness that doesn't have to depend on the body > or mind. It's the same as when we separate the wax of a candle from its > wick: The flame disappears, but the fire potential isn't annihilated. > Whether or not there's fuel, it exists in the world by its very nature. This > is the awareness of nibbana. That's actually what I have been trying to say about Nibbana all along. But I should let the subject drop dead now, lest it becomes a crusade. :-) 6461 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 11:40 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Dear Cybele and others, > Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply > to (some by you, some by Anders, and otehrs) but don't have > enough time. > Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent > a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at > at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive > to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal > meditation though. If it's not your own way, it's no good, as you will probably find yourself distrubred by attachments to views of of a certain standard required ("idiot, can't you fix your mind for even thirty seconds!" - that's what I used to do anyway :-)) I like to go out in the forest sometimes as well, and just sit there for half and hour to an hour (depending on my mood). It's all very conduicive to meditation. > You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the > satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a > special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is > not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that > death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types > of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None > of these require a special posture to develop. As we read > Samyutta Nikaya (translated as Kindred Sayings, P.T.S.) > Salayatana Vagga Interesting stuff. When I meditate, I always go for the 'undirected awareness' technique (which is what my own teacher favours) and metta, which is my favourtie. It's much morew conduicive to concentration for me, and always installs a great sense of well-being. > I also find the study of the teachings a very strong condition > for understanding. On the other hand I know a person or two who > are knowledgeable about Dhamma but who seem to have no grasp of > the nature of this moment. Sometimes I think the best one could > do for them is to lock then in a cave for a year - make them > bring to mind their learning for its proper use. Abhidhamma can > be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual > happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. It > is good to be reminded of that danger Sadhu! That's very good (and very important). I agree that reading the scriptures can be a very strong condition for understanding (that's how it was for me with the Platform Sutra), but if one mistakes being able to comprehend it for actual understanding (or insight for that matter) then one can very well get lost. 6462 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:52am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:54 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > I am not distributing certificates Kom, you have to ask Rob, he is the > stream enterer not me. :-) Damn you seem eager to award that title to as many people as possible :-) 6463 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:59am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Anderson Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Dear Kom, > > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: > >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath > >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your > >own practice including: > >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts > >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to > >keenly observe the movement. > > The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) > as follows: > > "Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, > should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of > wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. I.B. > Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to the > Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe > silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the > Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). Hahaha, no idle talk, no silence. I wonder if there's anything that's not forbidden somehow in the Vinaya! Only kidding, but I just think this is kinda funny (although I wholeheartedly agree with the rule). Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6464 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:38 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. > It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. I first came to Zen because of its lack of a formal approach. Then I discovered Theravada and was drawn to the fact that it had a formal approach. Then I discovered the drawbacks of formal as well as informal approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and Theravada for its formal approach! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6465 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:03am Subject: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Thank you Jim. > I look forward for yoiur post. > And by the way, I prefer the Narada translation as well. > I am fond of Narada. > But in that case seemed pertinent use this one. ;-) Does anyone know if Narada's translation is available anywhere on the net? If not, what would you say are your favourite internet translations of the Dhammapada? 6466 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:04am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... ----- Original Message ----- From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 10:06 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Palmer > > Date: Saturday, July 14, 2001 4:09 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... > > > >Hello everybody, > > > >Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the urge to > >participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' as my friend > >Cybele would say :-) > > > >A few of you may know me from my recent 'de-lurking' in Dhamma-List in > which > >case I apologise for the repetition. > > > >My name is John Palmer and I'm based in Romford, not far from London. I'm > 39 > >and having been practising for around 4 years, my interest having been > >stirred up by a course at the Buddhist Society here. > > > >I'm very much a beginner > > We are all beginners here... no matter how many years we have been > practicing... the trick though is to stay a beginner! ;-) So true. If you think you have attained something you can rest assured that it's an illusion. Always! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6467 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:12am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:56 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > Dear Tori, > I think what really blinds you to these realities is that they are > taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". > I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on this. > >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends in > Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her to > the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were > running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. > These friends then said that "this shows how much more > understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the same > thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only got > her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no > concern at all. > Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she said > was "they don't understand the path". Great story, Robert. As I see it, it just shows in practise what I was trying to say with words in my original post. 6468 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:15am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 5:19 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > Dear Mike, > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > > > This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. > > However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to > > liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To > > me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with > > cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant > > feeling attending any of them can condition so much > > attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned > > them. Have I missed anything here? > > > > mike > > I haven't seen you missing anything at all. I was just trying to > add to the discussion that people sometimes confuse the different > neutrality including: > 1) Upekkha and Tatramajjhatta > 2) Tatramajjhatta that arises with samatha, and Tatramajjhatta that > arises with the satipatthana > > > Here is a list of upekkah definition: > (http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat5.html): > > There are 10 kinds of upekkha (indifference), namely > > Chalagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to > the 6 arammana of the arahanta, who has eradicated all kilesa. > > Brahmaviharupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is > indifferent to all entities. > > Bojjhagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is one of the > components that make enlightenment possible. > > Viriyupekkha, the viriya-cetasika which is right perseverance which > is not too tense nor too lax in the development of bhavana. > > Sankharupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is indifferent when the > realization of the tilakkhana of the sankhara-dhamma. > > Vedanupekkha, the vedana-cetasika that does not feel unhappy or > happy. > > Vipassanupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is neutral in the > consideration of the arammana that arises from causes and conditions. > > Tatramajjhattatupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika that is > neutral, not biased or partial. > > Jhanupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the jhana which > attenuates the preoccupation by other dhamma which renders the peace > less steadfast. This intends especially the tatiyajjhana (from the > perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which has abandoned piti. > > Parisuddhupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the > catutthajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which is > completely peaceful and cleansed from all adversaries, without any > further function to abandon the elements of jhana. Aargh, my eyes are loosing focus. I think you just used more Pali terms in your post than you did English words, Kom :-) Damn, I need to learn more Pali. Merry, Anders 6469 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:40am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 11:35 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > Perhaps I should move in with Anders or Robert, they are well equipped to > stand up to me! ;-) Haha, I might treat you to a real U. G. Krishnamurti cure (ever read some of his stuff? That guy crushes ego like the rest of us munches corn flakes. Nothing is spared!). 6470 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:26am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 7:23 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > Anders: > >I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, > >I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make > >the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really > >poor at it :-)). > > What does it means 'prepared to do the effort'? It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and work to overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will thus never make much progress. > Meditation is an essential mental training and important part of the > Buddhist tradition, as studying and listening to Dhamma. > According with the original texts. Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? > >But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to practise. He > >hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. > > Well but we are not Hui-neng or have his past accumulations. > Unless you are talking only ofr yourself. > What I am not going to evaluate or prove right or wrong but I am talking > generally. No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustarte the wide range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was Dogen who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are sharp and dull." > Well this should not be our concern. See above... > I refer to my own experience naturally but the fact of being stuck is due to > a wrong effort not necessarily to the technique itself. > Or to our past accumulations. No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different techniques because there are different people with different temperaments and capabilities. > >It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are > >incapable of being mindful, and that you are constantly being dragged > >around by your defilements, then meditation might be good for you, so as to > >loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a catalyst > >to foster awareness throughout your daily life. > > Well this is the purpose - purification of the mind. > And who is not constantly dragged around by defilements? Some people aren't, apparently. > Who can say earnestly that is fair to skip this mental training and not > doubt that one is misled by preferences and self conceit? No one, to be fair. The reason I don't meditate is a lack of self-discipline to be honest. I know that it would probably do me a world of good if I did it on a regular basis. But I've found that my practise is not very dependent on seated meditation. On the other hand, if I didn't make progress then that would be due to my own laziness. No reason to point any fingers. But some people will never experience realisation because they are not prepared to make the effort needed to exploit their own capacities. Simple cause and effect. > Well we are considering that one pays attention to daily awareness and not > shielding himself behind anything whatsoever - meditation or study or > hedonism. > And Jhanas are not the goal in Vipassana. > We don't practice Samatha to attain Jhanas, we practice Vipassana to develop > insight. Pardon my asking, but is Vipassana limited to seated meditation? > >On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in your > >daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you might > >not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. > > Who can affirm such a thing considering that we are immersed in delusion? True. As I said, I would always recommend meditation to everybody. > Who can be sure of mental health, spiritual health? > With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation of > the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily meditation in > formal terms. Neither do I. > >Expedient means, such as meditation, are purely used to counter > >defilements. If there's nothing to counter, why do it? > > Expedient means Anders? > Meditation is taught everywhere as the core of Buddhist teachings indeed. > Naturally I am talking about Buddhism not other approaches that might > interest you. The whole system of Buddhism is nothing more than a set of expedient means to end the cycle of birth and death. What's so strange about that? > That is all the point indeed. > I just speak about Theravada tradition and Vipassana. > What is written in Satipathana Sutta as Buddha's original teaching is > unequivocable in my understanding. > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the most > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? > Quotating for further discussion and reference: > > > 'This is the only way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness.' You interpret that to mean seated meditation. I interpret that to mean daily mindfulness. 6471 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:20am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 2:03 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) > Hi, Derek: > You have a very good language background. > You can start reading a Pali text, placing the text and > its translation side-by-side. I am familar with Pali (because > I was a Buddhist monk in South-east Asia having spent > 12 hours a day reading its texts for the duratin of several years. > Spendijng just two months in May and June, I've picked up Sanskrit > and teaching it right now as a university credit summer course. > (I have 45 students with various language/linguistic background.) > Those who know Pali CANNOT read Sanskrit straighforwardly. > However, those who know Sanskrit SHOULDN'T have much problem > in reading Pali. I strongly encourage you to start reading Pali texts. > Don't start with Pali grammar, but start reading the Pali texts. > tadao Do you do Sanskrit translations as well, Tadao? 6472 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:12am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 12:11 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders, >In view of the fact that we are dealing with your understanding of ignorance only, it would be appropriate that you describe what you understand ignorance to be. Try to not refer to the scriptures. Use your own experience. Actually, the link of ignorance wasn't really what I was aiming at. It was more the Samsaric cycle as a whole. >In view of the fact that I attended a gymnasium in Holland, I find it hard to believe that you, who attends a gymnasium in Denmark, does not possess a dictionary in which the term "locus" is defined. However, this link should help you. I do in fact (and you should find it hard to believe). But all three dictionaries are located at my dad's house (I am typing this from my mom's). The dictionaries here are rather old, and as such the word wasn't there. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary >A helpful hint, your question was: Where did ignorance arise? And why do I presuppose there is a locus for ignorance? Well, since I was really aiming at the Samsaric cycle, let's rephrase: Why do you presuppose there is a locus for Samsara? Because if there isn't, you affirm the doctrine of annihilation after Parinibbana. >Still play any role playing games? Nah, I lost interest (although I still like to flip through the books from time to time). Why do you ask? 6473 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:52am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 3:12 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > Anders -- I loved your little aside about how the Kaalaama Sutta > itself is not to be relied upon, according to the Kaalaama Sutta! As > far as your question about "where everything started from" is > concerned, I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There > is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- > conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- > being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from > what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is > a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, > therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, > made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern any Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that there is not simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only way for it to be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when Nibbana itself is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that there is a self involved). 6474 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 8:06 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > Dear Cybele, > > I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure > how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). > > --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the > most > > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? > > But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no > challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. > > If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not > everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and > Vipassana the same way. If I read what Nina is saying right, > Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is currently > arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when Satipathana is > rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing your eyes, and > observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a retreat. > > Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical > example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is > about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices > Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising > nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. > > Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what > Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some > people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that > they are denying the development of wisdom. > > Your intellectualizing-male friend, Good point, Kom. It's all relative. 6475 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 6:14 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > >> Well, the beginning is not different from the end. I'll explain below. >I have actually never contemplated the beginning myself. Because of that, = >only the scripture is a guide. There are other on-going thread that >discusses the sutta(s?) that the Buddha mentioned that: >a) Ignorance rises out of asava (a kind of tanha) >b) Ignorance rises out of tanha (craving) >I still don't have a clue what you are implying, but it seems we are discussing how ignorance rises out of something in the beginning of the samsaric cycle, which implies how it could end? Is this where you are leading to? >(The beginning wouldn't ever be verifiable, even though the end will at least be implied by the enlightenment.) Ignorance was just an example (since it is mentioned as the first link in the suttas). You are right, the 'end' is better to use. I'll try to reformulate my question this time (which wasn't clear at all the first time): I think we both agree that after Parinibbana, there is just Nibbana left (or do we?). My question is: How can there ever be any knowledge that Nibbana remains when that which cognises Nibbana (conditioned elements) has dispersed? >> Please define heart-base (heart-base, hsin in Chinese) generally means >> 'Budha-nature' or Nirvana. >The vathu rupa, which heart-base (hadaya vathu) is, is a conditioned materiality said to be located in the middle of the heart (and somewhere else if without a heart!). It is a place of rising for many types of consciousness and mental factors. It is certainly not Nibbana. Good. I figured it might not have the same meaning as the Chinese word. >I don't believe there are any scripture explaining the end of samsaric cycl= >e by the process of how it comes in the beginning. There is only: without >this, that can't come to be, etc (and nibbana is definitely *not* included = >as a link). Even though I may be able to able to derive (if not contrive!) >such a logic, I wouldn't trust it much myself. Logic (or my logical mind) = >has failed to reveal the truths many many times. The buddha didn't >expound the beginning much at all (even related to explaining the end), it = >would only lead to more delusion to think I can explain as such. Exactly. Once the entire Samsaric cycle has ceased (whether it is before Samsara, if there ever was such a time. I don't think so, or after) there is just that which is not subject to the laws of dependent co-origination left; the Unconditioned. > Well, as I mentioned in another post, I draw from both Mahayana and > Theravada, and I don't think either is untrue. I don't think that Mahayan= a > arose simply as a 'rebellious' way to create a > new doctrine. I think it arose out of the need to emphasise parts of the > Dhamma which might have been somewhat under-emphasised by the old schools at > that given point in time, and thus it highlights aspects of the Dhamma which > might not be very strong in the schools before it. But that is just my view. > I would like to quote Bodhidharma, the first Patriarch of Zen, to show you > what I've been trying to say all along: > ..."This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll= > never find another Buddha [Nirvana]. To search for enlightenment or nirvana > beyond this mind is impossible.... When the mind reaches nirvana, you don't > see nirvana, because the mind is nirvana. If you see nirvana somewhere > outside the mind, you're deluding yourself. >The theravadans try to stick to the original text as much as possible for >knowing (or fearing, for some of us) that diverging from it will distort th= e meanings of the teachings. I am quite sure that some of the distortions introduced by different people (even in translations), intentional or not, = calling themselves Theravadan or not, with or without delusion while so doing, more often lead people to the wrong end than the right one. The Buddha dhamma is incredibly subtle, a distortion sometimes serves as a hinderance (conventional, not the 5 hinderances!) rather than an aid to the understanding, and ultimately the realization. Yup. On the other hand, a rephrasement can also serve to help people understand whose mindframe might not be akin to to Indian one at the Buddha's time. Generally, my impression is that Mahayana (and perhaps Zen most of all) is more based around the experiental approach of explaining reality, whereas Theravada is more based around the causal appoach towards reality. Of course, things aren't as black and white as that, but that's the general impression I have. >Again, just like the concept of duality, I can somewhat map what Bodhidharma said to the Theravadan frame of references, but not completely, especially the part "the mind is nirvana." I think it's important to remember just how much the various interpretation of the Buddhadhamma should be relied on (including one's own). Ajahn Chah, for example (whom I would definitely count as an enlightened individual), once commented that the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [of Zen], Hui-neng was highly profound and he hoped that one day his own students would be able to comprehend the subtle wisdom it contains. Hui-neng didn't even bother saying Mind is Nirvana. He simply renamed Nirvana to 'Essence of Mind'. How should we trust Ajahn Chah's interpretation of the Pali Canon, as well as his interpretation the Sutra of the Sixth patriarch? Do you trust Ajahn Chah's wisdom over your own? If so, why? PS. Just in case anyone is curious, the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch is available at my own website via this link: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen-writings/platform-sutra.htm Anders 6476 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:14am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 7:57 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > My question was, where did ignorance arise once it had arisen? Dear Anders, > Is it right that everything happens because of conditions? Naturally, that is so. >Ignorance arises because of many different causes, but the most important one is because of the lack of panna (wisdom). Perhaps, your question is more philosophical than I understand it? Well, once again my poor verbal skills showed. The intended meaning of my question was missed by a long shot. I've tried to rephrase it. 6477 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:28am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 7:35 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all directed > as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. In > fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! > > This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the > inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's. When we move > with the speed of mind that we do, this medium and its deceptiveness can > lead to heedlessness and one can very easily hurt another with words -- > especially when people are so attached to them. Not everyone is capable of > letting words go... tanha for words... > > After taking time to reflect and being "silent" on this list and some > others, it becomes apparent that sometimes we need to take a long, hard look > at the verbolatry that can be made to appear so sincere, so right, so > true -- when in fact, the contradictions not only of terms of Dhamma, but of > the very Dhamma Itself appear most readily. > > As far as "butt kicking" is concerned: I am really interested in seeing > others manage their own kicks to their derrieres! I have to watch my own > derriere and keep it on the cushion more and more! I can only recommend that > others do the same. Practice is where it is at... not in chatter. > > When it comes to Dhamma, my sometimes perhaps, imposing tones are not what > matters. Often, some people just cannot handle the truth and subvert it into > an emotional reaction, railing against the person who expresses it and > projecting their own difficulties. In this case, "I" hardly matters. I am > not here to have go around after go around. > > Sometimes, too, no matter what peripheral words we use to deliver the truth > with, it can still be hard for another to realize. > > The advice of the Blessed One was to avoid extremism and fanaticism, and to > be especially careful of holding views. Look at what people write --- it is > forensic. We do not retract the written word as easily as vocalized speech. > The two are entirely different in many respects. > > What I cannot sometimes feel at ease with is the way the simple Dhamma and > its practice gets turned into something complex and seemingly out of reach > for so many. While we have this luxury, I am reminded of the illiterate > people I have met in Asia who practice Dhamma and meditate and "get it". > They may not be so erudite but they practice, and practice well. They > literally shine light and live the Dhamma which is observed in their daily > lives and actions. I wonder what they would offer concerning all the words > floating around made to look so important? I wonder if some of us could be > open to the advice of an illiterate dirt farmer or a housewife with zero > formal education? > > Let's just face the facts, a lion's roar does not exactly fit in with the > New Age "fluff" and the subversion of the Dhamma we can readily see for > ourselves. A small point here is that there is no such thing as > "modernizing" the Dhamma. It is not something to be bought and sold like a > commodity and, in fact, it is "big business" today. > > If we are to have a great capacity for compassion, then it has to begin with > ourselves, yes, but in fact, too, it is always other directed when it is > real compassion. And that may seem paradoxical but in fact it tells us how > deeply interconnected we actually all are. > > Something that would help here: Let us not be so concerned that we are > offended, but more concerned that we offend! > > Enough words. I would rather leave us with one for practice and with its > full implications: Sadhu! Wise words indeed, Bhante. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6478 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:10am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:43 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > Anders > > Thanks for your reply and comments below. I think the various posts to > date have covered the main points. > > Just one aspect of your post I would like to comment on. You said- > > > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite > > difficult > > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through > > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in > > order to observe it. > > The object of panna of the level of satipatthana/vipassana must be a > reality appearing at that moment. I am not sure how the observance of > cause and effect fits into this. Well, cause and effect is just my 'western label' for dependent co-origination. We are basically saying the same thing with different words, I think. > What you are advocating, I think, is the 'have less clinging first, then > you will have more panna' approach (which is usually expressed in terms of > developing samatha rather than specifically equanimity). Would you not > consider the clinging to be a possible possible object for panna? Ooh, yes definitely. good point! Any mental factor is an applicable object (personally, I found observing clinging to be very hard to discern directly initially though. Don't know how that's like for others). 6479 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:11am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Sweetheart You returned back! I rejoice, I thought that you have let me down! ;-) You got lost in the threads, it was not me to attribute the title to Rob but somebody else, an ex-monastic David. I was just paying my respects, you know how I am 'reverent' on this issue. Read much more attentively our correspondence, don't disappoint me master. You are my guide and my light! :-))))) Please don't forget the tip please... Love Cybele >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > I am not distributing certificates Kom, you have to ask Rob, he is the > > stream enterer not me. :-) > >Damn you seem eager to award that title to as many people as possible :-) > > 6480 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:15am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom >>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. > > It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. > >I first came to Zen because of its lack of a formal approach. Then I >discovered Theravada and was drawn to the fact that it had a formal >approach. Then I discovered the drawbacks of formal as well as informal >approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and Theravada >for >its formal approach! > >Anders Honore >************************************************* >Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ >************************************************* > > > 6481 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Anders > > > Perhaps I should move in with Anders or Robert, they are well equipped >to > > stand up to me! ;-) > >Haha, I might treat you to a real U. G. Krishnamurti cure (ever read some >of >his stuff? That guy crushes ego like the rest of us munches corn flakes. >Nothing is spared!). > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha who already takes good care. And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of others Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. You name it and I have done it, you can bet! You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. Love Cybele 6482 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:47am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern any > Nibbana after Parinibbana? Anders, With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) Derek. 6483 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Ditto, Howard--and thanks very much, both. mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Howard: > What you say in the last two sentences is, on > my opinion, very important! This goes a long way > towards ameliorating the "atomistic view" by showing > that even though the various cittas occur during > discrete time units, they are interdependent, they > are connected by conditionality!! ----------Yes, exactly. __________________> robert 6484 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:36am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Anders, >Does anyone know if Narada's translation is available anywhere on the net? >If not, what would you say are your favourite internet translations of the >Dhammapada? The following is a list of 11 Dhammapada translations available online that was submitted to dhamma-list by Ven. Dhammanando (of Iceland) on May 29/99. In it you will find the link to Narada's translation which is still valid. I don't know about the others. Jim ================================ Max Muller's English translation of the Dhammapada has now been added to the Gutenberg archives. You can get it by ftp from: ftp://sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk//Mirrors/uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu/pub/etext/gutenbe rg/dhmpd10.zip or from any of the Gutenberg mirror sites. Below are listed other Dhammapada translations available on the web. In order of preference: 1. Ven. Acarya Buddharakkhita http://world.std.com/~metta/canon/khuddaka/dhp1/index.html (There is also a feminist edition of Buddharakkhita's trans. available from http://wsrv.clas.virginia.edu/~cam4z/home.htm . In this version "he" is replaced by "one", "himself" by "oneself" etc.) 2. Sathienpong Wannapok http://www.seattleboys.com/dharma/canon/dmp.zip 3. Rev. John Richards http://www.edepot.com/dhamma2.html 4. Rev. Narada http://www.serve.com/cmtan/Dhammapada/index.html 5. Harischandra Kaviratna http://www.halcyon.com/pasadena/dhamma/dham-hp.htm 6. Joko Beck http://www.edepot.com/dhamma3.html 7. Ven. Thanissaro http://world.std.com/~metta/canon/khuddaka/dhp/index.html 8. Phra Khantipalo http://www.saigon.com/~anson/dhp_ev/dhp_idx.htm 9. Daw Mya Tin (Sasana Pitaka Association) http://www.buddhism.ndirect.co.uk/dmpada1.htm (not yet complete in this online version) Finally, a very nice German translation in rhyming couplets: 10. Kurt Schmidt http://www.palikanon.com/khuddaka/dhp.html Yathaa bubbu.laka.m passe Yathaa passe mariicika.m Eva.m loka.m avekkhanta.m Maccuraajaa na passati. (Dhp. 170) Als Wasserblase schau sie an, als Truggesicht, Die Welt; dann findet dich der Fuerst des Todes nicht. (K.R. Norman) One should see it as a bubble; one should see it as a mirage. The king of death does not see one regarding the world in this way. 6485 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:48am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders > >Good point, Kom. It's all relative. > INDEED Anders, INDEED. But we should pay attention and notice it. Believing that one has the knowledge and actually having it is a very subtle affair. It's all relative...to mindfulness. Cybele 6486 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:03am Subject: Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear everybody Dear Tori The Buddhist Path for me is to walk on steadily yet not being very concerned about reaching any destination, so to speak 'wherever you go there you are', being on the road is already a trip (sorry but I am an anachronistic late hippie) Meditation is a mental training, is about fostering awareness, is to sharpen your mind and penetrate the nature of phenomena, of life itself. It's investigation of mental processes, non biased and dispassionate. The 'motivation' is in doing it simply and unpretentiously, without any particular expectation to accomplish anything special what doesn't mean that you don't have purposefulness. Aspiration and desire are to be distinguished as inner drives but nevertheless craving is very subtle and we have to be attentive to don't get entrapped in old mental patterns that are confortable like an old pair of sleepers and prevent us from observing reality as it is. And meditation is to develop skills in observing reality as it is, without fear or denial and not distorting it to accomodate to our views and prejudices. What is the motivation to be alive, to breath, to eat, to drink? Dhamma is about life, the motivation is being alive and exploring fully this possibility. And so is meditation. Our mind perceive this reality and contain all the possibilities but we have to learn the skills, to deepen your 'sight-insight'. I will quotate somebody I admire who lived very much in the present moment in mindfulness and he is not a buddhist teacher, the great Thoreau: Direct your eye right inward, and you'll find A thousand regions in your mind Yet undiscovered. Travel them and be expert in home-cosmography. Thoreau - Walden I know awareness is not but a sparkling light just perceptible that flickers in our mind and for me even when we communicate at a deeper level with somebody this is already like meditation. Never approached meditation as something separate from me. The meditative mind can happen always and we don't have to pursue it just to be open, to surrender, is effortless. It's something experiencing reality and understanding it, accepting whatever comes. Dhamma is lively, I don't let myself be fooled by rigidity and narrowmindness, Dhamma is wide enough to embrace everybody and everything, is heartwarming and a source of strenght, it's fullness, openess because is empty of self and can contain everything without oppression: dhamma is about freedom, be still and feel the refreshing breeze in this hot afternoon. :-) Just practicing for it's own sake, I don't demand nothing, I don't expect nothing just being present, awake to this very moment. Love CYbele 6487 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! Dear Derek > >--- "Anders Honoré" >wrote: > > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern >any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? > >Anders, Derek: > >With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I >say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. > >Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. > >After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. > >After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) > >Derek. Normally I don't get myself engrossed in Nibbanistic discussions but I must say that your choice in illustrating it is SO CUTE! Lovely! Cybele 6488 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi, Jim: Thank you very much for your citation of the Pali passage from the Vinaya. So it is one of the aapattis. (Monks try hard not break the rules down to the level of paacittiyas, but they many not be aware of the presence of many aapattis.) Thank you again, tadao 6489 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:16am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Hi, Kom: As for Dhamapada books, the book I like most is the following: Dhammapada: A Practical Guide to Right Living (Tesxt and Translation) by Venerable Aacharya Buddharakkhita Thera. Published by Buddha Vacana Trust, Maha Bodhi Society, Bangalore-9. I do not where I've got my copy, but it is very inexpensive, handy (light weight), and, most importantly, it contains orginal Pali texts (so that you can learn by heart any orignal Pali verses which you like). tadao 6490 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:44am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > Anders: I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really poor at it :-)). > > > > What does it means 'prepared to do the effort'? > >It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and work to >overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will thus >never make much progress. Cybele: Of course it's a free choice but why one should be silly to waste an opportunity of clear comprehension in the buddhist path? Who is free from limitations apart Buddha himself? > > > Meditation is an essential mental training and important part of the > > Buddhist tradition, as studying and listening to Dhamma. > > According with the original texts. > >Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning >counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? Counter-measure Anders, don't you ever think that perhaps all your self confidence it's a smoke curtain that prevents you of facing some reality that is a bit difficult to deal with? Do you really believe you are that much BEYOND? Meditation it is not to oppose anything but to develop right understanding; this is not an expedient means, this is investigation of Dhamma, this is lifelong lasting. Dear Anders I never dropped my initial theory about some manic tendences of many so called spiritual aspirants. Too much self confidence, you are flying very high; for me Dhamma is very down to earth. > > >But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to >practise. >He hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. Cybele: > > Well but we are not Hui-neng or have his past accumulations. > > Unless you are talking only of yourself. > > What I am not going to evaluate or prove right or wrong but I am > >talking generally. Anders: >No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustarte the wide >range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was Dogen >who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are sharp and >dull." Indeed and I have met plenty of dulls Andres, don't be too optimistic. Wisdom is fruit of right understanding and this very world would not be the mess that is if people were wise, don't you think so? > > > I refer to my own experience naturally but the fact of being stuck is >due to a wrong effort not necessarily to the technique itself. > > Or to our past accumulations. >No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different >techniques because there are different people with different temperaments >and capabilities. Nobody ever contested it. Meditation is in the buddhist path and who threads the buddhist path cannot dismiss it so lightly; about this issue we are trying to clarify. You are not buddhist and therefore doesn't concern you perhaps. What doesn't change the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment through meditation. Why study the texts if you neglect this fundamental principle? > > >It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are >to > >loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a >catalyst > >to foster awareness throughout your daily life. Cybele: > > Well this is the purpose - purification of the mind. > > And who is not constantly dragged around by defilements? Anders: >Some people aren't, apparently. Oh I would like to be introduced to them. You are beyond defilements? Or you believe you are? Seems that here we are a huge company of fools, I would like to meet all this wise people that you have the privilege to know being a 18 years old guy. Cybele: > > Who can say earnestly that is fair to skip this mental training and not >doubt that one is misled by preferences and self conceit? Andres: >No one, to be fair. The reason I don't meditate is a lack of >self-discipline to be honest. I know that it would probably do me a world >of good if I did it on a regular basis. But I've found that my practise is >not very dependent on seated meditation. On the other hand, if I didn't >make progress then that would be due to my own laziness. No reason to point >any fingers. But some people will never experience realisation because they >are not prepared to make the effort needed to exploit their own capacities. >Simple cause and effect. Cybele: Anders we don't practice meditation to accomplish anything, we don't have expectations, we just sit still and observe the arising and passing away of phenomena, we observe reality in bare attention. That's all, no fireworks, no mystical visions. At least not in Vipassana. Cybele: > > Well we are considering that one pays attention to daily awareness and >not shielding himself behind anything whatsoever - meditation or study or >hedonism. > > And Jhanas are not the goal in Vipassana. > > We don't practice Samatha to attain Jhanas, we practice Vipassana to >develop insight. Anders: > >Pardon my asking, but is Vipassana limited to seated meditation? No Vipassana is every moment but to observe without so much interference of conceptual thought we sit still as well. I vaguely remember that a certain Gautama practiced like that and he figure out something about the very nature of this troubled life of ours. It seems they used to call him the one who is awake... > > > >On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in >your daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you >might not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. They are meditating, the object is their very illness. Anders it seems that you support the idea that sit meditation and daily awareness are almost incompatible. It's all meditation but teh formal one has a relevance in the practice that we cannot overlook because doesn't 'suits' us. Cybele: > > Who can affirm such a thing considering that we are immersed in >delusion? Anders: >True. As I said, I would always recommend meditation to everybody. Cybele: > > Who can be sure of mental health, spiritual health? Andres: > > With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation >of the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily >meditation in formal terms. But you don't practice... I interrupt here otherwise it becomes far too long and boring to read over. Metta Cybele 6491 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:25am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Hi, Derek: (i) When you studied Sanskrit, did you use Whiney's Sanskrit Grammar? For my course, I've cheked most of the grammar books, and I chose the cheapest textbook: Coulson, Michael (1992) Sanskrit: An Introduction to the Classical Langauage. Chicago, Ill: NTC/Contemporaty Publishing. I LOVE this textbook. While all the grammar books are for the sake of grammar learning, this textbook guides students how to read Sanskrit texts. As for your question, the goal of my class is reading orignial Sanskrit texts So as reading practices, in each class, I use even a sentence or two (from the Sanskrit Reader) and a few lines from verses I've collected from other sourses. I do not like grammar, so when I teach such languaes, as Pali and Sankrit, reading of original texts becomes the main endevour of my classes. (ii) More importantly, as for your Pali study, if you need any grammar book, don't use A.K. Warder's book, which, in my view, an absolute bore. I know one book which suits your language background; i.e., Geiger, Wilhelm. (1943). Paali Literature and Langauge. Calcutta: Univeristy of Calucatta. This is an excellent (grammar) book for those who know Sanskrit/Vedic. The book contrasts many pali words with Sanskrit/Vedic words. Also, if you are interested in reading older Pali texts, such as Dhammapada and Sutta-nipaata, this book explains the declentions and conjugations of "archaic words", whose explantions you would find nowhere else. So I highly recommend you to get a hold of a copy of this ?ook. You need not study it, you can just use its index to consult forms you are not familiar with. So, it is not the same as learning a totallly new langauge. Also, as I recommend you last time, please please start reading Pali texts/sentences. At first it may be time consuming, but soon you will pick up your pace. Remember that you have an excellent langauge background. Good luck with your Pali study, tadao 6492 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi, Dear Kom: In my view, you cannot slow down any realities. You may think that you can regulate the speed of, say, your breathing in and out. But it is just your idea. Doesn't matter how slowly you breathe in and out, the speed of the arising/falling-away of the actual realies you experience through your door-ways does not change at all. If you think that by way of slowing your activies you can see things more clearly, you are living in your own worlds of the concepts, i.e., me trying to catch naamas and ruupas. These naamaas and ruupas are, in fact, far too "real" (here, I cannot find a good word) to be caught by our intention or desire. If they were so easily grasapable/catchable, then, the Buddha wouldn't have spent uncoutless lives to acculate his wisdom. tadao 6493 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:56am Subject: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > ANDERS: > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > cognised by the sixth > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an > object > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > discern any > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > there is not > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only > way for it to > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when > Nibbana itself > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that > there is a > self involved). > _________________ The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and Phala-citta. About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were there any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was the Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara (formations)[the five aggregates]? Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, vinnana? At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we think somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having existed. This would be annihilationism. What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was never a being to be annihilated. robert 6494 From: gayan Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:09am Subject: Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! dear robert, I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where buddha says something like this, "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about annihilation.To that I say this, yes,I preach you about annihilation,annihilation of dukkha that is, and nothing else." (pardon for the vagueness) rgds --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > ANDERS: > > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > > cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an > > object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > > discern any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > > there is not > > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only > > way for it to > > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when > > Nibbana itself > > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that > > there is a > > self involved). > > > _________________ > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > Phala-citta. > > About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were there > any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was the > Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or > sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara > (formations)[the five aggregates]? > Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, > vinnana? > > At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we think > somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having existed. > This would be annihilationism. > What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has > ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, > mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was > never a being to be annihilated. > robert > > 6495 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Tadao, I learned Sanskrit at university and our professor had written his own introductory textbook -- including grammar, of course, but also including vocabulary, pronounciation, practice exercises, and some cassette tapes to assist with pronounciation. I don't think his book is commercially available but he may sell copies privately. It was designed for use in university courses. For Pali I use mainly the Geiger/Norman. I occasionally look up explanations in Warder, but I'm not working my way systematically through Warder's book. Sean and Jim have helped me out with questions (on the Pali translator list). Best regards, Derek. 6496 From: gayan Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah dear cybele, Thanks for posting this, i have read this before with the same amusement and excitement. I am a fan of ven.chah's similes which are very much inline with similes found in tipitaka. 'In my view and understanding' I think that meditation is the super- tool. A mind conduicive to formal/informal meditation is a result of past good kammas as per many stories in tipitaka.So eventhough I observe that I am not a good meditator and my mind is not easily calmed I tell myself that I need not to have a grudge against meditation. :o) This story is not releted to the topic, but I like to post it anyway. ven.chah cautions his pupils about the potential attachment to the pleasant sights and feelings which result from deep concentration. "Do not give a damn about those bright lights, its not worth, I have a brighter light in my torch over here..."hahaha rgds an everybody --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear everybody > > I just got it from a friend and I thought of sharing with you as we are or > were discussing on the subject of meditation. > No offense meant, just a viewpoint. > > > > >An intellectual Buddhist once asked the Ajahn Chah an annoying > >intellectual question, quoting all sorts of sutras and so forth. Ajahn Chah > >asked her about her daily practice and she admitted that she had no > >practice, but rather she spent much time analyzing sutras. Chah > >replied, "Madame, you are the farmer who, each morning, goes out to > >the chicken coop and collects the chicken shit instead of the eggs." > > > > Love > > Cybele > 6497 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:44am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Anders, I don't think I put too much pali in my posts to you! Those terms are lifted off a book translation which has many pali words. I hardly know all= the terms myself. There are many word glossary on the net including: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/glossary_of_pali_ terms.htm kom --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 5:19 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > > > > Dear Mike, > > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > Dear Kom > > > > > > This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. > > > However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to > > > liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To > > > me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with > > > cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant > > > feeling attending any of them can condition so much > > > attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned > > > them. Have I missed anything here? > > > > > > mike > > > > I haven't seen you missing anything at all. I was just trying to > > add to the discussion that people sometimes confuse the different > > neutrality including: > > 1) Upekkha and Tatramajjhatta > > 2) Tatramajjhatta that arises with samatha, and Tatramajjhatta that > > arises with the satipatthana > > > > > > Here is a list of upekkah definition: > > (http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat5.html): > > > > There are 10 kinds of upekkha (indifference), namely > > > > Chalagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to > > the 6 arammana of the arahanta, who has eradicated all kilesa. > > > > Brahmaviharupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is > > indifferent to all entities. > > > > Bojjhagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is one of the > > components that make enlightenment possible. > > > > Viriyupekkha, the viriya-cetasika which is right perseverance which > > is not too tense nor too lax in the development of bhavana. > > > > Sankharupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is indifferent when the > > realization of the tilakkhana of the sankhara-dhamma. > > > > Vedanupekkha, the vedana-cetasika that does not feel unhappy or > > happy. > > > > Vipassanupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is neutral in the > > consideration of the arammana that arises from causes and conditions. > > > > Tatramajjhattatupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika that is > > neutral, not biased or partial. > > > > Jhanupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the jhana which > > attenuates the preoccupation by other dhamma which renders the peace > > less steadfast. This intends especially the tatiyajjhana (from the > > perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which has abandoned piti. > > > > Parisuddhupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the > > catutthajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which is > > completely peaceful and cleansed from all adversaries, without any > > further function to abandon the elements of jhana. > > Aargh, my eyes are loosing focus. I think you just used more Pali terms in > your post than you did English words, Kom :-) Damn, I need to learn more > Pali. > > Merry, > Anders 6498 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- gayan wrote: > Thanks Gayan, I think I have a vague memory of this too! robert dear robert, > > I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where buddha says > something > like this, > "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about annihilation.To > that I > say this, yes,I preach you about annihilation,annihilation of > dukkha > that is, and nothing else." > > (pardon for the vagueness) > rgds > > 6499 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert: I also vaguely recall the sutta. (Is it not from the Anguttara Nikaaya? If it is, it must be from the book of "One".) tadao 6500 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:14pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear tadao, Thanks for the pointer, and welcome to DSG. I am looking forward to learning mroe from you. kom --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Dear Kom: > In my view, you cannot slow down any realities. You may think that > you can regulate the speed of, say, your breathing in and out. But > it is just your idea. Doesn't matter how slowly you breathe in and > out, the speed of the arising/falling-away of the > actual realies you experience through your door-ways > does not change at all. If you think that by way of slowing your > activies you can see things more clearly, you are living in your > own worlds of the concepts, i.e., me trying to catch naamas and > ruupas. These naamaas and ruupas are, in fact, far too "real" > (here, I cannot find a good word) to be caught by our intention > or desire. If they were so easily grasapable/catchable, then, > the Buddha wouldn't have spent uncoutless lives to acculate > his wisdom. tadao 6501 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: So did you study at UCLA? Did you have to memorize all the Sandhi rules? Unlike Sanskrit, Sandhi is not extensive in Pali. In any script versions of Pali text, words are separted, so invidiual words are so recognizable. Given your Sanskrit/Laten background, you will soon see that Pali is much much easier language to learn. As in Sanskrit, Pali may use compounding extensively, but the feature is not prblematic as far as the Tipitaka is concerned. Once you get into commentaries, then, you will face up with extensive use of compounding. But, here again, given your Sanskrit background, you can easily indentify which compounds are dvanda, tatpurusa, karmadhaaraya, etc. As for Pali grammar book, a couple of months ago, I ordred one book published by a German publisher (Mouton). I was told that it would take some time to get a copy of cheap (paper-back) version of the book, which I have been waiting for. Once I receive a copy, I will let you know how good or useful it is. tadao P.S. I studied Pali using Thai textbooks. Also after studying Pali several years, I was exposed to Paanini's grammar. My encourtering his grammar was the oorgin of my interests in linguistics, which I teach here as a lecturer (regularly I teach such courses as acoustic/experimenal phonetics, psycholinguistics, and writing systems of the world, and offer such courses as Pali and Sanskrit only as summer courses.) 6502 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom: We are all learners. Let's help each other to develp the right understanding. tadao 6503 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Rob > > > >I > practice insight > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > concentration > purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > _______________________________ Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to the breath? We have to be very circumspect about the practice, I think. Do we really want to be aware of any dhamma, as it really is, or are we secretly looking for calmness. I mentioned recently that I was waliking in the forest and sat in a place - and found this conducive to contemplation. While sitting I might have had the idea 'hmm, this place is quite good, but maybe I could find a better spot". Instead of just knowing the moment. Or I might think I need to reflect on the teachings first; rather than just being aware. \ Now I am sitting at my computer; I could have the idea that this is not ideal "I should be sitting in the forest". However wherever we are, whether there is thinking or not, dhammas are arising and can be known. Last week I was in Tokyo. Shinjuku station has almost 2million people a day passing through it. I find it a very conducive place for reflection and direct awareness of seeing and colour. One can see that there are only different colours appearing through the eyedoor and immediateley thinking forming concepts about the visible object. That doesn't mean I think I have to be in such situations for awareness to arise. > Indeed that's what I think meditation can prevent! > People churning over intellectual knowledge when they are > totally ignorant > of their own minds and hearts. > They are only 'parroting' the teachings, they don't enquiry or > question, > their minds are dull. > > Abhidhamma can > >be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual > >happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. > It > >is good to be reminded of that danger > >robert > > I agree and that's why I think that the study should be > tempered with > meditation. > ___________ What is meditation? What was I was doing at shinjuku station? Could we be sitting very still concentrating and yet be doing something other than what the Buddha taught? robert 6504 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:49pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, You are back in flood! --- "Anders Honoré" > Ignorance was just an example (since it is mentioned as the first link in > the suttas). You are right, the 'end' is better to use. I'll try to > reformulate my question this time (which wasn't clear at all the first > time): I think we both agree that after Parinibbana, there is just Nibban= a > left (or do we?). Yes, I think we agree. Nibbana doesn't rise, it doesn't fall, therefore, it "remains". > My question is: How can there ever be any knowledge that > Nibbana remains when that which cognises Nibbana (conditioned elements) has > dispersed? I don't think that the Buddha ever said the "knowledge" of nibbana remains after all the kandhas cease. My speculation is that since Nibbana = is the anti-thesis of all the conditioned phenomena, that it is unconditioned, neither rising nor falling, and it becomes obvious at the point of cognition. > Exactly. Once the entire Samsaric cycle has ceased (whether it is before > Samsara, if there ever was such a time. I don't think so, or after) there= is > just that which is not subject to the laws of dependent co-origination left; > the Unconditioned. I don't think we disagree on this. The only disagreement is obviously whether or not Nibbana is consciousness. Again, as I mentioned, there doesn't appear to be much support in the teaching that Nibbana is consciousness. > Yup. On the other hand, a rephrasement can also serve to help people > understand whose mindframe might not be akin to to Indian one at the > Buddha's time. Generally, my impression is that Mahayana (and perhaps Zen > most of all) is more based around the experiental approach of explaining > reality, whereas Theravada is more based around the causal appoach towards > reality. Of course, things aren't as black and white as that, but that's = the > general impression I have. I wouldn't call all the teachings I have from different people as simple "rephrasements". Some inventions hinder instead of help. > > >Again, just like the concept of duality, I can somewhat map what > Bodhidharma said to the Theravadan frame of references, but not > completely, especially the part "the mind is nirvana." > > I think it's important to remember just how much the various interpretation > of the Buddhadhamma should be relied on (including one's own). If I were to derived the concept of nibbana on my own, I would be suspicious of it. Since I don't, and this is taught by others, and so far = best supported by the scriptures, then I have no reason to suspect this particular model. I am not convicted of this understanding, although I am= concerned about how people come up with such drastic variations. Ajahn Chah, > for example (whom I would definitely count as an enlightened individual), > once commented that the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [of Zen], Hui-neng was > highly profound and he hoped that one day his own students would be able to > comprehend the subtle wisdom it contains. > Hui-neng didn't even bother saying Mind is Nirvana. He simply renamed > Nirvana to 'Essence of Mind'. How should we trust Ajahn Chah's > interpretation of the Pali Canon, as well as his interpretation the Sutra= of > the Sixth patriarch? Do you trust Ajahn Chah's wisdom over your own? If so, > why? Ajahn Chah may be an Ajanh to many, but I haven't had the opportunity to be his student. Because of that, I certainly wouldn't take Ajanh Chah on his words because I simply don't know what he teaches. My point is, if a teaching, by anybody, is not supported by the Buddha teachings (of course, subjected to one's own understanding), we regard it not to be the teaching of Buddha. I have observed some of your statements to fall within the teaching, and some outside of it. One of the= thing that I consider to be outside (nibbana as a consciousness), I think, = is sufficiently discussed for my purpose. kom 6505 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:07pm Subject: Quotes from Acharn Sujin 1.(was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, I thought you might like to read this. In December Acharn sujin visited Cambodia. Some of her talks were recorded and a new book in Thai has been published. I was just sent some translated extracts. In this section of the book the audience consisted of monks, nuns and laypeople. Toward the end Sujin is asked questions about satipatthana by the Sangharaja, Cambodia's head monk. (Khun Butsawong, the man who translates Sujin's talks for Cambodia radio station, translates between Sujin and the venerable monk) The post is split into 2 sections. Discussion in the Unaloam Temple, Phnom Penh. Sujin: I know that people in Cambodia take a great interest in satipatthana and therefore let us discuss this subject of Buddhism because it is of the highest benefit. If one studies the Dhamma without developing the understanding which realizes the dhammas one has studied, one merely develops theoretical understanding of realities. There are realities, dhammas, all the time, also at this moment. When people study dhammas, they usually study concepts denoting realities. Dhammas are reality. However, if the Exalted One, the Sammasambuddha, had not attained enlightenment, nobody would know that what we take for self, for the world, for different things, are only dhammas, each with their own characteristic. I do appreciate the kusala all of you have accumulated, and this is the condition for you to come together at this place. If you had not accumulated kusala in the past there would no condition for you to listen to the Dhamma now. The Dhamma is the truth but it is difficult to comprehend. No matter whether one is born as a human being or as another kind of living being, there are only dhammas, realities, that are born. However, how many people who listen to the Dhamma can really understand that everything is only dhamma, reality? It seems that the Dhamma which is real is very ordinary. However, it is difficult to really understand it, because it is the true Dhamma of the ariyans, the enlightened ones. When we are sound asleep nothing appears to us, but why is it that as soon as we have opened our eyes there are objects appearing to us? This seems very ordinary to us, but we should really understand the reason why, while we are asleep nothing appears, and why, when we have opened our eyes, different objects can appear. If there would not be nama dhamma (mental reality), there would not be any reality that could appear. If there would not be seeing, different things could not appear at this very moment. If we would not hear, smell, taste, experience things through the bodysense or think, the world could not appear. At this moment we all are seeing and on account of what we see happiness or sorrow arises. When we hear, happiness and sorrow arise on account of what we hear. It is the same in the case of the experiences through the other senses. This is the ordinary daily life of everybody. Every day we see, we hear, we experience happiness and sorrow, time and again. Everybody is attached to what he sees. Can anyone deny that he clings each time he sees? These are dhammas which arise and take their course, and nobody can prevent them from arising. When life arises it has to take its course each moment, and nobody can exert control over the amount of happiness or sorrow he experiences, this depends on conditions. Do you think about birth in the same way as the Bodhisatta? You may think that being born is just an ordinary event, common to everybody. Nobody can prevent this and nobody particularly wants to be born, but when there are the right conditions there has to be birth. However, the Bodhisatta reflected on birth as follows: dhammas which have arisen must fall away. When will there be an end to what is susceptible to change, when will it fall away and not arise again? People who have not realized the noble Truths and do not take an interest in the Dhamma will have to continue to see, to hear, all the time, in each plane of existence, during each life. This will happen until they begin to see that it is of the greatest benefit to study the Dhamma and to hear the Dhamma from the person who has attained enlightenment and who could reach the end of the arising of dhammas. People who are not the Sammasambuddha nor a Solitary Buddha(Pacceka Buddha) should be listeners, people who listen attentively and with great care to the Dhamma. We should remember that the Dhamma the Buddha realized through his enlightenment is of a profound nature and that nobody can understand it without study and investigation. The Buddha realized through his enlightenment the true Dhamma of the ariyans (the enlightened ones). He realized the dhammas which are reality, so that people who had developed panna to the degree of penetrating the true nature of these dhammas could become ariyans as well. We may have developed worldly knowledge in many fields, in many branches of science, but we are still susceptible to suffering, dukkha. All of us have to undergo many kinds of dukkha. Let everybody here consider the truth of daily life: we have a body and thus, we are susceptible to sickness, to suffering. We should realize that even a discomfort such as hunger occurring in daily life is dukkha. Is there anybody who never experienced pain or illness? Even while we are sitting now we may feel stiffness. Apart from bodily pain occurring in daily life, there is also mental pain. When we suffer from bodily pain there is bound to be mental affliction as well. We can discern these two kinds of dukkha; we can see that bodily pain is real and that mental pain, oppression or disturbance, is also dukkha. We can understand that these two kinds of dukkha are truly dukkha; they are called Ňdukkha dukkhaÓ. There are three kinds of dukkha: dukkha-dukkha (intrinsic suffering), vipariťŚma dukkha (suffering in change) and sakhŚra-dukkha (suffering inherent in conditioned realities). As regards dukkha-dukkha, this is bodily pain and mental affliction that everybody experiences. This does not mean that people who know these kinds of dukkha are already ariyans. Everybody knows these kinds of dukkha in daily life. There is another kind of dukkha which is vipariťŚma dukkha, dukkha because of change. This kind of dukkha occurs when happiness changes, when it does not last. Everybody looks for happiness and wants to experience happiness, but when one has acquired it, it changes again, it does not last. What causes happiness is susceptible to change and then one looks again for something else that can bring happiness. For example, people wish to acquire a particular thing, but when they have acquired it, it can only bring happiness for a moment, and therefore, they wish to acquire something else again that can bring happiness. Thus, happiness which changes and does not last is a kind of dukkha, suffering. Everybody has to experience dukkha, each day, but one does not feel that there is dukkha because of the fact that everything arises and then falls away, that everything changes very rapidly. One does not realize the dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas, sakhŚra dhammas, which are impermanent. The Buddha explained the characteristics of the three kinds of dukkha by way of feelings. As to dukkha-dukkha, this is bodily pain and unpleasant mental feeling, domanassa vedanŚ, which is mental pain. Thus, when dukkha-dukkha is classified by way of feelings, it includes the painful feeling which accompanies body-consciousness and the unpleasant mental feeling which accompanies the citta with aversion. Happy feeling, sukha vedanŚ, is a cause for suffering when it changes, and one looks for another object that can bring happiness; thus, it is suffering in change, vipariťŚma dukkha. Indifferent feeling, feeling that is neither pleasant nor unpleasant, and also all other dhammas which arise and fall away, which are impermanent, are sakhŚra dukkha. People may well know bodily suffering and mental suffering, and they may well realize that even pleasant feeling is suffering, since it is susceptable to change, but this does not mean that they are ariyans. They cannot become enlightened until they realize the kind of dukkha which is sakhŚra-dukkha, dukkha inherent in all0conditioned realities. Is there anybody among you while you are sitting here who really knows to what extent there is dukkha? Everything arises and the falls away extremely rapidly. People who have studied the Dhamma know that a moment of seeing is different from a moment of hearing and that therefore seeing has to fall away before the reality of hearing can arise. Everybody can know through the study of Dhamma that the arising and falling away is dukkha, but this is understanding of the level of theoretical knowledge, pariyatti. This is different from the direct realization of the truth that the dhammas which arise and then fall away are dukkha. We read in the Tipi“aka that people of other beliefs asked the monks for what reason they were ordained in accordance with the Dhamma and the Vinaya. The monks answered that the reason was practising with the purpose of realizing dukkha. Thus we see that the understanding of dukkha has several degrees. There is not merely the degree of knowledge stemming from listening. People who have not developed panna, right understanding, may understand in theory, because they listened to the Dhamma, that the citta which sees falls away. However, they do not realize that the impermanence of realities is dukkha. As soon as one kind of citta falls away it is succeeded by another kind of citta which arises. One kind of dhamma arises and falls away and then another dhamma arises succeeding it, but they are not ready to see dukkha, that is, the arising and falling away of dhammas. The arising and falling away of dhammas occurs extremely rapidly and therefore people believe that these dhammas are a self who is there all the time. Therefore, they are not affected by the arising and falling away of the dhammas that see or hear. They take dhammas for permanent and self, until they know the true nature of the dhammas and do not take them for self any more. The understanding which is the study of dhammas should be developed gradually, stage by stage. One cannot forego any stage of development, and therefore, it is not possible to realize immediately the arising and falling away of realities. It is necessary to know first the characteristic of nŚma which is non-self, and the characteristic of rśpa which is non-self. We have discussed this subject here only for a little while and therefore you may not be able to realize already the characteristic of nama dhamma and of rśpa dhamma. We should continue to discuss this subject for a long time. Buddhism does not teach only about dukkha, it also teaches about the cause of the arising of dukkha, the dhamma which is the cessation of dukkha and the way of the development of panna that leads to the complete cessation of dukkha, so that it does not arise again. This is the teaching of the four noble Truths. Pa––Ś that can penetrate the four noble Truths should be developed stage by stage. For example, there is seeing at this moment and this is real, and thus, panna can only know the characteristic of the dhamma which is seeing. It can realize seeing as the dhamma which knows an object, as an element (dhŚtu) which knows or experiences. What appears through the eyesense is rśpa dhamma that does not know anything. This is the development of panna in daily life. Daily life is different for different people; some people may have accumulated skill for jhŚna and others not, but realities appear naturally in the life of each individual. So long as lokuttara citta (supramundane citta experiencing nibbŚna) has not arisen yet a person cannot consider and investigate lokuttara citta as the noble Truth of dukkha, but he can investigate other cittas that arise and appear at that moment. Thus, the study of dhammas should be in conformity with a personŐs real life so that he can understand what has been taught in the Tipitaka, also with regard to the four noble Truths. When someone is seeing and satipa““hŚna does not arise, panna cannot clearly realize the difference between nŚma dhamma and rśpa dhamma and then the noble Truth of dukkha cannot be penetrated. At this moment dhammas are arising and falling away, but ignorance (avijjŚ) cannot penetrate the truth and there is still clinging and desire to realize the truth. All kinds of clinging and desire are obstructions, they prevent a person to become detached and to realize the third noble Truth, the cessation of dukkha, that is, nibbŚna. Panna is not developed if one merely expects to know what has not arisen yet, what has not appeared yet. However, there is a way to test whether there is the real panna or not at this moment, when a reality is appearing. We can find out whether or not the characteristic of that reality can be understood as a nama dhamma or a rśpa dhamma. People should not have false expectations to know a reality other than the dhamma that appears at this very moment. At this moment a reality is appearing but there is no panna which knows as it really is the characteristic of that reality. How can panna then develop? If there is no understanding at this moment, there will not be understanding at the next moment. Only when panna arises together with sati, when there is awareness and understanding of the characteristic of the reality that appears, can panna can gradually develop. Panna can grow together with sati which is aware over and over again of the characteristics of all kinds of dhammas. In this way there can be understanding of all dhammas appearing through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door. People should understand correctly that the reality appearing at this very moment is the dhamma panna should know as it really is. If they do not know yet the dhamma which appears now, they should continue to study the Dhamma and continue to listen to the Dhamma. In that way understanding can grow and there will be conditions for the arising of satipatthana. There is no other way to know the characteristics of dhammas as they really are. When you are listening and beginning to have understanding, you are actually beginning to develop the panna that is able to know the characteristics of realities. This is the very beginning of the development of insight, of vipassana. (from here there are questions - see next post) 6506 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:20pm Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Tadao, I studied Sanskrit at the University of British Columbia, Canada, and my teachers were Dr Karin Preisendanz (now of University of Hamburg, Germany) and Dr Ashok Aklujkar (who wrote our textbook). I remember that we did spend a week or two memorizing sandhi rules ... not sure if we memorized absolutely all of them though! I started learning Pali mainly because I wanted to understand the chanting we do at my temple here in Vancouver ("itipi so bhagavaa ...," etc.). After that, I found that I would come across passages in the sutta-s where the precise meaning wasn't clear from English translations. So I started to make a close study of bits and pieces in the original Pali. For example, just this evening I was reading in English translation that the Buddha's two teachers also practiced mindfulness and concentration (in MN 26). I wanted to know if these were really the same words as steps 7 and 8 of the Noble Eightfold Path, so I looked up the Pali, and sure enough ... his two teachers practiced sati and samaadhi. (After that I started to investigate the question of what the Buddha's innovations were, beyond his teachers, but that's another story!) Are you in Thailand? I am going to Wat Mahathat in Bangkok at the end of August to practice meditation and also to explore whether if I'd like to do a longer-term ordination. Derek. 6507 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:21pm Subject: Quotes from Acharn Sujin 2 (was:Theravada and Satipathana - Kom In this section Butsawong translates questions from the audience and Sujin replies. ButSawong: there is a question about a parrot that develops satipatthanna by reciting, ŇAtthi, atthi Ó (the pali term for bones) 3 . I would like to ask how rupa dhamma or nama dhamma can be the object of satipatthana in this way? Sujin: A parrot cannot know the four noble Truths and nobody can know the mind of a parrot. If a parrot says, ŇbonesÓ and a human being says the word ŇbonesÓ, is there a difference between the ability of a bird and of a human being to understand the meaning of this word? What is a person thinking who has listened to the Dhamma for a long time and hears the word ŇbonesÓ; does he think in a way different from a parrot ? A parrot and a human being have each a different bodily appearance. Is seeing-consciousness different in the case of a parrot and of a human being, or is it the same? We can see that a parrot is different from a human being because of the bodily appearance. However, nama dhamma has no outward appearance; there are kusala cittas and akusala cittas which arise. Birth as a bird is the result of akusala whereas birth as a human is the result of kusala. We should consider the Dhamma in all details. When someone just listens to the words of the Dhamma without considering them he may mistakenly believe that a parrot can develop satipathana. The parrot may have accumulated inclinations which we cannot know; it is true that the Bodhisatta who developed panna was also born as a bird in his former lives. We do not know about this, we only know with regard to ourselves the realities which arise. We can find out that satipatthana is not at all easy. We have to listen to the Dhamma for a long time so that there can be conditions for sati to be aware of a reality even at this very moment. Nobody here can know the citta of someone else, and who would have the kind of panna that knows the citta of a parrot? Thus, what we would be able to know is our own citta at this moment and this is what is most beneficial. Then we shall know that even thinking of a parrot is only one moment of citta that thinks. This is different from the citta that sees or hears. This is the way to develop panna so that we correctly understand the characteristic of nŚma dhamma, the element that knows, that can know an object through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door. Everybody here can only know his own citta and thus he should have more understanding of his own citta. But Sawong: There are questions concerning the development of satipatthana. In the section on ŇClear Comprension it has been stated that one should be aware while going forward. Should sati be aware now of going forward or of the element of wind produced by citta which conditions the going forward? Sujin: At this moment nobody is going forward, but sati can arise and be aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that is real at this moment. There is no need yet to think of something. If you can understand the characteristic of sati which is aware of the characteristic of the reality now there will be no doubt about the object of awareness. Sati is anatta, non-self, and when there are the right conditions it can arise and be aware of realities at any moment in daily life, no matter whether one sits, is lying down, stands, walks, speaks, is silent or thinks. But Sawong: Someone has a question about right understanding, sammaditthi. He asks whether sammaditthi arises when someone practises satipatthana in daily life. Can he at such a moment consider rśpa dhamma and nama dhamma? Or are there other dhammas arising together with samma ditthi(right understanding) that he can consider? Sujin: There are eight Path factors, but usually five factors count, because the three factors which are the abstinences (virati cetasikas) cannot arise together with the citta which is not supramundane citta, lokuttara citta 4 . These five Path factors are: right understanding (samma ditthi), right thinking (sammŚ-sankappa), right effort (samma-vayama), right mindfulness (samma-sati) and right concentration (samma sammadhi). While we are sitting there is rśpa produced by citta 6 . How can this rśpa be known? When a particular reality is known it can only be known when it appears through the appropriate doorway. When a blind person, for example, wants to know what the different colours really are, he cannot know this because the eye-door is lacking. Sound does not appear to a deaf person, and thus, pa––Ś could not know the characteristic of sound. At this moment a reality appears and thus there must be a doorway, the means through which that reality can appear. Without a doorway that reality cannot appear. With regard to the rśpa produced by citta, this arises within oneself, not outside. Therefore, only when it appears through a doorway it could be known. Can anybody without the rśpa which is bodysense (kŚyapasŚda rśpa) experience a rśpa appearing at the body? Can rśpas such as softness, hardness, cold, heat, motion or pressure appear? When someoneŐs bodysense is contacted by cold, heat, softness or hardness, he takes the cold, heat, softness or hardness for his own. The rśpas of cold, heat, softness, hardness, motion and pressure arise and appear at the body, but if a person does not know that they are not self or belonging to a self, how can he know the characteristic of rśpa produced by citta? Cold, heat and the other rśpas appearing through the bodysense are not only rśpas produced by citta; there are also the rśpas produced by the other three factors, namely, kamma, temperature (utu) and nutrition (ŚhŚra). Thus, the study on the level of theoretical knowledge of the Dhamma (pariyatti) is the study of the names of realities. At that level the characteristics of realities do not appear to panna. Panna should be developed stage by stage so that the true nature of realities can be directly known. But Sawong: The venerable Head Patriarch has some questions. If it is true that one cannot choose or select any object for the practice of satipatthana, how do you explain that, as we read in the commentaries, objects are selected in accordance with a personŐs temperament or character, such as a greedy temperament (tanhŚ carita) or a speculative temperament (di““hi carita) 7 . Furthermore, some people have samatha as their vehicle, they have developed tranquillity and insight, and some have vipassanŚ as their vehicle, they have developed only vipassanŚ. In the Commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta a city with four gates has been compared to nibbana, and it has been explained that just as people can enter a city with four gates by anyone of these gates, one can attain enlightenment by means of anyone of the four applications of mindfulness, mindfulness of the body, of feeling, of citta and of dhammas. How do we have to understand this? Sujin: Usually when people read in the scriptures about these subjects they desire to know more about this, or they desire to act in a particular way. When they hear about different temperaments, such as a person of an intelligent temperament, a ruminating temperament, or a hateful temperament, they think of themselves as having such or such temperament and they choose a particular way of development which suits their character. However, in reality this subject of the Dhamma has been taught so that it is a condition for the arising of panna that knows the truth. Only when one develops satipatthana panna can arise and then a person can know what character or temperament he has. Without the development of satipatthana he does not know realities and he can only guess what kind of temperament he has. There are qualities such as attachment, aversion, ignorance, and also panna, understanding of the Dhamma. What temperament do we have? This is only thinking and guessing. Everybody has these dhammas. Only when panna arises and sati is aware we can know the truth about the different characters of each individual, we can know how our accumulated inclinations are the condition for our own temperament. Someone may guess about his temperament and he may believe that he should develop a particular object among the four Applications of Mindfulness. He hopes to obtain a result by this way of practice. However, this is not the right condition for knowing the truth of non-self of realities; it is not the way to know all realities thoroughly. Someone may select an object and fix his attention on that object since he believes that he has such or such temperament and that he should therefore develop this particular Application of Mindfulness. At that moment he neglects awareness of all the objects he is used to taking for self. Of what temperament is a person when attachment arises, when aversion arises or when ignorance arises? All these realities are non-self, anatta. Therefore, the wrong view of self cannot be eradicated by selecting an object someone believes is suitable for his temperament. It is true that in the development of samatha the object of meditation is selected in accordance with someoneŐs character. By the development of samatha defilements are subdued so that calm increases. However, the development of vipassanŚ is different from the development of samatha and it has a different aim, namely, the eradication of ignorance. Ignorance of realities conditions the wrong view which takes realities for self. Therefore, in the development of satipatthana there should not be any selection of objects of understanding. In the ŇPath of DiscriminationÓ(Treatise I on Knowledge, Ch 1, Section 1, All), it has been said: ŇBhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is all that is to be directly known? Eye is to be directly known, visible object is to be directly known, eye-consciousness... eye-contact... any feeling that arises with eye-contact as its condition whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant is also to be directly known...Ó Further on all realities are summed up and it is said that all of them should be known thoroughly, not any reality is excepted. But Sawong: The venerable Patriarch wishes to express his appreciation, anumodana, to the Thai Buddhists who are a large group brought here by Mother Sujin, and who have come to Cambodia to support Buddhism. People here listen to the Dhamma now with great joy and happiness. The Patriarch considers himself as the host receiving his guests who bring along the noble Truths. He wishes to apologize if there is anything lacking or anything which is not as it should be. Everybody begins to understand the subject of maha-satipatthaa. They try to grasp the meaning of satipatthana and thus they ask questions all the time about this subject. If there are questions which are not suitable I also wish to apologize to Mother Sujin. As the host, the Patriarch extends his blessings to everybody of this group and expresses his thankfulness. ****** 6508 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom hi rob and cybele: At 21:36 2001/07/18 -0700, you wrote: > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Rob > > > > > > >I > > practice insight > > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > > concentration > > purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. > > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > > > _______________________________ > > Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a > dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to the > breath? ======================== i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes one is getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a reminder to return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever realities are appearing....isn't that right, cybele? ======================== > What is meditation? ======================== how about: awareness of realities arising in the present (or just slightly past, as image/memory, according to jon and howard's recent exchange) ======================== What was I was doing at shinjuku station? > Could we be sitting very still concentrating and yet be doing > something other than what the Buddha taught? ======================== of course we could be. however, isn't it possible that we could also be walking through shinjuku station and thinking we are being aware of realities, when we are just thinking about being aware? and thinking we are practicing as the Buddha taught? and perhaps even enjoying these thoughts? how do we know we are practicing what the Buddha taught whether we are sitting with our eyes closed or walking through a train station? rob, do you usually *try* to be aware of realites in shinjuku station? :-) bruce 6509 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "Purnomo ." wrote: > Dear freinds, > > I noticed that we discuss about zen and Theravada. May I take your time ? > I think that Zen and Theravada is different. The great is Theravada is used > Tripitaka as "path" to Nibbana. So, if we discuss of weak or strong of > religion it is no use. > I just to point that The Buddha learn us Samatha and Vipassana. Are those in > Zen ? I think there aren't. Vipassana is only one way to Nibbana. > > with metta, I'm stepping out on a limb, because I'm far from as educated in Buddhism as most people on this list. But I think that both Mindfulness and Insight are very present in Zen. In Vietnamese Zen, as practiced by Thich Nath Hanh, it's hard to tell Zen and Vipassana practice apart in many ways. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6510 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: This case is a rare one where only the Buddha or the person > themself could really see the subtlety of the intention. I think > you've hit the mark with "connection betwen her love and > non-judgemental attitude". One of the things Acharn sujin > sometimes says when asked about matters such as paying taxes, > part of which may go towards the army etc. is that she "is not > the manager of the world". That woman was a sotapanna and could > never have the intention to kill . However, she was not an > anagami or arahant and still had attachment to her husband. > > I think there are others who could add more to this. > look forward to more from you Robert > robert Dear Robert, Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I am not too familiar yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a sotapanna is an enlightened person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant denotes someone who has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? I think it is interesting that the sotapanna could still have attachment, although a positive, sort of pure attachment, in the form of love for her husband, and that the arahant would have transcended even this positive relation to others, and be, I suppose, 'completely free' of either positive or negative attachments or aversions. If you could say a bit more about the conditions of these different attainments, it would be of great interest to me. If this is too redundant for the group, I would be happy to be referred to an appropriate passage on the web. Nice again to be in your company! Thanks, Robert E. 6511 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- bruce wrote: > hi rob and cybele: > > > At 21:36 2001/07/18 -0700, you wrote: > > > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > > > Dear Rob > > > > > > > > > >I > > > practice insight > > > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > > > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > > > concentration > > > purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. > > > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > > > > > _______________________________ > > > >Robert: Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a > > dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to > the > > breath? > > ======================== > i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes > one is > getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a > reminder to > return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever > realities are > appearing....isn't that right, cybele? > ======================== Robert:When "one is getting carried away by concepts" are there paramattha dhammas (realities) arising? If there is never awareness of the thinking process it will not be known as it is. Are there really anchors in samsara? While one is returning to the breath how many dhammas have arisen and passed away? Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) xxvii writes: “Because the functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has to be taken while the deed is being performed to its completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas 3)”I can perform” and 4) “I can feel”. Thus these four imaginary characteristic functions of being have bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. But the elements have not the time or span of duration to carry out such functions” (end quote) This "deep-rooted belief in their existence" can occur even while one thinks they are being aware. That is why samatha and vipassana are different. One can develop samatha correctly and still have self-view as much as ever. > > > > What is meditation? > ======================== > how about: awareness of realities arising in the present (or > just slightly > past, as image/memory, according to jon and howard's recent > exchange) > ======================== Yes, if it is correct awreness. perhaps we could add:arising in association with panna. > > What was I was doing at shinjuku station? > > Could we be sitting very still concentrating and yet be > doing > > something other than what the Buddha taught? > > ======================== > of course we could be. > > however, isn't it possible that we could also be walking > through shinjuku > station and thinking we are being aware of realities, when we > are just > thinking about being aware? and thinking we are practicing as > the Buddha > taught? and perhaps even enjoying these thoughts? > > how do we know we are practicing what the Buddha taught > whether we are > sitting with our eyes closed or walking through a train > station? > > rob, do you usually *try* to be aware of realites in shinjuku > station? :-) _______ Robert:As I have written before, Bruce, much/most of the time it is some subtle deviation or clinging or idea of control. One of things we have discussed in the past is how clinging in subtle forms should be known in the present moment too. it can be seen and thus it becomes clearer when it arises. I think without studying the teachings, meeting with Acharn sujin, I would be convinced that I had awareness much more than than I do (and this is still probably an over-estimation). I would be that much more deluded. robert 6512 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Stream Entry - clarification Anders, This is a very profound post. Your questions about whether oneself or others would need or want to know one's realization in an objective way, raises very interesting questions. It occurs to me that being able to certify one's own level of attainment can only be a gift for the ego, and make one feel 'proud' to have attained something. I can't see any way out of this, and it helps me to understand why Zen Master Ikkyu tore up his certificate of enlightenment when his students at the monastery had become too attached to his stature. They wept and taped it back together until he finally burned it. Why be attached to such things? Subhuti's words in the Diamond Sutra are remarkably profound if taken in this way. What does it do for the practitioner to know if they are a stream-entrant or not? It merely clouds their awareness with a self-concept. It can only be an overlay. Now if the 'stream-entrant' describes his actual experience and properties, well, that might be useful. It is possible to take an inventory without providing a label that glosses all the specifics. So if you were to say 'I no longer have attachment to possessions', or 'I have attachment to possessions but I'm no longer attached or averse to that attachment' this could be useful information to you or others, because it goes to an actual element of living, letting go, being at peace in awareness, etc. When you say 'but let's figure out if I'm really enlightened or not', however, you are then involved in a contest, rather than a description of where you are really at. So I have to agree with you, and to admit that the aspect of me that wants to know 'Is Anders enlightened?', 'Is Robert [me] enlightened or is he not?', or 'is he close to realization?', is nothing other than the ego-sense, which is enamoured of attainments and sufferings. What does it do for me to see this? Well, then I can relax in the 'is-ness' that is present right now, and stop worrying about 'me', which is an indulgence of the ego-sense in the first place. And worrying about whether Anders is a stream-entrant, although an exciting diversion, is also another way of the ego [by projection] asking itself 'Am I enlightened? Is my attainment lesser or greater than this or that person? How great or miserable am *I*?' So what happens when I drop all that? Then I am faced with existence itself, and where I really am with that existence, and where I really am with this moment. And then I am forced to ask myself: well, with this moment what am I going to do? Will I be vigilant, and look into this matter of 'Who am I?' in this moment? Or will I look for another distraction or contest to get off the path? Really, when you look at it, there's only the path [which is not really a path but just being present/Mindful at any given opportunity] or not the path [going off into dreamland again]. And it's both simple and frighteningly present right now. It also occurs to me that while dropping the quest to define one's attainment, that negative labelling also serves the same purpose, of bolstering the sense of oneself as a separate entity. I am constantly saying to myself 'well you have all this attachment and emotion all the time; nope, you're not there yet, buddy' and negatively evaluating my 'prospects' for realization. This is an enormous obstacle to realizing my true nature *now*. One cannot realize in the future when conditions are right. Now is always the time to look into who one really is. Enlightenment, as I understand the Buddha, is not really an attainment. It is a prior condition. This is exciting if realized in truth. It means that I am already living/expressing pure Buddha-nature/Right View, but unfortunately I am too deluded at the moment to enjoy this truth. So that immediate delusion can be looked at *now* and at any time. It doesn't have to wait until I judge myself as capable or deserving. Robert E. ------------------------------- --- Anders Honoré wrote: > It seems that my website caused some confusion as to the whether or not, I > am a stream-entrant. So I figured I'd spell it out and make my own view > clear in this regard. > > I have made no claim, nor will I ever, make the claim that I am a > stream-entrant. As I said, I confess to consuming alcoholic substances from > time to time, so on that account, anyone who feels that this "disqualifies" > me, are in their right mind to do so. > > But, nor will you see me deny that I might be a stream-entrant. As they > Diamond Sutra wisely says: > > "Subhuti, what do you think? The stream entrant is able to think, 'I have > attained the stream entrant's reward', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Stream entrant' is the > name for entering the stream and for entering nowhere else: not entering > forms, sounds, odors, tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas. This is called a > 'stream entrant'." > "Subhuti, what do you think? The Once-returner is able to think, 'I have > attained the Once-returner's reward', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Once-returner' is the > name for one more arrival and really is without future arrival. This is > called a 'Once-returner'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Non-returner is > able to think, 'I have attained the Non-returner's reward', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Non-returner' is the name > for no further arrival, and really has no non-arrival. This is why he is > called 'Non-returner'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Worthy (arhat) is > able to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? Really, there is nothing > called a 'Worthy'. > "World Honored One, if a Worthy were to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's > enlightenment', then it would be because of attachment to a self, a person, > sentient beings, and a soul. World Honored One, the Buddha has said that I > have attained the samŕdhi of non-dispute that among others is the best. It > is the best because I am free of the desire to be a Worthy. I do not think, > 'I am free of the desire to be a Worthy'. World Honored One, if I were to > think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', then the World Honored > One would not have said that Subhuti is a happy woodland practitioner, > because Subhuti really practices nowhere. And so he is called 'Subhuti, the > happy woodland practitioner'." > ------------------- > So even if I were a stream-entrant, it would be erroneous to say "I am a > stream-entrant," as this would still be an attachment to the image of self > (I know; because I used to think I was. Big mistake! Hindered my practise a > great deal). > As I said, I do not care if I am stream-entrant or not, nor do I have any > interest in finding out. > > Some may interpret this as a sign that I really am a stream-entrant. That > too is an illusion! To say that someone is a stream-entrant or not, would > require you to take static "snapshot" of reality an evaluate this. Already, > the flux of existence has moved on, and the snapshot is no longer in accord > with reality, so what is the point? Ultimately, it can never be a correct > assessment. > > If it is really that important for anyone here to find out, then I suggest > that you find someone who might be qualified to make that assessment, namely > an actual stream-entrant and qualified teacher, and I will be happy to > comply. For myself, such a thing has no relevancy however. Having confirmed > whether I am enlightened or not, will not serve to further my own practise > and progress. > To those, who would like to know, I would quote the words of Hui-neng, the > Sixth Patriarch of Zen in this regard: > > "If you are under delusion and cannot realize your Essence of Mind, you > should seek the advice of a pious and learned friend. When your mind is > enlightened, you will know the Essence of Mind [Nibbana], and then you may > tread the Path the right way. Now you are under delusion, and do not know > your Essence of Mind. Yet you dare to ask whether I know my Essence of Mind > or not. If I do, I realize it myself, but the fact that I know it cannot > help you from being under delusion. Similarly, if you know your Essence of > Mind your knowing would be of no use to me. Instead of asking others, why > not see it for yourself and know it for yourself?" > > Personally, I do not see the point of discerning such things. It has no > relevancy for me; and as Hui-neng points out, it should not have any > relevancy for anyone else either. > > Some may argue "but we should know, so that we might know whether your words > are valid or not." To this, I would say, go and read the Kalama Sutta, which > essentially says: > > "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When > there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, > don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical > conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering > views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our > teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are > unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized > by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, lead to harm & > to suffering' -- then you should abandon them. > ------------------- > Basically, it tells you to go from your own direct experience of the Dhamma. > If you find your own direct experience of the Dhamma inadequate to answer > such a question, then what is the point of lingering on it, since it has no > practical application for you that might help you further your own daily > practise? > I think there are many people here who might find themselves violating the > principles laid forth in this sutta, but again, this is not something that > they should accept from my words, or even the Kalama Sutta itself! This is > something they have to discover from their own personal experience. > > But as I said, if it is important for some people "know" (although it is a > false knowing), then I will be happy to comply provided they can find > someone qualified to give an answer in this regard. > > Regards, > Anders > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6513 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > We can know for ourselves in our daily life anytime we do something that > in conventional terms might be seen as 'encouraging unwholesomeness' in > others whether the citta (moment of consciousness) accompanying that > action is kusala or akusala. Thanks Jon. I appreciate your response. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6514 From: craig garner Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear Cybele, That was a lovely description of the path and its many ways of unfoldoing thank you so much for your words of truth. With love Craig ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:03 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody > > Dear everybody > Dear Tori > > The Buddhist Path for me is to walk on steadily yet not being very > concerned about reaching any destination, so to speak 'wherever you go there > you are', being on the road is already a trip (sorry but I am an > anachronistic late hippie) > Meditation is a mental training, is about fostering awareness, is to > sharpen your mind and penetrate the nature of phenomena, of life itself. > It's investigation of mental processes, non biased and dispassionate. > The 'motivation' is in doing it simply and unpretentiously, without > any particular expectation to accomplish anything special what doesn't > mean that you don't have purposefulness. > Aspiration and desire are to be distinguished as inner drives but > nevertheless craving is very subtle and we have to be attentive to > don't get entrapped in old mental patterns that are confortable like an old > pair of sleepers and prevent us from observing reality as it is. > And meditation is to develop skills in observing reality as it is, > without fear or denial and not distorting it to accomodate to our views and > prejudices. > What is the motivation to be alive, to breath, to eat, to drink? > Dhamma is about life, the motivation is being alive and exploring fully this > possibility. And so is meditation. > Our mind perceive this reality and contain all the possibilities > but we have to learn the skills, to deepen your 'sight-insight'. > I will quotate somebody I admire who lived very much in the present moment > in mindfulness and he is not a buddhist teacher, the great Thoreau: > > Direct your eye right inward, and you'll find > A thousand regions in your mind > Yet undiscovered. Travel them and be > expert in home-cosmography. > > Thoreau - Walden > > I know awareness is not but a sparkling light just perceptible that flickers > in our mind and for me even when we communicate at a deeper level with > somebody this is already like meditation. > Never approached meditation as something separate from me. > The meditative mind can happen always and we don't have to pursue > it just to be open, to surrender, is effortless. > It's something experiencing reality and understanding it, accepting whatever > comes. > > Dhamma is lively, I don't let myself be fooled by rigidity > and narrowmindness, Dhamma is wide enough to embrace everybody and > everything, is heartwarming and a source of strenght, it's fullness, openess > because is empty of self and can contain everything without oppression: > dhamma is about freedom, be still and feel the refreshing breeze in this hot > afternoon. :-) > Just practicing for it's own sake, I don't demand nothing, I don't expect > nothing just being present, awake to this very moment. > > Love > > CYbele 6515 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom hi rob > > ======================== > > i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes > > one is > > getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a > > reminder to > > return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever > > realities are > > appearing....isn't that right, cybele? > > ======================== > > Robert:When "one is getting carried away by concepts" are there > paramattha dhammas (realities) arising? If there is never > awareness of the thinking process it will not be known as it is. bruce: there aren't any rules that say one has to return to the breath...when you realize you're thinking, you have awareness of thinking, that's all; whether it arises with panna or not is another story; and all of it is dependent on conditions: there might be long strings of papanca and then, awareness of thinking, or there might not be anything like that at all.... the point is not to hold on to the breath or anything else, but awareness of whatever arises at the six dvara....the breath is is just a sensation to remind you that indeed realities are arising constantly at the six doors...you could just as easily use the ringing of the telephone....whether awareness arises or not is beyond control.... > Are there really anchors in samsara? While one is returning to > the breath how many dhammas have arisen and passed away? bruce: i have no idea, and don't think it's possible or even necessary to know, especially at our level...this reminds me of that recent exchange about the time-length of a process of citta....x milliseconds vs y milliseconds....i realize the topic might be interesting to some, but is that contemplating the Dhamma?? sounds more like counting angels dancing on the head of a pin! > Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) > xxvii writes: $BE#(Jecause the > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > deed is about to be performed and > 2) the care that has > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > 3)$BG*(J can perform$BG(Jand > 4) $BE*(J can feel$BG(J > Thus these four > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > to carry out such functions$BG(J(end quote) bruce: this is great. > This "deep-rooted belief in their existence" can occur even > while one thinks they are being aware. > That is why samatha and vipassana are different. One can develop > samatha correctly and still have self-view as much as ever. bruce: of course. but is self-view a danger only to those who develop samatha correctly? i would think it is just as great a danger to those who think they are developing vipassana correctly, but aren't.... so how can we know if insight is being cultivated correctly? > > however, isn't it possible that we could also be walking > > through shinjuku > > station and thinking we are being aware of realities, when we > > are just > > thinking about being aware? and thinking we are practicing as > > the Buddha > > taught? and perhaps even enjoying these thoughts? > > > > how do we know we are practicing what the Buddha taught > > whether we are > > sitting with our eyes closed or walking through a train > > station? > > > > rob, do you usually *try* to be aware of realites in shinjuku > > station? :-) > _______ > Robert:As I have written before, Bruce, much/most of the time it > is some subtle deviation or clinging or idea of control. > One of things we have discussed in the past is how clinging in > subtle forms should be known in the present moment too. it can > be seen and thus it becomes clearer when it arises. > I think without studying the teachings, meeting with Acharn > sujin, I would be convinced that I had awareness much more than > than I do (and this is still probably an over-estimation). I > would be that much more deluded. bruce: i know you've said that before, and i'm pretty certain that's all that arises in me too, if even that....i guess what i was trying to say was that i don't think it's more likely that one will have clinging or an idea of control while sitting than while walking through a train station....but a lot of the list members give the impresssion that clinging is more likely to arise while sitting, or that awareness of realities at the six doors is less likely to arise sitting, but not at other times, as if everyone who sits is in the immediate danger of getting stuck in some jhana cave sparkling with piti, thinking they hit the mother lode..... again, how do we do know whether or not subtle clinging to a sense of self is arising at all? as for the arising of panna: how many on this list can say -- honestly -- that they do not hope it will arise (some day, some life), that they do not care if it arises, and that there is no trying, in their practice, whether in train stations, reading the Dhamma or sitting on cushions? bruce ps: thanks for the quotes from khun sujin. discovering her writing is why i joined this list in the first place. she is so brilliantly clear. unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends up, for me at least, being more confusing than clarifying.... 6516 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- bruce wrote: > > > > This "deep-rooted belief in their existence" can occur even > > while one thinks they are being aware. > > That is why samatha and vipassana are different. One can > develop > > samatha correctly and still have self-view as much as ever. > > bruce: of course. but is self-view a danger only to those > who develop > samatha correctly? i would think it is just as great a danger > to those who > think they are developing vipassana correctly, but aren't.... > > so how can we know if insight is being cultivated correctly? Vipassana cannot be developed at all unless there is sufficient understanding of anatta at the intellectual level. My point was that samatha is not dependent on understanding anatta. > > > > > > Robert:As I have written before, Bruce, much/most of the > time it > > is some subtle deviation or clinging or idea of control. > > One of things we have discussed in the past is how clinging > in > > subtle forms should be known in the present moment too. it > can > > be seen and thus it becomes clearer when it arises. > > I think without studying the teachings, meeting with Acharn > > sujin, I would be convinced that I had awareness much more > than > > than I do (and this is still probably an over-estimation). I > > would be that much more deluded. > > bruce: i know you've said that before, and i'm pretty certain > that's all > that arises in me too, if even that....i guess what i was > trying to say was > that i don't think it's more likely that one will have > clinging or an idea > of control while sitting than while walking through a train > station....but > a lot of the list members give the impresssion that clinging > is more likely > to arise while sitting, or that awareness of realities at the > six doors is > less likely to arise sitting, but not at other times, as if > everyone who > sits is in the immediate danger of getting stuck in some jhana > cave > sparkling with piti, thinking they hit the mother lode..... > > again, how do we do know whether or not subtle clinging to a > sense of self > is arising at all? > > as for the arising of panna: how many on this list can say -- > honestly -- > that they do not hope it will arise (some day, some life), > that they do not > care if it arises, and that there is no trying, in their > practice, whether > in train stations, reading the Dhamma or sitting on cushions? +--------- if we don't see that hoping for what it is - craving- I think it will be a continual hidden hindrance. I think also some of us can say there has been some panna arising at times- it isn't just hope. > > bruce > > ps: thanks for the quotes from khun sujin. discovering her > writing is why > i joined this list in the first place. she is so brilliantly > clear. > unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends up, > for me at > least, being more confusing than clarifying.... __________ I take your point. I will try to reduce the number of my posts. Thanks robert 6517 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom she is so brilliantly > > clear. > > unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends up, > > for me at > > least, being more confusing than clarifying.... > __________ > I take your point. I will try to reduce the number of my posts. > Thanks > robert robert PLEASE don't even consider reducing the number of your posts!!...yours are among the most edifying on the list! really!! it's probably more that i'm ready for a much-needed break from the discussions (which i'll be getting next week :-) bruce 6518 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Cybele, So nice to hear this, now all you got to do is plan a trip to Bangkok. To be in the presence of the most, if not truly selfless person I know, Acharn Sujin. Nina is now my favourite writer, her writings always point to personal experience unlike most others whose writhings usually cause me to conceptualize and unknowingly get caught in the resultant view. Anumodana, Sukin. cybele chiodi wrote: > >Dear Cybele, > >before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a > >private note to me about how last night you were explaining > >Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. > >best wishes > >robert > > > > Dear Rob > > Yes I am very keen on sharing this experience, was very profound to me. > > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation and > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he had > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain with > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I would > try to explain the passage. > What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate the > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading and > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to feel > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded way. > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying to > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in the > meanwhile. > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping John > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a very > curious and relaxed manner. > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I felt > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can penetrate > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each > other. > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind was > very allert indeed. > Well there it is Rob; looking forward for your comments. :-) > Please be merciless, don't destroy brutally my dear illusions...joking! > > Cybele 6519 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Bruce, This goes straight to my heart - (hadaya vattha) ( the place where mindprocesses based on vanity arise). Thanks. But anyway this is one of the times where I have been thinking about cutting back. I feel the best way to help anyone is by encouraging them to study and learn more from the tipitaka and from Nina and acharn Sujin's books. I look on this list as an opportunity to give that encouragement; the rest is mostly incidental. see you in bangkok soon robert --- bruce wrote: > she is so brilliantly > > > clear. > > > unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends > up, > > > for me at > > > least, being more confusing than clarifying.... > > __________ > > I take your point. I will try to reduce the number of my > posts. > > Thanks > > robert > > robert PLEASE don't even consider reducing the number of your > posts!!...yours are among the most edifying on the list! > really!! it's > probably more that i'm ready for a much-needed break from the > discussions > (which i'll be getting next week :-) > > bruce > > > 6520 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom At 01:51 2001/07/19 -0700, you wrote: > Dear Bruce, > This goes straight to my heart - (hadaya vattha) ( the place > where mindprocesses based on vanity arise).... ha ha! that's great! see you soon.... bruce 6521 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Sukin You are trully gallant. Thanks. Nina is not my favourite writer because she uses a dry language that doesn't appeal to my latin blood but suits me as certainly keeps me safe from getting overexcited - I must necessarily be cool and this detachment helps while studying dhamma. No offense meant Nina, much appreciation for your remarkable dedication. I will enjoy meeting Sujin but you see dear Sukin I am not very confident in 'gurus' of any kind. I respect them and appreciate their teachings but I have met so many famous, eminent teachers monastics and laypeople and I have learned to don't hold to my expectations. It's difficult for others to live up our expectations, we have so many and are so demanding! :-) I know Sujin doesn't present herself as a guru, this is only a remark of our tendence to grasp, to be possessive of teachings and teachers. What I truly enjoy Sukin is seeing how different people from very different backgrounds and mentalities can be drawn together and despite their differences communicate in the language of Dhamma, like me and you. This is lovely and encouraging for me. :-) Love Cybele >Dear Cybele, >So nice to hear this, now all you got to do is plan a trip to Bangkok. >To be in the presence of the most, if not truly selfless person I know, >Acharn Sujin. >Nina is now my favourite writer, her writings always point to personal >experience unlike most others whose writhings usually cause me to >conceptualize and unknowingly get caught in the resultant view. >Anumodana, > >Sukin. > 6522 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dearv 'asterix' >>dear cybele, > >Thanks for posting this, i have read this before with the same >amusement and excitement. >I am a fan of ven.chah's similes which are very much inline with >similes found in tipitaka. >'In my view and understanding' I think that meditation is the super- >tool. >A mind conduicive to formal/informal meditation is a result of past >good kammas as per many stories in tipitaka. So eventhough I observe >that I am not a good meditator and my mind is not easily calmed I >tell myself that I need not to have a grudge against meditation. :o) Really appreciate your input. Because it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about meditation and evrybody else dismisses it what I couldn't believe true. Thank you very much for posting your comments and sharing. >This story is not releted to the topic, but I like to post it anyway. >ven.chah cautions his pupils about the potential attachment to the >pleasant sights and feelings which result from deep concentration. >"Do not give a damn about those bright lights, its not worth, I have >a brighter light in my torch over here..."hahaha :-))) Great, he is hilarious. Love Cybele 6523 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:14pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Cybele, Tori and John,(Alan, Alex) I'm racing against the clock to catch up with posts in the internet cafe in Chichester (nearest town to Dairy Cottage) and it's taking some catching up! Just wonderful posts from everyone (including yours) and a very busy month.....;-))... Thanks for all your kind words and I'm so glad you all enjoyed the get-together as much as I did....it was super to meet you all and I appreciate the long journeys you all had to make.. My mother and the other friends enjoyed meeting you all too. Hope to hear from Alex here in due course and John, delighted to read your intro on dsg and to hear that you and Cybele are reading ADL together!! look f/w to the next reunion.. Sarah 6524 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear Craig Glad to share and feel your appreciation. I was very sincere. LOve Cybele > >Dear Cybele, That was a lovely description of the path and its many ways of >unfoldoing thank you so much for your words of truth. With love >Craig >----- Original Message ----- >From: cybele chiodi >>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:03 AM >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with >Tori >and everybody > > 6525 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Bruce > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > > > >I > > > practice insight > > > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > > > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > > > concentration purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare > > > attention. > > > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > > > > > _______________________________ > > > > Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a > > dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to the > > breath? Bruce what I practice is Vipassana and therefore I don't ignore and dhamma arising. I observe it without elaboration and return to my breath to avoid clinging and mental proliferation. But I have four objects to relate to. Body Feelings Mind Mental objects >======================== >i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes one is >getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a reminder to >return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever realities are >appearing....isn't that right, cybele? >======================== Indeed that's why I say I don't practice Anapanasati. It's a different approach. > > > What is meditation? >======================== >how about: awareness of realities arising in the present (or just slightly >past, as image/memory, according to jon and howard's recent exchange) Good 'definition'. Metta Cybele 6526 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Quotes from Acharn Sujin 1.(was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Rob I printed out the text and will read with attention. Can't read long text directly on the screen, I am old fashioned. My reply will follow. Thanks Love Cybele >From: Robert Kirkpatrick >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Quotes from Acharn Sujin 1.(was: Theravada and >Satipathana - Kom >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:07:24 -0700 (PDT) > >Dear Cybele, >I thought you might like to read this. >In December Acharn sujin visited Cambodia. Some of her talks >were recorded and a new book in Thai has been published. I was >just sent some translated extracts. >In this section of the book the audience consisted of monks, >nuns and laypeople. Toward the end Sujin is asked questions >about satipatthana by the Sangharaja, Cambodia's head monk. >(Khun Butsawong, the man who translates Sujin's talks for >Cambodia radio station, translates between Sujin and the >venerable monk) >The post is split into 2 sections. > 6527 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:27pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 5:44 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Anders, >I don't think I put too much pali in my posts to you! No, not at all! Thankfully. It was all in jest... :-) 6528 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:27pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, >You are back in flood! Yup. --- "Anders Honoré" > >> My question is: How can there ever be any knowledge that >> Nibbana remains when that which cognises Nibbana (conditioned >>elements) has >> dispersed? >I don't think that the Buddha ever said the "knowledge" of nibbana >remains after all the kandhas cease. My speculation is that since Nibbana = >is the anti-thesis of all the conditioned phenomena, that it is >unconditioned, neither rising nor falling, and it becomes obvious at the >point of cognition. For some reason I can't make much sense of what you're saying here, in relation to my question (my fault). Would you mind rephrasing it. >I wouldn't call all the teachings I have from different people as >simple "rephrasements". Some inventions hinder instead of help. Me neither. They explain things from a totally different perspective. Some 'inventions' help some people and hinder others. People are different, so I think it's fair that there are different approaches. One has to find that which suits oneself. >If I were to derived the concept of nibbana on my own, I would be suspicious of it. Since I don't, and this is taught by others, and so far = best supported by the scriptures, then I have no reason to suspect this particular model. I am not convicted of this understanding, although I am= concerned about how people come up with such drastic variations. Yup, that's what I wonder about most too. Ajahn Chah, > for example (whom I would definitely count as an enlightened individual), > once commented that the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [of Zen], Hui-neng was > highly profound and he hoped that one day his own students would be able to > comprehend the subtle wisdom it contains. > Hui-neng didn't even bother saying Mind is Nirvana. He simply renamed > Nirvana to 'Essence of Mind'. How should we trust Ajahn Chah's > interpretation of the Pali Canon, as well as his interpretation the Sutra= of > the Sixth patriarch? Do you trust Ajahn Chah's wisdom over your own? If so, > why? >Ajahn Chah may be an Ajanh to many, but I haven't had the opportunity to >be his student. Because of that, I certainly wouldn't take Ajanh Chah on >his words because I simply don't know what he teaches. Never read any of his teachings? They are really great. You should read them someday. >My point is, if a teaching, by anybody, is not supported by the Buddha >teachings (of course, subjected to one's own understanding), we regard it >not to be the teaching of Buddha. I have observed some of your >statements to fall within the teaching, and some outside of it. One of the= >thing that I consider to be outside (nibbana as a consciousness), I think, = is sufficiently discussed for my purpose. Quite right 6529 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:56pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:44 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > >It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and work to > >overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will thus > >never make much progress. > > Cybele: > Of course it's a free choice but why one should be silly to waste an > opportunity of clear comprehension in the buddhist path? > Who is free from limitations apart Buddha himself? Apparently, many people are silly. > >Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning > >counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? > > Counter-measure Anders, don't you ever think that perhaps all your self > confidence it's a smoke curtain that prevents you of facing some reality > that is a bit difficult to deal with? > Do you really believe you are that much BEYOND? Whoa, did I push some bottons there? You are reading into my message Cybele. I already said that the reason I don't meditate personally on a regular basis is due to plain laziness, and that I know it would do me a world of good. What I'm saying above is in general, not something about me. > Meditation it is not to oppose anything but to develop right understanding; > this is not an expedient means, this is investigation of Dhamma, this is > lifelong lasting. Which in turn is a counter-measure against ignorance (which is even more lasting than a life-time). I am telling you, it's all expedient means. Ask any stream-entrant you know, they'll agree :-) > Dear Anders I never dropped my initial theory about some manic tendences of > many so called spiritual aspirants. > Too much self confidence, you are flying very high; for me Dhamma is very > down to earth. I honestly can't see what triggered this reaction from you in my own writings. It seems to me that you somehow attached to the idea that I had inserted myself on some cloud high above you, and you seem to dislike that. Generally, through the past couple of posts, I've been sensing a growing aversion. What's the deal with you? My deal is that I am self-confident (interpret that negatively or positively as you wish). But that doesn't mean I am not listening. Already, I am sitting here noting my own response to your response. For me, Dhamma is the most down-to-earth thing I know. > Anders: > >No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustarte the wide > >range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was Dogen > >who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are sharp and > >dull." > > Indeed and I have met plenty of dulls Andres, don't be too optimistic. Of course I have met many more dulls than sharp-wits myself as well. But what are you aiming at? > >No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different > >techniques because there are different people with different temperaments > >and capabilities. > > Nobody ever contested it. > Meditation is in the buddhist path and who threads the buddhist path cannot > dismiss it so lightly; about this issue we are trying to clarify. > You are not buddhist and therefore doesn't concern you perhaps. Who said that I am not a Buddhist? > What doesn't change the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment > through meditation. > Why study the texts if you neglect this fundamental principle? As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of expedient means. For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how degrading" Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. You can employ them as you wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not ultimately aimed at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do you much good. > Anders: > >Some people aren't, apparently. > > Oh I would like to be introduced to them. > You are beyond defilements? > Or you believe you are? Nope, again you interpret me into a general context. > Seems that here we are a huge company of fools, I would like to meet all > this wise people that you have the privilege to know being a 18 years old > guy. Sure. Send me a private email and I'll give you their adresses :-) I am not saying I know any arhats, but I certainly know people who are a lot wiser than me. > Cybele: > Anders we don't practice meditation to accomplish anything, we don't have > expectations, we just sit still and observe the arising and passing away of > phenomena, we observe reality in bare attention. > That's all, no fireworks, no mystical visions. > At least not in Vipassana. That's the attitude in meditation you are talking about. I am talking about the actual result. > Anders: > > > >Pardon my asking, but is Vipassana limited to seated meditation? > > No Vipassana is every moment but to observe without so much interference of > conceptual thought we sit still as well. > I vaguely remember that a certain Gautama practiced like that and he figure > out something about the very nature of this troubled life of ours. > It seems they used to call him the one who is awake... Haha, yes. I also recall how some of his students only had to listen to one discourse to become arhats. Or are they not truly enlightened because they did not follow the 'proper' and 'formal' Buddhist path? > They are meditating, the object is their very illness. > Anders it seems that you support the idea that sit meditation and daily > awareness are almost incompatible. How did you come up with that idea? I mentioned in a previous post that seated meditation is to be used as a catalyst to foster daily awareness. > It's all meditation but teh formal one has a relevance in the practice that > we cannot overlook because doesn't 'suits' us. To tell you the truth, I don't give a fuck about formal or informal practises. That's all a load of hogwash which enables one to separate oneself from it, and shelter yourself from reality. What I care about is the personal practise: What are the fruits, what is lacking? What progress is being made? If no progress is being made, find some other expedient means that will help you progress (and seated meditation is usually a universal helper). But I knwo someone who practised formal meditation for decades. He didn't begin to make real progress until he actually quit it. > > > With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation > >of the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily > >meditation in formal terms. > > But you don't practice... Nope. Does that make me a hypocrite? Genuine question really. 6530 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:57pm Subject: re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Anderson Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:36 AM Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) > Dear Anders, > > >Does anyone know if Narada's translation is available anywhere on the net? > >If not, what would you say are your favourite internet translations of the > >Dhammapada? > > The following is a list of 11 Dhammapada translations available online that > was submitted to dhamma-list by Ven. Dhammanando (of Iceland) on May > 29/99. In it you will find the link to Narada's translation which is still > valid. I don't know about the others. Thank you very much. Will go and have a look. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6531 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:11pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:29 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > >Haha, I might treat you to a real U. G. Krishnamurti cure (ever read some > >of > >his stuff? That guy crushes ego like the rest of us munches corn flakes. > >Nothing is spared!). > > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha who > already takes good care. Gee, I hate to break it to you, but the Buddha is actually dead, Cybele :-) > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of others Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in reality. > Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my > present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. > You name it and I have done it, you can bet! > You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. Ever been a moonie? 6532 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:58pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:47 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern any > Nibbana after Parinibbana? Anders, >With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I >say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. >Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. >After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. >After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) I'll buy that one. :-) Now, should I go and chop wood one way or the other... 6533 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:19pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:08 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) > Dear Robert, > Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I am not too familiar > yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a sotapanna is an enlightened > person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant denotes someone who > has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? If I remember, an anagami is a non-returner (will be reborn in the some heavenly abode and there attain Parinibbana), whereas an arahant (Arhat) has eradicated all the fetters and will enter Parinibbana, upon the death of their physical bodies. 6534 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:11 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > Sweetheart > > You returned back! I rejoice, I thought that you have let me down! ;-) Nah, I have just been missing an internet connection. > You got lost in the threads, it was not me to attribute the title to Rob but > somebody else, an ex-monastic David. Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) > I was just paying my respects, you know how I am 'reverent' on this issue. > Read much more attentively our correspondence, don't disappoint me master. > You are my guide and my light! :-))))) > Please don't forget the tip please... Oh my god, I forgot to tip!!! I had a hundred bucks prepared for Lance Armstrong to win the Tour! Damn. 6535 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:01pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:15 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > >>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > > I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. > > > It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. > > > >I first came to Zen because of its lack of a formal approach. Then I > >discovered Theravada and was drawn to the fact that it had a formal > >approach. Then I discovered the drawbacks of formal as well as informal > >approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and Theravada > >for > >its formal approach! You made a reply Cybele, but you seem to have forgotten to write anything in that reply :-) 6536 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:01pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:42 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah > Dear everybody > > I just got it from a friend and I thought of sharing with you as we are or > were discussing on the subject of meditation. > No offense meant, just a viewpoint. > > > > >An intellectual Buddhist once asked the Ajahn Chah an annoying > >intellectual question, quoting all sorts of sutras and so forth. Ajahn Chah > >asked her about her daily practice and she admitted that she had no > >practice, but rather she spent much time analyzing sutras. Chah > >replied, "Madame, you are the farmer who, each morning, goes out to > >the chicken coop and collects the chicken shit instead of the eggs." > > > > Love Haha, you gotta love that guy. Beautiful! 6537 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:07pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Stream Entry - clarification ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:35 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Stream Entry - clarification > Anders, > This is a very profound post. Your questions about whether oneself or others > would need or want to know one's realization in an objective way, raises very > interesting questions. > > It occurs to me that being able to certify one's own level of attainment can only > be a gift for the ego, and make one feel 'proud' to have attained something. I > can't see any way out of this, and it helps me to understand why Zen Master Ikkyu > tore up his certificate of enlightenment when his students at the monastery had > become too attached to his stature. They wept and taped it back together until he > finally burned it. Haha, how 'Zen'. > Why be attached to such things? Subhuti's words in the Diamond Sutra are > remarkably profound if taken in this way. > > What does it do for the practitioner to know if they are a stream-entrant or not? > It merely clouds their awareness with a self-concept. It can only be an overlay. > Now if the 'stream-entrant' describes his actual experience and properties, well, > that might be useful. It is possible to take an inventory without providing a > label that glosses all the specifics. So if you were to say 'I no longer have > attachment to possessions', or 'I have attachment to possessions but I'm no longer > attached or averse to that attachment' this could be useful information to you or > others, because it goes to an actual element of living, letting go, being at peace > in awareness, etc. When you say 'but let's figure out if I'm really enlightened > or not', however, you are then involved in a contest, rather than a description of > where you are really at. > > So I have to agree with you, and to admit that the aspect of me that wants to know > 'Is Anders enlightened?', 'Is Robert [me] enlightened or is he not?', or 'is he > close to realization?', is nothing other than the ego-sense, which is enamoured of > attainments and sufferings. > > What does it do for me to see this? Well, then I can relax in the 'is-ness' that > is present right now, and stop worrying about 'me', which is an indulgence of the > ego-sense in the first place. And worrying about whether Anders is a > stream-entrant, although an exciting diversion, is also another way of the ego [by > projection] asking itself 'Am I enlightened? Is my attainment lesser or greater > than this or that person? How great or miserable am *I*?' Yes, we all want to categorise ourselves and our practise. Is this good or bad, or what? In reality, our practise just *is*. > So what happens when I drop all that? Then I am faced with existence itself, and > where I really am with that existence, and where I really am with this moment. > And then I am forced to ask myself: well, with this moment what am I going to do? > Will I be vigilant, and look into this matter of 'Who am I?' in this moment? Or > will I look for another distraction or contest to get off the path? > > Really, when you look at it, there's only the path [which is not really a path but > just being present/Mindful at any given opportunity] or not the path [going off > into dreamland again]. And it's both simple and frighteningly present right now. > > It also occurs to me that while dropping the quest to define one's attainment, > that negative labelling also serves the same purpose, of bolstering the sense of > oneself as a separate entity. I am constantly saying to myself 'well you have all > this attachment and emotion all the time; nope, you're not there yet, buddy' and > negatively evaluating my 'prospects' for realization. This is an enormous > obstacle to realizing my true nature *now*. Yep. Basically, you're just creating more volition for yourself. But for those who are prone to think 'I have attained this or that' I would certainly say 'think " I am not there yet"'. > One cannot realize in the future when > conditions are right. Now is always the time to look into who one really is. > Enlightenment, as I understand the Buddha, is not really an attainment. It is a > prior condition. This is exciting if realized in truth. It means that I am > already living/expressing pure Buddha-nature/Right View, but unfortunately I am > too deluded at the moment to enjoy this truth. So that immediate delusion can be > looked at *now* and at any time. It doesn't have to wait until I judge myself as > capable or deserving. The path is all about removing things (delusion, ill will, attachment) rather than attaining something. 6538 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:16pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life ----- Original Message ----- From: bruce Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:42 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > and is beyond our control? Pardon me for breaking in, but doesn't your question entail that there is someone to control (or to not have control)? 6539 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Dear Ken, i'm rather behind but have just read your super intro.... --- Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. this is great to hear and thanks for letting us know. > I am posting this message, partly to say thank you for your invaluable > guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. > > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. I think others are beginning to feel the same way...it's a real pleasure for me to read the posts here too.. > > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions > beyond our control. > yes, you've got the 'essence'... > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] > I like this quote very much too and it really shows your excellent appreciation of the Teachings (to my mind!!). Whatever I read, whether suttas, vinaya or abhidhamma, I read it in this light... > Thanks for your inspiring post too, Ken....look f/w to more, but in any case it's great to know there are people like yourself out there lurking and benefiting as we are... BTW, where in Oz are you....hope to meet you one day. Larry, Also great to have you and your important and carefully considered abhidhamma questions here...I'd like to add more, but as I just mentioned to Cybele and co, no time for now...If you are inclined, pls add a little more about yourself (if I've missed it in my rush to catch up, ignore!!) Ray H, thanks for your further comments...glad you're enjoying the group too...you've all joined in one of the busiest months to date;-))Most members have written intros scattered in the archives....but ask anyone to tell you more and they MAY oblige.....One or two others at least are in Calif, inc. Kom AND next Oct (2002) khun Sujin is planning to be there...Kom or I will give more details in due course...I'm hoping to join, but we'll see... l/f to more from you too, Sarah 6540 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:11pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life At 12:16 2001/07/19 +0200, you wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bruce > > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:42 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing > abhidhamma in daily life > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > > and is beyond our control? > > Pardon me for breaking in, but doesn't your question entail that there is > someone to control (or to not have control)? no it doesn't entail that at all; the "our" is conventional.... 6541 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:24pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders informal > > >approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and >Theravada > > >for > > >its formal approach! > >You made a reply Cybele, but you seem to have forgotten to write anything >in >that reply :-) It was just a mistake, pressed wrong button. Cyber confusion. > > > 6542 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom I am looking forward for your reply to my post. Have you already dropped the issue? Love Cybele 6543 From: Herman Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:35pm Subject: Determining consciousness Hi all, I have scoured the net, and have found very little regarding votthapana, determining consciousness. Google gave me 40 hits , with at least a quarter being in languages I did not comprehend. All the references I read amounted to less than an A4 page of information. There are millions of pages on kamma, with myriads of interesting, sometimes amusing, often conflicting views. Likewise kusala and akusala. But very little on votthapana. This citta is not determined by kamma. And this citta determines whether what follows is kusala or akusala. It is the crux of the biscuit, how things are determined. This is where right view and wrong view arise. What determines the result of a votthapana-citta? If anyone can assist in my quest for freedom, and tell me more about determining consciousness, I would be grateful. Herman 6544 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Sweetheart > > > > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha >who already takes good care. > >Gee, I hate to break it to you, but the Buddha is actually dead, Cybele :-) Yes and so is Krishnamurti. And don't reveal this secret to anybody else...but you are going to die too!!!! :-( > > > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of >others > >Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in >reality. I have more than the double of your years therefore ahime' I met a great deal of real 'masters', fake masters, gurus, good teachers, crap ones and so on. > > > Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my > > present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. > > You name it and I have done it, you can bet! > > You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. > >Ever been a moonie? > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) Cybele 6545 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:46pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders > > > You got lost in the threads, it was not me to attribute the title to Rob >but > > somebody else, an ex-monastic David. > >Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) I know I am noticeable, what can I do, it's my magnetic personality. hehehehehehehhe :-) 6546 From: Herman Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex And who was Osho's dentist? (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Sweetheart > > > > > > > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha > >who already takes good care. > > > >Gee, I hate to break it to you, but the Buddha is actually dead, Cybele :-) > > > Yes and so is Krishnamurti. > And don't reveal this secret to anybody else...but you are going to die > too!!!! :-( > > > > > > > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of > >others > > > >Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in > >reality. > > I have more than the double of your years therefore ahime' I met a great > deal of real 'masters', fake masters, gurus, good teachers, crap ones and so > on. > > > > > > Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my > > > present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. > > > You name it and I have done it, you can bet! > > > You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. > > > >Ever been a moonie? > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > Cybele > 6547 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:07pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:48 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > And who was Osho's dentist? > > (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) Herman, are you trying to tell us that YOU KNEW Osho's dentist!?! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6548 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:17pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:46 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > >Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) > > I know I am noticeable, what can I do, it's my magnetic personality. > hehehehehehehhe :-) Indeed ;-) Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? 6549 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:15pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:41 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > Yes and so is Krishnamurti. He is? I thought it was only J. Krishnamurti who had passed away. > And don't reveal this secret to anybody else...but you are going to die > too!!!! :-( Well, considering that I have yet to turn 20, I automatically fall into the category of people who says: "Bah, that's just a nasty rumour, incited to keep the population in line." > > > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of > >others > > > >Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in > >reality. > > I have more than the double of your years therefore ahime' I met a great > deal of real 'masters', fake masters, gurus, good teachers, crap ones and so > on. Yeah, but how was U.G.? > >Ever been a moonie? > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? 6550 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:20pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 4:56 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > > ANDERS: > > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > > cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an > > object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > > discern any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > > there is not > > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only > > way for it to > > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when > > Nibbana itself > > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that > > there is a > > self involved). > > > _________________ > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > Phala-citta. Magga and Phala... I lost the glossary link. Could you translate (or repost the glossary link)? > About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were there > any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was the > Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or > sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara > (formations)[the five aggregates]? > Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, > vinnana? > > At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we think > somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having existed. > This would be annihilationism. > What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has > ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, > mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was > never a being to be annihilated. > robert Well, one has to consider the four views refuted by the Buddha (or was it Sariputra? Or both?): 'And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to declare, "Friend, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment -- being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death"?' 'No, venerable sir.' 'Very good, Anuradha. Both formerly & now, Anuradha, it is only stress that I describe, and the stopping of stress.' (S XXII.86 ) Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6551 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:20pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders >> > >It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and >>work to > > >overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will >thus never make much progress. > > > > Cybele: > > Of course it's a free choice but why one should be silly to waste an > > opportunity of clear comprehension in the buddhist path? > > Who is free from limitations apart Buddha himself? > >Apparently, many people are silly. But you are not, then no justification. ;-) > > > >Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning >counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? Cybele: > > Counter-measure Anders, don't you ever think that perhaps all your self >confidence it's a smoke curtain that prevents you of facing some reality >that is a bit difficult to deal with? > > Do you really believe you are that much BEYOND? > >Whoa, did I push some bottons there? You are reading into my message >Cybele. >I already said that the reason I don't meditate personally on a regular >basis is due to plain laziness, and that I know it would do me a world of >good. What I'm saying above is in general, not something about me. I relate things to personal experiences Anders. The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that ggrrrrr I see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a shield of defensiveness. Your previous posts were cool and reasonable and whether I agree or not I respected. Because they showed openmindness. When the tone is too self assured I am prone to fire up; this happens not only with you but with everyone else Anders. In an ever changing reality we cannot be sure of anything but be open to observe in wholeheartedness and cope. Cybele: > > Meditation it is not to oppose anything but to develop right >understanding; > > this is not an expedient means, this is investigation of Dhamma, this is >lifelong lasting. > >Which in turn is a counter-measure against ignorance (which is even more >lasting than a life-time). I am telling you, it's all expedient means. Ask >any stream-entrant you know, they'll agree :-) Anders I will beat you up virtually naughty guy! Behave yourself! ;-) Don't start stretching your wings to fly high. Cybele: > > Dear Anders I never dropped my initial theory about some manic tendences >of many so called spiritual aspirants. > > Too much self confidence, you are flying very high; for me Dhamma is >very down to earth. Anders: >I honestly can't see what triggered this reaction from you in my own >writings. It seems to me that you somehow attached to the idea that I had >inserted myself on some cloud high above you, and you seem to dislike that. I already told you Anders in a very straightforward manner what triggered my reaction. I am attached to many ideas as you for sure. I am not concerned if yours is a sense of superiority or not. What I dislike is a forceful assertiveness. Your being 'beyond'. It's most evident and I don't need to deny that aversion has arisen and I sent the post all the same because I wish to come to terms with your attitude, therefore I show mine without 'make up'. I don't play roles of equanimous and evolved. I am what I am and I am burdened with aversion, craving and delusion like everybody else. >Generally, through the past couple of posts, I've been sensing a growing >aversion. Replied above. Anders: >What's the deal with you? My deal is that I am self-confident(interpret >that negatively or positively as you wish). But that doesn't mean I am not >listening. Already, I am sitting here noting my own response to your >response. >For me, Dhamma is the most down-to-earth thing I know. Hei Anders now we start communicating, that's good. My point was indeed that you were not listening. I felt you like in a cocoon of 'self confidence'. > > Anders: > > >No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustrate the >wide range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was >Dogen who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are >shar and dull." > > > > Indeed and I have met plenty of dulls Anders, don't be too optimistic. > >Of course I have met many more dulls than sharp-wits myself as well. But >what are you aiming at? Just what I said, no hidden agenda Anders. Anders: > > >No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different >techniques because there are different people with different temperaments >and capabilities. Cybele: > > Nobody ever contested it. > > Meditation is in the buddhist path and who threads the buddhist path >cannot dismiss it so lightly; about this issue we are trying to clarify. > > You are not buddhist and therefore doesn't concern you perhaps. > >Who said that I am not a Buddhist? It seemed to me that you don't want to be labelled and that you prefer 'a wide range' of knowledge to explore and not concentrate on one path. Cybele: > > What doesn't change the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment > > through meditation. > > Why study the texts if you neglect this fundamental principle? Anders: >As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of expedient >means. For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how >degrading" >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. You can employ them as you >wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not ultimately aimed >at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do you much >good. We cannot aim at anything at all Anders because all depend on right conditions arising and our past accumulations but we can practice awareness to penetrate the reality of phenomena. That's what meditation is about as Abhidhamma. A tool to foster mindfulness. There is no 'aim' for me but just practicing and as a natural unfolding this ignorance and attachment will vanish. > > > Anders: > > >Some people aren't, apparently. > > > > Oh I would like to be introduced to them. > > You are beyond defilements? > > Or you believe you are? > >Nope, again you interpret me into a general context. Than we must refine our skills of communication. Cybele: > > Seems that here we are a huge company of fools, I would like to meet all >this wise people that you have the privilege to know being a 18 years old >guy. > >Sure. Send me a private email and I'll give you their adresses :-) Only if they are handsome otherwise I don't care! ;-) >I am not saying I know any arhats, but I certainly know people who are a >lot wiser than me. So do I. To be continued... Cybele 6552 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Herman >> >And who was Osho's dentist? > >(rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) > >Herman That one I missed but I met Osho in Poona during one of my long stays in India, long time ago. Didn't impress me that much. Cybele 6553 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders >> > >Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) > > > > I know I am noticeable, what can I do, it's my magnetic personality. > > hehehehehehehhe :-) > >Indeed ;-) >Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) Invite me for the performance. Cybele 6554 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:45pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all over the place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly scandinavians. ;-) Cybele 6555 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana annihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- : > > > > ANDERS: > > > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > > > cognised by the sixth > > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or > an > > > object > > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > > > discern any > > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > > > there is not > > > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the > only > > > way for it to > > > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is > when > > > Nibbana itself > > > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply > that > > > there is a > > > self involved). > > > > > _________________ > > > > Robert:The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > > Phala-citta. > _______ > Anders:Magga and Phala... I lost the glossary link. Could you > translate (or repost > the glossary link)? ______ magga citta (path consciuosness) , phala citta (fruition consciousness) _________ > > Robert: About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were > there > > any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was > the > > Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or > > sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara > > (formations)[the five aggregates]? > > Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, > > vinnana? > > > > At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we > think > > somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having > existed. > > This would be annihilationism. > > What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it > has > > ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, > > mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there > was > > never a being to be annihilated. > > robert > __________ >Anders: Well, one has to consider the four views refuted by the Buddha > (or was it > Sariputra? Or both?): > 'And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as > a truth or > reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to > declare, > "Friend, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative > man, attainer of > the superlative attainment -- being described, is described > otherwise than > with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, > does not exist > after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither > exists nor does > not exist after death"?' > > 'No, venerable sir.' > > 'Very good, Anuradha. Both formerly & now, Anuradha, it is > only stress that > I describe, and the stopping of stress.' > (S XXII.86 ) > ____________--- If one has the idea of the Tathagata as existing, as a being then one is caught up in view already. If you say "he exists, does not exist... " it is all tangled up with view. In the Samyutta nikaya , khandasamyutta (85(3) Yamaka: venerable Yamaka was caught in view, he had the idea that the Buddha and arahants existed and after death would be annihilated. The Saratthapakasini notes (p1078 of Bhikkhus bodhi's translation of the samyutta nikaya): "If he had thought 'Formations arise and cease; a simple process of formations reaches nonoccurence' this would not be view (ditthigata) but knowledge in accordance with the Teaching. But since he thought "A being is annihilated and destroyed' this becomes a view.""endquote As I said what the teachings say is about the parinibbana of an arahant is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was never a being to be annihilated. robert 6556 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > I am looking forward for your reply to my post. > Have you already dropped the issue? > Hmmm.... I must admit, I was about to drop it, since I thought we at least have discussed the differences (maybe no answers!) that were put forth. Also, Robert (and Bruce, Tadao, etc.) have been responding to the same thread, which I thought expanded on what we were discussing earlier. I can recap my thoughts, and maybe you can recap yours, and then we can see what we still left undiscussed... 1) The definition of being formal. I understand that you said being formal means dedicating a time of the day regularly to do sitting meditation. I still wonder about the origin of such definition as I don't think anybody can be following the steps in the sutta in an hour to observe breath, bones, and corpses, which are also clearly in the sutta. 2) I believe there are adjuncts, beyond what the Buddha taught, added to the practices taught by the different schools of meditations. We discussed doing things slowly, and the observation of silence. With these adjuncts, I would be more careful learning from these schools, as they may add in other areas that are more subtle than the two discussed. I am not saying they are (completely) not transmitting the Buddha's dhamma, but I think we need to be vigilent to differentiate what is Buddha's and not Buddha's teachings (from anybody not excluding Anders, Roberts, etc.). 3) I understand Maha-satipatthana sutta, and in fact many of the Buddha's teachings, to have both samatha (meditation or not) and satipatthana in it. It is easy personally for me to see how contemplating on death, corpses, and bones can be objects of samatha, whereas the concentration on breath is harder to see if it is actually wholesomeness and unwholesomeness that is arising. It is hard for me to see how observing the breath can be purely satipatthana (as you mentioned.) However, it is definitely easy to see how I could be attached to the different feelings that arise while sitting. 4) Rambling thought: I think people are fixated on "what can I do to speed up my insight, enhance my understadings, etc." For example, you see many posts about the different "techniques" to get on the path, and if one of the techniques don't appear to work, don't do it. Buddha's teaches many causes/supports to the insights arising including listening to the teachings, contemplation, satipathana, sila, dana, and tranquil meditations. Do we drop some of these stuffs because they don't appear to aid the insights? Should we also add stuffs outside the teaching that appear to help (or are said to help)? kom 6557 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that ggrrrrr I > see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a shield of > defensiveness. Then that is some negative conditioning you'll just have to overcome, Cybele. Misplaced confidence may be a hindrance, but can you possibly be the judge of such a thing in another? I think not. Best work on your own bhavana. > Your previous posts were cool and reasonable and whether I agree or not I > respected. Because they showed openmindness. > When the tone is too self assured I am prone to fire up; this happens not > only with you but with everyone else Anders. Perhaps this is exactly the sort of provocation you need then. > Anders: > >As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of expedient > >means. > For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how > >degrading" > >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means (upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient means, never more than a raft. You can employ them as you > >wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not ultimately aimed > >at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do you much > >good. > > We cannot aim at anything at all Anders because all depend on right > conditions arising and our past accumulations but we can practice awareness > to penetrate the reality of phenomena. Sorry Cybele, but we can and MUST aim, and aim high--as high as possible. Aspiration is the foundation of the path. Without the highest aspiration possible we don't stand a snowballs's chance in one of the hot hells of getting out of this mess. Penetrating the charateristics of dhammas takes enormous effort and perserverance, and it is the aspiration to reach supreme enlightenment that is the fodder for the sort of pratice necessary to awaken. That means we need to practice at least as much as a musician practicing for a Carnegie Hall recital. Serious, day-in, day out, consistent, every- waking-second-focused-on-the-aim practice. If we don't have the aspiration to replicate the Buddha's awakening, then we'll never engage the practices necessary to do so, or we'll become discouraged at the first obstacle that comes our way and give up. We have to not only aim high, but also to have the confidence we can achieve that aim as well. > There is no 'aim' for me but just practicing and as a natural unfolding this > ignorance and attachment will vanish. You have an awful lot of the very sort of confidence you decry in suggesting your practice will bring about this result. But will it? What did the Buddha do? Did he just kinda hang out, practice a little here and there, hoping that things would sorta "natuarlly" work out, y'know, and if not, oh well? Not the Buddha whose teachings I am familiar with. He abandoned a life of total luxury to take up the homeless life, engaged in brutal ascetic practices for several years, and sat under the Bo tree with the SOLE AIM of not stirring from his spot until he'd attained supreme enlightenment, Buddhahood. Can you or I hope to ever attain this without at least equivalent effort? 6558 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- > > Dear Robert, > Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I > am not too familiar > yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a > sotapanna is an enlightened > person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant > denotes someone who > has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? > > I think it is interesting that the sotapanna could still have > attachment, although > a positive, sort of pure attachment, in the form of love for > her husband, and that > the arahant would have transcended even this positive relation > to others, and be, > I suppose, 'completely free' of either positive or negative > attachments or > aversions. > > If you could say a bit more about the conditions of these > different attainments, > it would be of great interest to me. If this is too redundant > for the group, I > would be happy to be referred to an appropriate passage on the > web. > > Nice again to be in your company! > > ____________________ Dear Robert E. Thanks for the questions. Just to reiterate, Nibbana is not consciousness, it is the object of mind. When vipassana wisdom is highly developed, the mind of the ordinary person changes to the mind of the Noble One. This change is called path moment. It is followed immediately by path fruition. Both have nibbana as their object. The four paths to enlightenment are stream-winner, once returner, non-returner, and fully-enlightened or Perfect One (the Arahant). There are ten fetters keeping us from full enlightenment: 1) Wrong view of self 2) Doubt about the Buddha's teaching 3) Clinging to rules and rituals 4) Sensual desire 5) Hatred 6) Desire for fine material existence 7) Desire for immaterial existence (Fine material existence is an existence where there is still body. Immaterial existence is where there is only nama. So both of these fetters (6 and 7) refer to craving for types of heavenly existence.) 8) Pride 9) Restlessness 10) Ignorance The First Path, the stream-winner path-moment erases the first three fetters; for the Second Path, the once-returner path-moment weakens the next two fetters; for the Third Path, the non-returner path-moment erases the two weakened fetters; and for the Fourth Path, the arahatta path moment erases the five remaining fetters. The first path also eradicates all stinginess; the sotapanna is naturally generous. The sotapanna's attachment to husband of wife can be just as impure as ours. What they don't have anymore is attachment to selfview, they cannot see any dhamma as self . The wisdom developed to see dhammas as they are is gradual, over lifetimes; the one who attains to nibbana will have no doubt about this matter according to the teaching. It is deep wisdom that penetrates to nibbana. This book mark will take you to a list of websites highly recommended by the moderators of dhammastudygroup http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links best wishes robert 6559 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:02pm Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about > meditation and evrybody else dismisses it Count me among the meditation-believers, Cybele! Whether it's informal (sati) or seated, formal meditation (sati and samaadhi), it's the only thing that really makes a difference for me. I see all this dhamma study as merely an adjunct and a support for real practice. There! Now I'll get myself thrown into the heretic's club ;-) Derek. 6560 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:16pm Subject: Re: What the Buddha taught --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > I think we need to be vigilent to differentiate what is Buddha's and not > Buddha's teachings (from anybody not excluding Anders, Roberts, etc.). Agreed! And from my reading of the sutta-s, what the Buddha taught is not the same thing as "vipassanaa" as taught nowadays. The Buddha's own teachers practiced mindfulness (sati) and concentration (samaadhi). Where the Buddha went beyond his teachers is that he directed his purified and concentrated mind to knowledge of three things -- (i) his past lives, (ii) the passing away and reappearance of beings, and (iii) the destruction of the aasava-s. That's very different from what the modern "vipassanaa" movement advocates. I'm not saying that either is right or wrong; just observing the difference. Derek. 6561 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Howard --- Howard wrote: > As I have read, a bhavanga citta is likened to a spider sitting in the > center > of his web (latent discernment waiting to "pounce"), waiting for a > stimulus > (phassa) to scurry after prey (to discern the next object and become > active > discernment instead of latent discernment). Interesting analogy. I though it might also be useful to give the description of bhavanga citta from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation and commentary summary prepared by Bhikkhu Bodhi (Ch III, Guide to ##8)-- "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment during life whenever there is no active cognitive process taking place. … When an object impinges on a sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing the object. Immediately after the cognitive process is completed, again the bhavanga supervenes and continues until the next cognitive process arises. Arising and perishing at every moment during this passive phase of consciousness, the bhavanga flows on like a stream, without remaining static for two consecutive moments." In the same passage it discusses the meaning and function of bhavanga-- " The word bhavanga means factor (anga) of existence (bhava), that is, the indispensable condition of existence. Bhavanga is the function of consciousness by which the continuity of the individual is preserved through the duration of any single existence, from conception to death." Jon 6562 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Bruce --- bruce wrote: > hi cybelle > > this is just great to hear, all your study sounds as though it is paying > off, although i would also add to jon's note about paccaya that perhaps > your years of sitting meditation played a part too, especially if while > sitting you were able to accurately notice realities as they > appeared....that is what you do (or rather what you intend to do) when > you > practice "formally", am i right cybelle? However, Bruce, it seems that Cybele's experience this time occurred without any intention to notice realities. Is it possible that this could give rise to a citta of a different quality than at times when we are trying to notice realities, hence with an idea of self? The paying attention to realities without there being any intention to do so is, I would say, conditioned by rather special factors. -- of course whether noticing > arises or not doesn't depend on the intention for it to > arise....although i > must admit i find that dedicating time every day to cultivation works > much > better for me than only waiting to notice throughout the day, with the > result that the more regularly i sit, the more i seem to remember to > note > during non-sitting times But if the intention to notice at times of formal practice is not the correct way, then the 'noticing' occurring during the day may also not be the correct way, since it would be tainted by the ideas held about the formal practice. I mention this simply to try and highlight the subtle difference that I believe is the key to the understanding of the Buddha's teaching on the development of awareness and understanding, and to which your comments below are directed. > hi jon and nina > > apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and > considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no > one > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the > Dhamma > simply another way of saying "noting realities as they appear at the six > doors"? As I understand it, Bruce, consideration of what one has read or heard, or is hearing or reading or talking about at the time, and reflection on how it may relate to the experience of the present moment, can be useful. That is why it can be particularly helpful to read or talk about the realities that are being experienced at the present moment (ie. right now). There may some moments of kusala interspersed among the many moments of akusala. Is that not enough, or do you want more!?! > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps > a > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling > self > wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... It's true that the intention to listen and the actual moment of hearing are separate moments and indeed different types of citta. That's not the way is seems to us, of course -- perhaps we should no pretend otherwise! Jon 6563 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Jon, --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott > "Bhavanga- cittas arise and pass away every moment > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > the object. Did he go on to define what active cognitve process is? kom 6564 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:33pm Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Jon, --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott <114059178213193154090218164036129208> wrote: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > the object. Sorry to repeat the question. Did he go on to define what active cognitiv= e process is? Did he define an unactive cognitive process? Is bhavanga an unactive cognitive process? kom 6565 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Kom > > "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment > > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > > the object. > > Sorry to repeat the question. Did he go on to define what active > cognitiv= > e > process is? Did he define an unactive cognitive process? Is bhavanga > an > unactive cognitive process? He is presumably using 'active cognative process' as a translation of a particular pali term. I had taken it to mean 'vitthi-citta', but I'm not sure what accounts for the 'active'. Bhavanga cittas are cittas that are not vitthi cittas (ie. cittas that arise in a process). I'll let you know if i find out. Jon 6566 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life thanks for this reply jon -- yes, this does help, especially your wrap-it-up description of my "condsideration" albatross...i hope to ask khun sujin for further clarification if i get the chance.... *intending* to have awareness is not, er, intentional, at least in my daily sitting and noticing throughout the day...it's probably there but in that pesky realm everyone refers to as "subtle"..."intention" is the seed for a whole new series of questions...if it's been discussed before, though, perhaps you or someone else could give me message #s or dates or subject titles to search? bruce At 22:29 2001/07/19 +0800, you wrote: > Bruce > > --- bruce wrote: > hi > cybelle > > > > this is just great to hear, all your study sounds as > though it is paying > > off, although i would also add to jon's note about > paccaya that perhaps > > your years of sitting meditation played a part too, > especially if while > > sitting you were able to accurately notice realities > as they > > appeared....that is what you do (or rather what you > intend to do) when > > you > > practice "formally", am i right cybelle? > > However, Bruce, it seems that Cybele's experience this > time occurred without any intention to notice > realities. Is it possible that this could give rise > to a citta of a different quality than at times when > we are trying to notice realities, hence with an idea > of self? > > The paying attention to realities without there being > any intention to do so is, I would say, conditioned by > rather special factors. > > -- of course whether noticing > > arises or not doesn't depend on the intention for it > to > > arise....although i > > must admit i find that dedicating time every day to > cultivation works > > much > > better for me than only waiting to notice throughout > the day, with the > > result that the more regularly i sit, the more i > seem to remember to > > note > > during non-sitting times > > But if the intention to notice at times of formal > practice is not the correct way, then the 'noticing' > occurring during the day may also not be the correct > way, since it would be tainted by the ideas held about > the formal practice. > > I mention this simply to try and highlight the subtle > difference that I believe is the key to the > understanding of the Buddha's teaching on the > development of awareness and understanding, and to > which your comments below are directed. > > > hi jon and nina > > > > apologies for not following up on your responses to > my "listening to and > > considering" query a long way back there (before you > left, actually > > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: > i was incredibly > > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what > "considering" the Dhamma > > entails....i understand (only conceptually of > course) that there is no > > one > > doing the considering....does this mean that the > considering just arises > > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha > dhamma? or is it just > > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is > considering the > > Dhamma > > simply another way of saying "noting realities as > they appear at the six > > doors"? > > As I understand it, Bruce, consideration of what one > has read or heard, or is hearing or reading or talking > about at the time, and reflection on how it may relate > to the experience of the present moment, can be > useful. That is why it can be particularly helpful to > read or talk about the realities that are being > experienced at the present moment (ie. right now). > There may some moments of kusala interspersed among > the many moments of akusala. Is that not enough, or > do you want more!?! > > > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" > something we can do > > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and > control....perhaps > > a > > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as > opposed to listening, > > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here > in japan who liked to > > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he > would also say the same > > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the > idea of a controlling > > self > > wasn't something that required prepositions for > those verbs, ie looking > > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we > can neither decide to > > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... > > It's true that the intention to listen and the actual > moment of hearing are separate moments and indeed > different types of citta. That's not the way is seems > to us, of course -- perhaps we should no pretend > otherwise! > > Jon 6567 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life --- bruce wrote: > thanks for this reply jon -- yes, this does help, especially your > wrap-it-up description of my "condsideration" albatross...i hope to ask > khun sujin for further clarification if i get the chance.... > > *intending* to have awareness is not, er, intentional, at least in my > daily > sitting and noticing throughout the day...it's probably there but in > that > pesky realm everyone refers to as "subtle"... Exactly so, Bruce. Subtle expectation, desire, intention, call it what you will. If one perceives a more-or-less direct relationship between the 'practice' and the (possible) arising of awareness/understanding, how could there not be that expectation? After all, that is the rationale for doing the practice -- to see things more clearly. Jon 6568 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, I'd like to thank the contributors to the equanimity thread, especially Kom--I had no idea how many different connotations 'upekkha' has in the texts and always just sort of took them all in in a sort of vague, general sense (as I usually do). Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I think we have to be careful here. The so-called > practice of developing equanimity may in fact not be > kusala of any kind at all. If it stems from a > desire to have less lobha and dosa (whether > because of the belief that lobha and dosa are > antithetical to the development of understanding or > for any other reason), it is bound to be akusala. > It is just an aspect of the desire for more > kusala/understanding or less akusala. I am not > saying this is so in your case, but I mention it > because one often finds references which seem to > suggest that this is part of the way of practice > taught by the Buddha. I did want to add one more citation: "'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of equanimity is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of equanimity is to be pursued. And this sort of equanimity may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. 'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said." Digha Nikaya 21 Sakka-pańha Sutta Sakka's Questions http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html mike 6569 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:37pm Subject: A danger to the sasana Dear group, Sometimes one hears of people saying that study of the Abhidhamma is a waste of time: one is just caught up in intellectual conceptualising and papanca. That may be true for some people but I would beware of making a generalisation. Here is a sutta worth considering. (the only problem being that those who do not see any value in study probably will not read it because it must be just intellectual waffle) So for the converted (most of this list I guess): Samyutta Nikaya IX (20)7 p708 of Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation The Peg --------------------------------------------- Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1] "In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works -- the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples -- are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering. "In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- will come about. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves." The commentary notes that this means deep teachings such as those dealing with emptiness(sunnatapatisamyutta), explaining mere phenomena devoid of a being (sattasunnata-dhammamattam eva pakasaka) [like the whole of the Abhidhamma? -robert] 6570 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Thanks, Mike. robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > > I did want to add one more citation: > > "'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be > pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in > 6571 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom I will be very honest with you and I don't mean hostilityu, don't misread me. My tones are intenses because is my temperament. Yet I am not opposing or averting your understanding in this issue. Sometimes we are very attuned even if with different opinions but some others you are listening to your thoughts about the issue but to mine indeed. I have voiced out very PRECISE questions that have been as usual on this subject cleverly avoided. All the point can simply be reduced to one - Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation, sitting crosslegged and contemplating the four foundations of mindfulness. This we are taught - whether in Theravada, or Tibetian, or Zen, or Pure land Schools, even the Nichiren use meditation as a tool in the practice. Now how do you assume that you can dismiss meditation and realize whatever is only studying the texts and conceptual thought. This is my issue and it seems to me that I am pretty straightforward to ask it clearly. For a moment it seemed to me that you were interested in understand the point of meditation in my practice but now you are focussing only in dismantle this possiblity and reafirm your convictions. You are not listening, you are not sharing woth me, you are listening to yourself only. I paid attention to your viewpoint, I am studying Abhidhamma and considering the teachings, I am including such directions in my practice of daily awareness - I did not hide myself in any cocoon of self confidence, I am ready to discuss and ponder another approach. But I need an answer that is enough substantial. Don't use Robert to illutrate anything Kom; Robert practiced so much meditation in his life previously to Khum Sujin that I am not surprised on how penetrative is his view, even not considering his past accumulations. That's the very fact that nobody considers. Let's examine: >1) The definition of being formal. I understand that you said being formal >means dedicating a time of the day regularly to do sitting meditation. I >still wonder about the origin of such definition as I don't think anybody >can be following the steps in the sutta in an hour to observe breath, >bones, and corpses, which are also clearly in the sutta. I never declared that you should dedicate one hour or 5 for that matter Kom. We get all confused between daily practice and retreats. A schedule is an schedul, no big deal - you dedicate the time and energy it suits you. And obviuosly you cannot find in a sutra an indication of how much time one should devote to the practice - it's such a subjective point. > >2) I believe there are adjuncts, beyond what the Buddha taught, added to he >practices taught by the different schools of meditations. Don't produce 'smoke curtains Kom'- MEDITATION IS in the original teachings. This we are discussing. Let's keep focussed. Whatever else is frame, the big picture is that. Buddha reached deliverance through meditation and this he taught the mankind. Otherwise as you are very keen on texts - you show me a text were this is disclaimed. I send this by now. Love Cybele 6572 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] on the practice of silence (was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Cybele, >>The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) >>as follows: >> >>"Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, >>should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of >>wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. >>I.B.Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to >>the Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe >>silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the >>Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). > > >This is most curious as in the Theravada tradition during retreats the >observance of the Noble Silence is compulsory and highlighted as a >indispensable tool for the practice (I mean during retreats only). >Whether the teachers are monastics or laymen; in eastern as in western >countries. > >Could you share with us a resume of this several pages leading up to the >disclosure of the motivation for this rule? Here's a condensed version of quotes from pp. 208-11, The Book of the Discipline, Part IV. (trs. I.B. Horner): [While the Lord was staying near Savatthi,] "several monks, friends, and associates, entered on the rains in a certain residence in the Kosala country. Then it occurred to these monks: 'Now by what means can we, all together, on friendly terms and harmonious, spend a comfortable rainy season and not go short of almsfood?' " "Then it occurred to these monks: 'If we should neither address one another nor converse, but whosover should return first from the village . . . [a long passage on how the duties are to be performed] . . . by signalling with his hands, having invited a companion (to help him) by a movement of his hand; but he should not for such a reason break into speech . . . Then the monks neither addressed one another nor conversed . . . [same passage repeated verbatim with tense changes to show that all this had taken place for the duration of the retreat] . . . did not break into speech." [At the end of the three months rains retreat these monks then went to see the Lord near Savatthi.] "Then the Lord spoke thus to these monks, I hope that you kept going, I hope that, all together, on friendly terms and harmonious, you spent a comfortable rainy season and did not go short of almsfood?' [The monks replied that things had gone well for them.] "Now, Truthfinders (sometimes) ask knowing, and knowing (sometimes) do not ask . . . In two ways, Lords question monks, either: . . . or 'Shall we lay down a training rule for disciples?' Then the Lord spoke thus to these monks: 'But in what way, monks, did you, all together, on friendly terms . . . not go short of almsfood?' 'In that connection, did we, Lord, several friends and associates enter on the rains . . . [all what took place is repeated from the beginning] . . . but not for such a reason did he break into speech. Thus did we, Lord, . . . not go short of almsfood.' "Then the Lord addressed the monks, saying: 'Indeed, monks, these foolish men having spent an uncomfortable time pretend to have spent an equally comfortable time. Indeed, monks, these foolish men having spent communion like beasts, pretend to have spent an equally comfortable time. Indeed . . . like sheep, pretend to have spent an equally comfortable time . . . How, monks, can these these foolish men observe an observance of members of (other) sects: the practice of silence?' " [Here's an interesting footnote on the practice of silence, p. 211: "custom of being dumb (muuga), according to VA. 1073, for three months. Cf. the monks who sat like dumb swine, (muugasuukaraaa), when they might have been speaking dhamma, above p.131."] Best wishes, Jim 6573 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:58pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 3:43 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how > > >degrading" > > >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. > > Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a > fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there > is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. > Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism > and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot > be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means > (upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient > means, never more than a raft. Yes, a raft it is. 6574 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:59pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:45 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? > > Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all over the > place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly scandinavians. > ;-) NOOO! Non e possible! 6575 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:41 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > >Indeed ;-) > >Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > Invite me for the performance. Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow isn't due to come for another five months. :-) 6576 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Erik >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that >ggrrrrr I see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a >shield of defensiveness. > >Then that is some negative conditioning you'll just have to overcome, >Cybele. Misplaced confidence may be a hindrance, but can you possibly >be the judge of such a thing in another? I think not. Best work on >your own bhavana. Dear Erik very curious that YOU are the one who make this remark considering how you get carried away by your own moods and beliefs quite often and I have an apology letter of yours to prove it. It's always so simple for us point the finger but indeed who doesn't has such a tendence? I don't see this big deal and neither Anders because he could discuss with me and speak his mind. I am not trying to repress anybody. I am working on my bhavana and Anders can perfectly deal with me without your coming for rescue. Do you think that your approach with me is less harsh? It is very unkind what you said Erik. Your tone is very much incisive. I am not judging him, I am discussing without playing roles in all earnest. Sharing and clarifying is already bhavana for me if you don't mind. He doesn't need your virile friendship to support him; he is very clever and quite stable. No need to come out and defend your fellow danish. Erik it seems that you cannot cope with my intensity but you are very intense as well. And I accept you. > > > Your previous posts were cool and reasonable and whether I agree or >not I respected. Because they showed openmindness. > > When the tone is too self assured I am prone to fire up; this >happens not only with you but with everyone else Anders. > >Perhaps this is exactly the sort of provocation you need then. Indeed, that's what I was explaning Erik. I am honest, I don't need to reinvent myself in the virtual world. You are going to meet me in Bkk if you care to, obviously and you will verify that I am not different in real life than I am here. What I declare I am - there is very little distinctions or incongruences. > > Anders: > > >As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of >expedientmeans. > > For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how > > >degrading" > > >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. > >Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a >fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there >is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. >Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism >and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot >be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means >(upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient >means, never more than a raft. You are being dogmatic affirming this. If I have another approach, mine is necessarily the one to be discarded? And meditation that was the REAL ISSUE is not about developing SKILLS of awareness? > > You can employ them as you > > >wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not >ultimately aimed > > >at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do >you much > > >good. > > > > We cannot aim at anything at all Anders because all depend on right > > conditions arising and our past accumulations but we can practice >awareness to penetrate the reality of phenomena. > >Sorry Cybele, but we can and MUST aim, and aim high--as high as >possible. Aspiration is the foundation of the path. Without the >highest aspiration possible we don't stand a snowballs's chance in >one of the hot hells of getting out of this mess. Erik, you misread me completely. It's not about aspirations. The point on not 'aiming' is don't becoming attached to the goal, but just walk the path. Has nothing to do with aspiration. And is so curious because I would say that by now my 'faith' and love for Dhamma are so evident and you make such frivolous observations in my case. And I am sorry Erik but in my school the goal is the path. >Penetrating the >charateristics of dhammas takes enormous effort and perserverance, >and it is the aspiration to reach supreme enlightenment that is the >fodder for the sort of pratice necessary to awaken. That means we >need to practice at least as much as a musician practicing for a >Carnegie Hall recital. Serious, day-in, day out, consistent, every- >waking-second-focused-on-the-aim practice. If we don't have the >aspiration to replicate the Buddha's awakening, then we'll never >engage the practices necessary to do so, or we'll become discouraged >at the first obstacle that comes our way and give up. We have to not >only aim high, but also to have the confidence we can achieve that >aim as well. Why have you chosen me to make such statements Erik. I am a very serious practitioner. Don't treat me as a non commited person, this is very much unfair and totally out of place. > > There is no 'aim' for me but just practicing and as a natural >unfolding this ignorance and attachment will vanish. > >You have an awful lot of the very sort of confidence you decry in >suggesting your practice will bring about this result. But will it? Sweetheart I PRACTICE, that's all my point: I don't practice craving for this or that I simply practice in the best way I can. And this is not self confidence, this is confidence IN the practice. >What did the Buddha do? Did he just kinda hang out, practice a little >here and there, hoping that things would sorta "natuarlly" work out, >y'know, and if not, oh well? Not the Buddha whose teachings I am >familiar with. He abandoned a life of total luxury to take up the >homeless life, engaged in brutal ascetic practices for several years, >and sat under the Bo tree with the SOLE AIM of not stirring from his >spot until he'd attained supreme enlightenment, Buddhahood. Can you >or I hope to ever attain this without at least equivalent effort? ERIK by now I am shouting my brains out. What are you talking about? Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN TO RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. I have set all my life to study and practice Dhamma, how can you be so insensitive declaring this? I am very much keen in practicing, you MISREAD ME, you got all wrong Erik. Read all the thread and afterwards, we can discuss because you are indeed JUDGING ME and spitting out sentences. You are not my teacher, my teacher is the path. You are preaching me and you contest my tone with Anders. We are really mirrors for each other. Metta Love and respect Cybele 6577 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Derek > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about > > meditation and evrybody else dismisses it > >Count me among the meditation-believers, Cybele! Whether it's >informal (sati) or seated, formal meditation (sati and samaadhi), >it's the only thing that really makes a difference for me. I see all >this dhamma study as merely an adjunct and a support for real >practice. > >There! Now I'll get myself thrown into the heretic's club ;-) > >Derek. > Sweetheart, I love you!!!!! One more in the heretic club, we must organize meetings and socialize among outsiders of the Abhidhamma. ;-) Big kiss and a hug as well Love Cybele 6578 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:43am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN TO > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche once said: "He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not become a monster himself." 6579 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:43am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders >> > >Indeed ;-) > > >Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? > > > > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. > > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > > Invite me for the performance. > >Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow isn't due >to come for another five months. :-) Really? In England, there is already an awful climate, windy, rainy, cold and depressive inducing. I think that I should come to visist you! ;-) You can dance even in the carpet, it's ok. Cybele 6580 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Anders >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN >TO > > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. > >Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that >Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche >once said: >"He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not >become >a monster himself." We are becoming pathetic by now. I am not hunting anybody. I found that Erik interferred on a thread without actually following it because indeed he assumed lots of things about my practice that indeed were very much in harmony with his approach. What shows me that he haven't read what I wrote previously. I felt him very much coming in 'rescue' and I think that you are quite capable of handling it alone. Cybele 6581 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation, sitting > crosslegged and > contemplating the four foundations of mindfulness. > This we are taught - whether in Theravada, or Tibetian, or > Zen, or Pure land > Schools, even the Nichiren use meditation as a tool in the > practice...... >Whatever else is frame, the big picture is that. > Buddha reached deliverance through meditation and this he > taught the > mankind. > Otherwise as you are very keen on texts - you show me a text > were this is > disclaimed. _________________ Dear Cybele, You seem to indicating meditation as being based on sitting crosslegged. In fact for anapanasati - which is the way all Buddhas are enlightened - that posture is necessary. However, there were others - such as sariputta - who attained sotapanna while listening to a discourse (standing). The texts say that anapanasati(mindfulness of breathing ) is not suited for all. If it were the only way to develop wisdom then we would certainly all have to be now sitting crosslegged (if we wanted to develop any understanding). I find it very heartening to hear that in any position understanding can be developed. Otherwise when in shinjuku station I would be thinking 'god, if only I was in a quiet place where I could sit and develop understanding'; not realising that dhammas are arising at each moment - ready to be insighted. Or when talking with or helping my children perhaps I would have a slight non-presentness - wishing I could be by myself where the 'real work' could be done. Not seeing that speaking can be known directly as it really is - simply a type of rupa conditioned by different cittas. The Digha Nikaya DN 33 explains the different ways that wisdom is fulfilled and vimutti (liberation) attained(this is a summary, a little imprecise. I don't have the actual translation in front of me) 1. when a Master or a reverend fellow disciple teaches the Dhamma to a brother.[he listens]...... 2. while he himself teaching others the Dhamma in detail . . . 3. when he is reciting the doctrines of the Dhamma in detail . . . 4. when he applies his thought to the Dhamma . . . 5. when he has well grasped some given clue (nimitta) to concentration, has well applied his understanding, has well thought it out, has well penetrated it by intuition (pa~n~naa) . . . No mention of sitting crosslegged in these five ways- although certainly the last type encompasses anapanasati (and hence also sitting crosslegged). ____________ Cybele:Now how do you assume that you can dismiss meditation and realize whatever is only studying the texts and conceptual thought. __________ Robert:When I first learned about Buddhism I was overawed by the themes expounded. The void, the deathless, freedom, nirodha, non-graping and so on. I would hear a talk and it all seemed right. I could certainly see that these things must be true. I listened to h famous teachers who put things so beautifully; it was almost poetry. They made the path seem simple and direct.But somehow I found it didn’t quite transform me as I had expected. After a few years I decided to deleve into the pali texts. I was warned off this by some. I had this urge to learn about Abhidhamma – a monk told me that this was "only theory"; “you should just practice”, he said. Anyway I studied and gradually things began to make more sense. I found details in the Abhidhamma and commentaries that I could not find anywhere else. For instance here is a passage about verbal intimation – “the mode and the alteration in the consciousness-originated earth element that causes that occurrence of speech utterance which mode and alteration are a condition for the knocking together of clung to matter…..” This is not just theory – it happens everytime we talk to others. Speech is merely these elements, not us. The Buddha taught them so that there can be awareness of them. So that they are not taken for self. You see I had heard from other teachers that everything is anatta but I found while I believed this to be true, nonetheless when I spoke I thought it was “me” speaking. Contemplating passages like this helped to bring attention to every little moment in life and break it down into its component parts. Before I studied I had heard many times that avijja(ignorance) keeps the wheel spinning. But ignorance of exactly what? They said ignorance of the four noble truths but without the details I couldn't grasp the meaning. The commentary to the udana says that ignorance darts among what is not real (people, beings) and does not dart among what is real (paramattha dhammas, the five aggregates). This helped me a lot when I read it years ago. It made sense . I thought ""yes we are always thinking of “us” and “them” of ‘he” and “she” but we don’t consider that this is merely concept. What then is real? And how to understand paramattha dhammas."" In this way the study of paramattha dhammas, realities, became uppermost and has helped me to gradually see the difference between concept and reality (a little). So on this list I write what has helped me in the hope that it will help others. I know I am one of the slow ones who needs lots of help, lots of details before anything makes sense. h robert 6582 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear cybele, can i have the best of 'both' worlds.?? I am fond of both abhidhamma and 'heresy', thats what I understood as what is encouraged in tipitaka. btw Name the place, :o) rgds ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:26 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > > Dear Derek > > > > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about > > > meditation and evrybody else dismisses it > > > >Count me among the meditation-believers, Cybele! Whether it's > >informal (sati) or seated, formal meditation (sati and samaadhi), > >it's the only thing that really makes a difference for me. I see all > >this dhamma study as merely an adjunct and a support for real > >practice. > > > >There! Now I'll get myself thrown into the heretic's club ;-) > > > >Derek. > > > > Sweetheart, I love you!!!!! > One more in the heretic club, we must organize meetings and socialize among > outsiders of the Abhidhamma. ;-) > > Big kiss and a hug as well > > Love > > Cybele 6583 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] on the practice of silence (was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) dear Jim Thank you very much for your kindness in researching about this issue. Very interesting. Love Cybele 6584 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: anumodana. op 18-07-2001 06:08 schreef ppp op tadao: > I've neglected the study of Dhamma for a long long time, but > there are many (Pali) phrases which I would never forget, and, which > remind me how lucky I am for having encountered the Buddhas' teaching > in this life. Due simply to various "conditions" (including this > Internet link as one of them, I am here again, resuming my study > of Dhamma. > Dear Tadao, thank you for your kind letter. I appreciate very much all your posts, and I also appreciate it that you will help Robert's students with the Japanese translation of Buddhism in Daily Life. How nice to have contact with you again in this way. I still remember that you gave me for my birthday, when we were in Sri Lanka, a Pali text of alobha, adosa and amoha, beautifully written out by you. We both owe a lot to the late Alan Driver, our friend and great teacher. Please, when there is an occasion, would you share with us the phrases you never forget? We can benefit from this. My warmest regards to Susie, I am always so happy to hear from her. Sarah brought us all together again with great metta, she is so clever achieving this. I admire her for the way she always welcomes the newcomers with such kindness. Your letter was the condition for me to reread Alan Driver"s "Be here now", which is, as most people here know, on Robert's Web Abhidhamma Vipassana. His message is still loud and clear. He had such a direct way of explaining difficult matters, his way was down to earth. I came across several passages that will give an answer to questions asked in this forum, I shall quote him. Kindest regards, Nina. 6585 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]bhavangacitta op 17-07-2001 06:02 schreef Robert Kirkpatrick op Robert: > Dear Howard, > A very good question. 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 other wise 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. Dear friends, I am very glad Robert wrote about the tape on bhavanga. I would like to add a few things. I was present there and I remarked to Acharn that I was so surprised that bhavangacitta could be object of awareness. Acharn answerd: When I asked: can the object of bhavangacitta be known, the answer was: no. She explained about bhavangacitta: there is nothing appearing and then an object appears when there are cittas arising in a process that experience one of the objects through six doors. In other words, there is nothing, meaning, no object impinges on one of the doorways so that it can appear. Thus, we should not exclude bhavangacitta from the objects of awareness. Bhavangacitta is a difficult subject and I have heard that some people translate it as subconsciousness, but this creates misunderstandings. It is a citta that arises and falls away, there is a succession of them in between the processes of cittas (vithicittas). They are citta, experiencing an object and accompanied by feeling. What object, what feeling? Just before death of the previous life kamma conditioned the last javana cittas, that are kusala cittas or akusala cittas. If kusala kamma will produce a happy rebirth, it conditions kusala javanacittas experiencing a desirable object, and, as Acharn Sujin explained, it can be an object experienced through any of the six doors. The rebirth-consciousness is not kusala citta, it is kusala vipakacitta, thus of the jati (nature) of vipaka, result. There are different types and of different degrees (for details, see Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 11). They can be with or without panna, they can be accompanied by pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. They experience an object, but not an object that is impinging on one of the six doors, like the cittas, arising in processes. They experience the same object as the object experienced by the last javanacittas of the previous life. The succeeding bhavangacitta and all the bhavangacittas are the same type of vipakacitta as the rebirth-consciousness, and they experience the same object, and they are accompanied by the same feeling, pleasant or indifferent. If akusala kamma will produce an unhappy rebirth, it conditions akusala javanacittas just before death and these experience an undesirable object, such as a symbol or sign of the akusala kamma one performed, or an image of one's nextdestiny. The rebirthconsciousness that is akusala vipaka experiences the same undesirable object, and it is accompanied by indifferent feeling. It is actually the same type of citta as santiranacitta, investigating consciousness, but here it does not arise in a process, it is "doorfreed" (dvara vimutta) and performs the function of rebirth. It is ahetuka (rootless) akusala vipakacitta. Thus, although the last javanacittas that were akusala cittas could be dosamulacittas accompanied by unpleasant feeling, the vipakacitta that is rebirth-consciousness conditioned by the akusala kamma conditioning those javanacittas, cannot be accompanied by unpleasant feeling, it is ahetuka vipakacitta, accompanied by indifferent feeling only. The following bhavangacittas are the same type of citta, experiencing the same undesirable object, accompanied by the same feeling. Jonothan touched on another important point: can we find details on the processes of cittas in the scriptures, or is there just the nucleus of them? I have mentioned this in my preface to "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", because I thought people would like to know about this. Yes, we find important material on this subject in the "Path of Discrimination", Patisambhidamagga, of the Khuddaka Nikaya, Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XVII, Behaviour, Cariya. And also in the Conditional Relations, Patthana, Feeling Triplet, Investigation Chapter, under Proximity and Repetition, where also the process of enlightenment is dealt with. But we have to know that the cittas arising in processes are referred to as mind-element (including adverting-consciousness and receiving-consciousness) and mind-consciousness-element (all cittas other than those included in mind-element and the sense-cognitions of seeing, etc.). I shall not quote now, that takes too much time. The commentaries have worked out more details, but they are based on very old sources of the Theravada tradition. Buddhagosa did not put in his own ideas. Nina. 6586 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Considering op 18-07-2001 18:42 schreef bruce: > hi jon and nina > > apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and > considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the Dhamma > simply another way of saying "noting realities as they ppear at the six > doors"? > > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps a > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling self > wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... Dear Bruce, let me quote from Alan Driver: End quote. Maybe this answers your questions. You could call it listening or hearing, it does not matter. Nina. 6587 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Gayan > >Dear cybele, > >can i have the best of 'both' worlds.?? >I am fond of both abhidhamma and 'heresy', thats what I understood as what >is encouraged in tipitaka. > >btw Name the place, :o) > > >rgds I agree, let's explore all possibilities!! ;-) The place, let's see... Sri Lanka uphill, in Ella! Love Cybele 6588 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah oh..easy for me.. just 70+ miles from where i live. ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > > Dear Gayan > > > > >Dear cybele, > > > >can i have the best of 'both' worlds.?? > >I am fond of both abhidhamma and 'heresy', thats what I understood as what > >is encouraged in tipitaka. > > > >btw Name the place, :o) > > > > > >rgds > > I agree, let's explore all possibilities!! ;-) > The place, let's see... Sri Lanka uphill, in Ella! > > Love > > Cybele > > 6589 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: . Nibbbana op 13-07-2001 15:12 schreef Derek Cameron op Derek: I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There > is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- > conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- > being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from > what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is > a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, > therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, > made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Dear Derek and all, I am glad you brought up this important text. I have noticed that people might think that nibbana is citta, or even right view which is panna cetasika. In that case nibbana would be conditioned, and there would not be the third noble Truth, no cessation of dukkha. Dukkha is the arising and falling away of conditioned dhammas. Citta experiences an object, it is conditioned by object-condition and several other conditions. Cetasika is conditioned by citta and several other conditions. When the Buddha was the Bodhisatta Sumedha he made the quest for the unconditioned, that which is not dukkha. See the Chronicle of the Buddhas (Buddhava'msa), Sumedha: < Sitting in seclusion I thought thus then:" Again-becoming is dukkha, also the breaking up of the physical frame. Liable to birth, liable to ageing, liable to disease am I then; I will seek the peace that is unageing, undying, secure." In the first book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics) Nibbana is referred to as the unconditioned element, asankhata dhatu (See Appendix II) and it is nama or arupa( non rupa), but it is different from conditioned nama, it does not experience an object. Realities are either nama or rupa, and since nibbana is not rupa it is classified as nama. Kom has explained very clearly about the classification of the four paramattha dhammas. We read in the Atthasalini, Expositor (II, Book II, Part II, Suttanta Couplets, 392) an explanation of nama. Nama is derived from namati, bending towards an object, and it can also be a name. Citta and cetasika bend towards an object, experience an object. And also: they cause one another to bend on to the object: "The four khandhas are name (nama) in the sense of bending, for they bend towards the object. In the sense of causing to bend all (of the foregoing, namely nibbana and the four nama khandhas) are "name" (nama). For the four khandhas cause one another to bend on to the object; and nibbana bends faultless dhammas on to itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of the object." Thus, nibbana does not bend towards an object, it does not experience an object, but, it is predominant object condition for the lokuttara cittas that experience it, it bends them towards itself in that way. Buddhists take their refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the ariyan Sangha. At this moment we do not know what nibbana is like, and it makes no sense to speculate about it. We have confidence that there is a Path leading to the end of dukkha, and that there are people who have realised the third noble Truth by following this Path. We have to learn what dukkha is, the impermanence of nama and rupa. This can only be realized if we study now what nama is and what rupa is, so that their characteristics can be clearly distinguished, there is no other way. I liked what Robert said about awareness, even of attachment to right view, being aware again and again and again of the object at the very moment it appears, so that we come to know its true nature. Nina. 6590 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:33am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Anders > > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. > > > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > > > Invite me for the performance. > > > >Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow isn't due > >to come for another five months. :-) > > Really? > In England, there is already an awful climate, windy, rainy, cold and > depressive inducing. > I think that I should come to visist you! ;-) > You can dance even in the carpet, it's ok. Actually, the weather is starting to improve over hear. We've had some awful weather as well for a while, but in the past few days, things have begun to turn around. 6591 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:35am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Anders > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN > >TO > > > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. > > > >Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that > >Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche > >once said: > >"He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not > >become > >a monster himself." > > > We are becoming pathetic by now. > I am not hunting anybody. > I found that Erik interferred on a thread without actually following it > because indeed he assumed lots of things about my practice that indeed were > very much in harmony with his approach. > What shows me that he haven't read what I wrote previously. > I felt him very much coming in 'rescue' and I think that you are quite > capable of handling it alone. Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. 6592 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: To be brief, I am in Victoria. I teach at UVic. tadao 6593 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 7:23am Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > To be brief, I am in Victoria. I teach at UVic. tadao Small world! Maybe you know Ashok Aklujkar, my Sanskrit professor at UBC? Derek. 6594 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 7:49am Subject: Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex No, Anders, but I fully intend to market the sacred molars I am yet to manufacture in my little shed out the back. This will hopefully allow me to do away with the dana my employer so graciously extends to me :-) Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <180015253121038031172218004036129208> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:48 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in > West Sussex > > > > And who was Osho's dentist? > > > > (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) > > Herman, are you trying to tell us that YOU KNEW Osho's dentist!?! > > Anders Honore > ************************************************* > Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ > ************************************************* 6595 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 8:34am Subject: Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Cybele, Why eat meat before abstaining (carnivale)? The theory of carnivale is one thing. It has to do with preparation for fasting and contemplation. The practise of carnivale is another thing. Anytime I've been close enough to see, it has been pure, unadulterated debauchery. Which aspect were you hoping to share with the Scandinavians? :-) Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? > > Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all over the > place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly scandinavians. > ;-) > > Cybele > > > > > 6596 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:42am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear all: With respect to Aachaan Chah's comment, if we know that "chiken shit" can be used as fertilizer to nurish plants (i.e. right understanding) we eventually eat to survive, it is nothing wrong with collecting it. Many people, in fact, avoid eggs under the assumption that they contain too much bad colesterol, which is the main underlying cause of the hear-attack (i.e. wrong practice). Sorry, I do not know who Aachaan Chah is, but it is dengerous to practice Dhamma without paying respect to Buddha's words. tadao 6597 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:20am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Kom and Tadao, If you don't already know about it, there's a wonderful site in Taiwan with the Dhammapada in Pali and English with analysis and with sound files for individual words and whole sentences--a really great site: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/PALI/reading.htm The sound files work best if you right-click on them and select 'Save As' to put them on your hard drive, them open them for play-back. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Kom: > As for Dhamapada books, the book I like most is the > following: > Dhammapada: A Practical Guide to Right Living > (Tesxt and Translation) by Venerable Aacharya > Buddharakkhita Thera. Published by Buddha Vacana > Trust, Maha Bodhi Society, Bangalore-9. > I do not where I've got my copy, but it is very > inexpensive, handy (light weight), and, most > importantly, it contains orginal Pali texts (so > that you can learn by heart any orignal > Pali verses which you like). tadao 6598 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:22am Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi there, As an addendum to the discussion , bhavanga-cittas are said to have the same object as the birth consciousness. Herman --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Kom > > > > "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment > > > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > > > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > > > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > > > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > > > the object. > > > > Sorry to repeat the question. Did he go on to define what active > > cognitiv= > > e > > process is? Did he define an unactive cognitive process? Is bhavanga > > an > > unactive cognitive process? > > He is presumably using 'active cognative process' as a translation of a > particular pali term. I had taken it to mean 'vitthi-citta', but I'm not > sure what accounts for the 'active'. Bhavanga cittas are cittas that are > not vitthi cittas (ie. cittas that arise in a process). > > I'll let you know if i find out. > > Jon > > 6599 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Gayan and Robert, So do I--unfortunately, I'm unable to find it so far (as usual of late). I'll post it if I can find it. mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > --- gayan wrote: > > > Thanks Gayan, > I think I have a vague memory of this too! > robert > > dear robert, > > > > I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where > buddha says > > something > > like this, > > "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about > annihilation.To > > that I > > say this, yes,I preach you about > annihilation,annihilation of > > dukkha > > that is, and nothing else." > > > > (pardon for the vagueness) > > rgds 6600 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: anumodana. Hi, Khun Nina: Thank you very much for you warm reply. Yes, it is very nice indeed to get a benefit of the technology, so that we can discuss Dhamma again. As for your memory of Allen, I have the same idea. I would never never have been able to understand Dhamma without his help. He taugt me how to interpret your book (Bhuddhism in Daily Life), Khun Sujin's various talks/comments, and, more importantly how to understand (the essence of) the Budha's Teaching. As an academic, I've encounterd many many scholars, including Noam Chomsky, but I still think that Allen was the brightest guy I've ever met in my life (which, of course, doesn't mean, as we all know, that he was the nicest person I've met). Due to conferencing/publication, I've visited Holland three times for the last few years. And Holland, especially, Amsterdam is my FAVOURITE place. Once I step out of the Amsterdam Central Station, I feel "freedom", since it is such a toleratnt society. At any rate, I've negelcted Dhamma for a long long time, and there are so many things I have to learn from you. Best Wished, tadao 6601 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: A small word, indeed. Sorry, I do not know your Sanskrit professor. (In average, I develop a course a term so that I can learn something new all the time. And as I mentioned previously, I hardly knew Sanskrit until a couple of months ago.) tadao 6602 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:54am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Hi, Mike: Thank you very much for the information on the Taiwanese Web-site on Dhammapada. I will check it later. tadao 6603 From: gayan Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:44am Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah dear tadao, Everybody who thinks that what buddha taught has some essense, respects him and his words. Achan chah was giving a simile., which is inline with similes found in dhammapada. [links to A chahs's works can be found in www.accesstoinsight.org] rgds --- ppp wrote: > Dear all: > With respect to Aachaan Chah's comment, > if we know that "chiken shit" can be used as > fertilizer to nurish plants (i.e. right understanding) > we eventually eat to survive, it is nothing wrong > with collecting it. Many people, in fact, avoid > eggs under the assumption that they > contain too much bad colesterol, which > is the main underlying cause of the > hear-attack (i.e. wrong practice). > Sorry, I do not know who Aachaan Chah is, but > it is dengerous to practice Dhamma without > paying respect to Buddha's words. > tadao 6604 From: Ken Howard Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:49am Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Bruce, As a lurker of long standing, I am familiar with your views on the study-verses-formal-practice issue. If I remember correctly, it was a number of your earlier posts that I found particularly helpful. They eloquently asked the questions that I was trying to formulate in my own mind. I should point out that I am now a convert to the `other side' -- happy to toe the party line -- but even so, we seem to be seeing the issue from similar perspectives. For example, you are asking why it seems to be OK to listen to the Dhamma with the delusion that there is a self who is listening, but it is not OK to meditate in the same way. For all the excellent material on the overall issue, I haven't noticed any answers to precisely that question. But I have my own theories! I find it helpful to think of the Dhamma as a gift given by the Buddha, specifically to worldlings like us. So at the initial stage of accepting the gift, it is proper and Dhamma-consistent that we do so with the [involuntary] worldling's delusion that there is a self who accepts. The magic of the gift is that, at the moment we `take hold of it', the delusion of self slips away and we have understanding at the level of satipatthana. I'm not sure how far I can go with the gift simile, but perhaps it could be said that, while there is satipatthana, the time may be right for formal practice -- while there is no satipatthana, we are back to where we need to accept the gift (to listen to the Buddha's teaching). I am wondering if formal practice might be intended for the disciple in whom satipatthana is currently arising strongly and consistently (in whom there is, for some considerable time, no notion of self), and who is ready for a catalyst or impetus to push him on to the next stage (e.g. of Stream-entry) (?) Kind regards Ken Howard --- bruce wrote: > > 6605 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:59am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Anders > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN > >TO > > > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. > > > >Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that > >Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche > >once said: > >"He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not > >become > >a monster himself." > > > We are becoming pathetic by now. > I am not hunting anybody. > I found that Erik interferred on a thread without actually following it > because indeed he assumed lots of things about my practice that indeed were > very much in harmony with his approach. > What shows me that he haven't read what I wrote previously. > I felt him very much coming in 'rescue' and I think that you are quite > capable of handling it alone. Cybele, darling, did you have any inkling of just how many chuckles I had writing that post to you? I know you have a deep-seated thing for us Scandinavians (admit it, you LOVE that cool Northern European thing--nothing like that to get you all hot & bothered!). I suspect I know why: that passionate latin blood needs a little (or maybe a LOT of) tempering, and I think that is why you so enjoy teasing us so much (in the same way I enjoy teasing you)! :) 6606 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 11:11am Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Sweetheart, I love you!!!!! And a big metta citta to you too (did I get the jargon right there?). Anyway, I send you love, Derek. 6607 From: bruce Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life ken thanks so much for your input, it's insightful and very helpful....glad that you found past posts/queries of mine helpful, and kind of surprised, as i consider myself a bit fumble-mouthed when it comes to discussing the Dhamma... i still have one foot firmly in each camp (as far as i can tell) and will continue to practice through both sitting and studying until conditions determine otherwise :-) cheers bruce At 02:49 2001/07/20 -0000, you wrote: > Dear Bruce, > As a lurker of long standing, I am familiar with your views on the > study-verses-formal-practice issue. If I remember correctly, it was a > number of your earlier posts that I found particularly helpful. They > eloquently asked the questions that I was trying to formulate in my > own mind. > > I should point out that I am now a convert to the `other > side' -- happy to toe the party line -- but even so, we seem to > be seeing the issue from similar perspectives. For example, you are > asking why it seems to be OK to listen to the Dhamma with the > delusion that there is a self who is listening, but it is not OK to > meditate in the same way. For all the excellent material on the > overall issue, I haven't noticed any answers to precisely that > question. But I have my own theories! > > I find it helpful to think of the Dhamma as a gift given by the > Buddha, specifically to worldlings like us. So at the initial stage > of accepting the gift, it is proper and Dhamma-consistent that we do > so with the [involuntary] worldling's delusion that there is a self > who accepts. The magic of the gift is that, at the moment we > `take hold of it', the delusion of self slips away and we > have understanding at the level of satipatthana. > > I'm not sure how far I can go with the gift simile, but perhaps > it could be said that, while there is satipatthana, the time may be > right for formal practice -- while there is no satipatthana, we are > back to where we need to accept the gift (to listen to the > Buddha's > teaching). > > I am wondering if formal practice might be intended for the disciple > in whom satipatthana is currently arising strongly and consistently > (in whom there is, for some considerable time, no notion of self), > and who is ready for a catalyst or impetus to push him on to the next > stage (e.g. of Stream-entry) (?) > > Kind regards > Ken Howard > 6608 From: Binh Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:01pm Subject: Dhammapada/Narada (complete version) --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > > 4. Rev. Narada > http://www.serve.com/cmtan/Dhammapada/index.html ----------------------------------------------------------- BA: That site stores only the short English translation. The complete electronic version of the book by Ven. Narada (Pali, English, footnotes and associated stories) is stored at: http://www.metta.lk/english/index_author.htm#narada (Warning: it's a huge *.DOC file, about 7 Mb!) Metta, Binh 6609 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 4:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah I am not quite sure whom I am discussing with on Archan Chah's teaching. But my point is that if some Buddhist says that there is no reason/use in reading the actual words of the Buddha, then, he/she is in a denger of losing the sight of the Buddha's teaching. Even if the similes cited by Archan Chah and those uttered by the Buddha were exactly the same, this fact wouldn't gurantee that he and the Buddha are on the same wave-length (as far as the right practice is concerned). tadao 6610 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:17pm Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life > I'm not sure how far I can go with the gift simile, but perhaps > it could be said that, while there is satipatthana, the time may be > right for formal practice -- while there is no satipatthana, we are > back to where we need to accept the gift (to listen to the > Buddha's > teaching). I would agree with this if I understand your meaning correctly. In my case what has been most helpful is working through the incorrect understanding regarding views first and foremost. Basic study of the theory has been the most helpful in my own experience, and served as the springboard for actual meditation. Without knowing WHAT we're meditating on, any meditation automatically degenerates into wrong meditation. > I am wondering if formal practice might be intended for the disciple > in whom satipatthana is currently arising strongly and consistently > (in whom there is, for some considerable time, no notion of self), > and who is ready for a catalyst or impetus to push him on to the next > stage (e.g. of Stream-entry) (?) I think this makes a lot of sense. There's no sense putting the cart before the horse. What was most helpful for me is the Tibetan pedagogy called "trang-gye," which is a contraction meaning to "lead out" (of wrong view) and lead in (to Right View). I will shill a bit for the Tibetan Gelug-pa school's strategy here, which in my totally unbiased opinion (ha!) is incomparable for straightening out wrong views. Nothing else I've seen comes close in terms of detail, explicating very subtle points on what constitutes right vs. wrong view. To give some detail on what this pedagogy entails, it uses what's called the "Four Schools Pedagogy," the four schools representing the Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Yogacara, and finally, Madhyamika, the final system, the correct system. What this pedagogy works through are the various wring views held and espoused by proponents of the so-called "lower" (non-Madhyamika) schools. These are views held by some proponents (no longer extant) of historical Buddhist interpretations of anatta (or as we call them in the Mahayana system, emptiness). It begins with the Vaibhasikas (Abhidhammists--and no, NOT the kind gentlefolk here--this is a hypothetical school no longer in existence yet was a view held by a certain sub-sect at some point into he distant past). It begins by taking apart the idea of paramattha dhammas as "absolute existents," and demonstrates how this is a fallacious view because it asserts that these paramattha dhammas exist absolutely, "by way of their own entitiness" or svabhava (Sanskrit svabhava, not the Pali sabhava, which to my understanding is somewhat different in interpretation). Using logic, one begins working through how this is a mistaken view. Next, it unpacks the view of the hypothetical school of the Sautrantikas, who held the view that there are such absolutely, "truly existent" entities called "partless particles," which are "zero-point" particles with "true" (read, inherent) existence. This view is refuted, using Master Vasubandhu's reasoning that such "partless particles" could not aggregate to form composed entities because if they lack parts, they lack even relationality in space (North, South, East, West, etc.), and would altogether occupy zero space, thus such a view entails an absurd conclusion. Next, it takes on the Yogacara view, which refutes these lower schools yet still manages to get stuck on the notion that there is something "truly existent," namely, consciousness, (this school is also referred to as the Cittamatra or Mind Only school). The view held by this school is that nothing apart from mind "truly exists" (there are not external objects, only mind--this is a nearly solipsistic view, but somewhat more subtle). This is shown to be in error using the refutations found in the higher school, the Madhyamika school, which refutes this as another logical absurdity. Things brings us to the Madhyamika system, which asserts that no entities exist inherently, apart from production. This is the correct view. Well, almost. There are two subdivisions within the Madhyamika school, the lower and higher. The lower being the Madhyamika- Svatantrika school espoused by Bhavaviveka, which denies the true existence of the personal self, but still somehow manages to assert that there is a difference between the emptiness (anatta) of persons and the emptiness of phenomena. This is taken on by the highest and final system, the Madhyamika- Prasangika school, which makes no distinction between the self of persons and the self of phenomena, which notes that ALL are empty of self-nature in precisely the same way, and uses the logic of negation and prasanga (prasanga means taking a syllogism and drawing it out to its absurd logical conclusion, as in, to follow such a line of reasoning entails the absurd consequence X) to demonstrate this conclusively. The Prasangika system makes no affirming or positivistic assertions about anything. It is purely a deconstrutive approach, as opposed the the Svatantrika school, which uses formalized autonomous syllogisms-- which is an erroneous way of reaching a conclusion since one is making positivistic logical assertions which always erquire the fundation of some unprovable axiom--the complete opposite of the Prasangika system, which is totally destructive of such syllogisms, favoring the deconstructive approach that negates all positivistic assertions, all of which at some level entail a logical absurdity. Within the Prasangika system, then, one uses negation of views (ditthi) to, via non-affirming negastion, to come to correct view of what emptiness (anatta) is. This is a POWERFUL approach. Stunningly so. It also perfectly fits in with what Peter Masefield noted as a critical aspect of the path as found in the Pali Suttas, namely, the so-aclled sysetm of "progressive instruction" the Buddha used to lead hidd disciples out of wriong view and into Right View. I came across Peter's thesis one place (after having gone through this training under one of my lamas) and all I could think was YES! Someone gets it! And Peter uses only the Pali Suttas for his referrences on this. This is how the Buddha led people straightaway to Right View in his sermons, resulting in the attainment of everything from stream-entry to arahat within the span of a single discourse. It may be true that few of us in this part of the sasana have the accumualations (Hui Neng comes to mind as a rare exception) to get it from progressive instruction alone. But in my opinion, this is critical, absolutely necessary, as a precursor for effective meditation. By-the-by, there is nothing in the progerssive pedagogy NOT found in the Pali Suttas. For example, one need only examine the Visuddhimagga beginning with XXI.53 to see where this is discussed. The Tibetan Prasangika system goes even further. The Gelug-pas have blown this out into the very finest detail, and it is truly remarkable as a meditation on emptiness. In addition, the Gelug-pas use all the standard 20 modes of analysis on emptiness found in the Vis. and goes even further using what they call the "Diamond Slivers," which further refine what emptiness is and is not (for example Vis. XX.6 et. al.). While I realize this is not as popular among those who have the accumulations to study the rise and fall, it is nonetheless, in my opinion, a critical point of study, since the arising and passing away of dhamma is implied by the study of anatta, and vice-versa. This INTELLECTUAL meditation can, by itself, if we are to accept what the Suttas say, enough for some to awaken on the spot. For nearly everyone else, though, it must be supplemented by dedicated sitting meditation, jhanas (for those so inclined), etc. But in my opinion, to have established a very clear and strong undersatnding of Right View intellectually first is the most beneficial. Without this we run the danger of having no clue what to look for in meditation. It is very easy to become confused by appearances, mistaking "experiences" for emptiness, which as Arya Nagarjuna has said "is the relinquishing of all views." 6611 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:45pm Subject: Question for Nina (and others) Nina, I have a question expanding somewhat on Herman's question on votthapanna (determinging consciousness), as well as how votthapana, javana, and tadarammana all hang together in terms of how kamma is created. I apologize, but due to space constraints (I moved to BKK with literally one bag on my back!), my copy of "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" is now in storage back in NYC, but I do recall I didn't find any clarification on how votthapana, the javana cittas, and tadarramana all relate to one another within the same vithi. Okay, here's my question. Votthapana, as far as I can tell, is what determines the nature of the object such that it becomes known as something kusala or akusala, so when the javana cittas arise, followed by tadarammana, this is where the kammic sankharas are created in the sankharakhanda. Is this correct? Also, is votthapana similar in function to sanna in this sense, or are they just another way of saying the same thing, meaning, does sanna subsume the santirana and votthapana cittas? Is this where the "marking" of the arammana within the vithi occurs, or am I all wet on this? As you can hopefully see, I have quite a bit of confusion on the exact moment when the kusala/akusala/abyakata kamma is "planted" (for lack of a better word) in the sankharakhanda. My original guess has been that tadarammana, which is performing the function of "registering," is necessary for a sankhara to be created, and that this is, again from my limited guesswork, conditioned by the previous javana cittas, meaning, that if the process of javana aborts prior to completing (such as the five javana cittas that occur and then are interrupted near the moment of death), that there is no "registration" of the kusala/akusala/abhyakata kamma at all? In other words, from my faulty recollection from "Abhidhamma in Daily Life," at the moment of death the process is too weak to take it past five javana cittas, and the vithi is interrupted, meaning, that tadarramana never has a chance to "register" the result, meaning there is no kamma created at all if the vithi is aborted prior to the completion of the seven javana cittas PLUS the result being registered by tadarramana. To recap in the simplest terms: is tadarammana necessary to register kamma, or is it the jaavna cittas that perform the function of creating kamma? Thanks, Erik 6612 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:18pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation, sitting crosslegged and > contemplating the four foundations of mindfulness. > This we are taught - whether in Theravada, or Tibetian, or Zen, or Pure land > Schools, even the Nichiren use meditation as a tool in the practice. I am sorry I have been avoiding this direct question, and have been discussing other issues that I thought were important in understanding what Satipathanna really was. I have discussed issues that were easy to demonstrate that they are not part of what the Buddha were teaching as Satipatthana so that I remind myself and perhaps others that not all what we hear, even from respected source, are the teachings of the Buddha. The questions that you directly ask is obviously more tenuous as now I would have to explain what I understand Satipathanna to be and to justify why one would do something seeminly not in line with what the Buddha said. (Wouldn't you agree that it is easier to dispute what is not than to prove what is?) I was hoping to hear you explain what Satipathana and insights really were (and hence, the question of what is formal/not formal, and what is/isn't) and see how close we are in understandings (so that the message doesn't have to be this long and perhaps dry and boring). Given that I didn't succeed to nail down what you understood, I now am writing this message which maybe longer than what I originally plan to do on the topic. Let me first make a comment that I am not (or am not currently!) against samatha meditation of any kind. I will be using the words Samatha meditation and satipathana from here. For their differences (and meanings?), see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL 20POST%20LINKS under Samatha & Vipssana Bhavana. I found this (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/941 ) to be very concise and clear explanation. What I understand Satipathanna to be is this: to be free from this birth- death cycle, one must know the realities as they are, as impermanent, dukkha, and anatta. This appears to be the absolute requirement, most likely indisputable, of any suttas we come across when talking about attainment or people who have attained. The logics and the observations (which could be wrong) are the followings: 1) As Roberts has pointed out, there are people mentioned to attain not in sitting position. Englightenment is not exclusive to sitting position. I think you and I agree on this point. 2) It is not obvious either that people who attained developed Jhana to at least the first rupa jhana. For those people not explicitly mentioned in the commentary, we can only conclude that they either don't, or the information is omitted. 3) There are people who attained based on hearing the teachings of the Buddha alone. Although it is often unclear what their background in developing samatha meditation in that life is, one thing is usually clear, they realize some characteristics of realities as they truly are. The sutta that I have read mentioned the impermanence of realities. 4) The commentaries mentioned people who became englightened without the attainment of Jhana. 5) If we read other suttas that implied the development of the path, it seems like there are many paths, many practices that you can choose from for the development of wisdom. Yet, in the Satipatthana, it is mentioned to be (perhaps ambiguously for some people) the only path. These two observations are obviously in contradiction. For example, take a look at Annapanasati sutta (at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn118.html). The Buddha appeared to categorize the attending bikkhus into 7 (exclusive) categories. There are 4 that have attained, 2 types that appear to be explicitly developing the path, and 1 type that perhaps can be implied to be developing the path. Only one of those types explicitly developed the path through annapanasati (the breathing meditation/awareness). Are these 2 different approaches in developing the path? Yet the path is one? Now, if you have looked at Robert's explanation, and all Nina's materials, you will undoubtedly come to the same conclusion what they are trying to explain. The absolute requirement, regardless of one's disposition to develop other levels of wholesome qualities or accumulation, is to know realities as they truly are (now). Without this knowledge (not just conceptual thoughts), one does not attain, regardless of one's other "practices" in that life or other accumulations. I will be just parroting what have been said many times by some members of this group. Knowing the realities as they are means knowing them now. One doesn't have to be doing anything in particular (except for sleeping) for this to occur. One does not have to sit, does not have to stand, does not have to walk, one can even be dying when this occurs. Why then, one might ask, did the Buddha explain about sitting crossed- legged in Maha-Satipatthana sutta? If you remember, I asked you if Maha- satipatthana is a step-by-step manual, i.e., one has to complete all the steps to complete the practice. If the teachings I heard from the meditation schools are the same that you have heard, the answer is no. (I didn't see any corpses or bones in these retreats) The question I have is, why skip the other ones? What did the Buddha say to have us do one and skip the others? What do you mean one path? I can choose one object but not the others: that seems like more than paths to me... Now if you take what some people said that the Buddhas often teach the dhammas appropriate to the accumulation and liking of the people attending his talk, and that Satipatthana is nothing (figuratively only; Satipatthana is profound and subtle, self-reachable by only 2 kinds of Buddhas) more than knowing the realities as they are. The answer is clear (to me). People at the Buddha's time are highly attuned to doing samatha meditations *already*, even before hearing the Buddha's teachings, including annapanasati (observing the breath) and asubha bhavana (contemplating corpses and bones). Buddha is mentioning to them that even then, when developing Samatha bhavana, there are realities that are suitable objects of Satipatthana. The point that I am concluding (wrongly or rightly) is this, one needs to sit to develop samatha meditation, definitely for Jhana level, and most likely for access (Upacara) level. One does not need to sit to know realities as they truly are. I think this is the reason why some people in this group doesn't think that one has to be sitting cross-legged to develop satipatthana. Is Samatha bhavana (sitting meditation) necessary for one to reach the path? I suspect that one needs to have enough accumulation of this type to attain the path, either in this life or in prior lives. However, this is not the only kinds of Kusala that is not satipatthana that is needed to attain the path. It is said that one need to fully accumulate the 10 paramis (see http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20perfections%20of 20insight.htm) including: Giving (dana), Virtue (sila), Renunciation (nekhamma), Wisdom (panna), Energy (viriya), Patience (Khanti), Truthfulness (sacca), Determination (adthithana), Loving-kindness (metta), and Equanimity (upekkha). It seems to me that one has to have accumulated more than the awareness of the current realities in order to reach the path (eventually). One of these is mentioned to be Jhana (Nekkhama). Have any of us accumulated enough of each parami to reach the path? Unknown: maybe, or maybe not. Should we develop all kinds of kusala whenever possible? Absolutely. What is it that maybe unique in this life but not the next? The development of Satipatthana. It is possible to be developing other kinds of kusala in a life without the buddha. Why do I not practice samatha bhavana (which I equate to when one has to sit down, cross-legged) to the level of access and jhana concentration? I have alluded to this in one of the messages I responded to you. I am not confident that the meditation teachers that I have met understood the differences between samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana sufficiently. One may be developing miccha samathi but is deluded to be developing samatha bhavana, and worse yet, vipassana bhavana. There are many warnings about Micha samathi and samma samathi. Based on my own experience, these differences are hard to know (to me). I clearly prefer the teachers who sticks as closely with the text as possible. Why is that? I have never ever run into a single other person in my life that explains what I know as me in such amazingly detailed description, and yet these descriptions appear to be true in every single way despite all the infinite subtleties. Not only this person penetrate all these realities thoroughly, but also he is able to explain them such that I too can understand. Truly marvelous. Why should my confidence of other teachings be higher than this person's? > is only studying the texts and conceptual thought. I am not convinced that Nina and Roberts, despite their lucidity in dhamma explanation, only study texts and conceptual thoughts. I am not implying that you suggest this, of course, but I think this is a generalization that doesn't hold true to everybody, or unless you are pointing out to me that I may be such a person. > dismantle this possiblity and reafirm your convictions. It is true that I only pointed out the discrepancies I saw. I was hoping to understand what you understood as Vipassana and "formal" meditation before I dove into such a message. Failing to understand what you meant, I didn't say anything else that might be useful or revealing to you. > I paid attention to your viewpoint, I am studying Abhidhamma and considering > the teachings, I am including such directions in my practice of daily Thank you for being so open and anumoddha for your investigation. > Otherwise as you are very keen on texts - you show me a text were this is > disclaimed. Although I am probably to the point of of being dogmatic sometimes about sticking to the texts, I do this (sometimes) because of the highest respect for the person saying those words. The ironic part of this is, I understand the teachings from the people whom I think adhere to this noble tradition (of explaining the true meanings, of verifying other teachings, including their own, against the teaching of this person, of not inventing their own ideas and conceptual thoughts), and just start looking through the texts myself. It's going to take me another lifetime before I can quote you the texts that support all my understandings above. kom 6613 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:28pm Subject: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Mike, Thanks a bunch! kom --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom and Tadao, > > If you don't already know about it, there's a > wonderful site in Taiwan with the Dhammapada in Pali > and English with analysis and with sound files for > individual words and whole sentences--a really great > site: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/PALI/reading.htm > > The sound files work best if you right-click on them > and select 'Save As' to put them on your hard drive, > them open them for play-back. > > mike > > --- ppp wrote: > > Hi, Kom: > > As for Dhamapada books, the book I like most is the > > following: > > Dhammapada: A Practical Guide to Right Living > > (Tesxt and Translation) by Venerable Aacharya > > Buddharakkhita Thera. Published by Buddha Vacana > > Trust, Maha Bodhi Society, Bangalore-9. > > I do not where I've got my copy, but it is very > > inexpensive, handy (light weight), and, most > > importantly, it contains orginal Pali texts (so > > that you can learn by heart any orignal > > Pali verses which you like). tadao > 6614 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:52pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Erik > > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > > > The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that > >ggrrrrr I see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a > >shield of defensiveness. > > > >Then that is some negative conditioning you'll just have to overcome, > >Cybele. Misplaced confidence may be a hindrance, but can you possibly > >be the judge of such a thing in another? I think not. Best work on > >your own bhavana. > > Dear Erik very curious that YOU are the one who make this remark considering > how you get carried away by your own moods and beliefs quite often and I > have an apology letter of yours to prove it. I do indeed get carried away by my moods at times, being a moody person by accumulation, and you managed to catch me at literally the most difficult point in my life when my ability to consider the impact of my speech wasn't functioning very well at all. Not to make excuses for lapsing in tempering my words (I accept full responsibility for my speech). I recognize my typical character trait of bluntness can rankle at times, and seek to correct myself the moment I'm aware I've erred in any way. Then again, you need to meet me halfway and not get your dander up the moment I don't phrase things the way your ego would prefer to hear it. > Do you think that your approach with me is less harsh? > It is very unkind what you said Erik. Gah, Cybele, so quick to read hostility when nothing could be further from the truth! You love directness if I am to judge from your own communications to me, and I have no problem responding to you in kind, since samsara is infinitely more unpleasant than a couple of unvarnished words and entirely BENEFICIAL (as in connected with the goal) from your buddy Erik. If you take what I said as motivated by anything other than the very deepest concern for your well-being, then you have errred in your judgment severely about my intentions as your friend. As the Buddha said, the very best friends are those who rebuke us when necessary, even if that means having to do it in a way the ego gets upset with. In fact, if the ego gets upset abuot such a rebuke, then it demonstrates conclusively the message hit the mark. Now, as to your taking offense at what was to me quite a lighthearted ribbing really isn't anything I can help. That is solely your own projection machine revving up to full speed and imputing a motivation to me that had nothing to do with the sorts of cittas arising within my own mental continuum, which were (and I KNOW this) solely spoken with the deepest love for you and your well-being. You had damn well better know by now know I have nothing but the greatest respect and care for you dearest Cybele. But if you can't handle a little directness in the spirit of genuine friendship from time-to-time, then it's apparent you need to grow something like a much thicker skin. And folks who speak directly are your very best friends in this regard. Do not take this as patronization. You've pointed out to me areas I need to improve in as well and many deep bows to you for this. That is what true friendship int the Dhamma are all about, isn't it? > Your tone is very much incisive. By habit. I am a decisive person, and that is reflected in my speech and attitude. Sometimes I can be more direct than I should be, I confess, and that is definitely an area for improvement. I am SLOWLY growing more politic as time goes on, but if you think I'nm going to toss the baby out with the bathwater and become some mealy-mouthed terrified-to-offend milksop just to suit you (or anyone), think again. > I am not judging him, I am discussing without playing roles in all earnest. > Sharing and clarifying is already bhavana for me if you don't mind. > He doesn't need your virile friendship to support him; he is very clever and > quite stable. > No need to come out and defend your fellow danish. > Erik it seems that you cannot cope with my intensity but you are very > intense as well. And I accept you. I can cope with your intensity quite easily when you don't deny me the right to respond in kind, and I feel it is extremely unfair of you to deny me the same form of communication you engage in yourself (let's not mince words, you are as direct as anyone I've ever known, and I LOVE it!). To act one way yourself and deny another that same mode of interaction is, shall we say, a tad hypocritical. > You are going to meet me in Bkk if you care to, obviously and you will > verify that I am not different in real life than I am here. > What I declare I am - there is very little distinctions or incongruences. I don't doubt you are the same in real life as here. Indeed you're irrepressible. And I love it! :) > >Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a > >fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there > >is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. > >Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism > >and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot > >be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means > >(upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient > >means, never more than a raft. > > You are being dogmatic affirming this. No dear. I am telling it exactly like it is. If you don't like it, tough noogies, as they say. It is a fact, and a fact anyone serious about the Dharma had better learn pronto if the aim is to do anything more than slap a label Buddhist on oneself and pretend to be a follower of the Buddha's instructions. Was the Buddha dogmatic in affirming the Dharma is no more than a raft for crossing over? That is about as anti-dogmatic as it gets, the ONLY reason I label myself a Buddhist today, if you must know. And that is the precise sentiment I am repeating. And I'm repeating it because it's entirely borne out by direct experience. For me this isn't dogma, in the same way for me the existence of Bangkok isn't dogma. It's fact. I'm here. I can see it right outside my window. Bangkok exists. Period. Is making an entirely factual statement and kind of dogma? Hardly. > >Sorry Cybele, but we can and MUST aim, and aim high--as high as > >possible. Aspiration is the foundation of the path. Without the > >highest aspiration possible we don't stand a snowballs's chance in > >one of the hot hells of getting out of this mess. > > Erik, you misread me completely. > It's not about aspirations. It damn well IS about aspirations, Cybele. Show me anyone who lacks aspiration and you'll show me an aimless drifter with one foot in the grave. Suh a person is no follower of the ariyan Dhamma, which is ALL ABOUT the aspiration to reach supreme enlightenment. There is no alternative other than endless rounds of rebirth and suffering. > The point on not 'aiming' is don't becoming attached to the goal, but just > walk the path. Of COURSE we shouldn't become ATTACHED to the goal (or to progress). On the other hand, we can and should DESIRE (in the chanda, not tanha sense) to attain supremem enlightenment IN THIS VERY LIFETIME. As I see it, the dangers of ignoring aspiration are infinitely greater than any danger of becoming attached to the goal. High aspirations will naturally lead us to the teachers and teachings that help us avoid the very attachements many people seem to be so terrified of. Without high aspirations, we will sit ansd spin on the wheel of samasara endlessly, becasue we'll never bother to engage the needee practices to awaken. That is the only point I am making here, and it is a CRITICAL one. > And is so curious because I would say that by now my 'faith' and love for > Dhamma are so evident and you make such frivolous observations in my case. > And I am sorry Erik but in my school the goal is the path. This is, pardon me, a bunch of newage (rhyme with sewage) garbage, because this approach it is nowhere confirmed in any sutta I've ever come across. As if practice itself IS equivalent to enlightenment. No way! If that's all it is, then a frog sitting on a lilypad is just as enlightehed as a Buddha. Okay, I know this goal=path can be an expedient means for some who are really uptight about practice, and far be it from me to denigrate that which works for even one Dhamma practioner, but as a general rule, did you ever hear the Buddha teach the path is the goal? Find me that Sutta and I'll recant on the spot. > >Penetrating the > >charateristics of dhammas takes enormous effort and perserverance, > >and it is the aspiration to reach supreme enlightenment that is the > >fodder for the sort of pratice necessary to awaken. That means we > >need to practice at least as much as a musician practicing for a > >Carnegie Hall recital. Serious, day-in, day out, consistent, every- > >waking-second-focused-on-the-aim practice. If we don't have the > >aspiration to replicate the Buddha's awakening, then we'll never > >engage the practices necessary to do so, or we'll become discouraged > >at the first obstacle that comes our way and give up. We have to not > >only aim high, but also to have the confidence we can achieve that > >aim as well. > > Why have you chosen me to make such statements Erik. > I am a very serious practitioner. I know for sure you are dead-serious. Why are so so quick to assume this was directed at Cybele? Taking things personally isn't at all helpful (in fact it's just another expression of deeply-entrenched of self-cherishing). Thre was nothing specifically directed at you in this; it was more a general comment which happened to conveniently fit into the post I made. No more, no less. Dukkha is when we relate everything back to ME ME ME!!! It appears my reply to you has created a little dukkha, even though it was spone a a more general observation not directed specifically at you. > ERIK by now I am shouting my brains out. Ah, I do so love that passionate latin blood! > What are you talking about? I am talking about what is necessary for us to awakening to the Dhamma taught by Lord Buddha. No more, no less. > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN TO > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. No. > I have set all my life to study and practice Dhamma, how can you be so > insensitive declaring this? Oh, that terrible, boorish Erik up to his old tricks again! It's obvious I need to go to sensitivity training courses to make sure I don't dare offend anyone's precious litle ego. Wouldn't want to do that, now would we? After all, ego, taking things personally, is the critical component of the path. Clinging to notions like "he abused me, he wronged me" is certain in accord with the Dhamma as the Buddha taught in the Dhammapada, no? :) > I am very much keen in practicing, you MISREAD ME, you got all wrong Erik. > Read all the thread and afterwards, we can discuss because you are indeed > JUDGING ME and spitting out sentences. Of course I'm judging your intepretation of practice (but NOT YOU PERSONALLY). If your ego takes offense at that, whoes problem is that? > You are not my teacher, my teacher is the path. Wow, Cybele, I'm a sorry but I didn't realize you'd already attained Buddhahood, so I guess I should shut up now, eh? I happen to consider everyone my teacher, from the lowliest worm to the Tathagatas, knowing just how much I have yet to learn. But I can see you have transcended all inorance, so there's obviousy nothing mroe for me to say to someone fully enlighetnhed like your conventional self. > We are really mirrors for each other. You are indeed a wonderful mirror for me Cybele, and I bow many times in your direction for your immense kindness in demonstrating where and when I err. I hope someday you'll come to appreciate my gift of friendship in doing the same for you. Love, Erik 6615 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- Anders Honore wrote: > --- "cybele chiodi" > wrote: > > > > Dear Anders > > > > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in > the snow. > > > > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > > > > Invite me for the performance. > > > > > >Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow > isn't due > > >to come for another five months. :-) > > > > Really? > > In England, there is already an awful climate, windy, rainy, cold > and > > depressive inducing. > > I think that I should come to visist you! ;-) > > You can dance even in the carpet, it's ok. > > Actually, the weather is starting to improve over hear. We've had > some awful weather as well for a while, but in the past few days, > things have begun to turn around. so can we expect a performance? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6616 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:34pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > > Phala-citta. This is said in total ignorance, but: is it possible that nibbana is the object of consciousness in terms of focus in advanced practice, but that it is not actually cognized, identified, or perceived by that consciousness? This would allow nibbana to remain non-objective while still being a focus for attainment. At the realization of nibbana, the focus upon it would be abolished [even though it has never been seen] and nibbana would be realized as the cognizer rather than the object of cognition. This would in a sense mean that nibbana remains an idea of a sort, even for advanced practice right up until the time of actual attainment when all idea-images are dissolved in the realization of being the source rather than the receiver of consciousness. Is this off the wall? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6617 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:42pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Derek Cameron > > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:47 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! > > > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern > any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? > > Anders, > > >With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I > >say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. > >Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. > >After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. > >After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) > > I'll buy that one. :-) Now, should I go and chop wood one way or the > other... only if you're building a fire. robert e. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6618 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:57pm Subject: Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > > > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > > > Phala-citta. > > This is said in total ignorance, but: is it possible that nibbana is the object > of consciousness in terms of focus in advanced practice, but that it is not > actually cognized, identified, or perceived by that consciousness? Your contention dones't sound at all ignorant to me. Nor to acharyas like Master Vasubandhu, who also questioned how Nibbana, lacking all marks, can possibly be "cognized" by citta, which by definition has sanna as a component among the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas. How can sanna perform its function when there is nothing to mark, Nibbana being unconditioned? I haev yet to see any satisfactory explanation of this, and yet if we read what Khun Sujin says: "Cakkhu-vinnana-citta does not arise with lobha, dosa, moha or any other sobhana-cetasika. Cakkhu-vinnana-citta arises with only seven cetasika, namely phassa-cetasika, vedana-cetasika, sanna-cetasika, cetana-cetasika, ekaggata-cetasika, jivitindriya-cetasika and manasikara-cetasika. These seven cetasika are the sabba-citta- sadharana-cetasika, the cetasika that arises with all citta. The citta cannot arise without these seven cetasika. No matter which kind of citta, akusala-, kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, lokuttara-citta or any citta whatever, would have to arise concurrently with these seven cetasika. These sabba-citta-sadharana-cetasika are the annasamana-cetasika, or cetasika that conform with whatever they arise with. Concurring with akusala-citta, the seven sabba-citta- sadharana-cetasika are akusala; with kusala-citta, they are kusala etc." To recap the key point here: "No matter which kind of citta, akusala- , kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, ***lokuttara-citta*** or ***any citta whatever***, would have to arise concurrently with these seven cetasika." Very clearly lokuttara cittas have sanna using this definition from the Abhidhamma. What I'd like to understand is how the Abhidhamma can possibly support this contention, because by reason alone it entails the absdurd consequence that Nibbana is somehow conditioned! How could it be otherwise if sanna is a part of the mix? Sanna by definition requires someTHING to mark, and the act of "marking" immediately creates a this/that, subject/object (Nibbana as object, citta as subject) dichotomy. And nowhere is there any "mark" (other than anatta) that applies to Nibbana, and how can one possibly perceiev the existence of a mere absence of greed, hatred, and delusion? Given there are NO, as in, zero, zip, nada, nil, kein, nichivo conventional marks that pertain to Nibbana, how can sanna possibly perform any function of "marking" the Nibbaba as arammana without any samutti aspect there to mark? Can sanna possibly mark what doesn't even exist conventionally? > This would allow nibbana to remain non-objective while still being a focus for > attainment. At the realization of nibbana, the focus upon it would be abolished > [even though it has never been seen] and nibbana would be realized as the cognizer > rather than the object of cognition. I really like your probing this issue. It's something I've always questioned in terms of the notion that lokuttara cittas somehow "cognize" Nibbana. > This would in a sense mean that nibbana remains an idea of a sort, even for > advanced practice right up until the time of actual attainment when all > idea-images are dissolved in the realization of being the source rather than the > receiver of consciousness. > > Is this off the wall? Robert, you have elucidated what is an extremely subtle point here, and I thank you for bringing it up. Cheers, Erik 6619 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:55pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 6:17 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life > This is taken on by the highest and final system, the Madhyamika- > Prasangika school, which makes no distinction between the self of > persons and the self of phenomena, which notes that ALL are empty of > self-nature in precisely the same way, and uses the logic of negation > and prasanga (prasanga means taking a syllogism and drawing it out to > its absurd logical conclusion, as in, to follow such a line of > reasoning entails the absurd consequence X) to demonstrate this > conclusively. > > The Prasangika system makes no affirming or positivistic assertions > about anything. It is purely a deconstrutive approach, as opposed the > the Svatantrika school, which uses formalized autonomous syllogisms-- > which is an erroneous way of reaching a conclusion since one is > making positivistic logical assertions which always erquire the > fundation of some unprovable axiom--the complete opposite of the > Prasangika system, which is totally destructive of such syllogisms, > favoring the deconstructive approach that negates all positivistic > assertions, all of which at some level entail a logical absurdity. > > Within the Prasangika system, then, one uses negation of views > (ditthi) to, via non-affirming negastion, to come to correct view of > what emptiness (anatta) is. > > This is a POWERFUL approach. Stunningly so. It also perfectly fits in > with what Peter Masefield noted as a critical aspect of the path as > found in the Pali Suttas, namely, the so-aclled sysetm > of "progressive instruction" the Buddha used to lead hidd disciples > out of wriong view and into Right View. > > I came across Peter's thesis one place (after having gone through > this training under one of my lamas) and all I could think was YES! > Someone gets it! And Peter uses only the Pali Suttas for his > referrences on this. This is how the Buddha led people straightaway > to Right View in his sermons, resulting in the attainment of > everything from stream-entry to arahat within the span of a single > discourse. > > It may be true that few of us in this part of the sasana have the > accumualations (Hui Neng comes to mind as a rare exception) to get it > from progressive instruction alone. But in my opinion, this is > critical, absolutely necessary, as a precursor for effective > meditation. > > By-the-by, there is nothing in the progerssive pedagogy NOT found in > the Pali Suttas. For example, one need only examine the Visuddhimagga > beginning with XXI.53 to see where this is discussed. The Tibetan > Prasangika system goes even further. The Gelug-pas have blown this > out into the very finest detail, and it is truly remarkable as a > meditation on emptiness. In addition, the Gelug-pas use all the > standard 20 modes of analysis on emptiness found in the Vis. and goes > even further using what they call the "Diamond Slivers," which > further refine what emptiness is and is not (for example Vis. XX.6 > et. al.). > > While I realize this is not as popular among those who have the > accumulations to study the rise and fall, it is nonetheless, in my > opinion, a critical point of study, since the arising and passing > away of dhamma is implied by the study of anatta, and vice-versa. > > This INTELLECTUAL meditation can, by itself, if we are to accept what > the Suttas say, enough for some to awaken on the spot. For nearly > everyone else, though, it must be supplemented by dedicated sitting > meditation, jhanas (for those so inclined), etc. But in my opinion, > to have established a very clear and strong undersatnding of Right > View intellectually first is the most beneficial. Without this we run > the danger of having no clue what to look for in meditation. It is > very easy to become confused by appearances, mistaking "experiences" > for emptiness, which as Arya Nagarjuna has said "is the relinquishing > of all views." Ah, Nagarjuna. A great chap really. He took emptiness to its absolute limit to destroy the fallacious views flourishing in the various schools and then he put it down and never touched upon the subject again. His writings on the path as such are actually quite clear and thorough though. Perhaps it would interest you to know (I know I've said this before) that he actually said that the Buddha did teach self, for those who understood the derived implication of the word. Regards, Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6620 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:57pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 5:48 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > I am not quite sure whom I am discussing with on > Archan Chah's teaching. But my point is that > if some Buddhist says that there is no reason/use > in reading the actual words of the Buddha, then, > he/she is in a denger of losing the sight of the > Buddha's teaching. Even if the similes cited by > Archan Chah and those uttered by the Buddha were > exactly the same, this fact wouldn't > gurantee that he and the Buddha are on the same > wave-length (as far as the right practice is > concerned). > tadao Nonetheless, the difference between a real-life teacher and the Buddha is that the real-life teacher can adapt to the present circumstances, which the suttas can't. 6621 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 4:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 2:42 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah > Dear all: > With respect to Aachaan Chah's comment, > if we know that "chiken shit" can be used as > fertilizer to nurish plants (i.e. right understanding) > we eventually eat to survive, it is nothing wrong > with collecting it. Many people, in fact, avoid > eggs under the assumption that they > contain too much bad colesterol, which > is the main underlying cause of the > hear-attack (i.e. wrong practice). > Sorry, I do not know who Aachaan Chah is, but > it is dengerous to practice Dhamma without > paying respect to Buddha's words. Ajahn Chah was, at least as I see it, probably the greatest Thai Theravadan teacher of the 20th century. You should read some of his stuff. It's great. I have lots of teachings from him available at my website. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6622 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 4:02pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 1:49 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex >No, Anders, but I fully intend to market the sacred molars I am yet to manufacture in my little shed out the back. This will hopefully allow me to do away with the dana my employer so graciously extends to me :-) LOL! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > And who was Osho's dentist? > > > > (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) > > Herman, are you trying to tell us that YOU KNEW Osho's dentist!?! 6623 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 4:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 9:25 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > > --- "cybele chiodi" > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Anders > > > > > > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in > > the snow. > > > > > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > > > > > Invite me for the performance. > > > > > > > >Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow > > isn't due > > > >to come for another five months. :-) > > > > > > Really? > > > In England, there is already an awful climate, windy, rainy, cold > > and > > > depressive inducing. > > > I think that I should come to visist you! ;-) > > > You can dance even in the carpet, it's ok. > > > > Actually, the weather is starting to improve over hear. We've had > > some awful weather as well for a while, but in the past few days, > > things have begun to turn around. > > so can we expect a performance? Haha, well I learned a funk-dance routine much faster than anticipated during rehearsal for a play, so I might just make it in time! :-) 6624 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 5:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Tadao Very surprised you don't know Ajahn Chah; he is considered in the Theravada world one of the most eminent monks and teachers. Like Buddhadasa in importance without being a scholar. He was for the active practice with a lot of enhancement on meditation. And regarding 'losing sight of the Buddha's of the Budddha's teachings', his 'order' of Forest Monks is one of the most strict on Vinaya rules for example. Most of the greatest teachers have always been humorous and without pomposity. Wisdom it is not always solemn. Metta Cybele > >I am not quite sure whom I am discussing with on >Archan Chah's teaching. But my point is that >if some Buddhist says that there is no reason/use >in reading the actual words of the Buddha, then, >he/she is in a denger of losing the sight of the >Buddha's teaching. Even if the similes cited by >Archan Chah and those uttered by the Buddha were >exactly the same, this fact wouldn't >gurantee that he and the Buddha are on the same >wave-length (as far as the right practice is >concerned). >tadao > 6625 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 5:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders > > >"He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does >not > > >become > > >a monster himself." > > > > > > We are becoming pathetic by now. > > I am not hunting anybody. > > I found that Erik interferred on a thread without actually >following it because indeed he assumed lots of things about my practice >that indeed were very much in harmony with his approach. > > What shows me that he haven't read what I wrote previously. > > I felt him very much coming in 'rescue' and I think that you are >quite capable of handling it alone. >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. Everything is worth noting for me Anders. And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my assumed attack on 'nationalism'. Cybele 6626 From: Tori Korshak Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 5:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody > Dear Cybele, Dhamma is uplifting, kalyana, Meditation is mind training, enabling awareness, a determining factor, a conditon. Studying provides the knowledge, meditation provides the experience, like the blind man carrying the cripple. Together they help each other. Metta, Victoria >Dhamma is lively, I don't let myself be fooled by rigidity >and narrowmindness, Dhamma is wide enough to embrace everybody and >everything, is heartwarming and a source of strenght, it's fullness, openess >because is empty of self and can contain everything without oppression: >dhamma is about freedom, be still and feel the refreshing breeze in this hot >afternoon. :-) >Just practicing for it's own sake, I don't demand nothing, I don't expect >nothing just being present, awake to this very moment. > >Love > >CYbele > > 6627 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 6:36pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 11:20 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > > Dear Tadao > > Very surprised you don't know Ajahn Chah; he is considered in the Theravada > world one of the most eminent monks and teachers. > Like Buddhadasa in importance without being a scholar. > He was for the active practice with a lot of enhancement on meditation. > And regarding 'losing sight of the Buddha's of the Budddha's teachings', his > 'order' of Forest Monks is one of the most strict on Vinaya rules for > example. > Most of the greatest teachers have always been humorous and without > pomposity. > Wisdom it is not always solemn. A friend of mine actually emailed a story about him just yesterday. It goes like this: One time, a lady who was an expert at Abhidhamma and a teacher of Abhidhamma came to see Ajahn Chah. She told him how studying the Abhidhamma helped her understanding. Ajahn Chah smiled. Then she told him how the books of Abhidhamma helped her students grasp the teachings. Ajahn Chah smiled and agreed. Then she asked him if he encouraged his students to study Abidhamma too. He said he did. Then she asked "what books?" Ajahn Chan pointed to his heart and said, "Only here. Only here." 6628 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 6:33pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 11:36 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. > > Everything is worth noting for me Anders. > And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my assumed attack > on 'nationalism'. Yes, isn't it? Nonetheless, the test of those words lies in your own use of them, not some German philosopher's. 6629 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 6:37pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 9:42 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! > > I'll buy that one. :-) Now, should I go and chop wood one way or the > > other... > > only if you're building a fire. Aah, I'll just go carry the water instead then. 6630 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 6:45pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 9:57 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Your contention dones't sound at all ignorant to me. Nor to acharyas like Master Vasubandhu, who also questioned how Nibbana, lacking all marks, can possibly be "cognized" by citta, which by definition has sanna as a component among the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas. How can sanna perform its function when there is nothing to mark, Nibbana being unconditioned? I haev yet to see any satisfactory explanation of this, and yet if we read what Khun Sujin says: >"Cakkhu-vinnana-citta does not arise with lobha, dosa, moha or any other sobhana-cetasika. Cakkhu-vinnana-citta arises with only seven cetasika, namely phassa-cetasika, vedana-cetasika, sanna-cetasika, cetana-cetasika, ekaggata-cetasika, jivitindriya-cetasika and manasikara-cetasika. These seven cetasika are the sabba-citta- sadharana-cetasika, the cetasika that arises with all citta. The citta cannot arise without these seven cetasika. No matter which kind of citta, akusala-, kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, lokuttara-citta or any citta whatever, would have to arise concurrently with these seven cetasika. These sabba-citta-sadharana-cetasika are the annasamana-cetasika, or cetasika that conform with whatever they arise with. Concurring with akusala-citta, the seven sabba-citta- sadharana-cetasika are akusala; with kusala-citta, they are kusala etc." >To recap the key point here: "No matter which kind of citta, akusala- , kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, ***lokuttara-citta*** or ***any citta whatever***, would have to arise concurrently with these seven cetasika." >Very clearly lokuttara cittas have sanna using this definition from the Abhidhamma. What I'd like to understand is how the Abhidhamma can possibly support this contention, because by reason alone it entails the absdurd consequence that Nibbana is somehow conditioned! How could it be otherwise if sanna is a part of the mix? Sanna by definition requires someTHING to mark, and the act of "marking" immediately creates a this/that, subject/object (Nibbana as object, citta as subject) dichotomy. And nowhere is there any "mark" (other than anatta) that applies to Nibbana, and how can one possibly perceiev the existence of a mere absence of greed, hatred, and delusion? Given there are NO, as in, zero, zip, nada, nil, kein, nichivo conventional marks that pertain to Nibbana, how can sanna possibly perform any function of "marking" the Nibbaba as arammana without any samutti aspect there to mark? Can sanna possibly mark what doesn't even exist conventionally? >I really like your probing this issue. It's something I've always >questioned in terms of the notion that lokuttara cittas >somehow "cognize" Nibbana. I have to say that the Mahayanist scriptures are a lot more clear on this subject than the Pali Canon (I guess that's why they wrote them). I thought the subject was settled with the sutta quotation I provided about consciousness without feature and end, being unconditioned, but that wasn't really accepted since unestablished consciousness as Nibbana is mentioned only in two suttas. Well, I have let my view of all this be known and this is the last participation that I will make on this subject. 6631 From: Ong Teng Kee <165071178165221135048061175168240089018102139234061113> Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 7:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]bhavangacitta(Jim) Dear Jim, I think this email by Nina is a good reply for your question about bhavanga .If we try to know the bhavanga object through mind door ,it will follow by 7 kusala or akusala javana which is still not the resultant bhavanga citta.The other 5 doors won't work as well. ----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:15:25 +0200 To: <114015113213038031090057228208100015039145163254013098114113048091051010099190191156009204035181> Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]bhavangacitta > op 17-07-2001 06:02 schreef Robert Kirkpatrick op > Robert: > > > Dear Howard, > > A very good question. 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 other wise 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. > > Dear friends, I am very glad Robert wrote about the tape on bhavanga. I > would like to add a few things. I was present there and I remarked to Acharn > that I was so surprised that bhavangacitta could be object of awareness. > Acharn answerd: cannot be experienced.> When I asked: can the object of bhavangacitta be > known, the answer was: no. She explained about bhavangacitta: there is > nothing appearing and then an object appears when there are cittas arising > in a process that experience one of the objects through six doors. In other > words, there is nothing, meaning, no object impinges on one of the doorways > so that it can appear. Thus, we should not exclude bhavangacitta from the > objects of awareness. > Bhavangacitta is a difficult subject and I have heard that some people > translate it as subconsciousness, but this creates misunderstandings. It is > a citta that arises and falls away, there is a succession of them in between > the processes of cittas (vithicittas). They are citta, experiencing an > object and accompanied by feeling. What object, what feeling? Just before > death of the previous life kamma conditioned the last javana cittas, that > are kusala cittas or akusala cittas. If kusala kamma will produce a happy > rebirth, it conditions kusala javanacittas experiencing a desirable object, > and, as Acharn Sujin explained, it can be an object experienced through any > of the six doors. The rebirth-consciousness is not kusala citta, it is > kusala vipakacitta, thus of the jati (nature) of vipaka, result. There are > different types and of different degrees (for details, see Abhidhamma in > Daily Life, Ch 11). They can be with or without panna, they can be > accompanied by pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. They experience an > object, but not an object that is impinging on one of the six doors, like > the cittas, arising in processes. They experience the same object as the > object experienced by the last javanacittas of the previous life. The > succeeding bhavangacitta and all the bhavangacittas are the same type of > vipakacitta as the rebirth-consciousness, and they experience the same > object, and they are accompanied by the same feeling, pleasant or > indifferent. > If akusala kamma will produce an unhappy rebirth, it conditions akusala > javanacittas just before death and these experience an undesirable object, > such as a symbol or sign of the akusala kamma one performed, or an image of > one's nextdestiny. The rebirthconsciousness that is akusala vipaka > experiences the same undesirable object, and it is accompanied by > indifferent feeling. It is actually the same type of citta as > santiranacitta, investigating consciousness, but here it does not arise in a > process, it is "doorfreed" (dvara vimutta) and performs the function of > rebirth. It is ahetuka (rootless) akusala vipakacitta. Thus, although the > last javanacittas that were akusala cittas could be dosamulacittas > accompanied by unpleasant feeling, the vipakacitta that is > rebirth-consciousness conditioned by the akusala kamma conditioning those > javanacittas, cannot be accompanied by unpleasant feeling, it is ahetuka > vipakacitta, accompanied by indifferent feeling only. The following > bhavangacittas are the same type of citta, experiencing the same undesirable > object, accompanied by the same feeling. > > Jonothan touched on another important point: can we find details on the > processes of cittas in the scriptures, or is there just the nucleus of them? > I have mentioned this in my preface to "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", > because I thought people would like to know about this. Yes, we find > important material on this subject in the "Path of Discrimination", > Patisambhidamagga, of the Khuddaka Nikaya, Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XVII, > Behaviour, Cariya. And also in the Conditional Relations, Patthana, Feeling > Triplet, Investigation Chapter, under Proximity and Repetition, where also > the process of enlightenment is dealt with. But we have to know that the > cittas arising in processes are referred to as mind-element (including > adverting-consciousness and receiving-consciousness) and > mind-consciousness-element (all cittas other than those included in > mind-element and the sense-cognitions of seeing, etc.). I shall not quote > now, that takes too much time. The commentaries have worked out more > details, but they are based on very old sources of the Theravada tradition. > Buddhagosa did not put in his own ideas. > Nina. > 6632 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 8:30pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders > > >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. > > > > Everything is worth noting for me Anders. > > And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my assumed >attack > > on 'nationalism'. > >Yes, isn't it? Nonetheless, the test of those words lies in your own use of >them, not some German philosopher's. Yes but you cannot dismiss the fact that quotating the philosopher you burden the message of a particular indeniable significance 'connected'. Difficult noting without considering the cultural/social aspect in this case for me. Cultural conditionings are extremely hard to uproot. Cybele 6633 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Tadao, I went through a phase 8 or 9 years ago when I read "A Still Forest Pool: The Insight Meditation of Achaan Chah" repeatedly. It certainly helped me to suffer less. I went to the temple in Thailand where his remains are kept purely out of respect for him, to express my gratitude for his teachings. Derek. 6634 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear Tori > >Dear Cybele, > > Dhamma is uplifting, kalyana, Meditation is mind training, enabling >awareness, a determining factor, a conditon. Studying provides the >knowledge, meditation provides the experience, like the blind man carrying >the cripple. Together they help each other. > >Metta, >Victoria > Sadhu x 3 dear friend. What is the true meditation? It is to make everything: coughing, swallowing, waving the arms, actions, the evil and the good, prosperity and shame, gain and loss, right and wrong, into one single koan. Hakuin Love Cybele 6635 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 8:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Derek > >Tadao, I went through a phase 8 or 9 years ago when I read "A Still >Forest Pool: The Insight Meditation of Achaan Chah" repeatedly. It >certainly helped me to suffer less. I went to the temple in Thailand >where his remains are kept purely out of respect for him, to express >my gratitude for his teachings. > >Derek. I share your admiration and reverence for Ajahn Chah. When I read his books there is a disclosure inside me, compassion arises and understanding of Dhamma becomes experience. I was attracted to Theravada teachings because of a wonderful book of his disciple Ajahn Sumeddho - 'The mind and the way'. 'A Still Forest Pool' is a very inspiring book indeed. He was a great teacher and a great human being. I bow to his memory. Cybele 6636 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Gayan >oh..easy for me.. >just 70+ miles from where i live. > Lucky guy!!! You live in paradise. Serendipy Island! ;-) I love Sri Lanka Gayan, I lived in Kandy and I spent plenty of time in Nilambe high up among tea plantations near Galaha. There I took the refuges and precepts with Ven. Dhammika. Have you ever been there? Did you meet Godwin Samaratne? Love Cybele 6637 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:54pm Subject: A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Anders Dear everybody > > Most of the greatest teachers have always been humorous and without > > pomposity. > > Wisdom it is not always solemn. Anders: >A friend of mine actually emailed a story about him just yesterday. It goes >like this: > >One time, a lady who was an expert at Abhidhamma and a teacher of >Abhidhamma came to see Ajahn Chah. She told him how studying the >Abhidhamma helped her understanding. Ajahn Chah smiled. Then she told >him how the books of Abhidhamma helped her students grasp the >teachings. Ajahn Chah smiled and agreed. Then she asked him if he >encouraged his students to study Abidhamma too. He said he did. Then >she >asked "what books?" Ajahn Chan pointed to his heart and said, "Only >here. Only here." Thank you very much for this. Very soothing. I am also a firm believer of a path with heart: there is no wisdom without compassion and when compassion arises it is because there is already a clear comprehension. This is also my personal journey and has been unfolding like this since I have memory of it. I was indeed reflecting, pondering this morning that I am far too anarchyc for the imprinting of this list. Here the members are for the analytical approach of Dhamma, very logical, methodic, rational, abstract, concentrated; sticking faithfully to the texts and not considering different perspectives that could be a distraction or misleading for their studies. I am ardent, passionate, intuitive, misruled, never abstract, always referring to actual experience, very openminded to different sources of knowledge. Sometimes communication just doesn't occur, the right conditions are not there and my skills are limited by my own conditionings and I feel quite frustrated, powerless. I get impatient. I try to 'listen' to others and not only to my self just seeking reassurance on my 'beliefs'. But often I don't feel 'exchange', there is a kind of impermeability. Whether no one is listening or I am totally unable to communicate in a intelligible language for this list. Or both. Perhaps I should consider the Zen saying: Say one word with your mouth shut! And as Erik say mind 'my own bhavana' instead of struggling to communicate. Anyway whatever I have to express is certainly not so important uttering. Or listening. Metta Cybele 6638 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Fwd: [Women-in-Buddhism] 20 Difficulties For Humans, smile :) >The Buddha said : > >"There are twenty difficult things which are hard for human beings: > >1. It is hard to practice charity when one is poor. >2. It is hard to study the Way when occupying a position of great >authority. >3. It is hard to surrender life at the approach of inevitable death. >4. It is hard to get an opportunity to read the sutras. >5. It is hard to be born directly into a Buddhist environment. >6. It is hard to bear lust and desire without yielding to them. >7. It is hard to see something attractive without desiring it. > >*8. It is hard to bear insult without making an angry reply [smile :)] > >9. It is hard to have power and not pay regard to it. >10. It is hard to come in contact with things and yet remain >unaffected by them. >11. It is hard to study widely and investigate everything thoroughly. >12. It is hard to overcome selfishness and sloth. >13. It is hard to avoid making light without having studied the Way >enough. >14. It is hard to keep the mind evenly balanced. >15. It is hard to refrain from defining things as being something or >not being something. >16. It is hard to come into contact with clear perception of the Way. >17. It is hard to perceive one's own nature and through such >perception to study the Way. > >*18. It is hard to help others towards Enlightenment according to >their various needs. [keep smiling :) regularly] > >19. It is hard to see the end of the Way without being moved. >20. It is hard to discard successfully the shackles that bind us to >the wheel of life and death as opportunities present themselves." > >(From: The Sutra of 42 Sections, Kinh Tu+' Tha^.p Nhi. Chu+o+ng) > > >Metta > >Cybele > 6639 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:15pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders Thanks for your comments. > > Just one aspect of your post I would like to comment on. You said- > > > > > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite > > > difficult > > > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, > through > > > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to > it, in > > > order to observe it. > > > > The object of panna of the level of satipatthana/vipassana must be a > > reality appearing at that moment. I am not sure how the observance of > > cause and effect fits into this. > > Well, cause and effect is just my 'western label' for dependent > co-origination. OK. I thought perhaps you were referring to kamma and vipaka. But my comment still applies. I was trying to make the point that understanding 'cause and effect' is not the same as understanding the characteristic of a reality presently appearing. Vipassana involves the latter. It is only this that leads eventually to the eradication of defilements. Our task in this life is to develop understanding at the level of vipassana to the degree possible. To what extent there is understanding of dependent origination is another matter. > > Would you not > > consider the clinging to be a possible possible object for panna? > > Ooh, yes definitely. good point! Any mental factor is an applicable > object Glad you agree, Anders! As I'm sure you know, applicable objects include rupas as well as mental factors and consciousness, something that people sometimes overlook. Everyone wants to know the mind, but no-one seems interested in boring old visible object, sound etc. In fact, we have exactly the same misconceptions (ie. wrong view) about these objects when they appear as we do about mental objects -- we take them for self (not always 'our' self, but self nonetheless), so they need to be known as they are, too. > (personally, I found observing clinging to be very hard to discern > directly > initially though. Don't know how that's like for others). It's there all the time, if only we knew how to recognise it. Again, I think there is often a tendency, for obvious reasons, to want to see the realities that are kusala rather than those that are akusala (eg, the equanimity rather than the clinging). In fact, there is so much of the latter but so little of the former. Having the idea that certain realities are more desirable or more worth knowing about than others can be an obstacle to the arising of awareness of a reality appearing at the present moment. Jon 6640 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Determining consciousness Hi, Herman --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > I have scoured the net, and have found very little regarding > votthapana, determining consciousness. Google gave me 40 hits , with > at least a quarter being in languages I did not comprehend. All the > references I read amounted to less than an A4 page of information. > > There are millions of pages on kamma, with myriads of interesting, > sometimes amusing, often conflicting views. Likewise kusala and > akusala. > > But very little on votthapana. This citta is not determined by kamma. > And this citta determines whether what follows is kusala or akusala. > It is the crux of the biscuit, how things are determined. This is > where right view and wrong view arise. What determines the result of > a votthapana-citta? > > If anyone can assist in my quest for freedom, and tell me more about > determining consciousness, I would be grateful. I like your vivid description "the crux of the biscuit". Before you get too frustrated with the apparent lack of information about how to get on top of this chap, let me mention a point that I have just come across in looking for references. Apparently the votthapana citta arises only in cognative processes through one of the 5 sense doors. It does not arise in a cognative process occurring in the mind door independently of the physical senses. This leaves a whole lot of mind door processes that are without this particular citta, but which are still kusala or akusala. So votthapana citta might not be the key to everything after all! Jon. 6641 From: Tori Korshak Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 11:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Derek and Cybele, Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu. I too share your admiration and reverence for Ajahn Chah. Metta, Victoria >Dear Derek > > > > >Tadao, I went through a phase 8 or 9 years ago when I read "A Still > >Forest Pool: The Insight Meditation of Achaan Chah" repeatedly. It > >certainly helped me to suffer less. I went to the temple in Thailand > >where his remains are kept purely out of respect for him, to express > >my gratitude for his teachings. > > > >Derek. > >I share your admiration and reverence for Ajahn Chah. >When I read his books there is a disclosure inside me, compassion arises and >understanding of Dhamma becomes experience. >I was attracted to Theravada teachings because of a wonderful book of his >disciple Ajahn Sumeddho - 'The mind and the way'. >'A Still Forest Pool' is a very inspiring book indeed. >He was a great teacher and a great human being. >I bow to his memory. > >Cybele > 6642 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Determining consciousness op 19-07-2001 13:35 schreef Herman op Herman: > > I have scoured the net, and have found very little regarding > votthapana, determining consciousness. This citta is not determined by kamma. > And this citta determines whether what follows is kusala or akusala. > It is the crux of the biscuit, how things are determined. This is > where right view and wrong view arise. What determines the result of > a votthapana-citta? Dear Herman, the accumulated kusala or akusala condition the cittas succeeding the votthapanacitta, determining consciousness. This citta is neither cause nor result, it is kiriyacitta, inoperative citta. It is ahetuka, without beautiful roots or unwholesome roots. It is actually the same type of citta as the mind-door adverting-consciousness, but in a sense-door process it performs the function of votthapana, determining. After, for example, seeing-consciousnes, the vipakacitta, citta that is result of kamma, experiences a pleasant object or an unpleasant object, the receiving-consciousness (sampaticchanacitta) that is also vipaka follows in its train, then investigating-consciousness (santirana-citta) that is also vipaka, "investigates" the object just for one extremely short moment, and after that votthapanacitta arises, that determines the object just for one extremely short moment, it determines whether kusala cittas or akusala cittas will follow, but that citta itself is kiriyacitta. There is a fixed order of the cittas arising in a process, it is all so fast. It takes its course according to different conditions. If there is wise attention to the object, be it pleasant (desirable) or unpleasant (undesirable), kusala cittas will follow the votthapanacitta. If there is unwise attention, akusala cittas will follow, and this is according to conditions. The same happens in a mind-door process, then the mind-door adverting-consciousness is followed by kusala cittas or by akusala cittas, depending on accumulated conditions. We have accumulated both akusala and kusala, but there are certain factors that can condition whether kusala citta or akusala citta arises, such as good or bad friends, the surroundings where one lives, the possibility to hear Dhamma, or the absence of this possibility, the development of satipatthana, etc. There is no person who can induce the arising of kusala citta or akusala citta, it all depends on conditions, and the different cittas arise and fall away extremely rapidly. Nina. 6643 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:43am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Yet, in the Satipatthana, it is > mentioned to be (perhaps ambiguously for some people) the only path. Kom, The idea that the Mahasatipa.t.thaana Sutta claims its practices to be the "only" path is based on mistranslating the Pali word ekaayano. Derek. 6644 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:48am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Typo: should be ekayaano, not ekaayano. Derek. 6645 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 3:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Derek Very tricky, you remark on the fact that there was a mistranslation of the pali word and doesn't explain the actual meaning. Very cryptical. :-) Ekayano maggo more than the sole and only way is translated as 'the DIRECT or STRAIGHT path'. A designation of Satipatthana indeed. LOve Cybele >From: "Derek Cameron" >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom >Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:43:47 -0000 > >--- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Yet, in the Satipatthana, it is > > mentioned to be (perhaps ambiguously for some people) the only path. > >Kom, > >The idea that the Mahasatipa.t.thaana Sutta claims its practices to >be the "only" path is based on mistranslating the Pali word ekaayano. > >Derek. > > 6646 From: Num Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Determining consciousness Dear Nina, I am kind of pretty busy because my vacation is coming. I have to finish couple of things before taking off. Anyway, it's hard to be a lurker. I am not good at that at all. <> Let me ask you about "desirable and undesirable" objects. What's the criteria or definitions of being "desirable and undesirable". Let me give you some examples, I enjoy listen to the music while driving. When I am working or reading, I cannot stand listening to the same song even at the lowest volume. When it's hot, I love the rain to come but when I play tennis outdoor, I do not want it to rain. Umm, let say when I see something attractive, as Cybele post about 20 difficulties for humans, it's hard not to desire or give in. At times, I wish I am not seeing them because lobha is so fast, quick and sticky in grasping the objects. About the blood, some will faint when they see even a drop of blood, I do not really like to see it but when I see it, the blood is the blood. I do not feel it desirable or undesirable. Some people love to see flowering trees in spring, some prefer to see a colorful fall. I feel suffocated wearing tight shirt, some people really like to wear it. So are "desirable and undesirable" quality are objects of individual affection? Is there a neutral object as well? Since all vipaka citta and cetasika as well as all rupa are abyakata dhamma. Desirable or undesirable quality seems to be as part kusala or akusula. I am not clear about this. From my thinking visual object is visual object, like or dislike depends on one's accumulation. Anumodhana in your dedication. Num 6647 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 4:07am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Dear Derek > Very tricky, you remark on the fact that there was a mistranslation of the > pali word and doesn't explain the actual meaning. > Very cryptical. :-) Cybele, you're teasing me! :-) I was being purposefully brief because I thought we'd already discussed this issue ... but maybe that was on another list? Anyway, ekayaano maggo "one-going path" is a path that goes to only one place -- a path sure to lead to that one place. In the other example of this word in the Pali Canon, it's used to describe a physical path that leads to a pit of burning coals ... in other words, a path that's sure to lead you directly to that one place. I think someone said that it's the commentary on the MN that misleads people into translating it as "only," but I'm not sure about that point, since I don't stay up late a nights reading the commentaries! Derek. 6648 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 4:13am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Derek, Thanks for pointing that out. The new traslation in the Wisdom Publication comments on this multiplicity as well. kom --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > Typo: should be ekayaano, not ekaayano. > > Derek. 6649 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:55am Subject: Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... Dear Herman >> >Cybele, > >Why eat meat before abstaining (carnivale)? The theory of carnivale >is one thing. It has to do with preparation for fasting and >contemplation. > >The practise of carnivale is another thing. Anytime I've been close >enough to see, it has been pure, unadulterated debauchery. Have you ever been in Brazil? If not you cannot understand the meaning of carnival and just dismiss it as 'debauchery', too simplicistic a view labelling it as excessive indulgence on sensual pleasures. Carnival doesn't belong to many cultures, difficult to analyse what is so unfamiliar to you and the show staged for tourists you watch in tv is not the real celebration. Moralistic suppression is not going to sublimate your instincts anyway. I always observed that more somebody try and repress more strong opposition and resistance arise. It's a very simple principle of physics - a force exerted in opposition to an applied force. Politically as ethically I still prefer being an anarchic than a reactionary. > >Which aspect were you hoping to share with the Scandinavians? :-) Well Herman, it depends on their gender actually. I would have interesting sharings with the male gender but then you don't indulge yourself. Too bad... :-)))) Cybele > > >Herman > > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > > > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > > > > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? > > > > Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all >over the > > place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly >scandinavians. > > ;-) > > > > Cybele > > > 6650 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: Good luck with your trip to Bangkok. My suggestion regarding your plan to visit to Wat Mahaataat is that there are a fair number of monesteris which Westerns frequent (e.g., Wat Bown), so try these places, too. tadao 6651 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:30am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah From the viewpoint of paramatta dhamma, there is no difference in so-called enverionment between in past and at present. The (past) diciples of the Buddha faced with the same realities which we have been facing at this moment. The most important thing to understand is whether we have a decent understanding that we are sorouned by what we have to verify for 24 hours a day. tadao 6652 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Hi, Cybele: Plese forgive my ignorance of not knowing who he was. (Thailand have prduced many fine meditation monks. At my era in Thailand, it was Archan Maha Boa.) The point I want to make is that if a teacher says that we need not read/listen to the Buddha's words, then, there is a fundamental problem with his teaching. tadao 6653 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Hi, Derek: As I am repeatedly saying, I am not evaluating his entire practice. I am commenting on his comment (from one source) that reading/listening to Buddha's words does not have any siginicance. If his method has helped you have less suffering, that is great. However, then, you have to think by your self very seriously whether you can confidently regard it as the way to eliminate all of your sufferings in a complete manner or not. You CANNOT CURE your headaches just by taking aspirines. Assited by your doctor, you have to find what the real cause of your headaches is, and have to find a medical treatment which can eradicate the underlying cause of the headache. There are a lot of people who are happy with having less headache without finding its cause. However, there are also people who would like to understand the real cause of the headache despite the fact that he/she may continuously suffer from the headache. If one combines both approaches, then, it would be nice. If, however, one think that by taking aspirines every day, one CAN eventually cure one's headache, then, he is fooling himself. tadao 6654 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 3:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: It shouldn't be the goal of your (possible) ordination. But a good thing with spending a life as a monk is that you will have a lot of your own time. No more (waste of) time for shopping or cooking. You can spend your own time for your meditation or for your Pali study. In realities, monks' life is not devoid of various chores. But, as a foreiger, you will be in a better position of not involving with various monesteric activities which Thai monks are obliged to perform. Besides Pali, you will possible be required to study Thai, learning of which is rather essential if you would like to travel. Do not expect that many Thais speak (decent) English (especially in rural areas). Once you are able to find suitable place(s) and to be sorrounded by entheatic/devoted Buddhists, your life as a monk would be rewardring. But I will warn you that these two conditions are rather hard to come by. tadao 6655 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:16am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders and Erik Sorry to be coming in late (just when you’re ready to drop the subject, Anders). Having briefly checked the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha (Bh. Bodhi translation – CMA), I think there may be some confusion between the question of whether Nibbana is a reality and therefore capable of being experienced, and its attribute as the ‘signless’. To summarise what I found on this issue— 1. Nibbana is classified as one of the ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas). Ultimate realities are distinguished from concepts in that they exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhava). 2. Nibbana is the object of each of the 8 supramundane cittas (ie. the path and fruition cittas of the 4 stages of enlightenment) 3. Nibbana has one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the unconditioned deathless element totally transcendent to the conditioned world. 4. Nibbana has 3 different aspects-- 4.1 It is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of greed, hatred, and delusion, and because it is devoid of all that is conditioned. 4.2 It is called signless (animitta) because it is free from the signs of greed, etc., and free from the signs of all conditioned things. 4.3 It is called desireless (appanihita) because it is free from the hankering of greed, etc., and because it is not desired by craving. 5. Nibbana is excluded from the category of the 5 aggregates because it lacks differentiation (such as past, present , future). [References: CMA Ch I, #2, #26-28; Ch VI, #31; Ch VII, #40] I think this represents the orthodox Theravadin doctrine. Jon --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 9:57 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness > vs. > Nibbbana - Final round! > >Your contention dones't sound at all ignorant to me. Nor to acharyas > like Master Vasubandhu, who also questioned how Nibbana, lacking all > marks, can possibly be "cognized" by citta, which by definition has > sanna as a component among the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas. How > can sanna perform its function when there is nothing to mark, Nibbana > being unconditioned? I haev yet to see any satisfactory explanation > of this, and yet if we read what Khun Sujin says: > >"Cakkhu-vinnana-citta does not arise with lobha, dosa, moha or any > other sobhana-cetasika. Cakkhu-vinnana-citta arises with only seven > cetasika, namely phassa-cetasika, vedana-cetasika, sanna-cetasika, > cetana-cetasika, ekaggata-cetasika, jivitindriya-cetasika and > manasikara-cetasika. These seven cetasika are the sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika, the cetasika that arises with all citta. The > citta cannot arise without these seven cetasika. No matter which > kind of citta, akusala-, kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, lokuttara-citta > or any citta whatever, would have to arise concurrently with these > seven cetasika. These sabba-citta-sadharana-cetasika are the > annasamana-cetasika, or cetasika that conform with whatever they > arise with. Concurring with akusala-citta, the seven sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika are akusala; with kusala-citta, they are kusala > etc." > >To recap the key point here: "No matter which kind of citta, akusala- > , kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, ***lokuttara-citta*** or ***any citta > whatever***, would have to arise concurrently with these seven > cetasika." > >Very clearly lokuttara cittas have sanna using this definition from > the Abhidhamma. What I'd like to understand is how the Abhidhamma can > possibly support this contention, because by reason alone it entails > the absdurd consequence that Nibbana is somehow conditioned! How > could it be otherwise if sanna is a part of the mix? Sanna by > definition requires someTHING to mark, and the act of "marking" > immediately creates a this/that, subject/object (Nibbana as object, > citta as subject) dichotomy. And nowhere is there any "mark" (other > than anatta) that applies to Nibbana, and how can one possibly > perceiev the existence of a mere absence of greed, hatred, and > delusion? Given there are NO, as in, zero, zip, nada, nil, kein, > nichivo conventional marks that pertain to Nibbana, how can sanna > possibly perform any function of "marking" the Nibbaba as arammana > without any samutti aspect there to mark? Can sanna possibly mark > what doesn't even exist conventionally? > >I really like your probing this issue. It's something I've always > >questioned in terms of the notion that lokuttara cittas > >somehow "cognize" Nibbana. > > I have to say that the Mahayanist scriptures are a lot more clear on > this > subject than the Pali Canon (I guess that's why they wrote them). I > thought > the subject was settled with the sutta quotation I provided about > consciousness without feature and end, being unconditioned, but that > wasn't > really accepted since unestablished consciousness as Nibbana is > mentioned > only in two suttas. Well, I have let my view of all this be known and > this > is the last participation that I will make on this subject. > > 6656 From: gayan Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:34am Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah dear cybele, > You live in paradise. Serendipy Island! ;-) Yeah, true to some point, only realised it after i started globetrotting.. > I love Sri Lanka Gayan, I lived in Kandy and I spent plenty of time in > Nilambe high up among tea plantations near Galaha. > There I took the refuges and precepts with Ven. Dhammika. What a great experience! You surely must have gathered much momentum for the "slow upward spiral"( as robert beautifully put , if i remember correctly) You are one lucky 'sacca gavesi'(truth seeker) > Have you ever been there? Sadly no, :0( , so close yet so far But most of my friends have been there, and they always explain the beauty and calmness there. >Did you meet Godwin Samaratne? Again, unfortunately ,no. But him as a kalyana mitta and his efforts are inspirations to many. I wish i had found refuge in the dhamma much earlier in my life, so I would have had the drive to meet the people I admire. But as we undertand , these things are uncontrollable. wish you a happy journey in dhamma rgds 6657 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina Bruce --- bruce wrote: > thanks for this reply jon -- yes, this does help, especially your > wrap-it-up description of my "condsideration" albatross...i hope to ask > khun sujin for further clarification if i get the chance.... > > *intending* to have awareness is not, er, intentional, at least in my > daily > sitting and noticing throughout the day...it's probably there but in > that > pesky realm everyone refers to as "subtle"..."intention" is the seed for > a > whole new series of questions...if it's been discussed before, though, > perhaps you or someone else could give me message #s or dates or subject > titles to search? I have just had a quick look in the 'Useful Posts' section of our website (link copied below) but could not see anything under 'intention'. However, you may want to try one or two of the posts mentioned there. Otherwise we look forward to your report or any discussion on this subject with Khun Sujin! Jon http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL%20POST%20LINKS 6658 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:17pm Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Dear Tadao, Thank you for your kind words. "Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers" --- William Wordsworth Derek. 6659 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 1:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Mike Thanks for this sutta reference - very apposite, as usual. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Jon, > > I'd like to thank the contributors to the equanimity > thread, especially Kom--I had no idea how many > different connotations 'upekkha' has in the texts and > always just sort of took them all in in a sort of > vague, general sense (as I usually do). > > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > I think we have to be careful here. The so-called > > practice of developing equanimity may in fact not be > > kusala of any kind at all. If it stems from a > > desire to have less lobha and dosa (whether > > because of the belief that lobha and dosa are > > antithetical to the development of understanding or > > for any other reason), it is bound to be akusala. > > It is just an aspect of the desire for more > > kusala/understanding or less akusala. I am not > > saying this is so in your case, but I mention it > > because one often finds references which seem to > > suggest that this is part of the way of practice > > taught by the Buddha. > > I did want to add one more citation: > > "'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be > pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in > reference to what was it said? When one knows of a > feeling of equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, > unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful > mental qualities decline,' that sort of equanimity is > not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of > equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful > mental qualities decline, and skillful mental > qualities increase,' that sort of equanimity is to be > pursued. And this sort of equanimity may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Equanimity is of two > sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' > Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it > said." > > Digha Nikaya 21 > Sakka-pańha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html > > mike Yes, if only we were able to tell the difference between kusala and akusala by knowing the characteristic of each, rather than only being able to guess at it by thinking in terms of the situation (eg 'I'm studying dhamma, so it must be kusala'). Thanks again, Mike. Jon 6660 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 4:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah - Tadao Dear Tadao > >Hi, Cybele: >Plese forgive my ignorance of not knowing who he was. >(Thailand have produced many fine meditation monks. >At my era in Thailand, it was Archan Maha Boa.) Ajahn Chan is well known and venerated in Thailand since long, long time I can assure you. The Forest Tradition is not a novelty. Obviously for who cares to know about it. >The point I want to make is that if a teacher says that >we need not read/listen to the Buddha's words, then, >there is a fundamental problem with his teaching. >tadao Tadao, that you judge all the teaching of Ajahn Chan for a short story you read about him it doesn't seems to me very penetrative observation of reality. However he never stated that you don't need to read/listen to the Buddha's words; you failed the interpretation of the story, what he meant is not conceptual thought but LISTENING WITH YOUR HEART. There is a fundamental problem with studying Buddha's teachings and being judgemental and heedless in your thought and speech. That any person express so lightly an opinion about somebody they know nothing is quite UNREALISTIC and unmindful. Why we have to be so rigid about the path? There are many approaches for different personalities, temperaments and this is being faithful to Buddha's teachings the same. Articulate words is so simple, don't tell me, I've lived on it but being mindful before we spit sentences is another issue. I know it as well, being of impulsive nature. Rigidity lead to things like Taliban. And what I am declaring is not out of antipathy for you but fruit of my right or wrong understanding on this subject. Metta Cybele 6661 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 5:22pm Subject: thailand/west --- ppp wrote: . Do not expect that many Thais speak > (decent) English (especially in rural areas). Once you are > able to find suitable place(s) and to be sorrounded > by entheatic/devoted Buddhists, your life as > a monk would be rewardring. ______ Thanks Tadao, Your presence on this group is so valuable. I was never a monk but can certainly verify the truth of the enthusiam and genuine understanding of many Thai's. I know of the wrongviews by a few; however, it seems I meet so many who have keen insight. Thai's who see the advantage of learning the deep aspects of Dhamma can well see that there is really no one. So when discussing Dhamma with them there are always questions and comments that aim to wipe away further the idea of self. It seems rarer to find this in the west; often even the most basic understanding of anatta is disputed; and so the same aspects have to be repeated again and again. This made me think of Bruce's recent comment on how the discussions on dsg are confusing and how he is looking forward to Thailand; and this is one of the conditions the Buddha gave for right view (residing in a suitable place where true Dhamma can be heard). It is hard for most to see that while discussing Dhamma there are immediate conditions for insight: that even at this moment conditioned dhammas are arising. They think study and practice are somehow separate - this stems from strongly held self-view. WE think we have to do this or that before insight arises - not realising that there is nobody who can do anything, but that any moment can be understood if panna has been developed; while no moment can be understood(at the level of satipatthana) if there is an idea of 'me' seeing. Some want to have 'experience', they think Abhidhamma is intellectual, they want to know their own heart; but what is more real than nama and rupa that is arising now? What could be more useful than learning to see what is really there - fleeting, insignificant dhammas- nobody. As this is gradually known a profound detachment - from taking any moment as mine- develops. (detachment from sense objects comes later) I guess i've visited thailand almost thirty times, and every time I'm humbled by the degree of confidence (saddha) and wisdom(panna) so many Thai's. robert 6662 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 6:13pm Subject: Re: Determining consciousness Dear Nina and Jon, ( no intention to exclude others I am unaware of) Thank you sincerely for the time and effort taken to answer the question. I often feel that I lack time. There are so many things which beg for attention, and the days consist of choosing this, rejecting that as objects for further consideration. Thank you again. Herman --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 19-07-2001 13:35 Herman wrote: > > > > > > I have scoured the net, and have found very little regarding > > votthapana, determining consciousness. This citta is not determined by kamma. > > And this citta determines whether what follows is kusala or akusala. > > It is the crux of the biscuit, how things are determined. This is > > where right view and wrong view arise. What determines the result of > > a votthapana-citta? > > Dear Herman, the accumulated kusala or akusala condition the cittas > succeeding the votthapanacitta, determining consciousness. This citta is > neither cause nor result, it is kiriyacitta, inoperative citta. It is > ahetuka, without beautiful roots or unwholesome roots. It is actually the > same type of citta as the mind-door adverting-consciousness, but in a > sense-door process it performs the function of votthapana, determining. > After, for example, seeing-consciousnes, the vipakacitta, citta that is > result of kamma, experiences a pleasant object or an unpleasant object, the > receiving-consciousness (sampaticchanacitta) that is also vipaka follows in > its train, then investigating-consciousness (santirana-citta) that is also > vipaka, "investigates" the object just for one extremely short moment, and > after that votthapanacitta arises, that determines the object just for one > extremely short moment, it determines whether kusala cittas or akusala > cittas will follow, but that citta itself is kiriyacitta. There is a fixed > order of the cittas arising in a process, it is all so fast. It takes its > course according to different conditions. If there is wise attention to the > object, be it pleasant (desirable) or unpleasant (undesirable), kusala > cittas will follow the votthapanacitta. If there is unwise attention, > akusala cittas will follow, and this is according to conditions. The same > happens in a mind-door process, then the mind-door adverting- consciousness > is followed by kusala cittas or by akusala cittas, depending on accumulated > conditions. We have accumulated both akusala and kusala, but there are > certain factors that can condition whether kusala citta or akusala citta > arises, such as good or bad friends, the surroundings where one lives, the > possibility to hear Dhamma, or the absence of this possibility, the > development of satipatthana, etc. > There is no person who can induce the arising of kusala citta or akusala > citta, it all depends on conditions, and the different cittas arise and fall > away extremely rapidly. > Nina. 6663 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Kom, sorry if I emberrass you, but you are a legend Herman 6664 From: bruce Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Determining consciousness nina this is so clearly explained! many thanks... bruce At 19:39 2001/07/20 +0200, you wrote: > op 19-07-2001 13:35 schreef Herman op > Herman: > > > > > > I have scoured the net, and have found very little regarding > > votthapana, determining consciousness. This citta is not determined by kamma. > > And this citta determines whether what follows is kusala or akusala. > > It is the crux of the biscuit, how things are determined. This is > > where right view and wrong view arise. What determines the result of > > a votthapana-citta? > > Dear Herman, the accumulated kusala or akusala condition the cittas > succeeding the votthapanacitta, determining consciousness. This citta is > neither cause nor result, it is kiriyacitta, inoperative citta. It is > ahetuka, without beautiful roots or unwholesome roots. It is actually the > same type of citta as the mind-door adverting-consciousness, but in a > sense-door process it performs the function of votthapana, determining. > After, for example, seeing-consciousnes, the vipakacitta, citta that is > result of kamma, experiences a pleasant object or an unpleasant object, the > receiving-consciousness (sampaticchanacitta) that is also vipaka follows in > its train, then investigating-consciousness (santirana-citta) that is also > vipaka, "investigates" the object just for one extremely short moment, and > after that votthapanacitta arises, that determines the object just for one > extremely short moment, it determines whether kusala cittas or akusala > cittas will follow, but that citta itself is kiriyacitta. There is a fixed > order of the cittas arising in a process, it is all so fast. It takes its > course according to different conditions. If there is wise attention to the > object, be it pleasant (desirable) or unpleasant (undesirable), kusala > cittas will follow the votthapanacitta. If there is unwise attention, > akusala cittas will follow, and this is according to conditions. The same > happens in a mind-door process, then the mind-door adverting-consciousness > is followed by kusala cittas or by akusala cittas, depending on accumulated > conditions. We have accumulated both akusala and kusala, but there are > certain factors that can condition whether kusala citta or akusala citta > arises, such as good or bad friends, the surroundings where one lives, the > possibility to hear Dhamma, or the absence of this possibility, the > development of satipatthana, etc. > There is no person who can induce the arising of kusala citta or akusala > citta, it all depends on conditions, and the different cittas arise and fall > away extremely rapidly. > Nina. > 6666 From: bruce Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Considering hi nina thanks also for this very appropriate quotation, although i must admit that i'm stumped by the exhortation at the end to "apply" and "be aware", as though there were a choice in the matter.... bruce At 19:15 2001/07/19 +0200, you wrote: > op 18-07-2001 18:42 schreef bruce op <>: > > > hi jon and nina > > > > apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and > > considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually > > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly > > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just > > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the Dhamma > > simply another way of saying "noting realities as they ppear at the six > > doors"? > > > > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do > > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps a > > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, > > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to > > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same > > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling self > > wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking > > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to > > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... > > Dear Bruce, let me quote from Alan Driver: > right way as much as conditions will allow. There will be studying of Dhamma > in the right wat as much as conditions will allow, no more. It is not self. > Heraing now is not self. Studying is not self. Right attention is not self. > So, if we think that"we" can study and "we" can listen, we are misleading > ourselves. We can be aware while studying and listening, in order to learn > that such moments are not self. The more we listen in the right way, if > there are condiitons for it, the more will we understand the difference > between just thinking and being aware. We will understand the difference > between trying to control realities and just letting awareness arise > naturally and being aware of what appears for one brief moment. Right > understanding develops only little by little.... Through listening to the > Dhamma and studying it, considering it carefully, intellectual understanding > is being accumulated. In this way conditions are being built up for the > arising of right awareness of one reality at a time. We cannot induce the > arising of right awareness, it all depends on the understanding which has > been accumulated. At the moment of awareness of a nama or rupa understanding > of its true characteristic can gradually be developed. This is a kind of > study, not the study of the level of intellectual understanding, but study > of realities while there is awareness... Sudying and listening is an > essential condition for awareness. One should consider what one hears and > apply it, and be aware.> > End quote. Maybe this answers your questions. You could call it listening or > hearing, it does not matter. Nina. > 6667 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:23pm Subject: Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... Dear Cybele, I have never been to Brazil. In Holland, where I was born, the catholic south of the country like to kick their heels up before Lent. It normally consists of getting extremely drunk ,and the behaviours that follow on from being mindless. Carnival is a roman catholic ritual. There are many catholic cultures around the world. I do not marvel at any of their combined wisdoms. Cybele's fourth law of thermodynamics may not get the same acceptance as Newtons first three. Keep trying, anyway :-) Why limit yourself to males? Is this some sort of moralistic repression? :-) Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Herman > > >> > >Cybele, > > > >Why eat meat before abstaining (carnivale)? The theory of carnivale > >is one thing. It has to do with preparation for fasting and > >contemplation. > > > >The practise of carnivale is another thing. Anytime I've been close > >enough to see, it has been pure, unadulterated debauchery. > > Have you ever been in Brazil? > If not you cannot understand the meaning of carnival and just dismiss it as > 'debauchery', too simplicistic a view labelling it as excessive indulgence > on sensual pleasures. > Carnival doesn't belong to many cultures, difficult to analyse what is so > unfamiliar to you and the show staged for tourists you watch in tv is not > the real celebration. > Moralistic suppression is not going to sublimate your instincts anyway. > I always observed that more somebody try and repress more strong opposition > and resistance arise. > It's a very simple principle of physics - a force exerted in opposition to > an applied force. > Politically as ethically I still prefer being an anarchic than a > reactionary. > > > > >Which aspect were you hoping to share with the Scandinavians? :-) > > Well Herman, it depends on their gender actually. > I would have interesting sharings with the male gender but then you don't > indulge yourself. Too bad... :-)))) > > Cybele > > > > > >Herman > > > > 6668 From: Erik Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:25pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > Anyway, ekayaano maggo "one-going path" is a path that > goes to only one place -- a path sure to lead to that one place. In > the other example of this word in the Pali Canon, it's used to > describe a physical path that leads to a pit of burning coals ... in > other words, a path that's sure to lead you directly to that one > place. I think someone said that it's the commentary on the MN that > misleads people into translating it as "only," but I'm not sure about > that point, since I don't stay up late a nights reading the > commentaries! Derek, this is something I find VERY interesting. When I first joined DSG I heard it stated that satipatthana--the way described in the Satipatthana Sutta--is the ONLY way to awakening, to the point it sounded very nearly like a dogma to these ears. Not that I was in the mood to dispute it since that's pretty much the same training I've had (from a slightly different angle, but the same nonetheless). Yet anytime I hear "THIS IS THE ONLY WAY" regarding any aspect of the path I only recall the last of the Four Bonds that wrongly believes "This alone is truth..." I'm not disputing the necessity of insight, and yet, I wonder if it really IS the only way. Perhaps there are other ways as well. I mean, the Buddha NEVER went further in his own statements (to my limited knowledge at least) than saying other teachers' systems and teachings may not (MAY, not dogmatically WON'T)) to lead to the same result as the Buddha's way. And that leaves things somewhat open, as I see it. I think of, for example, Mahavira (Jain), and from my very cursory readings of Jainism it almost, to my very uneducated (on Jainism) ear on this that sounds almost as if he attained a status equal to that of arahat. Then we have some Hindu sects (I can hear the stakes being rough-hewn and the kindling being collected even now), who have some awfully similar-sounding teachings to what you find in Buddhism (neti neti, anyone?). If you read the Jewish sage Maimonides' teachings on the Kabbalistic Ayin Sof (Infinite Emptiness), you see he says explicitly that the moer nergations, the nearer one is to G-d. And forget Taoism, "the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao" is nothing if not a direc teaching on relinquishing of all views, at least as I interpret that very first verse of the Tao te Ching. Know well this question comes from someone whose own (Gelug) lineage had an unfortunate track-record of literally burning down the monasteries of any sects in Tibet who dared even hint at something akin to "mind" as some truly existent thing when speaking of emptiness/anatta. The further I read into other traditions, the less certain I am the Buddhists are the only ones who've nailed it, given the vagaries of language and the total impossibility of transmitting the essence of Nibbana using names & terms. Even in Zen, for example, you hear talk of one's "Original Face" (which I think fits in with some f what Ansders has been talking about if I read his points as he intended them) and even, Indra forbid, Self! Even though all Zennists adamantly deny self-existence and remain in perfect accord on this point with all other systems of Dharma (this so-called "Self" in this case has nothing to do with atta, not being "truly" or "inherently" existent). Does anyone else here have any thoughts on this? If so, I'd be quite curious to hear other interpretations. 6669 From: Erik Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:36pm Subject: Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... --- Herman wrote: > Dear Cybele, > > I have never been to Brazil. In Holland, where I was born, the > catholic south of the country like to kick their heels up before > Lent. It normally consists of getting extremely drunk ,and the > behaviours that follow on from being mindless. > > Carnival is a roman catholic ritual. As far as I know, Carnaval is a pagan ritual co-opted by Catholics in the same way Christians borrowwed a paagn ritual for Christmas. Regardless, I find such traditions quite refreshing. I particularly like the spirit of Purim, the Jewish holiday where all roles are reversed and one is enjoined to make fun of the most solemn aspects of the tradition. Then again, we Buddhists are way ahead of the game, and need no special occasions for such tomfoolery. Which reminds me of an amusing little story. I recall one time my lama, Khen Rinpoche (abbot of Tibet's Sera Mey monastery and as far as I know the highest-ranking Gelugpa lama in North America), on his way into the shrine room with one of those little battery-powered laugh-boxes creating a horrible tinny little cackle. I could not figure out what the commotion was from afar because I couldn't hear what was going on, but I could see everyone nearly falling all over themselves in spastic laughter as he ambled slowly by (with the sea-captain's gait of a seventy-eight-year-old meditator), until he came near enough for me to get an earful. I just about peed my pants. To this day I still can't suppress a giggle thinking of that incident. 6670 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:56pm Subject: Re: thailand/west Dear Robert, The only things I know about Thailand are the things I perceive in the transit lounge, and the things I read in the press. I do not doubt that in the circles you move you find the things as you describe in your post. My understanding of some of the prevalent conditions in Thailand is, and I fully accept that this could be entirely flawed, that in order to score drugs or watch pornography, you go to a temple. And the justice system summarily executes people. Buddhist nations have no spectacular place in world history. I think to some extent the notion of anatta allows such phenomena as the killing fields of Cambodia and the annexation of Tibet. I know that in some Buddhist quarters, Ghandi is ridiculed because he acted. Why act, when it is all impermanent, without self? Anyway, for me a verifiable reality each moment is that this body acts to preserve and enhance itself. Breath in , breath out. Eat, drink, drive car very precisely in the middle of the lane so as not to kill this body. The concepts that fly around between the ears soon cease when an idiot doesn't give way to you at the roundabout. With metta Herman --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > --- ppp wrote: > . Do not expect that many Thais speak > > (decent) English (especially in rural areas). Once you are > > able to find suitable place(s) and to be sorrounded > > by entheatic/devoted Buddhists, your life as > > a monk would be rewardring. > ______ > Thanks Tadao, > Your presence on this group is so valuable. > I was never a monk but can certainly verify the truth of the > enthusiam and genuine understanding of many Thai's. I know of > the wrongviews by a few; however, it seems I meet so many who > have keen insight. > Thai's who see the advantage of learning the deep aspects of > Dhamma can well see that there is really no one. So when > discussing Dhamma with them there are always questions and > comments that aim to wipe away further the idea of self. It > seems rarer to find this in the west; often even the most basic > understanding of anatta is disputed; and so the same aspects > have to be repeated again and again. > This made me think of Bruce's recent comment on how the > discussions on dsg are confusing and how he is looking forward > to Thailand; and this is one of the conditions the Buddha gave > for right view (residing in a suitable place where true Dhamma > can be heard). > It is hard for most to see that while discussing Dhamma there > are immediate conditions for insight: that even at this moment > conditioned dhammas are arising. They think study and practice > are somehow separate - this stems from strongly held self-view. > WE think we have to do this or that before insight arises - not > realising that there is nobody who can do anything, but that any > moment can be understood if panna has been developed; while no > moment can be understood(at the level of satipatthana) if there > is an idea of 'me' seeing. Some want to have 'experience', they > think Abhidhamma is intellectual, they want to know their own > heart; but what is more real than nama and rupa that is arising > now? What could be more useful than learning to see what is > really there - fleeting, insignificant dhammas- nobody. As this > is gradually known a profound detachment - from taking any > moment as mine- develops. (detachment from sense objects comes > later) > I guess i've visited thailand almost thirty times, and every > time I'm humbled by the degree of confidence (saddha) and > wisdom(panna) so many Thai's. > robert > 6671 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear herman, All good points as usual. I was being a little provacative with my somewhat nationalistic post. Comments below: --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > The only things I know about Thailand are the things I > perceive in > the transit lounge, and the things I read in the press. I do > not > doubt that in the circles you move you find the things as you > describe in your post. ------ Actually I think this is it. I am lucky enough to have some rather fine friends in Thailand - and somehow or other most of the things that happen tend to be rather pleasant.(and I do see things through rose-tinted glasses at times) > My understanding of some of the prevalent conditions in > Thailand is, > and I fully accept that this could be entirely flawed, that in > order > to score drugs or watch pornography, you go to a temple. And > the > justice system summarily executes people. ______ Ha ha. I haven't heard about the drugs or porno in temples yet but I suppose that will come. Executions actually take years before they are carried out (firing squad, i think or maybe machine gun) and are often rescinded on the Kings orders > > Buddhist nations have no spectacular place in world history. I > think > to some extent the notion of anatta allows such phenomena as > the > killing fields of Cambodia and the annexation of Tibet. _______ This I am not sure of: Pol pot went to France and inbibed some heavy Marxist doctrine before coming back to cambodia. And wasn't Tibet China? Or do you mean anatta lets people do as they please with one? I know > that > in some Buddhist quarters, Ghandi is ridiculed because he > acted. Why > act, when it is all impermanent, without self? ______ I think we act as much as ever - (I still do) act up, that is_ > > Anyway, for me a verifiable reality each moment is that this > body > acts to preserve and enhance itself. Breath in , breath out. > Eat, > drink, drive car very precisely in the middle of the lane so > as not > to kill this body. The concepts that fly around between the > ears soon > cease when an idiot doesn't give way to you at the roundabout. ------- Yes, I think considering anatta doesn't make one more careless though. Anatta is about insight into conditionality and so one will still realise that getting run over by a truck is a condition for pain and worse. You make a great point though - anatta can be misinterpreted as license to do nothing. best wishes robert > > Herman > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > --- ppp wrote: > > . Do not expect that many Thais speak > > > (decent) English (especially in rural areas). Once you are > > > able to find suitable place(s) and to be sorrounded > > > by entheatic/devoted Buddhists, your life as > > > a monk would be rewardring. > > ______ > > Thanks Tadao, > > Your presence on this group is so valuable. > > I was never a monk but can certainly verify the truth of the > > enthusiam and genuine understanding of many Thai's. I know > of > > the wrongviews by a few; however, it seems I meet so many > who > > have keen insight. > > Thai's who see the advantage of learning the deep aspects of > > Dhamma can well see that there is really no one. So when > > discussing Dhamma with them there are always questions and > > comments that aim to wipe away further the idea of self. It > > seems rarer to find this in the west; often even the most > basic > > understanding of anatta is disputed; and so the same aspects > > have to be repeated again and again. > > This made me think of Bruce's recent comment on how the > > discussions on dsg are confusing and how he is looking > forward > > to Thailand; and this is one of the conditions the Buddha > gave > > for right view (residing in a suitable place where true > Dhamma > > can be heard). > > It is hard for most to see that while discussing Dhamma > there > > are immediate conditions for insight: that even at this > moment > > conditioned dhammas are arising. They think study and > practice > > are somehow separate - this stems from strongly held > self-view. > > WE think we have to do this or that before insight arises - > not > > realising that there is nobody who can do anything, but that > any > > moment can be understood if panna has been developed; while > no > > moment can be understood(at the level of satipatthana) if > there > > is an idea of 'me' seeing. Some want to have 'experience', > they > > think Abhidhamma is intellectual, they want to know their > own > > heart; but what is more real than nama and rupa that is > arising > > now? What could be more useful than learning to see what is > > really there - fleeting, insignificant dhammas- nobody. As > this > > is gradually known a profound detachment - from taking any > > moment as mine- develops. (detachment from sense objects > comes > > later) > > I guess i've visited thailand almost thirty times, and every > > time I'm humbled by the degree of confidence (saddha) and > > wisdom(panna) so many Thai's. > > robert > > > 6672 From: bruce Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 8:39pm Subject: Ajaan Chaa hi cybele and tadao pardon me for butting in you two, but i really think you're *both* missing the point of that Ajaan Chaa quotation... we must listen to/hear the Dhamma, *and* consider it for awareness to arise...this is where his theatrics with the heart/mind come in...i don't think he was dismissing the scriptures per se, but was rather criticising a purely text-based study without studying the present moment.... my problem w/the Ven Chaa is that he's just a bit too prone to pithy maxims...maybe there's something lost in his translation into english, but so much of what he says sounds completely zenny and precious, like haiku in english (they *never* work!)...a lot of westerners seem to like both (engl haiku and Ajaan Chaa) so i guess there's no accounting for taste/accumulations... btw, tadao, he was a student of Ajaan Mun Buridat, same as Ajaan Maha Bua...he attracted a *big* devotional following, including a lot of the westerners who are now teaching "vipassana" in the west.... bruce ps: wonder who the Abidhamma woman in the story was? a little too close to home, anyone? 6673 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajaan Chaa Hi Bruce > >hi cybele and tadao > >pardon me for butting in you two, but i really think you're *both* missing >the point of that Ajaan Chaa quotation... > >we must listen to/hear the Dhamma, *and* consider it for awareness to >arise...this is where his theatrics with the heart/mind come in...i don't >think he was dismissing the scriptures per se, but was rather criticising > >purely text-based study without studying the present moment.... Well Bruce sorry but this was most evident and a bit of common sense can figure it out. Indeed this I was trying to explain Tadao; he was never against the tests but on how you interpret them, if you indeed 'LISTENING' or purely conceptualizing. What else can you infer apart this? > >my problem w/the Ven Chaa is that he's just a bit too prone to pithy >maxims...maybe there's something lost in his translation into english, but >so much of what he says sounds completely zenny and precious, like haiku in >english (they *never* work!)...a lot of westerners seem to like both >(englhaiku and Ajaan Chaa) so i guess there's no accounting for >taste/accumulations... Well what I appreciate is his simplicity and straighforwardeness. Love Cybele 6674 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... Dear Herman >>Dear Cybele, > >I have never been to Brazil. In Holland, where I was born, the >catholic south of the country like to kick their heels up before >Lent. It normally consists of getting extremely drunk ,and the >behaviours that follow on from being mindless. We are mindless as well in Brazil but the ritual has a psychological and ritual relevance very connected with our culture where catholic religion ineherited from the missionaries is merged with animism and tribal beliefs from the African slaves. It's a cathartic ritual. > >Carnival is a roman catholic ritual. There are many catholic cultures >around the world. I do not marvel at any of their combined wisdoms. Good, openmindness is very much 'kusala'. :-) > >Cybele's fourth law of thermodynamics may not get the same acceptance >as Newtons first three. Keep trying, anyway :-) Translate sweetheart, my knowledge of Newton is only worse than my cooking and I can tell you my cooking is cathastrofic. > >Why limit yourself to males? Is this some sort of moralistic >repression? :-) Why? Because I am heterosexual but no prejudices. Now you should ask me why I am so sure of being heterosexual considering mostly I base my knowledge on actual experience... ;-) Love Cybele 6675 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west At 05:28 AM 7/21/01 -0700, you wrote: >Dear herman, > >I know > > that > > in some Buddhist quarters, Ghandi is ridiculed because he > > acted. Why > > act, when it is all impermanent, without self? >______ >I think we act as much as ever - (I still do) act up, that is_ > > > > >------- >Yes, I think considering anatta doesn't make one more careless >though. Anatta is about insight into conditionality and so one >will still realise that getting run over by a truck is a >condition for pain and worse. Thank you! This makes sense-not waxing so mystical here! >You make a great point though - anatta can be misinterpreted as >license to do nothing. But Robert, can you do nothing? >best wishes >robert >Metta, Victoria > 6676 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Erik Hi, Erik, Yes, this is an interesting issue. I think there are two distinct questions. Question 1: Is the Satipa.t.thaana Sutta the only way? Firstly, as I said, ekaayano maggo (the claim it makes for itself) doesn't really mean only way. But secondly, it's obviously not even the only way taught in the Pali Canon. The way the Buddha himself practiced included concentration meditation (samaadhi), following which he directed his purified and concentrated mind to knowledge of three things -- (i) his past lives, (ii) the passing away and reappearance of beings, and (iii) the destruction of the aasava-s. That was his method. How many people today even mention that that was how he practiced, let alone follow it? Even the most basic statement of the Buddha's prescription for practice, the Noble Eightfold Path, includes sammaa samaadhi (right concentration) as well as sammaa sati (right mindfulness). Question 2: Is Theravaada Buddhism the only way? On that one, it seems that for me personally Theravaada Buddhism is the best way, the one that's most suited to me. But I wouldn't say it was the only way for everyone everywhere. I've found wise sayings of Jesus, and in the Bhagavad Giitaa, and so on. And in real life I've come across some wonderful teachers, not all of whom have been Buddhists. Derek. 6677 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom By the way I am going to reply you mail but as is quite loooonnnng and articulated I need time to observe properly this reality of your mail. And energy to write a reply. Have been a bit in 'could not be bothered' low mood. This applies to Rob and Erik (the wicked)as well. LOve Cybele >From: Herman >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom >Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 10:38:13 -0000 > >Kom, sorry if I embarrass you, but you are a legend > > >Herman > > 6678 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Tori, Thanks for the insightful question. Let me try below. --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > >------- > >Yes, I think considering anatta doesn't make one more > careless > >though. Anatta is about insight into conditionality and so > one > >will still realise that getting run over by a truck is a > >condition for pain and worse. > > Thank you! This makes sense-not waxing so mystical here! > > >You make a great point though - anatta can be misinterpreted > as > >license to do nothing. > > But Robert, can you do nothing? > _________ Right. So we act in various ways depending on different factors. Even we try to do nothing - it is still an action. I think knowing about conditions and having understanding doesn't make one so different in some ways . We can look at the texts and see sotapanna who had wives, loved high living, cried and so on. Even they had no view about self but still they couldn't control to stop lust or anger arising at times. Some were even still soldiers - except that they couldn't kill ( they could act very martial though). On the other hand we see lay sotapannas who lived very simple celibate lives too. I think everyone has unique accumulations and so only gradually can we find out the lifestyle really suited to us. For some a very meditative, austere life, detached from other people is highly beneficial. But this may not suit all. I guess I fit somewhere out on the hedonistic fringes (for a sincere buddhist). What I think (could be wrong) is that it is best not to make rules but rather to find out for ourselves what fits. And while figuring out what is right we can be learning more about conditions. > best wishes robert 6679 From: bruce Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina i'll try to do a search before i go to see if anything hs been written on intention...may give up halfway, though, as these yahoo archive searches can take forever to yield nothing.... bruce At 13:11 2001/07/21 +0800, you wrote: > Bruce > > --- bruce wrote: > thanks for this reply jon > -- yes, this does help, especially your > > wrap-it-up description of my "condsideration" albatross...i hope to ask > > khun sujin for further clarification if i get the chance.... > > > > *intending* to have awareness is not, er, intentional, at least in my > > daily > > sitting and noticing throughout the day...it's probably there but in > > that > > pesky realm everyone refers to as "subtle"..."intention" is the seed for > > a > > whole new series of questions...if it's been discussed before, though, > > perhaps you or someone else could give me message #s or dates or subject > > titles to search? > > I have just had a quick look in the 'Useful Posts' section of our website > (link copied below) but could not see anything under 'intention'. > However, you may want to try one or two of the posts mentioned there. > Otherwise we look forward to your report or any discussion on this subject > with Khun Sujin! > > Jon > 6680 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:04pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, Then, my response probably will yet be longer!. By the time we settle with this thread, it will take each of us weeks to respond... I guess the electronic forum is really helpful, but is really no match to discuss in person. I hope you find peace in writing the response. kom --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > By the way I am going to reply you mail but as is quite loooonnnng and > articulated I need time to observe properly this reality of your mail. > And energy to write a reply. > Have been a bit in 'could not be bothered' low mood. > This applies to Rob and Erik (the wicked)as well. > > LOve > > Cybele 6681 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thailand/west Dear Rob My goodness your image of Thailand is pretty idyllic. I wish you could show me all this picturesque Thailand and mostly introduce me to all this insightful people you met there. And is curious that you consider Buddhist countries suitable to the knowledge of Dhamma. Thailand is one of the most corrupted countries in Southeast Asia, drugs, prostitution, bribery and the population buddhists by birth, worship Buddha as a God, DO NOT meditate, Abhidhamma they have no idea of what you are talking about and mix up nature cults with buddhist faith, rely on amulets rather than right understanding and just care about making merits supporting the Sangha (read monks). Sri Lanka has been sustaining a 'sacred', discriminatory war for more than 20 years against hindu-tamils. Imagine that as we have a Ministery of Culture, they have the Ministery of Buddhasasana but it was the 'buddhist memebers' of the government who made the constitution that outcasted the hindus as ethinic minority provocating the reaction leading to the war that is consumming the finances of a country that is already poor. The new generation could not care less about Buddhism and just parrot the west. Their dream is going to India and meet the movie stars of Bollywood. Burma/Myamar is under military repression, slavery like system, social, political and economical injustice THAT I HAVE OBSERVED right in front of my eyes with a policeman beating up a civil a bit drunk on the road - the Dhamma is preserved by monastics and laypeople BUT very old fashioned and meditation compulsive-obssessive till your legs drop dead by lack of circulation and you achieve a 'no cushion' flat bum. I love Southeast Asia Rob and I lived happily in all this countries but I see reality as it is - you are wearing rose tinted glasses sweetheart. Where is this wonderful country, wonderful people of yours, they are too good to be real. Personally I firmly believe that the future of Dhamma is actually in WEST. I apologise for my straightforwardeness with the Thais, Sri Lankans and Myamar members of the list, I enjoy both your countries as your people for different reasons than Rob but it doesn't prevent me from acknowledging reality. Love Cybele ______ >Thanks Tadao, >Your presence on this group is so valuable. >I was never a monk but can certainly verify the truth of the >enthusiam and genuine understanding of many Thai's. I know of >the wrongviews by a few; however, it seems I meet so many who >have keen insight. >Thai's who see the advantage of learning the deep aspects of >Dhamma can well see that there is really no one. So when >discussing Dhamma with them there are always questions and >comments that aim to wipe away further the idea of self. It >seems rarer to find this in the west; often even the most basic >understanding of anatta is disputed; and so the same aspects >have to be repeated again and again. >This made me think of Bruce's recent comment on how the >discussions on dsg are confusing and how he is looking forward >to Thailand; and this is one of the conditions the Buddha gave >for right view (residing in a suitable place where true Dhamma >can be heard). >It is hard for most to see that while discussing Dhamma there >are immediate conditions for insight: that even at this moment >conditioned dhammas are arising. They think study and practice >are somehow separate - this stems from strongly held self-view. >WE think we have to do this or that before insight arises - not >realising that there is nobody who can do anything, but that any >moment can be understood if panna has been developed; while no >moment can be understood(at the level of satipatthana) if there >is an idea of 'me' seeing. Some want to have 'experience', they >think Abhidhamma is intellectual, they want to know their own >heart; but what is more real than nama and rupa that is arising >now? What could be more useful than learning to see what is >really there - fleeting, insignificant dhammas- nobody. As this >is gradually known a profound detachment - from taking any >moment as mine- develops. (detachment from sense objects comes >later) >I guess i've visited thailand almost thirty times, and every >time I'm humbled by the degree of confidence (saddha) and >wisdom(panna) so many Thai's. >robert > 6682 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom > >Dear Cybele, > >Then, my response probably will yet be longer!. By the time we settle >with this thread, it will take each of us weeks to respond... No promise, that's why I want to take my time to reply in a mindful way but synthetic! ;-) > >I guess the electronic forum is really helpful, but is really no match to >discuss in person. True Kom, if you could see my smile you would realize that I am very cool despite the intensity that comes from my post, strange but true! >I hope you find peace in writing the response. Kom I just want to 'find' right understanding. :-)))))) Thank you for being so eloquent - I appreciate. Love Cybele 6683 From: bruce Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:28pm Subject: intention i happened to just now find an answer to the question i haven't asked yet, re: intention, in alan driver's (Ven Dhammadharo's) Be Here Now, from http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm ===== Q: But can't awareness be directed without introducing a self? Bhikkhu: By whom, by what? Why bother? If it arises, isn't that good enough? Why do we have to ahe any idea of somebody or something taking it and putting it there? Q: Is it because we have the intention of being aware of certain things? Bhikkhu: Why not be aware without intention because in fact, you cannot be aware, nor can you do anything, just by intention. Intention is anatta, not self. The condition for the arising of awareness is not an intention to be aware, but the right understanding. If we would like to change conditions, we can do so in our thinking, but in reality, we can't. If it seems to us that we have awareness when we intend to have it, then that is our thinking. And that is another subject - a very fit one - for awareness to realize that it is not self who is thinking wrongly at the moment either. Just another reality. There is no intention in the eightfold Path, none whatsoever. Intention is not among the eight factors of the eightfold path. ===== The rest of the essay is worth reading too, imho. bruce 6684 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:46pm Subject: Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Dear Mike, Robert, Gayan How are you? I think I have found a Suttam quite relevant to anihilation (vibhava). Although this Suttam is different from the one you remember, it explicitly describes anihilation of five aggregates. So the statement is even more stronger than anihilation of dukkha. You know what I mean! The Suttam is Section 55 Udana Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, Khandha Samyuttam, Khandha Vaggo, Samyuttanikayo. The sample lines come like these below. "rupam vibhavisatiti yathabhutam pajanatia .... "vińńanam vibhavisatiti yathabhutam pajanatia." It also has the noun forms such as " rupassa vibhava ..." I hope this message satisfies your Dhamma Wish to some degree! With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Gayan and Robert, > > So do I--unfortunately, I'm unable to find it so far > (as usual of late). I'll post it if I can find it. > > mike > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > > --- <> wrote: > > > > > Thanks Gayan, > > I think I have a vague memory of this too! > > robert > > > > dear robert, > > > > > > I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where > > buddha says > > > something > > > like this, > > > "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about > > annihilation.To > > > that I > > > say this, yes,I preach you about > > annihilation,annihilation of > > > dukkha > > > that is, and nothing else." > > > > > > (pardon for the vagueness) > > > rgds > 6685 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 0:51am Subject: Sańńa Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana PART (1) Re: Nibbana anihilation? Dear Erik, Robert Epstein, And Anders Honoré How are you? According to Gotama the Buddha, Sańńa does participate when consciousness is taking nibbana as its stimulus. I will provide Suttams references for this. First things, first. There is the Suttam support for Abhidhamma which confirms that sańńa is inserapable from every consciousness- (a sabbacittasadharana cetasika). The Suttam is Section 53, Upaya Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, within Khandha Samyuttam, Khandha Vaggo, Samyutta Nikayo. The paragraph is as follows. "Yo, bhikkhave, evam vadeyya– `ahamańńatra rupam ańńatra vedanaya ańńatra sańńaya ańńatra sankharehi vińńanassa agatim va gatim va cutim va upapattim va vuddhim va virulhim va vepullam va pańńapessami'ti, netam thanam vijjati. "Monks, whoever might thus talk about consciousness's happenings without matter, without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, that talk does not make sense." Apology for a shortened translation of the above paragraph! Please kindly go to a suitable book of translation done by someone such as Bhikkhu Bodhi by using the references. Now the main point is, Gotama the Buddha taught that,without memory (sańńa) no consciousness happens. By the way, it is now 2.44 AM in Canberra, so I am very sleepy. I will post the next part of this message tomorrow - how Sańńa behaves when consciousness deals with imageless nibbana - with references, of course. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- <> wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > > > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > > > > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > > > > Phala-citta. > > > > This is said in total ignorance, but: is it possible that nibbana > is the object > > of consciousness in terms of focus in advanced practice, but that > it is not > > actually cognized, identified, or perceived by that consciousness? > > Your contention dones't sound at all ignorant to me. Nor to acharyas > like Master Vasubandhu, who also questioned how Nibbana, lacking all > marks, can possibly be "cognized" by citta, which by definition has > sanna as a component among the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas. How > can sanna perform its function when there is nothing to mark, Nibbana > being unconditioned? I haev yet to see any satisfactory explanation > of this, and yet if we read what Khun Sujin says: > > "Cakkhu-vinnana-citta does not arise with lobha, dosa, moha or any > other sobhana-cetasika. Cakkhu-vinnana-citta arises with only seven > cetasika, namely phassa-cetasika, vedana-cetasika, sanna-cetasika, > cetana-cetasika, ekaggata-cetasika, jivitindriya-cetasika and > manasikara-cetasika. These seven cetasika are the sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika, the cetasika that arises with all citta. The > citta cannot arise without these seven cetasika. No matter which > kind of citta, akusala-, kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, lokuttara-citta > or any citta whatever, would have to arise concurrently with these > seven cetasika. These sabba-citta-sadharana-cetasika are the > annasamana-cetasika, or cetasika that conform with whatever they > arise with. Concurring with akusala-citta, the seven sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika are akusala; with kusala-citta, they are kusala > etc." > > To recap the key point here: "No matter which kind of citta, akusala- > , kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, ***lokuttara-citta*** or ***any citta > whatever***, would have to arise concurrently with these seven > cetasika." > > Very clearly lokuttara cittas have sanna using this definition from > the Abhidhamma. What I'd like to understand is how the Abhidhamma can > possibly support this contention, because by reason alone it entails > the absdurd consequence that Nibbana is somehow conditioned! How > could it be otherwise if sanna is a part of the mix? Sanna by > definition requires someTHING to mark, and the act of "marking" > immediately creates a this/that, subject/object (Nibbana as object, > citta as subject) dichotomy. And nowhere is there any "mark" (other > than anatta) that applies to Nibbana, and how can one possibly > perceiev the existence of a mere absence of greed, hatred, and > delusion? Given there are NO, as in, zero, zip, nada, nil, kein, > nichivo conventional marks that pertain to Nibbana, how can sanna > possibly perform any function of "marking" the Nibbaba as arammana > without any samutti aspect there to mark? Can sanna possibly mark > what doesn't even exist conventionally? > > > This would allow nibbana to remain non-objective while still being > a focus for > > attainment. At the realization of nibbana, the focus upon it would > be abolished > > [even though it has never been seen] and nibbana would be realized > as the cognizer > > rather than the object of cognition. > > I really like your probing this issue. It's something I've always > questioned in terms of the notion that lokuttara cittas > somehow "cognize" Nibbana. > > > This would in a sense mean that nibbana remains an idea of a sort, > even for > > advanced practice right up until the time of actual attainment when > all > > idea-images are dissolved in the realization of being the source > rather than the > > receiver of consciousness. > > > > Is this off the wall? > > Robert, you have elucidated what is an extremely subtle point here, > and I thank you for bringing it up. > > Cheers, > Erik 6686 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:08am Subject: Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Erik, You may find the following suttas pertinent to the discussion: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-175.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn011.html kom --- <> wrote: > --- "Derek Cameron" > wrote: > > > Anyway, ekayaano maggo "one-going path" is a path that > > goes to only one place -- a path sure to lead to that one place. In > > the other example of this word in the Pali Canon, it's used to > > describe a physical path that leads to a pit of burning coals ... > in > > other words, a path that's sure to lead you directly to that one > > place. I think someone said that it's the commentary on the MN that > > misleads people into translating it as "only," but I'm not sure > about > > that point, since I don't stay up late a nights reading the > > commentaries! > > I think of, for example, Mahavira (Jain), and from my very cursory > readings of Jainism it almost, to my very uneducated (on Jainism) ear > on this that sounds almost as if he attained a status equal to that > of arahat. Then we have some Hindu sects (I can hear the stakes being > rough-hewn and the kindling being collected even now), who have some > awfully similar-sounding teachings to what you find in Buddhism (neti > neti, anyone?). If you read the Jewish sage Maimonides' teachings on > the Kabbalistic Ayin Sof (Infinite Emptiness), you see he says > explicitly that the moer nergations, the nearer one is to G-d. And > forget Taoism, "the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao" is > nothing if not a direc teaching on relinquishing of all views, at > least as I interpret that very first verse of the Tao te Ching. > 6687 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:34am Subject: Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Erik, This is a passage from Sanpasadaniya Sutta (Serene Faith), in AN 28: 'Lord, if I were asked: " Well now, friend Sariputta, have there ever been in the past any ascetics and Brahmins more exalted in englightenment than the Blessed Lord?" I should say: "No." If asked: "Will there by any such in the future?" I should say: "No." If asked: "Is there any such at present?" I should say: "No." Again, if I were asked "have there been any such in the past eaual in englightenment to the Blseed Lord?" I should say: "Yes." If asked: "Will there be any such in the future?" I should say: "Yes." But if I were asked: "Are there any such at present equal in englightenment to the Blseed Lord?" I should say: "No." And if I were then asked: "Verenerable Sariputta, why do you accord this highest recognition to one and not the other?" I should say: "I have heard and received it from the Blessed Lord's own lips: "There have been in the past, and there will be in the future, Arahant Buddhas equal in enlightenment to myself.' I have also heard and received it from the Blessed Lord's own lips that it is not possible, it cannot be that in one and the same world-system, two Arahant supreme Buddhas should arise simultaneously. No such situation can exist." [End Quote] Some people have identified "Niganta Nattaputta", mentioned in the tipitakas, as the founder of the Jains. The Jains themselves (I have a few I know) do not know the founder by that name. Some encyclopedia attribute the founder of the Jain to be named "Mahavira" or "Nattaputta". kom > > I think of, for example, Mahavira (Jain), and from my very cursory > > readings of Jainism it almost, to my very uneducated (on Jainism) ear > > on this that sounds almost as if he attained a status equal to that > > of arahat. Then we have some Hindu sects (I can hear the stakes being > > rough-hewn and the kindling being collected even now), who have some > > awfully similar-sounding teachings to what you find in Buddhism (neti > > neti, anyone?). If you read the Jewish sage Maimonides' teachings on > > the Kabbalistic Ayin Sof (Infinite Emptiness), you see he says > > explicitly that the moer nergations, the nearer one is to G-d. And > > forget Taoism, "the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao" is > > nothing if not a direc teaching on relinquishing of all views, at > > least as I interpret that very first verse of the Tao te Ching. 6688 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: I love Thailand and Thai people. Prior to encountering the Buddhism, I studied Thai cultures as part of my (first) BA in socialogy. I learnt many important things from Thai people. The most important thing I learnt from them is, besides the Buddhhism, generocity. They are probably the most generous people in the world. (Khun Amara and her mother very much exemplify their generous nature.) Once you decide to stay longer there, you will see lots of nice qualiteis Thai people have, which the other peoples do not. (I am saying that they are void of many shortcomings.) At any rate, good luck with your trip. tadao 6689 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Herman and Robert: Nobody is perfect; no nation is perfect. Thailand has many prblems/flawa, but it is a country where the basic ethics of the Buddhim is well regarded by many Thais. Majority of them may have rather shallow understinding of the Dhamma. However, you can also find many many learned people, (I would like to say), such as Khun Sujin, from whom you can learn so much. As Robert rightly pointed out, and as cited in the Mangala Sutta, living in a "suitable place" is probably one of the most important factor, if not the most important factor, to develop the Dhamma. I have been finding that living in the Canadian society is not really "inducing", since the most of us are so preoccupied with material gains here. I am finding that chatting on the Dhamma on this Net so refreshing, despite the fact we may not agree with each other on various points. tadao 6690 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 21, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thailand/west Hi, Rob and Cyble: With respect to Thailand and Thai people, I have the same feeling as Rob does. Before going to South-east Asia, I studied their politics, cultures, etc. as an undergraduate in Japan. Eventually I lived in Thailand for five years, Sri Lanka for two and a half, and Indonesia for half a year. Once you live in these countries long enough to be able to observe thier real life, you, of coure, start seeing various shortcomings of the social systems, peoples's natures, etc. The important thing is, however, that your observation and findings do not correspond to things which you hear from the mass media. You will have more first hand understanding of these things, and start seeing that, desptie various shortcomings, these people are endowed with various qualities which we do not have. (i.e., You start seeing things not from the top-dwon fashion, but from the bottom-up fashion.) And in my case, I have developed very positive outlook of these peoples in Asia. Also, I think, it is rather dangerous to apply our own ideology to others' ways of life. They may be "terrible" from the Western democratic vewpoint, but, they have their own systems some of which work far better than the Western system. (Also, the Westeners often think that they "invented" democracy. However, the democraty which they invented was the" democracy of exclusion", which excludes the human rights of the poor, those of women, those of gay people, and those of minorities, etc.) It would be wise if one does not see or judge others' cultures based on one's own view/ideology, but see things as they are, while trying to find the postive aspects of the people involved. (Kun Nina may have something to say about the issue in hand becaue she lived in a rather different environment as I did: at that time, her husband was the Dutch ambasseder to Thailand). tadao 6691 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 7:27am Subject: Re: thailand/west Dear Tadao, Rob, and Cybele, I was listening to one of the (Thai) tape of TA Sujin the other day, and one of the audience made remarks about how Thais are nicer than Westerners when it comes to considerations to others and such. TA Sujin responded to the tune that everyone, unless they are an ariyan, still have the same basic greed, anger, and ignorance. [One is not better than the other from the standpoint that as long as one does not attain, one still have the opportunity to be monstrously bad in the future]. She often reminds us that it is a wise person who sees the good in others and the faults in oneself [so that one may correct it]. [This is how one grows one's kusala]. When one thinks of the faults of others, it is more than likely that akusala is rising. kom --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Rob and Cyble: > With respect to Thailand and Thai people, I have the same feeling as > Rob does. Before going to South-east Asia, I studied their politics, > cultures, etc. as an undergraduate in Japan. Eventually I lived in > Thailand for five years, Sri Lanka for two and a half, and Indonesia for > half a year. Once you live in these countries long enough to be able > to observe thier real life, you, of coure, start seeing various > shortcomings of the social systems, peoples's natures, etc. The > important thing is, however, that your observation and findings > do not correspond to things which you hear from the mass media. > You will have more first hand understanding of these things, > and start seeing that, desptie various shortcomings, these people > are endowed with various qualities which we do not have. > (i.e., You start seeing things not from the top-dwon fashion, but > from the bottom-up fashion.) And in my case, I have developed > very positive outlook of these peoples in Asia. > Also, I think, it is rather dangerous to apply our own ideology > to others' ways of life. They may be "terrible" from the Western > democratic vewpoint, but, they have their own systems some of which > work far better than the Western system. (Also, the Westeners often > think that they "invented" democracy. However, the democraty which > they invented was the" democracy of exclusion", which excludes > the human rights of the poor, those of women, those of gay people, > and those of minorities, etc.) It would be wise if one does not see > or judge others' cultures based on one's own view/ideology, but > see things as they are, while trying to find the postive aspects of > the people involved. (Kun Nina may have something to say about > the issue in hand becaue she lived in a rather different environment > as I did: at that time, her husband was the Dutch ambasseder to > Thailand). tadao 6692 From: Christine Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 8:22am Subject: Re: Ajaan Chaa Hi All, Thank you Cybele, Tadao, Bruce for your discussion of the relative merits of the style and content of the teachings of Ajahn Chah. I benefit immensely from all the posts on this list, though I lack the ability to join in the debates. Even unpopular or unsupported views teach me a lot, because I spend much time with Google seeking out further information to help me understand. This time I found a link which may be familiar to all of you, but which may be helpful to any others like myself still struggling across the misty flats with the mountain ahead yet to be climbed! http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/theravada-writings.htm Three or four complete books here by Ajahn Chah, as well as others. metta, Christine --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Hi Bruce > >hi cybele and tadao > >pardon me for butting in you two, but i really think you're *both* missing > >the point of that Ajaan Chaa quotation... > >my problem w/the Ven Chaa is that he's just a bit too prone to pithy > >maxims...maybe there's something lost in his translation into english, but > > > Well what I appreciate is his simplicity and straighforwardeness. 6693 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 8:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thailand/west Dear Tadao > >Hi, Rob and Cybele: >With respect to Thailand and Thai people, I have the same feeling as >Rob does. Before going to South-east Asia, I studied their politics, >cultures, etc. as an undergraduate in Japan. Please Tadao with respect for your values that is most evident I am not very much attuned with, don't start putting me off with your titles that are not guarantee of actual knowledge of anything for me; this namarupa from Brazil is not enough for you, do you need a bit of reassuring titles to consider me capable of discernment; well I am graduated in Philosophy. And I have also studied Sanskrit. Content now? And my job for years was as an air hostess all over the world and afterwards as a tourist guide in Europe and...Thailand, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia.... Direct observation of reality not theory. >Eventually I lived in >Thailand for five years, Sri Lanka for two and a half, and Indonesia for >half a year. Once you live in these countries long enough to be able >to observe thier real life, you, of coure, start seeing various >shortcomings of the social systems, peoples's natures, etc. Indeed Tadao, I lived in India, in Sri Lanka, in Burma, in Thailand, in Malaysia and I am very keen on observing cultures and integrating inside them without struggle; I am a nomadic by character. If you were a monk in Thailand or in any of the other places, first thing to consider is that your lifestyle was quite peculiar and 'sheltered'. Don't know how much of actual reality you got the chance to SEE. I am perfectly at ease in Southeast Asia Tadao, I get along better with a thai than with an anglosaxon, apart my English friend John that is a kind of patient, sweet and understanding human being that is literally impossible don't get along with him but for me is much simpler to cope with an Asian. Even my own people I can hardly stand with all their beach, football, carnival, political alienation... Must be my past accumulations... >The important thing is, however, that your observation and findings >do not correspond to things which you hear from the mass media. Naturally this discourse you can do perhaps with Herman for his political considerations but not with me. Herman seems to me a kind of knight in shining armour, a brave paladin sometimes and is rather sweet. And apart manipulative information in the media, not everything is to be dismissed so lightly. >You will have more first hand understanding of these things, >and start seeing that, desptie various shortcomings, these people >are endowed with various qualities which we do not have. >(i.e., You start seeing things not from the top-dwon fashion, but >from the bottom-up fashion.) I never disclaimed my sympathy and profound interest for eastern culture, that's exactly why I prefer living there than in West. But this doesn't prevent me from seeing reality as it is. And I am not talking about 'people' but on social and political context Tadao. I have many friends in all this places. Brazilian people is warm, communicative and cheerful, like in the stereotypes but brazilian government is corrupted and evil in the very core of their 'non beings' and the life, culture and mentality of this people is influenced by all this conditions, and eventually they end up being opportunists, immoral and dishonests - drugs, prostitution, robbery, sexual perversion. So what? That's it. And denial is certainly not going to change the situation. >And in my case, I have developed >very positive outlook of these peoples in Asia. Meaning that everybody should follow your positive outlook because you know better? >Also, I think, it is rather dangerous to apply our own ideology >to others' ways of life. They may be "terrible" from the Western >democratic vewpoint, but, they have their own systems some of which >work far better than the Western system. Lord Buddha, I agree and applaude; I am the in the front line to figure out an original formula for the third world countries rather than parrot the ridiculous mistakes that we have dome in West with appalling consequences. >(Also, the Westeners often >think that they "invented" democracy. However, the democraty which >they invented was the" democracy of exclusion", which excludes >the human rights of the poor, those of women, those of gay people, >and those of minorities, etc.) Please Tadao give me a break, your analysis of western as eastern culture lack of proper elements and sheer common sense. Injustice and corruption exists either in West or East - if you suffered discrimination where you live for being an eastern it's not anybody's personal fault. It's social and cultural conditions, that's my point. In Thailand, Bangkok, in touristic places they treat westerners with contempt and I don't blame them as these westerners have no respect at all for their values and traditions and want to impose their mentality, what is certainly not my case. I speak a crap thai and this doesn't prevent communication - I go around smiling (what it's totally natural on me because despite my assertiveness I am a sunny person) and clarifying I am buddhist, what indeed I am, meaning actual convertion, refuges, precepts and all that jazz and immediately people welcomes me. This is not the place to discuss such subject but if you are keen we can expand this issue in a proper site. Personally I am neither European nor American and all this discourse of cultural arrogance doesn't belongs to me at all. Wrong target my friend. I am a liberal and anarchic. I don't believe in 'white superiority', I am not colonialist nor paternalist. I just see reality as it is and not through rose tinted glasses. >It would be wise if one does not see >or judge others' cultures based on one's own view/ideology, but >see things as they are, while trying to find the postive aspects of >the people involved. Well you judged Ajahn Chan from a single story forwarded on a list. And suddenly there you are combacting heedlessness. I am not judging, I am refering FACTS, dear Tadao. Have you ever been on a Thai prison? I have been and I talked with the prisoners. Then please before you defend a country for the sake of the friends you admire and respect, try and find the real aspects of the people, the culture and the society involved. >(Kun Nina may have something to say about >the issue in hand becaue she lived in a rather different environment >as I did: at that time, her husband was the Dutch ambasseder to >Thailand). tadao I can imagine Khun Nina lived in a very realistic, diplomatic envinroment but Thailand is not all the Dutch Embassy unfortunetly my friend. Tadao a country is just 'a country', a conditioned phenomena as anything else and people is only 'people' non self, non abiding entity, just nama rupa, how it comes that you are so indignant? I like the fact that I am the passionate one but I cannot perceive all this so called japanese detachment. I am the one supposed to lose sight of anatta and get passionately identified with situations and people. You are stealing my role dhamma brother! :-) Referring to the texts is a good deal but applying that principles on real life is quite a challenge to our conditionings. Prejudices arises, aversion arises, personal interests and preferences, our pride, our nationalism, our desires and ideals, our cultural background. Where is actual reality in all this mental chaos? Don't misconstrue me Tadao, too semplicistic saying I am an ignorant of eastern culture only because I am western and non compliant. I have spent most of my life travelling in Asia, most probably a lot more than you, despite being an Asian yourself. And I have never conduced a sheltered life. I have been on the road far too long to wear rose tinted glasses. And the fact is reality is not always that alluring. And I am too honest to deny what I see. But I appreciate the beauty and goodness of all this countries. One thing doesn't spoil or prevent the other. Metta Cybele 6694 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 1:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Kom: I appreciate the point you raised. tadao 6695 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 1:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thailand/west Hi, Cebyle: Obviously, you have had a lot of interesting experiences in Asia, seeing a lot of things I've never seen. tadao 6696 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 8:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajaan Chaa - Christine Dear Christine Much appreciation. You are always very helpful with your links. And regarding your feeling of inadequacy to join the discussions, please don't wait to be fluent in Pali to come over. Dhamma is the ral issue and if you are seeker, you are MOST WELCOME. Don't feel intimidate with the erudition here, they don't bite I can assure you. We need a bit of equilibrium here, too much masculine vision, too much Yang, we need to temper it with a bit of feminine Yin. Please just come in and share with us your practice and your perplexities. I know you are brave enough. Jump aboard. By the way, very interesting the discussions on Buddhism and depression but as you can see I have been a bit engrossed lately. ;-) Love Cybele >>Hi All, > >Thank you Cybele, Tadao, Bruce for your discussion of the relative >merits of the style and content of the teachings of Ajahn Chah. I >benefit immensely from all the posts on this list, though I lack the >ability to join in the debates. Even unpopular or unsupported views >teach me a lot, because I spend much time with Google seeking out >further information to help me understand. >This time I found a link which may be familiar to all of you, but >which may be helpful to any others like myself still struggling >across the misty flats with the mountain ahead yet to be climbed! > >http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/theravada-writings.htm > >Three or four complete books here by Ajahn Chah, as well as others. > >metta, > >Christine >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Hi Bruce > > >hi cybele and tadao > > >pardon me for butting in you two, but i really think you're *both* >missing > > >the point of that Ajaan Chaa quotation... > > >my problem w/the Ven Chaa is that he's just a bit too prone to >pithy > > >maxims...maybe there's something lost in his translation into >english, but > > > > > Well what I appreciate is his simplicity and straighforwardeness. > > > 6697 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 1:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Hi, Suan Lua and Jim: What kind of ending is 'pajana"tia"? I need your help. tadao 6698 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 1:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Hi, Erick and Kom: What langauge is used for the Jain texts? Is it Prakrit? If so, can those who know Pali read the texts wihtout much problem? tadao 6699 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 9:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Kom > >Dear Tadao, Rob, and Cybele, > >I was listening to one of the (Thai) tape of TA Sujin the other day, and >one of the audience made remarks about how Thais are nicer than >Westerners when it comes to considerations to others and such. TA Sujin >responded to the tune that everyone, unless they are an ariyan, still have >the same basic greed, anger, and ignorance. [One is not better than the >other from the standpoint that as long as one does not attain, one still >have the opportunity to be monstrously bad in the future]. I entirely agree. We are all a 'mess'. But from the stanpoint of mess also the other way round is valid, from akusala can arise kusala. Everything is conditioned phenomena, every dhamma is impermanent, things are interdependent and neither Buddha, nor Tipitaka, or Abhidhamma are Gods to worship. Or Khun Sujin for that matter. > >She often reminds us that it is a wise person who sees the good in others >and the faults in oneself [so that one may correct it]. [This is how one >grows one's kusala]. When one thinks of the faults of others, it is more >than likely that akusala is rising. > >kom > I can appreciate her viewpoint but reality is reality dear Kom and if we have to observe reality as it is we cannot DENY this very same reality. And if what I observe can be delusion, as well it is either in something to flatter as something to blame. And if somebody wants to integrate in a place he should know what is the actual situation one has to cope with. Or let's continue living in an 'ivory tower'? Self deceit. Saying that westerners are 'evil' as sweetheart Prime Minister Mahathir from Malaysia declares is a radical, deceptive position specially considering that he is an acknowledged bastard. But saying that all Thais are insightful and have a natural confidence and familiarity with Dhamma is not very acurate as they are raised up in that envinroment, I bet you is easier for them to understand, where is the great kusala? Being born there? Great kamma. Then why all Asians, buddhist and non do acrobacies to finish in this Western Hell? Delusion indeed, survival or greed? And why the ordinary people not the instructed, priviledged ones believe in 'gods' and superstitions of every kind in Thailand and don't study Dhamma or meditate but just accomplish rituals and bows to Buddha images? I am looking only at the dark side or this is reality? You know what is curious Kom, that here seems that only 'the others' are deluded - Robert, Sarah, Jon are in the path to enlightenment and we 'the others' are ignorants that you veterans magnanimously tollerate and patronize when is necessary. But sometimes it occurs to any of you that perhaps indeed can happens that we talk sense? Just a question I pose to myself, no need to answer. Metta Cybele 6700 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 9:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thailand/west Hi Tadao > >Hi, Cebyle: >Obviously, you have had a lot of interesting experiences in Asia, >seeing a lot of things I've never seen. tadao > Cybele: Indeed so it seems Tadao and you experienced things that I didn't being a layperson. But let's don't assume that only one of us has the right view. What I wish to enhance is that there are always too sides in a coin and you cannot admire only one because it is much more appealing to our sense. You don't have to 'like me' necessarily to accept and consider my opinion and I don't need to 'like you' to do the same. It's not a question of preferences but what is fair: you have been honest in your sharing, fair enough; from my side I have been honest too accordingly with my experience. Much metta Cybele 6701 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear 'knight in shinning armour' Herman >>My understanding of some of the prevalent conditions in Thailand is, >and I fully accept that this could be entirely flawed, that in order >to score drugs or watch pornography, you go to a temple. No true, there is corruption but not at this extent. Unless an isolated case has been reported. >And the >justice system summarily executes people. True and the conditions in the prisons is appalling. There are many westerners locked up for drugs and even a small ammount of hashish means 30 to 40 years. Unless you have enough money to bribe your freedom. > >Buddhist nations have no spectacular place in world history. I think >to some extent the notion of anatta allows such phenomena as the >killing fields of Cambodia and the annexation of Tibet. I know that >in some Buddhist quarters, Ghandi is ridiculed because he acted. Why >act, when it is all impermanent, without self? Ahhh, must admit that your considerations are quite interesting. I am in agreement with you about their motivations based on buddhist principles. But for example in Burma, Myamar mostly the reason is non violence. However the repression is so diffused that the risks in fighting out the government are immense not barely for you but for your family and friends. People is enduring and are very brave. > >Anyway, for me a verifiable reality each moment is that this body >acts to preserve and enhance itself. Breath in , breath out. Eat, >drink, drive car very precisely in the middle of the lane so as not >to kill this body. The concepts that fly around between the ears soon >cease when an idiot doesn't give way to you at the roundabout. Very smart Herman; sadhu x 3. ;-)))) Love Cybele 6702 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:18am Subject: Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Suan Lua and Jim: > What kind of ending is 'pajana"tia"? > I need your help. tadao Tadao, I think that final "a" must be a typo. Ruupa.m vibhavissatiiti yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati "He understands as it is: 'Form will cease to exist'" Derek. 6703 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Hi, Derek: Thank you very much for your help for the Pali passage. Your interpretation/reading makes sense. tadao 6704 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 11:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sańńa_Is_Okay_With_Imageless_Nibbana__PART_(1)_Re:_Nibbana_anihilation?_ Dear Suan, Thanks for your accurate input, a great help . Erik the sanna (perception) is not mixed with nibbana. But Nibbana is the object. Even now when visible object (colours) is cognised by seeing consciousness the sanna that arises at the same time does not mix in with the visible object. The very first stage of vipassana nana sees the distinction between nama and rupa. robert --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > Dear Erik, Robert Epstein, And Anders Honoré > > > How are you? > > According to Gotama the Buddha, Sańńa does participate > when consciousness is taking nibbana as its stimulus. I > will provide Suttams references for this. > > First things, first. > > There is the Suttam support for Abhidhamma which confirms > that sańńa is inserapable from every consciousness- (a > sabbacittasadharana cetasika). > > The Suttam is > > Section 53, Upaya Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, within Khandha > Samyuttam, > Khandha Vaggo, Samyutta Nikayo. > > The paragraph is as follows. > > "Yo, bhikkhave, evam vadeyya– `ahamańńatra > rupam > ańńatra vedanaya ańńatra sańńaya ańńatra > sankharehi > vińńanassa agatim va gatim va cutim va upapattim > va > vuddhim va virulhim va vepullam va pańńapessami'ti, netam > thanam vijjati. > > "Monks, whoever might thus talk about consciousness's > happenings > without matter, without feeling, without memory, and without > other > mental components, that talk does not make sense." > > Apology for a shortened translation of the above paragraph! > Please > kindly go to a suitable book of translation done by someone > such as > Bhikkhu Bodhi by using the references. > > Now the main point is, Gotama the Buddha taught that,without > memory > (sańńa) no consciousness happens. > > By the way, it is now 2.44 AM in Canberra, so I am very > sleepy. > > I will post the next part of this message tomorrow - how Sańńa > > behaves when consciousness deals with imageless nibbana - with > > references, of course. > > > > With regards > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > 6705 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 5:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajaan Chaa Hi, Bruce: With respect to Aarchan Chah, I see your point. tadao 6706 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 1:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thailand/west Dear Robert, Can I deduce from what you have written below, that when someone seperates the pariyatti from the actual practice thinking that the former is a tool for the latter at another time and place, being a situation created by the mind, we are infact chasing our own projections? Sukin > It is hard for most to see that while discussing Dhamma there > are immediate conditions for insight: that even at this moment > conditioned dhammas are arising. They think study and practice > are somehow separate - this stems from strongly held self-view. > WE think we have to do this or that before insight arises - not > realising that there is nobody who can do anything, but that any > moment can be understood if panna has been developed; while no > moment can be understood(at the level of satipatthana) if there > is an idea of 'me' seeing. Some want to have 'experience', they > think Abhidhamma is intellectual, they want to know their own > heart; but what is more real than nama and rupa that is arising > now? What could be more useful than learning to see what is > really there - fleeting, insignificant dhammas- nobody. As this > is gradually known a profound detachment - from taking any > moment as mine- develops. (detachment from sense objects comes > later) > I guess i've visited thailand almost thirty times, and every > time I'm humbled by the degree of confidence (saddha) and > wisdom(panna) so many Thai's. > robert > 6707 From: Erik Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 2:05pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Erick and Kom: > What langauge is used for the Jain texts? Is it Prakrit? If so, > can those who know Pali read the texts wihtout much problem? I have no idea what language the Jain texts are written in. To be honest, I've only read a very tiny bit of Jain theory, and what caught me at first was what sounded like some very striking similarities between the desirelessness there and the Buddha's message on same. Frankly, though, when I dug a bit deeper, all the emphasis on what I see as overscrupulousness put me off rightaway, and in my present opinion, while I respect all systems of religion from Mormonism to Jainism as expedient means for those with the accumulations to make use of them at that point in their development, I do not consider them final. In other words, I do not see them concisely teaching how to permanently cut the fetters binding us to the wheel of samsara the way the Buddha's Dhamma does. For example, the Jaina teachings in general left me with a queasy feeling in my stomach, and yet, I wonder if perhaps, like Paccekabuddhas, the founder did get it somehow, but failed to articulate that understanding in such a way it would liberate others, leaving us with a system that focuses on all the wrong things and confuses overscrupulousness (one of the Buddha's failed experiments from previous lives, as I recall) with something that liberates. In other words, silabbataparamasa. What is definite accoerding to the Buddhist scriptures that there are many who have rightly self-awakened without hearing the Buddha's teachings in that particular lifetime, and this has always given me pause for consideration. While I have no interest at all in parcticing anything other than the Buddhadhamma, at the same time, I wonder, wonder wonder... Another consideration that comes to mind is that given anicca, dukkha, anatta are FACTS of existence, it stands to reason that someone with the appropriate accumulations could quite well awaken to this perfectly (it IS the natural condition of all sankhara dhammas after all), yet turn around and phrase their teachings in a way that sounds quite different from the teachings we associate with Shakyamuni Buddha. After all, it is said that the mode of teaching for devas is quite different from the sorts of sermons the Buddha propounded. I think (please someone correct me if I am mistaken here) that in some planes of existence the Dhamma is expounded only through various symbols and gestures or somesuch, and even here on the human plane is trasmitted often simply mind-to-mind (or a "direct pointing at the heart", as in Zen and in some forms of Tibetan Buddhism), withouth much reference to textual tradition. My opinion is that if one comes to understanding through any one of the three aspects (emptiness/anatta, anicca, dukkha), then all other modes of understanding are instantaneously established, though I have to say, there are so many ways of phrasing this pedagogically that the more I learn about and study the textual Dhamma, the less inclined I am to believe the Buddhists are the only ones who have arrived at these truths. Perhaps the nearest example I see fitting the Buddha's Dhamma is Taoism (or rather, the verses of the Tao te Ching). This is a question I am likely never to resolve in this lifetime if I fail in the aspiration of full Buddhahood this go-round, and will have to await until this collection of heaps attains supreme enlightenment and perfect omniscience to know for sure. Until then, this shall remain for me an open, but provocative, question. 6708 From: bruce Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 2:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) erik wrote: > After all, it is said that the mode of teaching for devas is quite > different from the sorts of sermons the Buddha propounded. right! i can't help but remember that, when the Buddha first expounded the Abhidhamma, it wasn't to humans.... b 6709 From: Erik Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 2:39pm Subject: Re: thailand/west --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Herman and Robert: > Nobody is perfect; no nation is perfect. Thailand has many > prblems/flawa, but it is a country where the basic ethics of the > Buddhim is well regarded by many Thais. Majority of them may have > rather shallow understinding of the Dhamma. However, you can also > find many many learned people, (I would like to say), such as > Khun Sujin, from whom you can learn so much. To go way off-topic here... One reason I was so keen to return to Thailand to live (among the countless reasons--at least ten FOR Thailand for every one reason to remain in the USA) is the emphasis here on good manners. I have grown extremely weary of the shocking barbarianism of the USA, and relish a place where concepts like greng-jai still obtain--at least to some degree, though I have to say I hope to see some backlash against the "appearances" thing with the highly-visible latest-model cell- phones and flashing gold business that reminds me so much of the 80's US excess. I was raised with very strict Danish manners (though those are today, unfortunately, mostly history, as my mother has often lamented upon return from visits there), and whether or not such social graces are often superficial, whether or not I am seen as a walking ATM machine as a farang, I still VASTLY prefer to live among people who give decent manners proper due. While Americans may lack the smile-with- subterfuge one often finds in the Land of Smiles and are far more direct (I do appreciate straightforwardness), I still find the general boorishness and myopia of most Americans oppressive. The only places I've ever really felt comfortable, for this reason, are Denmark and Thailand (The Netherlands are great too IMO, though not so much Germany, where I was stationed for two years as an enlistee in the Army, which I found wasn't much better than the US in my opinion). > As Robert rightly > pointed out, and as cited in the Mangala Sutta, living in a > "suitable place" is probably one of the most important factor, > if not the most important factor, to develop the Dhamma. I recall when my plane first landed here earlier this year, my gut instinct was to run out and kiss the ground in sheer joy at the idea of setting foot on the soil of a land where the Buddha's Dhamma is held in such high regard, where instead of seeing only monuments to greed, power, and money as I did out of my apartment window in Manhattan, I see here, side-by-side with the same symbols of commerce (in the form of wats & chedis), symbols of the Buddha's supreme enlightenment. What could possibly be more exciting than that for someone who's felt as if they were born in the wrong hemishpere and lived their entire life feeling like some sort of alien? I feel, in many ways, as if I've just arrived home. And the all the myriad social problems aside, I much prefer this to what I was living with for the past so many years, though we'll see how long this sentiment lasts once I've had time to really settle in and the rose-colored glasses come off. :) I have > been finding that living in the Canadian society is not really > "inducing", since the most of us are so preoccupied with material > gains here. I am finding that chatting on the Dhamma on this Net > so refreshing, despite the fact we may not agree with each > other on various points. I have to say I do like Canada, and Canada's (Vancouver, actually) one place I'd consider living again in North America. 6710 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:53am Subject: Yahoo Groups Mail Hi, all - As happened once before, I have noted that for the last day or so I have received almost no mail from Yahoo groups, whereas many e-mails are available to be read at the web site. Is anyone else in the same boat? 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) 6711 From: bruce Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west hi erik thoroughly enjoyed your post about thailand, as so much of what you say rings true with my experience in n america and asia...manners! what a wonderful thing! i can say they definitely make living in japan pleasant, even if the Dhamma here is for the most part fossilized into cultural heritage sites... cheers bruce 6712 From: Herman Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 4:31pm Subject: Re: thailand/west Hi Tadao, I certainly never intended to be critical of other cultures. Being a first generation emigrant, I find myself to be rootless ie I do not have a country I call home (nor do I feel this to be a lack). I do enjoy living in regional Australia, but I find wherever I go, and I have lived in many places, I am confronted by the behemoth known as self (he seems to accompany this body :-). I fully accept that there are places better suited than others for individuals. The following question is unrelated to your post, but perhaps you or someone else could shed light on why the dana/merit cycle still works in the East to maintain the Sangha, but why not in the West? Thank you for all your posts, Tadao Herman --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Herman and Robert: > Nobody is perfect; no nation is perfect. Thailand has many > prblems/flawa, but it is a country where the basic ethics of the > Buddhim is well regarded by many Thais. Majority of them may have > rather shallow understinding of the Dhamma. However, you can also > find many many learned people, (I would like to say), such as > Khun Sujin, from whom you can learn so much. As Robert rightly > pointed out, and as cited in the Mangala Sutta, living in a > "suitable place" is probably one of the most important factor, > if not the most important factor, to develop the Dhamma. I have > been finding that living in the Canadian society is not really > "inducing", since the most of us are so preoccupied with material > gains here. I am finding that chatting on the Dhamma on this Net > so refreshing, despite the fact we may not agree with each > other on various points. > tadao 6713 From: Herman Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 4:55pm Subject: Male/female perception (was Re: Ajaan Chaa - Christine Hi all, I have no doubt that generally speaking, men and women, perceive, process call it what you prefer, reality in a different way. Of course it doesn't apply in all cases, but there is the right brain/left brain tendencies of the sexes. Statistically, girls seem to be better at languages and the humanities, and have a feeling, intuitive approach to daily life, while boys tend to be better at mathematics and physics, and have an analytical approach to reality. There is a gnostic gospel of St Thomas (sorry , I am going off memory here) which has a text along the lines of the male has to include the female, and the female has to include the male for the kingdom to be attained. Any Buddhist or other comments? Metta Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Christine > > Much appreciation. You are always very helpful with your links. > And regarding your feeling of inadequacy to join the discussions, please > don't wait to be fluent in Pali to come over. > Dhamma is the ral issue and if you are seeker, you are MOST WELCOME. > Don't feel intimidate with the erudition here, they don't bite I can assure > you. > We need a bit of equilibrium here, too much masculine vision, too much Yang, > we need to temper it with a bit of feminine Yin. > Please just come in and share with us your practice and your perplexities. > I know you are brave enough. Jump aboard. > By the way, very interesting the discussions on Buddhism and depression but > as you can see I have been a bit engrossed lately. ;-) > > Love > > Cybele > > > >>Hi All, > > > >Thank you Cybele, Tadao, Bruce for your discussion of the relative > >merits of the style and content of the teachings of Ajahn Chah. I > >benefit immensely from all the posts on this list, though I lack the > >ability to join in the debates. Even unpopular or unsupported views > >teach me a lot, because I spend much time with Google seeking out > >further information to help me understand. > >This time I found a link which may be familiar to all of you, but > >which may be helpful to any others like myself still struggling > >across the misty flats with the mountain ahead yet to be climbed! > > > >http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/theravada-writings.htm > > > >Three or four complete books here by Ajahn Chah, as well as others. > > > >metta, > > > >Christine > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > Hi Bruce > > > >hi cybele and tadao > > > >pardon me for butting in you two, but i really think you're *both* > >missing > > > >the point of that Ajaan Chaa quotation... > > > >my problem w/the Ven Chaa is that he's just a bit too prone to > >pithy > > > >maxims...maybe there's something lost in his translation into > >english, but > > > > > > > Well what I appreciate is his simplicity and straighforwardeness. > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > 6714 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Bruce >>erik wrote: > > > After all, it is said that the mode of teaching for devas is quite > > different from the sorts of sermons the Buddha propounded. > >right! i can't help but remember that, when the Buddha first expounded the >Abhidhamma, it wasn't to humans.... > >b Must say...that was very smart! ;-))) Love Cybele 6715 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 7:56pm Subject: Study/Practice Dear Sukin, I wrote: > It is hard for most to see that while discussing Dhamma > there > > are immediate conditions for insight: that even at this > moment > > conditioned dhammas are arising. They think study and > practice > > are somehow separate - this stems from strongly held > self-view. > > WE think we have to do this or that before insight arises - > not > > realising that there is nobody who can do anything, but that > any > > moment can be understood if panna has been developed; while > no > > moment can be understood(at the level of satipatthana) if > there > > is an idea of 'me' seeing. Some want to have 'experience', > they > > think Abhidhamma is intellectual, they want to know their > own > > heart; but what is more real than nama and rupa that is > arising > > now? What could be more useful than learning to see what is > > really there - fleeting, insignificant dhammas- nobody. As > this _________ And you replied: Dear Robert, > Can I deduce from what you have written , that when > someone > seperates the pariyatti from the actual practice thinking that > the former > is a tool for the latter at another time and place, being a > situation created > > by the mind, we are infact chasing our own projections? > Sukin ____________ This is part of what I meant. While it is true that listening to Abhidhamma is a condition for future direct insight, it is also true that it is pointing to this moment. When we are listening to Dhamma or discussing or reading the texts what cittas are present? Isn't there seeing and visible object, sound and hearing, bhavanga cittas.... It all points to understand the anattaness of dhammas that are arsing now. These dhammas are arising right while listening or considering - now is the time to understand. However, if we listen without knowing that the whole Abhidhamma has one flavour- that of anatta- one can still believe "I am listening" or "the real understanding will come later when I do this or that" (whatever one thinks the real practice is). No rule that insight should arise now and yet if there is careful listening and right consideration then wisdom of some level must arise - couldn't stop it. I was in a car with Sarah and Jon and Sujin discussing Dhamma . Jon said he was a little tired to listen . Howver, I was keen and so (rudely) carried on the discussion. He had to listen and soon came in with some comments anyway. I think it all becomes seamless - listening, considering, any time because by habit it becomes natural to learn , investiate study,. And this is such a slow process though. Too, it is not a mathematical rule that we need so many moments of sati. It is view that is the danger. If understanding is developed by listening and considering then when there are moments of direct awareness the insight can go deeper . One can only know for oneself if there is more understanding than say a year ago. But it is sometimes hard to know the conditions that caused this. Do we listen with respect? In the attahsalini (translated as expositor p14)"the Bhikkhus who study the Abhidhamma experience infinite rapturous joy in reflecting..'The Teacher taught things mental and material, dividing them into various parts- things subtel and abstruse such as the aggregates sense organs, elements, controlling faculties, kamma and its results; and the distinction between mind and matter'The Thera Mahagatigamiyatissa ...was on the upper deck of a boat he looked at the great ocean...He thought to himslef which is more extraordinary - the ocean..or the basis of the method in the Patthana (last book of abhidhamma)The limits of the ocean became apparent but the limits of the universal patthana are not apparent. Abundant rapture arose in him as he reflected on the abstruse and subtle Dhamma and increasing insight he ..became established in arahantship"Endquote When we read this we should know that there was direct insight into nama and rupa happening even during the time he was reflecting. We might think we have to get "my mind calm first" before understanding can come. But even the idea of a mind is a delusion let alone My mind. The theory shows one that nothing lasts even for a moment. here I am talikng about vipassana,. For sila, samatha or giving one can still have such self-view and perform these good deeds - but not for vipassana. The theory gives enough undertanding so that all states can be dissected. Dissected even while they are happening. All the khandas (aggregates), all the time are in a flux; there is nothing good about them. They are, as the Patisambhidhimagga says, a disease and alien, not self. Do we think calmness is good, better than agitation? They are both merely conditioned phenomena, they pass away instantly. The Atthasalini, (triplets p451)defines "ignorant average man" as: "owing to the absense of access to the Scriptures, and of the higher attainment of the path and fruition. For to whoever owing to the absense of learning by heart and deduction therefrom regarding the khandas(aggregates) elements(dhatus) sense-organs(ayatanas) the causal mode, the applications of mindfulness etc there is NO attainment of that learning which represses opinionativeness, nor any access, owing to the non-attainment of what should be attained by conduct. Such a person, from the absense of such access and such attainment should be known as ignorant" In the Netti-Pakarana (translated as the Guide, PTS) p7. It explains the vipallasa, perversions of view. These are the perception of seeing the ugly as beautiful, the dukkha as sukkha, the impermanent as permanent and the not self as self. These vipallasa are said to be overcome repectively by the cattaro satipatthana (four foundations of mindfulness). Satipatthana sees realities as they really are - ugly, dukkha, impermanent and not-self. This is a gradual seeing though. The first phase (cira kala bhavana -long, long time development) is investigating and learning the characteristics (visesa lakkhana) of paramattha dhammas as they are. Perhaps we think we already know the characteristic of feeling. After all feeling arises with every citta. It is arising now. All of us experience it almost all day long. But do we experience it with sati and panna? Observe feeling now. Somewhere it is arising but is it experienced with sati or lobha or moha or dosa? Or are we not sure what type of citta experienced it? Do we think it is "us" who is experiencing feeling? Obviously if we do then that is not satipatthana - that is vipallasa , a perversion of view. Do we think I am having insight? Do we think sati is something we bought up, we conditioned? It is easy to see these strong vipallasa but there are more subtle aspects of vipallasa. By hearing enough and considering conditions are built up to gradually let go of the clinging to wrong practice that we have accumulated, Then there can be the opportunity for sati and panna to understand dhammas, as they are now. Whether we are sitting, or standing, or in the meditation center there can be awareness of dhammas -but not by clinging . There is no self - that is the illusion formed by the rapid change and the different elements doing their functions. It is like a movie - merely different frames joined together and giving the appearance of life.And yet, like a movie we get so engrossed in the 'story of my life'. None of the elements, the different cetasikas and cittas and rupas have any idea of wanting to do this or that. They are merely carrying out there function - which is to know, or to hear, or to see, or to crave and so many other elements with different functions. There are levels of understanding both at the theoretical and experiential level. The theory assists undertsanding at the practical level and the practical makes the the theory clearer. Even when we are thinking there can be moments of direct understanding of the characteristics of different realities. Also when we are studying a Dhamma book there can be many moments when there is direct study of realities. This is an important question because we have to learn how to study realities directly otherwise our Dhamma study is merely theoretical. Sometimes we might think "there is no self" but still have no understanding. Thus even when we are reflecting or contemplating or whatever we call it we need to develop the ability to see below the surface and see the realities that are conditioning the thinking. It can be done and discussions like these perhaps help to encourage. And are we grateful for the understanding we have now? Whatever level is there only because of the compassion of the Buddha who developed the parami over 100,000 aeons and 4 unthinkably long periods of time. And too the sangha that kept the teachings pristine for these thousands of years - in Sri lanka, thailand, Burma, Cambodia. robert 6716 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Desirable and undesirable objects op 20-07-2001 21:43 schreef Num op Num: > < unpleasant (undesirable), kusalacittas will follow the votthapanacitta. If > there is unwise attention,akusala cittas will follow, and this is according > to conditions. The samehappens in a mind-door process, then the mind-door > adverting-consciousnessis followed by kusala cittas or by akusala cittas, > depending on accumulatedconditions.>> > > Let me ask you about "desirable and undesirable" objects. What's the > criteria or definitions of being "desirable and undesirable". Let me give > you some examples, I enjoy listen to the music while driving. When I am > working or reading, I cannot stand listening to the same song even at the > lowest volume. When it's hot, I love the rain to come but when I play tennis > outdoor, I do not want it to rain. Umm, let say when I see something > attractive, as Cybele post about 20 difficulties for humans, it's hard not to > desire or give in. At times, I wish I am not seeing them because lobha is so > fast, quick and sticky in grasping the objects. > About the blood, some will faint when they see even a drop of blood, I do not > really like to see it but when I see it, the blood is the blood. I do not > feel it desirable or undesirable. Some people love to see flowering trees > in spring, some prefer to see a colorful fall. I feel suffocated wearing > tight shirt, some people really like to wear it. So are "desirable and > undesirable" quality are objects of individual affection? Is there a neutral > object as well? > > Since all vipaka citta and cetasika as well as all rupa are abyakata dhamma. > Desirable or undesirable quality seems to be as part kusala or akusula. I am > not clear about this. From my thinking visual object is visual object, like > or dislike depends on one's accumulation. Dear Num, Objects can be pleasant or unpleasant, and the experience of them is vipaka, result of kamma, but our like and dislike of them depend on our accumulated inclinations. As Ven. Narada remarks in A Manual of Abhidhamma, under Objects, that the sight of the Buddha is repulsive to a heretic. However, seeing a Buddha is kusala vipaka, but the dislike is akusala citta. You give examples of situations, but to know what object is experienced through which door we have to be more precise. There are countless moments of hearing different sounds, and who knows when hearing is kusala vipaka and when akusala vipaka? The thinking about it afterwards is not vipaka, it thinks of concepts. When it is said, a pleasant object or unpleasant object it refers to realities. The Atthasalini, under derived rupas, gives examples of pleasant and unpleasant objects: pleasant odour is desirable smell, unpleasant odour is undesirable smell. Nice is desirable taste, nauseous is undesirable taste. Someone wears a nice but heavy chain, through eyes a pleasant object, but through the bodysense an unpleasant object. What about the different objects experienced in hell planes and in heavenly planes? In the human plane there are both pleasant and unpleasant objects, we cannot always find out: vipakacitta passes so rapidly, and when we think about it, our personal inclinations come in. I find it already difficult enough to know what visible object is, that what appears through the eyes. it is not a concept of it I am bound to think of after the seeing. If someone shouts at you the sound is an unpleasant object, since it is produced by akusala citta, but you may be patient and have understanding of realities. Not necessary to dislike it. I heard such a good reminder on tape of Acharn Sujin: if we want to accumulate the perfection of patience, we should seize every opportunity to cultivate it, in our immediate surroundings. I hope you have a nice vacation in Canada, Nina. 6717 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]tadarammana, registering, and kamma. op 20-07-2001 07:45 schreef Erik op Erik: > I have a question expanding somewhat on Herman's question on > votthapanna (determinging consciousness), as well as how votthapana, > javana, and tadarammana all hang together in terms of how kamma is > created. > I do recall I didn't find any > clarification on how votthapana, the javana cittas, and tadarammana > all relate to one another within the same vithi. >Nina: In this case the preceding citta conditions the following one by way of anantara paccaya, proximity condition. > Okay, here's my question. Votthapana, as far as I can tell, is what > determines the nature of the object such that it becomes known as > something kusala or akusala, so when the javana cittas arise, > followed by tadarammana, this is where the kammic sankharas are > created in the sankharakhanda. Is this correct? Nina: As I explained to Hermann, vothapanacitta is ahetuka kiriyacitta, it is neither kusala nor akusala, nor vipaka. It determines the object, just for a moment and then passes immediately, it is different from kamma. Because of conditions akusala javana cittas or kusala javana cittas follow in that sense-door process. Then in a following mind-door process there are again akusala cittas or kusala cittas, depending on conditions. During javanacittas we accumulate inclinations to kusala or akusala, and when there are conditions there can be the performing of kusala kamma or akusala kamma at the moments of javana. Kamma produces vipaka later on. As to tadarammana cittas, arising after the javanacittas, these are just two more moments of vipaka, produced by the kamma that also produced the sense-cognition in that process. It can arise only in the sensuous planes of existence, and only with regard to cittas which are not jhĺnacittas but cittas experiencing sense objects. This has to do with being involved with sense objects, and thus, there are conditions for kamma to produce tadarammana cittas, vipakacittas that "hang on" to the sense object experienced in that process. , no, this is not so precise. Sankharakkhandha are all cetasikas, except feeling and remembrance. Kom summarized the different meanings of sankara in different contexts: sankharakkhandha, sankhara dhamma and abhisankhara in the Dependent Origination. It is difficult for all of us, we can so easily mix up different categories. Do you have this post, if not, do ask again. Eric: Also, is votthapana > similar in function to sanna in this sense, or are they just another > way of saying the same thing, meaning, does sanna subsume the > santirana and votthapana cittas? Is this where the "marking" of the > arammana within the vithi occurs, or am I all wet on this? Nina: no, votthapanacitta is not similar to sanna as to function. Sanna accompanies each citta, it marks or remembers the object. Eric: As you can hopefully see, I have quite a bit of confusion on the > exact moment when the kusala/akusala/abyakata kamma is "planted" (for > lack of a better word) in the sankharakhanda. My original guess has > been that tadarammana, which is performing the function > of "registering," is necessary for a sankhara to be created, > and that this is, again from my limited guesswork, conditioned by the > previous javana cittas, meaning, that if the process of javana aborts > prior to completing (such as the five javana cittas that occur and > then are interrupted near the moment of death), that there is > no "registration" of the kusala/akusala/abhyakata kamma at all? Nina: Just before death there may or may not be tadarammanacitta. When you use , you probably mean, wholesome or unwholesome qualities that have been accumulated. Eric: In other words, from my faulty recollection from "Abhidhamma in Daily > Life," at the moment of death the process is too weak to take it > past five javana cittas, and the vithi is interrupted, meaning, that > tadarramana never has a chance to "register" the result, meaning > there is no kamma created at all if the vithi is aborted prior to the > completion of the seven javana cittas PLUS the result being > registered by tadarramana. Nina: These five javana cittas before death are weak, but they are conditioned by the kamma that will produce the next rebirth. As I said, they may or may not be followed by tadarammanacittas. It seems you assume these cittas to perform a function they do not have. Eric: To recap in the simplest terms: is tadarammana necessary to register > kamma, or is it the jaavna cittas that perform the function of > creating kamma? Nina: No, tadarammanacitta does not register kamma, it is just vipaka, experiencing for two more moments the sense object that was experienced in that same process. When kamma is performed through body, speech or mind it is at the moment of javana, but I cannot pinpoint in which process. Have a fruitful stay in Bangkok with good discussions. Hoping to hear about your discussions with Khun Sujin, Nina. 6718 From: Victor Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 11:41pm Subject: Re: Study/Practice Hi all, > There is no self - that is the illusion formed by the rapid > change and the different elements doing their > functions. If interested, you might want to refer to Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html Metta, Victor 6719 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Tadao, This would have been a good recap of the 'Samatha vs. Vipassana' thread. I think it's a good metaphor. Actually it reminds me a lot of Ajahn Chah's style of instruction. Ajahn Chah's way of speaking was very informal and conventional most of the time. Taken out of context his comments often sound contradictory and/or even adhamma. Still I personally think he was a great monk (for what my opinion's worth). I do understand that you're evaluating one comment and not his entire practice. Thanks again for all your really excellent posts. mike --- ppp wrote: > You CANNOT > CURE your headaches > just by taking aspirines. Assited by your doctor, > you have to find > what the real cause of your headaches is, and have > to find a medical > treatment which can eradicate the underlying cause > of the headache. > There are a lot of people who are happy with having > less > headache without finding its cause. However, there > are also > people who would like to understand the real cause > of the headache > despite the fact that he/she may continuously suffer > from the > headache. If one combines both approaches, then, it > would be > nice. If, however, one think that by taking > aspirines every day, > one CAN eventually cure one's headache, then, he is > fooling himself. > tadao 6720 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 1:00am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, For sure, I think discernment is the key here. Is it really kusala, or does it just feel good? How could anyone know without having heard and understood the Dhamma? Lobha (even for kusala) especially can be accompanied by the most blissful feelings. Easy (and tempting!) to mistake these for kusala. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Yes, if only we were able to tell the difference > between kusala and > akusala by knowing the characteristic of each, > rather than only being able > to guess at it by thinking in terms of the situation > (eg 'I'm studying > dhamma, so it must be kusala'). 6721 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 1:23am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Erik, Robert Epstein, And Anders Honoré How are you? According to Gotama the Buddha, Sańńa does participate when consciousness is taking nibbana as its stimulus. I will provide Suttams references for this. First things, first. There is the Suttam support for Abhidhamma which confirms that sańńa is inserapable from every consciousness- (a sabbacittasadharana cetasika). The Suttam is Section 53, Upaya Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, within Khandha Samyuttam, Khandha Vaggo, Samyutta Nikayo. The paragraph is as follows. "Yo, bhikkhave, evam vadeyya– `ahamańńatra rupam ańńatra vedanaya ańńatra sańńaya ańńatra sankharehi vińńanassa agatim va gatim va cutim va upapattim va vuddhim va virulhim va vepullam va pańńapessami'ti, netam thanam vijjati. Shortened Translation "Monks, whoever might thus talk about consciousness's happenings without matter, without feeling, without memory, and without other mental components, that talk does not make sense." 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." (Last night, due to my sleepiness, I provided a shortened translation of the quoted Pali. Tonight, I included a full translation. But do not throw away the shortened translation yet! Some readers may find the full translation to be a bit challenging. They could first read the shortened version. With that understanding, they could find the full version eaiser to read.) Now the main point is, Gotama the Buddha taught that,without memory (sańńa) no consciousness happens. Erik asked: " How can sanna perform its function when there is nothing to mark, Nibbana being unconditioned? I haev yet to see any satisfactory explanation of this,..." I will try to answer Erik's questions with some Suttam references. My explanation may or may not be satisfactory to Erik, but my main purpose is not to satisfy anyone, but to provide orthodox Theravada texual evidences on the matter. Let us assume that a living awakener such as an Arahant is taking imageless or signless nibbana as a stimulus with one of resultant transworldly consciousnesses (lokuttara vipaka cittani). Even though nibbna is the primary stimulus, he or she, being in a waking state, is, at least, aware of his or her own body. His consciousness is exposed to perceptual stimuli as well as nibbana. In short, his memory does not go redundant when dealing nibbana. As visual consciousness deals with sights, mental consciousness (mano vińńana) deals with dhammaramana (concepts). Here, I use the term 'concept' to mean both real phenomena (paramattha dhamma) and conventions or labels (samuti dhamma). Now, as nibbana is a signless concept, conceptual memory (dhammasańńa) dealing with it does not have to mark the unavailable signs. But, nothing should prevent memory to note the very fact of nibbana having no signs. Otherwise, how would the Buddha be able to tell us about the singless nibbana. Suttam for the term 'dhammasańńa' is Section 56, Upadanaprivattana Suttam, Upaya vaggo, Khanddha Samyuttam, Khanddha Vaggo, Samyutta Nikayo. In short, Gotama the historical Buddha taught that memory does process signless nibbana. So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs. Erik wrote: "What I'd like to understand is how the Abhidhamma can possibly support this contention, because by reason alone it entails the absdurd consequence that Nibbana is somehow conditioned! How could it be otherwise if sanna is a part of the mix? Sanna by definition requires someTHING to mark, and the act of "marking" immediately creates a this/that, subject/object (Nibbana as object, citta as subject) dichotomy. And nowhere is there any "mark" (other than anatta) that applies to Nibbana, and how can one possibly perceiev the existence of a mere absence of greed, hatred, and delusion?" When memory (sańńa) processes a face, for example, only memory is conditioned or changed by the face, not the other way round. Memory is changed in the sense that it now carries the image of the face. But the face does not carry memory, so it does not have to change on account of being processed by memory. Similarly, when memory processes singless nibbana, only memory is changed or conditioned by nibbana because it now carries the signlessness of nibbna. Nibbana carries nothing. Memory is variable while nibbana remains constant. If memory creates a dichotomy by distinguishing between nibbana and citta, or nibbana and samsara, or signs and signlessness, what is wrong with that? Now, Suttam evidences for the nature of memory conditioned by the signlesss mind concentration (animittam cetosamadhim paticca ekattam) can be found in Sections 182 and 183 of Culasuńńata Suttam, Suńńata Vaggo, Upripannasa Pali, Majjimanikayo. According to Culasuńńata Suttam, memory at this level is empty of worries based on lower level memories, but it carries only worries related to the physical body. So sańńa is okay with signless mind or signless nibbana. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- <> wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > > > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > > > > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > > > > Phala-citta. > > > > This is said in total ignorance, but: is it possible that nibbana > is the object > > of consciousness in terms of focus in advanced practice, but that > it is not > > actually cognized, identified, or perceived by that consciousness? > > Your contention dones't sound at all ignorant to me. Nor to acharyas > like Master Vasubandhu, who also questioned how Nibbana, lacking all > marks, can possibly be "cognized" by citta, which by definition has > sanna as a component among the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas. How > can sanna perform its function when there is nothing to mark, Nibbana > being unconditioned? I haev yet to see any satisfactory explanation > of this, and yet if we read what Khun Sujin says: > > "Cakkhu-vinnana-citta does not arise with lobha, dosa, moha or any > other sobhana-cetasika. Cakkhu-vinnana-citta arises with only seven > cetasika, namely phassa-cetasika, vedana-cetasika, sanna-cetasika, > cetana-cetasika, ekaggata-cetasika, jivitindriya-cetasika and > manasikara-cetasika. These seven cetasika are the sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika, the cetasika that arises with all citta. The > citta cannot arise without these seven cetasika. No matter which > kind of citta, akusala-, kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, lokuttara-citta > or any citta whatever, would have to arise concurrently with these > seven cetasika. These sabba-citta-sadharana-cetasika are the > annasamana-cetasika, or cetasika that conform with whatever they > arise with. Concurring with akusala-citta, the seven sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika are akusala; with kusala-citta, they are kusala > etc." > > To recap the key point here: "No matter which kind of citta, akusala- > , kusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-, ***lokuttara-citta*** or ***any citta > whatever***, would have to arise concurrently with these seven > cetasika." > > Very clearly lokuttara cittas have sanna using this definition from > the Abhidhamma. What I'd like to understand is how the Abhidhamma can > possibly support this contention, because by reason alone it entails > the absdurd consequence that Nibbana is somehow conditioned! How > could it be otherwise if sanna is a part of the mix? Sanna by > definition requires someTHING to mark, and the act of "marking" > immediately creates a this/that, subject/object (Nibbana as object, > citta as subject) dichotomy. And nowhere is there any "mark" (other > than anatta) that applies to Nibbana, and how can one possibly > perceiev the existence of a mere absence of greed, hatred, and > delusion? Given there are NO, as in, zero, zip, nada, nil, kein, > nichivo conventional marks that pertain to Nibbana, how can sanna > possibly perform any function of "marking" the Nibbaba as arammana > without any samutti aspect there to mark? Can sanna possibly mark > what doesn't even exist conventionally? > > > This would allow nibbana to remain non-objective while still being > a focus for > > attainment. At the realization of nibbana, the focus upon it would > be abolished > > [even though it has never been seen] and nibbana would be realized > as the cognizer > > rather than the object of cognition. > > I really like your probing this issue. It's something I've always > questioned in terms of the notion that lokuttara cittas > somehow "cognize" Nibbana. > > > This would in a sense mean that nibbana remains an idea of a sort, > even for > > advanced practice right up until the time of actual attainment when > all > > idea-images are dissolved in the realization of being the source > rather than the > > receiver of consciousness. > > > > Is this off the wall? > > Robert, you have elucidated what is an extremely subtle point here, > and I thank you for bringing it up. > > Cheers, > Erik 6722 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 1:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Dear Suan, I'm afraid I don't have a translation of the Udana and though I might be able to sort it out eventually, the Pali's over my head--any chance of an English translation? Many thanks, as always, sir. mike --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > Dear Mike, Robert, Gayan > > How are you? > > I think I have found a Suttam quite relevant to > anihilation > (vibhava). Although this Suttam is different from > the one you > remember, it explicitly describes anihilation of > five aggregates. > > So the statement is even more stronger than > anihilation of > dukkha. You know what I mean! > > The Suttam is > > Section 55 Udana Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, Khandha > Samyuttam, Khandha > Vaggo, Samyuttanikayo. > > The sample lines come like these below. > > "rupam vibhavisatiti yathabhutam pajanatia .... > "vińńanam vibhavisatiti yathabhutam pajanatia." > > It also has the noun forms such as " rupassa vibhava > ..." > > I hope this message satisfies your Dhamma Wish to > some degree! > > > With regards > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > 6723 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Dear Suan, Sorry--I was reading too quickly. I see you referred to the Samyutta Nikaya (please excuse the Pali!) which I do have in English (PTS). Unfortunatlely the books and chapters are in English only--can you please help me to locate this? Thanks again... mike --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > The Suttam is > > Section 55 Udana Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, Khandha > Samyuttam, Khandha > Vaggo, Samyuttanikayo. 6724 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 2:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Kom, Hear, hear! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: She often reminds us that it is a wise person who sees the good in others and the faults in oneself [so that one may correct it]. [This is how one grows one's kusala]. When one thinks of the faults of others, it is more than likely that akusala is rising. 6725 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 2:27am Subject: Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? --- "m. nease" wrote: > I do have in English (PTS). Unfortunatlely the books > and chapters are in English only--can you please help > me to locate this? Hello again, Mike, I have the Bhikkhu Bodhi/Wisdom translation. The Samyutta Nikaya is divided into 56 samyuttas, which are grouped together into 5 major sections. This one is in overall samyutta number 22, which is the first samyutta within the third major section. Within that samyutta, it's the 55th sutta. Clear as mud? Derek. 6726 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 2:37am Subject: Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Dear Mike, The entire sutta is long, so I will only put B. Bodhi's translation of the = section (I think) here: From SN, Kandhavagga, Khandhasamyutta, Section 55: "Bikkhu, though someone might say: 'Apart from form, aprt from feeling, apart from perception, apart from volitional formations, I will make known = the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and rebirth, its growth, increase, and expansion' - that is impossible. [endquote] There is no comment associated with this section's translation. kom --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Suan, > > I'm afraid I don't have a translation of the Udana and > though I might be able to sort it out eventually, the > Pali's over my head--any chance of an English > translation? > > Many thanks, as always, sir. > > mike > 6727 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 2:51am Subject: Cybele's Cyber Carnival Dear Cybele & friends, I'm back to noise, crowds, heat, humidity and A COMPUTER ;-))) I'm catching up on posts in the middle of the night......another set of stories and concepts about situations and yet the realities (read those tedious namas and rupas ) are just the same:-)) I'm glad to catch up with all your input on dsg and in particular this thread with Kom about meditation and practice...this really is the crux of the matter. In my jet-lagged stupor, I doubt I'll be able to add anything, but let's see: --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > All the point can simply be reduced to one - > > Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation, sitting crosslegged and > contemplating the four foundations of mindfulness. > This we are taught - whether in Theravada, or Tibetian, or Zen, or Pure land > Schools, even the Nichiren use meditation as a tool in the practice. > Now how do you assume that you can dismiss meditation and realize whatever > is only studying the texts and conceptual thought. > This is my issue and it seems to me that I am pretty straightforward to ask > it clearly. Yes your point here and your comments about how you understand the Satipatthana Sutta are very clear. As you also suggest, your views are shared by the majority of Buddhists (and dsg too, I'm sure) and it seems we must be very arrogant to read/interpret/understand in any other way! There has been a lot of discussion about bhavana (translated as meditation) and about vipassana and samatha bhavana. I won't repeat this here and won't start quoting as I know this isn't what you want to hear. Let me just repeat that for me, whatever I read of the Buddha's teachings, I have confidence that he is talking about the development of satipatthana and about the realities (discussed in such detail in the abhidhamma) to be understood at the present moment. So when I read the sutta about going, standing, stitting, lying down, breathing, I understand him to be saying 'while going, standing etc develop awareness of all those namas and rupas..' If he were talking to me, he might say 'now Sarah, while hiking in the snow, entertaining in Sussex, listening for hours to your aunts, semi-sleeping huddled up on the long flight, visiting your father's grave on the Isle of Wight, develop awareness of seeing, hearing, aversion, mental and bodlily feelings, hardness, softness and so on..' In other words, it's not the 'situation' that counts, but the awareness of realities in what we take for being the situation. So often we get lost in the story about Thailand, the long flight, Sussex, the confrontation with a friend or wife or whatever and forget it's just a story. As i understand it, anytime we take the stituation for being something or real, it shows the wrong view of self again; no understanding of the distinction between concepts and realities. This doesn't mean 'don't think about stories', but while thinking, develop awareness. I think Howard raised some good points about the difference between conventional and absolute truths. the more understanding there is of the latter, the clearer the former become for what they are. Bruce will comment that when we read or hear 'develop awareness' it sounds like there is a self that can do something. All this means when I write it is 'by reading this, hopefully there will be conditions for understanding and awareness to arise and know reality more clearly'. It is a subtle point I know. Everyone knows here that hey can disagree or ask for clarifications i know! Cybele, as you may have gathered, I like to have my life pretty organised....and conventionally speaking, I'm quite disciplined. So I have a time each day for Tai Chi and for yoga and for spending with Jonothan, reading posts, eating lunch, work, teaching etc (having to get up very early to fit them all in :-)) ) so I certainly understand why some people like to sit quietly and contemplate or meditate for a fixed time in a day. However, I don't have any idea that any of my activities are more conducive for sati at any given time (not even my dhamma reading) and I don't undertake any of them for that purpose. I also find that sati nearly always arises at unexpected times such as when I'm listening to a boring aunt and there is aversion or when I'm half asleep on the plane with a baby crying behind me. If there is any idea of limiting the time or thinking a certain time is more conducive to sati, to my mind it shows an aspect of clinging to self again. Sometimes we mix the cause and result. We think it was the situation (meditation in Sri Lanka or the Indian trip with Khun Sujin) that conditioned the awareness now. In fact it must have been the wise considering and awareness at those times and other times that have made it possible for awareness to arise now. I agree with you that studying theory and detail just for the sake of studying is quite useless...one could be studying any subject. But if we read a little about nama and rupa and reflect on the clinging to self and wrong view of self at this moment, it can help to intellectually break down those wrong views. Slowly awareness develops which is aware of seeing and visible objects and other realities at any moment with no idea of a story or situation. Cybele, for me, this is 'freedom' and the true meaning of 'solitude' or silence'..learning to live alone with one reality and realising that life exists in just this moment. Whether we sit to meditate or read ADL, it is conditioned at that moment. It's true that you may sit to meditate and there may be sati or you may open ADL and have aversion;-), who knows? Either way there are realities arising that can be known and they are very unpredictable, don't you find? This is the way, fo me, that meditation or practice or bhavana makes life easier and simpler without any rules at all. And so the more awareness develops, the less it matters what country one is in, what one's job or routine is or how others are acting. Let's see if these reminders to myself as much as to you or anyone else condition any sleep.....;-)) Thanks again for your smiles, hugs and kind words...I so enjoyed our time together and do hope this doesn't sound arrogant , condescending or 'I know it all' at all...it's not meant to, I promise! love, Sarah p.s Bruce et al, well I do remember taking a lunch for A.Sumedho and A.Chah in Hampstead, London and having a discussion.....I also remember Sumedho telling him that I studied abhidhamma with Nina and K.Sujin and I led a regular dhamma discusion group at my house (tho' I certainly wouldn't have called myself an abhidhamma teacher). The conversation sounded like one we could well have had.....;-)) Actually what I remember most from the visit was my dismay when A.Chah mixed the apple crumble and custard I prepared for desert in with the curry that I had spent the morning cooking. He assured me (through Sumedho's translation) that the combination was delicious....but I don't remember slaving over a cooker since (as Jonothan will confirm!!). And yes...there were lots of nice smiles that day too, Cybele.... 6728 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 3:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Erik, I haven't forgotten this reply to me, though my response now (3a.m!!) maybe outdated or foggy!! --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter Abbott > wrote: > > > Erik, when we are concerned to get rid of 'dukkha' doesn't this > show the > > clinging? > > To follow the same logic, when the Buddha taught a path for > eradicating dukkha that he was promoting clinging. Good point! Perhaps it depends on what we mean by 'getting rid of dukkha'. As I understand the Buddha, he was talking about the inherent unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned realities not worthy of being clung to and to thus to be understood and eventually eradicated. I don't have your earlier post, but if I remember, you were talking about getting rid of what is unpleasant in life. I may be remembering (over a thousand posts ago) incorrectly. Anyway it suggested a clinging to the pleasant and aversion (wanting to get rid of) the unpleasant..Very natural, but not the way of understanding. > > In an absolute sense all realities are unsatisfactory (dukkha), even > > the blissful ones, and for this reason we need to know and develop > detachment > > not just from those we find unpleasant but from whatever is > conditioned now. > > Of course. However you miss one important point. When akusala arises > to such a strong degree it wipes out all your lofty aspirations, what > then? Unless we are arahants, there will be dukka, very much so in > the conventional sense. How do we deal with this? This was the excellent question i wanted to come back to.....not easy at all! The question really is, do we have a choice?? As I just mentioned to Cybele, it seems we can make a choice whether to meditate or pick up ADL. In fact, the realities (including the efforts and intentions) are conditioned already. You may have planned to take an LSD trip and then found yourself on quite another trip to Bkk instead!! Do we know what the reality will be at the next moment, let alone in one hour's time or one week's time? However beautifully we lay our plans, can we avoid dukkha (in the sense you mean of that which is unpleasant in life?). We cannot control or help the vipaka which is conditioned and though we may see the danger of aversion occasionally, it is bound to arise because of the deep-seated ignorance and attachment which we care a lot less about. It seems when life is tough that WE need to do something and to have a strategy ready to deal with it. Conventionally, this is fine....some sit on a cushion, some go on a trip or whatever kind, some take a hike or listen to a dhamma tape. In reality, no self, no control, no strategy, no trip...just realities to be known even at these times, however/whatever/wherever conditions lead us. > > There have to be ways of dealing with dukkha *right now* that let you > simply cope until the strength to overcome them fully through > insight. This (to my way of thinking of course) is the idea of self again that can DO something!! It's not a matter of doing something with wrong view and then later developing insight. Instead, whatever 'doing' is happening anyway, insight has to begin to develop from the very beginning.... >And insight will never have cause to arise when the mind is > constantly overwhelmed by the hindrances. Impossible! I disagree. As Cybele learnt recently, even in a big depression that seems to last a long time, there can be moments of awareness...the hindrances are realities that must be known too...but this has been discussed at length. Erik, please don't underestimate the power of sati as that will be a condition for it not to arise. Of course it is very brief and nothing to get excited about at all imho! > > "Drugs" is an awfully broad category, Sarah. ........ > Furthermore, it becomes possible to expose deep layers of > psychological holding and release them through this practice, which > is how I have used them the past twenty years or so. In the case of > MDMA, I consider this a perfect adjunct to practice, because it is so > versatile. I've enjoyed all the discussion on this topic. 2 quick comments only I promise: 1. As Dan and others have suggested, like 'sitting meditation' in order to develop more sati, this suggests the idea of a 'situation' as being more conducive rather than understanding reality conditioned now already.. 2. If akusala already is seen to arise to such a strong degree, why would one want to 'expose' any 'deeper layers of psychological holding'...? How hard does one have to knock one's head to know it's painful? I'm also thinking of Tom A's difficult experiences with TM and trying to work out what went wrong. Why not just accept that what has happened has been by conditions (including vipaka) and accumulated wrong view and defilements and just 'let go' or understand the thinking and other realities conditioned now? > > For example, if you know what you're doing you can use this as a very > nice way to spend several hours meditating on the Bhrahma viharas, > streaming tears of gratitude for your teachers and sending tidal > waves of metta to everyone around you just a quickie....no tears in metta or karuna as you know Erik....tears are with dosa, though some may disagree! Metta and karuna never arise with unpleasant feeling. --and if that isn't > extraordinarily high kusala I don't know what is. Those effects carry > over long beyond the session itself, and can leave one with something > like a "benchmark" for what really super-powerful metta feels like. > That practice was one of the practices that helped me get rid of > scads of ragged, nasty karma and even more anger I'd been carryng for > years (therapists were using MDMD to help patients get past painful > emotional blockages until it was made illegal in the '80s to further > the revolting War on Some Drugs), I don't doubt the possible therapeutic uses and find it interesting. But as I mentioned to Cybele, in terms of developing any bhavana, one needs to be clear on cause and result....but others have discussed this a lot more eloquently than I could now... Erik, I'm looking forward to meeting you in Bangkok very much indeed. I find your posts and studies and deep study to be very inspiring and extremely unusual. I also have a lot of confidence that you have the sincerity in your practice and appreciation of abhidhamma to really develop a lot of wisdom in daily life. I know Khun Sujin will enjoy discussing all these areas with you and you'll be a great asset to the group in Bkk as you are to us on dsg. Best wishes for your stay... Sarah > 6729 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 9:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Herman: Thank you for sharing your feeling of "being rootless" with us. I have the exactly same feeling as you do. I've been away from Japan for the last 30 years. In whichever countries I lived (Thailand, Sri Lanka, etc.), I have been very well taken of, and having nice/pleasant lives (Yes, Canada, Victoria is a very nice plase to live. You can ask Derek about Vancouver.) But regradless of the place I have lived (including my native country, Japan), I have never refrained myself from having a feeling that I do not really belong to this place/ society/country. In reality, we may not belong to any particular place. As the Buddha says, the world we live is full of fires, where we shouldn't feel cosy or "being settled". tadao 6730 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Male/female perception (was Re: Ajaan Chaa - Christine Hi, Herman: With respect to cerebral laterality, as we know that the left and right brains have different functions. As you rightly pointed out, the left brain is good at analytical processing, whereas the right brain is good at gestaltic processing. About for 95% of the population, the language processing faculty is (to a large extent) housed in the left brain. As for the differece in brain betwen males' and females', it hasn't been a well studied subject, the main reason being that the issue is too "political. One psychological study I am aware of involves a matrix and incidental memomry recall. You create a matrix where in some of the slots you place simple charcters, such as "a", "g", "p", "q", etc., randamly. After showing the matrix for a brief duration of time, you will ask your subjects about the characters and the locations of these characters they have seen on thu matrix. Interstingly, the female subjects have a better recall of the characters themselves, while the male subjects have better recall of the "locations" of these characters. The indication is that females are better at linguistic processing, while males are better at visual/spacial processing. One reason why females are good at language processing may be attributed to the fact that, unlike males', their brain function is less lateralized so that they can use both left and right brain in language processing. This fact can be supported by the another fact that males have much higher ratio than females in developing aphasia. Locailized cerebral lesions may easily affect language capability if they take places in so-called Broca's and Wernicke's areas. And in the case of males, having a lesion in such vital area necessarily leads to the dvelopment of aphasia, whereas it is not necessarily the case with female patients. This finding, as mentioned above, suggests that lateralization of felame brain is less dominant than that of the male brain. In sum, if you say that male and female brains differ from each other, I think, it is the right statement. But we really do not know yet to what extent those two types of brain differ from each other. (I am very sorry for discussing something which is not really related to the Dhamma.) tadao 6731 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Hi, Mike: I agree with what you are saying concerning Archan Chah. tadao 6732 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 22, 2001 10:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Kom and Mike: In this real society we live (especially, if one lives outside the so-called Buddhist countries), there aren't many opportunities of having kusala cittas. Any opportunity of having kusal cittas is precious. tadao 6733 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi, Sarah: Thank you for your very clear argumentation in responding to Eric's practice/feeling/etc. tadao P.S. My sleep has been improving. (Besides the weight-loss, mouth-taping, I've been finding that St. John wart is a very promising herbal remedy. Since taking it regulary, I've started feeling more refreshed in the morning.) 6734 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 7:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Yahoo Groups Mail My inbox runneth over, Howard (that is, I'm not having that problem at the moment). I did have a problem with an internet worm virus for the last couple days (Code Red)--maybe it affected Yahoo's servers somehow (though I think that's a long shot). Best wishes, sir... mike --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > As happened once before, I have noted that > for the last day or so I > have received almost no mail from Yahoo groups, > whereas many e-mails are > available to be read at the web site. Is anyone else > in the same boat? > > 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) > 6735 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 8:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Thanks, Derek--I think I can get there from here! mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > I do have in English (PTS). Unfortunatlely the > books > > and chapters are in English only--can you please > help > > me to locate this? > > Hello again, Mike, > > I have the Bhikkhu Bodhi/Wisdom translation. The > Samyutta Nikaya is > divided into 56 samyuttas, which are grouped > together into 5 major > sections. This one is in overall samyutta number 22, > which is the > first samyutta within the third major section. > Within that samyutta, > it's the 55th sutta. > > Clear as mud? > > Derek. > > 6736 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 8:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Suttam For Anihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Re: Nibbana anihilation? Excellent, Kom--thanks! mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike, > > The entire sutta is long, so I will only put B. > Bodhi's translation of the = > > section (I think) here: From SN, Kandhavagga, > Khandhasamyutta, Section > 55: > > "Bikkhu, though someone might say: 'Apart from form, > aprt from feeling, > apart from perception, apart from volitional > formations, I will make known = > > the coming and going of consciousness, its passing > away and rebirth, its > growth, increase, and expansion' - that is > impossible. [endquote] > > There is no comment associated with this section's > translation. > > kom > > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > Dear Suan, > > > > I'm afraid I don't have a translation of the Udana > and > > though I might be able to sort it out eventually, > the > > Pali's over my head--any chance of an English > > translation? > > > > Many thanks, as always, sir. > > > > mike > > > > --- 243181214009248125169154072026132253136158139046209 wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Mike, Robert, Gayan > > > > > > How are you? > > > > > > I think I have found a Suttam quite relevant to > > > anihilation > > > (vibhava). Although this Suttam is different > from > > > the one you > > > remember, it explicitly describes anihilation of > > > five aggregates. > > > > > > So the statement is even more stronger than > > > anihilation of > > > dukkha. You know what I mean! > > > > > > The Suttam is > > > > > > Section 55 Udana Suttam, Upaya Vaggo, Khandha > > > Samyuttam, Khandha > > > Vaggo, Samyuttanikayo. > > > > > > The sample lines come like these below. > > > > > > "rupam vibhavisatiti yathabhutam pajanatia .... > > > "vińńanam vibhavisatiti yathabhutam pajanatia." > > > > > > It also has the noun forms such as " rupassa > vibhava > > > ..." > > > > > > I hope this message satisfies your Dhamma Wish > to > > > some degree! > > > > > > > > > With regards > > > > > > > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > > > > > > > 6737 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 10:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Determining consciousness Herman --- Herman wrote: > Dear Nina and Jon, ( no intention to exclude others I am unaware of) > > Thank you sincerely for the time and effort taken to answer the > question. I often feel that I lack time. There are so many things > which beg for attention, and the days consist of choosing this, > rejecting that as objects for further consideration. Yes, this is life. But even the 'choosing' is just another moment of intention conditioned by our previous accumulations (and other factors). So there is no more control over this moment (ie. to express it in convventional terms, over 'what we choose') than over the fact that, say, we like one flavour but not another. Also, at times when we our lives are 'busy' it is an opportunity to see whether the realities that arise from moment to moment are in truth any different from the realities that arise at other times, or whether it is just our perception that this is so. Jon 6738 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 10:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Considering Bruce --- bruce wrote: > hi nina > > thanks also for this very appropriate quotation, although i must admit > that > i'm stumped by the exhortation at the end to "apply" and "be aware", as > though there were a choice in the matter.... Yes, it does appear that way to us, and conventional language of course is couched in terms that reflect this. But we are told that the reality is that there is not in fact any choice. So we can consider in our daily life whether such a state is consistent with our moment to moment experiences (but we should not expect an immediate resolution to the question). There is more likely to be consideration or useful reflection (=application?) if we have the benefit of a reminder to that effect. Reminders can come in any shape or form, from others or from ourself. A person wishing to give a reminder to someone may use conventional language for the purpose, because that after all is how we are accustomed to expressing ourselves, even when referring to absolute realities. Jon 6739 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 10:47am Subject: Choice (wasRe: Determining consciousness --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > Also, at times when we our lives are 'busy' it is an > opportunity to see > whether the realities that arise from moment to moment are in > truth any > different from the realities that arise at other times, or > whether it is > just our perception that this is so. > > ______ Thanks for this Jon. This is what I wanted to say in several posts - except I didn't have the right words to express it. robert 6740 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 11:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek An interesting (and provocative) post. I hope you don't mind me coming in. I would like to raise one or two questions. --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Erik, > > Yes, this is an interesting issue. I think there are two distinct > questions. > > Question 1: Is the Satipa.t.thaana Sutta the only way? > > Firstly, as I said, ekaayano maggo (the claim it makes for itself) > doesn't really mean only way. > > But secondly, it's obviously not even the only way taught in the Pali > Canon. > > The way the Buddha himself practiced included concentration > meditation (samaadhi), following which he directed his purified and > concentrated mind to knowledge of three things -- (i) his past lives, > (ii) the passing away and reappearance of beings, and (iii) the > destruction of the aasava-s. That was his method. How many people > today even mention that that was how he practiced, let alone follow > it? When you say 'that was his method', do you mean that (i) and (ii) are necessary for enlightenment? To put it another way, in his teaching of the path, does he teach that these are necessary for enlightenment? I think we need to separate the narrative of the Buddha's personal journey from his teaching as to what is essential for development of the path. (The same applies as regards the fact that the Buddha was sitting cross-legged at the time he attained enlightenment.) We should also remember that the goal he taught was enlightenment, not supreme Buddhahood - there is a considerable difference between the two, wouldn't you agree? > Even the most basic statement of the Buddha's prescription for > practice, the Noble Eightfold Path, includes sammaa samaadhi (right > concentration) as well as sammaa sati (right mindfulness). Yes. So the question is, how is samma samadhi of the eightfold path to be developed, according to the texts? Without looking into this, we can't draw any conclusion. Jon 6741 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 11:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Searches of the list --- bruce wrote: > i'll try to do a search before i go to see if anything hs been written > on > intention...may give up halfway, though, as these yahoo archive searches > can take forever to yield nothing.... Bruce, you might find it easier to do your searches on the eGroups archive (but bear in mind that posts there go back only to February of this year). Jon. eGroups archives: http://www.egroups.com/group/dhammastudygroup Userid: dsgarchives Password: metta 6742 From: bruce Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Considering thanks jon, for the reminder! bruce At 10:40 2001/07/23 +0800, you wrote: > Bruce > > --- bruce wrote: > hi nina > > > > thanks also for this very appropriate quotation, although i must admit > > that > > i'm stumped by the exhortation at the end to "apply" and "be aware", as > > though there were a choice in the matter.... > > Yes, it does appear that way to us, and conventional language of course is > couched in terms that reflect this. But we are told that the reality is > that there is not in fact any choice. So we can consider in our daily > life whether such a state is consistent with our moment to moment > experiences (but we should not expect an immediate resolution to the > question). > > There is more likely to be consideration or useful reflection > (=application?) if we have the benefit of a reminder to that effect. > Reminders can come in any shape or form, from others or from ourself. > > A person wishing to give a reminder to someone may use conventional > language for the purpose, because that after all is how we are accustomed > to expressing ourselves, even when referring to absolute realities. > > Jon > > 6743 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 11:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajaan Chaa - Christine Christine (and Cybele) Christine, I'd like to 'second' everything Cybele says (well, almost everything ...) and encourage you to come in with any comments or questions whatsoever, and not to be intimidated by any perception that your ability or knowledge is in any sense lacking. We all stand to benefit from sincere posts of any perspective. Cybele, thanks for giving encouragement to others. Jon --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Christine > > Much appreciation. You are always very helpful with your links. > And regarding your feeling of inadequacy to join the discussions, please > > don't wait to be fluent in Pali to come over. > Dhamma is the ral issue and if you are seeker, you are MOST WELCOME. > Don't feel intimidate with the erudition here, they don't bite I can > assure > you. > We need a bit of equilibrium here, too much masculine vision, too much > Yang, > we need to temper it with a bit of feminine Yin. > Please just come in and share with us your practice and your > perplexities. > I know you are brave enough. Jump aboard. > By the way, very interesting the discussions on Buddhism and depression > but > as you can see I have been a bit engrossed lately. ;-) > > Love > > Cybele > > > >>Hi All, > > > >Thank you Cybele, Tadao, Bruce for your discussion of the relative > >merits of the style and content of the teachings of Ajahn Chah. I > >benefit immensely from all the posts on this list, though I lack the > >ability to join in the debates. Even unpopular or unsupported views > >teach me a lot, because I spend much time with Google seeking out > >further information to help me understand. > >This time I found a link which may be familiar to all of you, but > >which may be helpful to any others like myself still struggling > >across the misty flats with the mountain ahead yet to be climbed! > > > >http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/theravada-writings.htm > > > >Three or four complete books here by Ajahn Chah, as well as others. > > > >metta, > > > >Christine 6744 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 4:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Study/Practice Robert and Skin: Thank you very much for the great discussion on satipatthana. Hi, Robert, I liked your quotation from Netti-Pakarana. Unfortunately, our (ignorant) minds/societies do not want to see things in their true forms. Thanks, again, for the good conversation/reminder. tadao 6745 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:21pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > I don't have your earlier post, but if I remember, you were talking about > getting rid of what is unpleasant in life. Right, which is dukkha. The entire point of the path. > I may be remembering (over a > thousand posts ago) incorrectly. Anyway it suggested a clinging to the pleasant > and aversion (wanting to get rid of) the unpleasant..Very natural, but not the > way of understanding. Okay, I'm gonna dive in on a point I've been meaning to raise here for some time. We talk about "self" and no controlling, so on, so forth. But CONVENTIONALLY we have to talk at this level. I see so much semantic contortionism here on DSG in HOW things are spoken of, that to even speak of something a certain way conventionally implies a view of self, etc. NO NO NO!!! Language is the problem here, I think, Sarah, and getting hung up on language is to miss the point entirely--it's actually getting caught in names & terms--views, again! Really. I consider this point a vital one. We can easily (and indeed must) at some level speak about conventional self, dukkha at the conventional level, practice at the conventional level: that to do this is to get that. When this arises, that arises; when this ceases, that ceases. There is no other way to even discuss practice using language, and while it is vital to understand WHAT is "self" and what is clung to as self, there can be a degree of overkill on semantics (which I have so often observed here) that makes communication very difficult if too much emphasis is given to the way things are phrased rather than their deeper meaning. Language is just another fabrication! We must let even language go! > > In an absolute sense all realities are unsatisfactory (dukkha), Not ALL realities, Sarah. All CONDITIONED realities. :) > > Of course. However you miss one important point. When akusala arises > > to such a strong degree it wipes out all your lofty aspirations, what > > then? Unless we are arahants, there will be dukka, very much so in > > the conventional sense. How do we deal with this? > > This was the excellent question i wanted to come back to.....not easy at all! > The question really is, do we have a choice?? As I just mentioned to Cybele, it > seems we can make a choice whether to meditate or pick up ADL. In fact, the > realities (including the efforts and intentions) are conditioned already. You > may have planned to take an LSD trip and then found yourself on quite another > trip to Bkk instead!! Do we know what the reality will be at the next moment, > let alone in one hour's time or one week's time? However beautifully we lay our > plans, can we avoid dukkha (in the sense you mean of that which is unpleasant > in life?). We cannot control or help the vipaka which is conditioned and though > we may see the danger of aversion occasionally, it is bound to arise because of > the deep-seated ignorance and attachment which we care a lot less about. What I was driving at here is that we need strategies for effectively dealing with dukkha in its many aspects, and Right View is simply one tool among many. What is certain is that insight alone is not enough to get rid of dukkha until arahata magga. If anyone believes otherwise they are in for one very rude and nasty shock! The Sabbasava Sutta for this reason details many other methods the Buddha expounded for terminating the asavas. > It seems when life is tough that WE need to do something and to have a > strategy ready to deal with it. Conventionally, this is fine....some sit on a > cushion, some go on a trip or whatever kind, some take a hike or listen to a > dhamma tape. > > In reality, no self, no control, no strategy, no trip...just realities to be > known even at these times, however/whatever/wherever conditions lead us. I see we're coming into accord now--at least I think... let's continue... > > There have to be ways of dealing with dukkha *right now* that let you > > simply cope until the strength to overcome them fully through > > insight. > > This (to my way of thinking of course) is the idea of self again that can DO > something!! Sarah, S-E-M-A-N-T-I-C-S again!!! :) :) :) There is no need to think of "self" other than conventionally when talking about cetana, yet, there is a conventional self that acts volitionally. While there are no sentient beings, never have been, never will be, there is no Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, there are conventionally composed entities that suffer, there are conventionally composed entities that serve as a valid basis for the label Buddha to expound that way out of suffering, there are conventionally composed doctrines that demonstrate the way out of suffering, there are conventionally composed entites that have eradicated sakkayaditthi, vicikicca, silabbataparamasa, etc. etc., and yet none of these fabrications have ever truly existed in the first place! :) > >And insight will never have cause to arise when the mind is > > constantly overwhelmed by the hindrances. Impossible! > > I disagree. As Cybele learnt recently, even in a big depression that seems to > last a long time, there can be moments of awareness...the hindrances are > realities that must be known too... Okay, that was a tad dogmatic-sounding. I meant this more generally, that when we're overwhelemed by suffering we're ususually too wrapped up in notions of "self" and pain to think of much else. I look into my own mind for this, nowhere else. And of course we can have moments of insight arising when overwhelmed by dukkha, in fact, that is one reason I have used psychedelics in the past--to expose deeply-held psychological garbage, extraordinarily painful garbage, so I could work with it more directly. That is why at least 50% of my "trips" were what many people consider "bad" trips, and I deliberately sought them out because this is where the heavy work of releasing that holding happens (and boy has it ever been effective in helping identify and terminate various hindrances, etc.). > > "Drugs" is an awfully broad category, Sarah. > ........ > > Furthermore, it becomes possible to expose deep layers of > > psychological holding and release them through this practice, which > > is how I have used them the past twenty years or so. In the case of > > MDMA, I consider this a perfect adjunct to practice, because it is so > > versatile. > > I've enjoyed all the discussion on this topic. 2 quick comments only I promise: > 1. As Dan and others have suggested, like 'sitting meditation' in order to > develop more sati, this suggests the idea of a 'situation' as being more > conducive rather than understanding reality conditioned now already.. But some situations ARE more conducive to insight. Please, Sarah, think carefully about what you're saying here. What you say sounds so fatalistic, as if there is no reason at all to seek out favorable conditions for practice! Whoa!!! Why then, is there emphasis on finding a queit place for meditation, why is there so much emphasis in the Visuddhimagga, for example, on establishing the appropriate external conditions conducive to meditation? Please explain your position to me in light of what the Vis. III.28 speaks of regarding conditions for meditation. Are these or are these not "situations?" Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and have no volitional control. Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says otherwise. In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have to get out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and forget practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a difference. While it is agreed we can't control vipaka, we can (and MUST, if we're serious about the path) strive to purify the mind with directed practice, even practices that will by definition partake of notions of "self"--until at least sotapatti-magga-nana. That is the entire point of bhavana. We need heaps of merit to even get rid of self-view in the first place, and I believe in placing the horse before the cart here and will simply restate the stock formula of dana, sila, bhavana, in order, one laying the foundation for the next, knowing that "self view" at some level is ALWAYS present until bhavana is developed to the degree sakkayaditthi is finally terminated. > 2. If akusala already is seen to arise to such a strong degree, why would one > want to 'expose' any 'deeper layers of psychological holding'...? How hard does > one have to knock one's head to know it's painful? There is a lot more to this, Sarah. One thing I found most helpful was that psychedelics stripped away the more conventional layers of ideation and exposed the roots of particular afflictions more readily by granting access to layers of the subconscious normally hidden from view--like drawing back a curtain on the inner workings of the conceptualization-machine we call the mind. I think of, for example, my arch-nemesis kukuccha, which through a number of sessions I was able to pinpoint at the root, so that now, I can catch it (mostly, still not always) while it is still tiny, before it snowballs into something that drags me into the muck for minutes, hours, or longer. Do you realize what a coup this has been in my own practice? That whiny little bugger (kukuccha) has been the source of more trouble in my practice than nearly any other hindrance, because I'm moody and broody by accumulation, and that brooding has interfered with practice to a very high degree. So to be able to spot this hindrance in its lair has enabled me to terminate it with extreme prejudice where it lives moer often than not now. > I'm also thinking of Tom A's > difficult experiences with TM and trying to work out what went wrong. Why not > just accept that what has happened has been by conditions (including vipaka) > and accumulated wrong view and defilements and just 'let go' or understand the > thinking and other realities conditioned now? Because that's only one way among many to effect the same aim, and not necessarily the best approach for everyone. > > For example, if you know what you're doing you can use this as a very > > nice way to spend several hours meditating on the Bhrahma viharas, > > streaming tears of gratitude for your teachers and sending tidal > > waves of metta to everyone around you > > just a quickie....no tears in metta or karuna as you know Erik....tears are > with dosa, though some may disagree! Metta and karuna never arise with > unpleasant feeling. I was speaking of tears of gratitude for my teachers and the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha, and the kindness of all my "mothers" (the Tibetans have such a sweet practice of seeing all beings as having been your mother in a previous existence as a way of recalling their kindness and terminating aversion to even those we consider enemies, by recalling their kindness in raising us, taking care of us, etc.-- which matches the Suttas where the Buddha said there are few beings in all samsara who hafe not at some time been our mother, father, brother, sister, etc.). If you believe tears of gratitude and love are a form of dosa, then I can only say I hope you sometime have the experience of knowing what such tears of love and joy feel like. There are few pracftices which are ther equal of meditation on the Bhramaviharas. And why, I must ask, is there practicelly NO emphasis here given to this indispensible practice? It's not like it's even controversial from the Theravada perspective, and all I can do is encourage people study the Visuddhimagga IX and meditate, meditate, meditate on the Four Immeasurables until such tears of joy and gratitude have the conditions to arise. > Erik, I'm looking forward to meeting you in Bangkok very much indeed. I find > your posts and studies and deep study to be very inspiring and extremely > unusual. "Extremely unusual." Heh. Not from my perspective, which is that the Dhamma is no more than a raft, meaning, that anything that may have benefit, even if it falls outside what most people are familiar with, are to me worthy of exploration, because I refuse to take anyone's word on anything unless I can verify it for myself through experimentation and careful testing, like testing gold--"burning, cutting, grinding." This proclivity to experiment is, I think, a function of nearly- insatiable curiosity, and I'm willing to try anything that may be of benefit (read conencted with the Goal in some way), even tangentially, as a way of getting to the bottom of things, the whys and wherefores, in other words. This is the very reason I'm studying the Abhidhamma, because I see it as a way to "reverse-engineer" many aspects and experiences of the Dhamma that have arisen in the course of my own practice, as well as wishing to have a technical way to unpack, in detail, how and why certain practices perform the functions they do, and how they all hang together. One of the monks in my bikkhu-sangha once called me the "mad scientist" because of my love of this sort of experimentation. It has held me in good stead so far, and I see no reason to stop playing, since there is so much yet for me to learn. > I also have a lot of confidence that you have the sincerity in your > practice and appreciation of abhidhamma to really develop a lot of wisdom in > daily life. I know Khun Sujin will enjoy discussing all these areas with you > and you'll be a great asset to the group in Bkk as you are to us on dsg. I truly look forward to meeting you too Sarah, and Jon, and Robert, and of course Khun Sujim. My best wishes to all, and let the debates continue!!! ... :) :) :) 6746 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]tadarammana, registering, and kamma. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Eric: To recap in the simplest terms: is tadarammana necessary to register > > kamma, or is it the jaavna cittas that perform the function of > > creating kamma? > Nina: No, tadarammanacitta does not register kamma, it is just vipaka, > experiencing for two more moments the sense object that was experienced in > that same process. When kamma is performed through body, speech or mind it > is at the moment of javana, but I cannot pinpoint in which process. > Have a fruitful stay in Bangkok with good discussions. Hoping to hear about > your discussions with Khun Sujin, Nina. Nina, thank you so much for clarifying this point to me. I got caught one time having to try to explain the exact point at which kamma was created and I fumbled the ball and assumed that the 'registration" function of tadarammana was they key to "registering" kamma. So then it IS javana. Great! >Sankharakkhandha are all cetasikas, except feeling and remembrance. >Kom summarized the different meanings of sankara in different >contexts: >sankharakkhandha, sankhara dhamma and abhisankhara in the Dependent >Origination. It is difficult for all of us, we can so easily mix up >different categories. Do you have this post, if not, do ask again. I would very much like to find this post from Kom. Does anyone have the post #? Again, so many thanks for your clarification. 6747 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Mike Yes indeed. Pleasant feeling is perhaps the least reliable of guides here! What I also find interesting is that, although this knowledge (ie. knowledge by direct experience of the characteristic of kusala vs. akusala mind states) comes to us as part of the Dhamma, it is in fact knowledge that remains extant during periods when the Dhamma is no longer alive. It is this that is the basis for the development of samatha. Only when this knowledge has been developed to a certain degree can the training of 'taking a meditation subject' comes into play, as far as I understand it. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Jon, > > For sure, I think discernment is the key here. Is it > really kusala, or does it just feel good? How could > anyone know without having heard and understood the > Dhamma? Lobha (even for kusala) especially can be > accompanied by the most blissful feelings. Easy (and > tempting!) to mistake these for kusala. > > mike > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > Yes, if only we were able to tell the difference > > between kusala and > > akusala by knowing the characteristic of each, > > rather than only being able > > to guess at it by thinking in terms of the situation > > (eg 'I'm studying > > dhamma, so it must be kusala'). 6748 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:42pm Subject: Sańńa Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana PART (1) Re: Nibbana anihilation? --- <> wrote: > Dear Erik, Robert Epstein, And Anders Honoré > > How are you? Speaking of my conventional self, great, and even moreso thanks to your amazingly lucid reply. What you have just managed to do is to clarify for me (in a way I hadn't expected at all) something I have been churning through for about three years now. I wish I could express my gratitude in words, but words fail. In short, I can only say, "WOW!" Thank you thank you thank you!!!! :) :) :) 6749 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 0:58pm Subject: Re: Considering --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Bruce > > --- bruce wrote: > hi nina > > > > thanks also for this very appropriate quotation, although i must admit > > that > > i'm stumped by the exhortation at the end to "apply" and "be aware", as > > though there were a choice in the matter.... > > Yes, it does appear that way to us, and conventional language of course is > couched in terms that reflect this. But we are told that the reality is > that there is not in fact any choice. In whose reality, Jon? The reality of those sectarianis the Buddha explicitly refuted this view in the Tittha Sutta? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-062.html "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that...whatever a person experiences...is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that...whatever a person experiences...is all caused by what was done in the past?' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief...unchaste...a liar...a divisive speaker...a harsh speaker...an idle chatterer...greedy...malicious...a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those priests & contemplative who hold to such teachings, such views." 6750 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 1:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Study/Practice Thanks Tadao, I just reread it. The quotes from the texts are ones that I find useful too. I think I got a bit long-winded, and with a fair dose of the missionary coming out too! I wrote a paragraph and then cut and pasted some old posts -hence the lenghth. robert --- ppp wrote: > Robert and Skin: > Thank you very much for the great discussion on satipatthana. > Hi, Robert, I liked your quotation from Netti-Pakarana. > Unfortunately, > our (ignorant) minds/societies do not want to see things in > their true > forms. Thanks, again, for the good conversation/reminder. > tadao > 6751 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 2:15pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Dear Jon, Please do join in. I'm glad I'm not the only one on the planet who's interested in the sutta-s! On the question of what is necessary for enlightenment ... when the Buddha gave talks, he didn't, as far as I know, say: "Practice X is the *only* way to nibbaana." What he did say was: "A monk does practice X, and nibbaana follows." So, no exclusivism, and no mention of necessity. Now, while the path of a Buddha is different from that of an arahant, the Buddha does *not* talk about acquiring the three knowledges as being only for himself. In some places, he describes the monk's path as including the acquisition of the three knowledges (e.g., in the Saamańńaphala Sutta, DN 2). In fact, in other places the monk's path includes the development of even more supernormal powers, including the ability to walk on water and fly through space (e.g. SN 51.11). Mahaa Kassapa had developed these powers, apparently with the Buddha's approval (SN 16.9). They are all the result of concentration practices (Iddhipaada-sa.myutta, SN 51). In other places, however, it is the cultivation of the 4 brahmavihaara-s that is given as the intervening step between the Noble Eightfold Path and nibbaana (e.g., The Simile of the Cloth, MN 7). And in other places, the Noble Eightfold Path is presented in a bare- bones form, without any additional attainments (e.g. MN 141). And, as we all know, in the Satipa.t.thaana Sutta (MN 10) the Buddha says that its methods alone (formal and informal sati practice) are enough to bring one to nibbaana -- apparently without a concentration practice. This omission of concentration seems to represent a later stage in the Buddha's teachings. Elsewhere, he says that lack of respect for concentration meditation is one of the five factors that will lead to loss of knowledge of the true Dhamma (SN 16.13), a deterioration which was apparently happening even during the Buddha's own lifetime. > how is samma samadhi of the eightfold path to be > developed, according to the texts? Right concentration is always defined as the 4 jhaana-s. Except, of course, in those places where it's defined as the 8 jhaana-s! Derek. 6752 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 3:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]tadarammana, registering, and kamma. Dear Erik, --- Erik wrote: > I would very much like to find this post from Kom. Does anyone have > the post #? It wasn't a post from me, but Num. Here's the link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6384 kom 6753 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 3:14pm Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > What I also find interesting is that, although this knowledge (ie. > knowledge by direct experience of the characteristic of kusala vs. akusala > mind states) comes to us as part of the Dhamma, it is in fact knowledge > that remains extant during periods when the Dhamma is no longer I am quite interested in hearing this part. You sound as if the development of tranquil meditation up to the Jhana level is no longer possible. How do I reach this conclusion? > alive. It > is this that is the basis for the development of samatha. Only when this > knowledge has been developed to a certain degree can the training of > 'taking a meditation subject' comes into play, as far as I understand it. > I am somehow got caught in the loop that developing Satipathanna must be enormously harder than developing Samatha vipassana because of the all the conditions involved (and developing Satipathana is still possible nowadays). There are still ascetics out there who don't care much about the 5 sensualities. What would prevent them from developing such practices? kom 6754 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 3:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Choice (wasRe: Determining consciousness Rob Thanks for your comment. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > > Also, at times when we our lives are 'busy' it is > an > > opportunity to see > > whether the realities that arise from moment to > moment are in > > truth any > > different from the realities that arise at other > times, or > > whether it is > > just our perception that this is so. > > > > ______ > > Thanks for this Jon. This is what I wanted to say in > several > posts - except I didn't have the right words to > express it. > robert If I may take the opportunity to expand a little further. This is something I find I need frequent reminding of myself, since much of my working life is spent rushing to get an item done in time, and suffering one setback after another in the process. When we are busy or flustered (and dosa of various kinds is predominant), it seems that any sort of useful reflection must be the last thing possible, but i have learnt that with constant study one can come to see at a thinking level at least level that the realities at those moments are really nothing more than the usual suspects in a slightly different guise (ie. combination), including good old seeing and visible object, hearing and sound etc. Jon 6755 From: Ken Howard Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 4:28pm Subject: Re: Hello dsg --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Ken, > Dear Sarah, Thank you for your kind welcome. Its very nice to be saying hello to you after reading your messages for so long. I live in coastal south Queensland where my days are occupied with Dhamma study, surfing and housework. The surf here is excellent on its good days so I needed to find dsg to accommodate my other great love to the same degree (better as it turned out). As for housework; since my wife does the bread-winning, thats OK as well. I must say, taking part is more stressful than lurking. I have the accumulations of a shy recluse and writing on the most difficult of subjects -- for mass scrutiny -- is outside the job description. Kind regards Ken Howard 6756 From: Christine Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 4:35pm Subject: Re: 'Ajaan Chaa - Christine' Cybele Dear Cybele, Thank you for your warm and welcoming encouragement. I'll take your advice and contribute when I can, and keep learning from all of you. I have enjoyed the Buddhism depression list too - thankfully they are a quiet group - I think dhammastudygroup must have the busiest member/post ratio on Buddhism on the net! metta, Christine --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Christine > > Much appreciation. You are always very helpful with your links. > And regarding your feeling of inadequacy to join the discussions, please > don't wait to be fluent in Pali to come over. > Dhamma is the ral issue and if you are seeker, you are MOST WELCOME. > Don't feel intimidate with the erudition here, they don't bite I can assure > you. > We need a bit of equilibrium here, too much masculine vision, too much Yang, > we need to temper it with a bit of feminine Yin. > Please just come in and share with us your practice and your perplexities. > I know you are brave enough. Jump aboard. > By the way, very interesting the discussions on Buddhism and depression but > as you can see I have been a bit engrossed lately. ;-) > > Love > > Cybele 6757 From: Christine Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 4:47pm Subject: Re: 'Ajaan Chaa - Christine' Jon Dear Jon, Many thanks - this is a very supportive list and I have noticed that even the occasional disagreements are generally resolved peacefully,- this makes it a safe place to 'take a risk.' Thank you to you Jon and Sarah (and many others) for making it so. metta, Christine --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Christine (and Cybele) > > Christine, I'd like to 'second' everything Cybele says (well, almost > everything ...) and encourage you to come in with any comments or > questions whatsoever, and not to be intimidated by any perception that > your ability or knowledge is in any sense lacking. We all stand to > benefit from sincere posts of any perspective. > > Cybele, thanks for giving encouragement to others. > > Jon 6758 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 4:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello dsg Dear Ken, --- Ken Howard wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thank you for your kind welcome. Its very nice to be saying hello to > you after reading your messages for so long. Good to have you and so encouraging to know there are lurkers out there like you (not that we'll let you lurk anymore.;-)) > > I live in coastal south Queensland where my days are occupied with > Dhamma study, surfing and housework. The surf here is excellent on > its good days so I needed to find dsg to accommodate my other great > love to the same degree (better as it turned out). As for housework; > since my wife does the bread-winning, thats OK as well. Wait til Jon reads this..he'll be green with envy..you have his dream lifestyle worked out!! Gold Coast? > > I must say, taking part is more stressful than lurking. I have the > accumulations of a shy recluse and writing on the most difficult of > subjects -- for mass scrutiny -- is outside the job description. An interesting topic in itself.... my problem is usually lack of time...when I write, I'm mainly considering the person(s) I'm writing to and forget the mass scrutiny..... you certainly write very well and are obviously very articulate and have considered A LOT! Look f/w to plenty more... (and we many just come and test out your surf one day;-)) I think Christine lives in Brisbane (right Christine?)..yr closest dsg-er to date....Herman is somewhere in NSW and anthony B (lost for now) in Syd. Best rgds, Sarah p.s. Herman..best wishes to you and 'your' Tori for the Sept wedding....does she have any interest in dsg? Enjoying yr posts, btw. A 6759 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 5:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cybele's Cyber Carnival Dear Sarah Terrific post! Glad to know that despite your certainties and assertiveness about the practice you are open to a frank dialogue without feeling I am just trying to 'challenge' or provocate for the sake of it or that I am a meditation compulsive-obssessive what I am not: while I highly appreciate the value of it in my inner research - simply could be my past accumulations... ;-) I am just trying to clarify the issue what for me seems legitimate and if I were not seriously interested in Abhidhamma or considering various approaches and the viewpoint and experience of others I would not waste time and energy struggling to communicate and stabilish a honest interaction. For me this is an object to investigate as another. Some consider me quite wild and aggressive in my straightforwardeness but I keep my mind very open and my attitude is unbiased as much as possible. And I am not 'one-sided' or prejudiced in my discussions whether I 'like' or 'dislike' my interloctor. My 'beliefs or convictions' are very much permeable and the intention is pretty much going beyond and expanding my possibilities of understand. And as it showed many times I don't have 'preferences' whether discussing with people I am fond of or others I am not so attuned; for the sake of objectivity. Hope you and the group can understand my position. This list for me is a device for awareness and I value my participation. My dhamma friends are the only 'family' I have and I am not sentimental about it but sincere. I will reply when I manage to Sarah because I have a bit of mails responses delayed - I don't want to hurry up but ponder carefully. Welcome back to full activity and many smiles for you. :-))))))))) LOve Cybele > >Dear Cybele & friends, > >I'm back to noise, crowds, heat, humidity and A COMPUTER ;-))) >I'm catching up on posts in the middle of the night......another set of >stories >and concepts about situations and yet the realities (read those tedious >namas >and rupas ) are just the same:-)) > 6760 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 5:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 'Ajaan Chaa - Christine' Jon Dear Jon > > > > Christine, I'd like to 'second' everything Cybele says (well, almost > > everything ...) and encourage you to come in... What, what 'ALMOST everything'???!!! My brainwashing program must be faulty somewhere, my hidden agenda is converting everybody to my inclinations and become a sort of professional 'guru' selling very expensive 'enlightenment workshops'! heheheheheheheheheheh!!!! LOve Cybele with any comments or > > questions whatsoever, and not to be intimidated by any perception >that > > your ability or knowledge is in any sense lacking. We all stand to > > benefit from sincere posts of any perspective. > > > > Cybele, thanks for giving encouragement to others. > > > > Jon > > > 6761 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 5:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 'Ajaan Chaa - Christine' Cybele Dear Christine Glad to know you decided to jumb aboard and 'navigate' together in this cybersamsaric ocean. We all learn through sharing our views and feelings and the contributions of everybody is valuable. Looking forward to your share of knowledge/experience and please don't be shy. Love Cybele > >Dear Cybele, > >Thank you for your warm and welcoming encouragement. I'll take your >advice and contribute when I can, and keep learning from all of you. >I have enjoyed the Buddhism depression list too - thankfully they are >a quiet group >- I think dhammastudygroup must have the busiest member/post ratio on >Buddhism on the net! >metta, >Christine > > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > > Dear Christine > > > > Much appreciation. You are always very helpful with your links. > > And regarding your feeling of inadequacy to join the discussions, >please > > don't wait to be fluent in Pali to come over. > > Dhamma is the real issue and if you are seeker, you are MOST WELCOME. > > Don't feel intimidate with the erudition here, they don't bite I >can assure > > you. > > We need a bit of equilibrium here, too much masculine vision, too >much Yang, > > we need to temper it with a bit of feminine Yin. > > Please just come in and share with us your practice and your >perplexities. > > I know you are brave enough. Jump aboard. > > By the way, very interesting the discussions on Buddhism and >depression but > > as you can see I have been a bit engrossed lately. ;-) > > > > Love > > > > Cybele > > > 6762 From: Christine Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 5:37pm Subject: Re: Hello dsg - Ken Hi Ken, May I also welcome your 'beginning to post'. I, too, am mostly a lurker but with Cybele, Jon and Sarahs' encouragement I am feeling more confident. I live and work south of Brisbane in the Beaudesert Shire - bush not beach - I live on ten acres. We seem to share some of the same accumulations. :-)) Look forward to more of your posts...... Cheers, Christine --- <> wrote: > --- Sarah Procter Abbott > wrote: > > Dear Ken, > > > > Dear Sarah, > Thank you for your kind welcome. Its very nice to be saying hello to > you after reading your messages for so long. > > I live in coastal south Queensland where my days are occupied with > Dhamma study, surfing and housework. The surf here is excellent on > its good days so I needed to find dsg to accommodate my other great > love to the same degree (better as it turned out). As for housework; > since my wife does the bread-winning, thats OK as well. > > I must say, taking part is more stressful than lurking. I have the > accumulations of a shy recluse and writing on the most difficult of > subjects -- for mass scrutiny -- is outside the job description. > > Kind regards > Ken Howard 6763 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 6:28pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > Elsewhere, he says that lack of respect for concentration meditation > is one of the five factors that will lead to loss of knowledge of the > true Dhamma (SN 16.13), a deterioration which was apparently > happening even during the Buddha's own lifetime. Oooh, Derek, you're a man after my own heart. :) > > how is samma samadhi of the eightfold path to be > > developed, according to the texts? > > Right concentration is always defined as the 4 jhaana-s. Except, of > course, in those places where it's defined as the 8 jhaana-s! But we still have to admit a bit of wiggle-room for those khanika jhanas, no? It is still a fact that many have awakened outside of formal sitting meditation practice. This cannot be denied. Then again, I suspect there are some who use this as justification for avoiding the very practices demonstrated unequivocally to lead to awakening, and as such run the very real risk of squandering this precious and extremely rare human birth of leisure and fortune--a birth even rarer for the fact that we also have the best of all of conditions to have met with the teachings (and teachers) of the Way. 6764 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: >>So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs.<< Dear Suan, Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an expression], but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' [which also makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not actually the object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of consciousness both before and after it has been experienced. Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being apprehended, even while being 'experienced' as one's own state. But memory forming a concept in order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to the concept as a pointer towards Nibbana itself. It also seems to me that every experience is exactly like this in truth, because no experience actually is apprehended as an object while being experienced, and ultimately all experiences are likewise 'signless'. Only objects have something to apprehend, and even this is only done by maintaining the concept of the object for a duration of more than a moment and turning it into a remembered or known object beyond the immediate experience. Thus, if I am not missing something which I hope you'll point out to me, this would be a proof that all experiences actually partake of the same signlessness and primordial reality of Nibbana, and that Nibbana is not only our very and only actual nature, outside of concepts of one kind or another including memories, but it is also the very and only signless reality of all existence. Robert E. 6765 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 10:26pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Epstein > > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:08 AM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also > Robert)1) > > Dear Robert, > > Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I am not too > familiar > > yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a sotapanna is an > enlightened > > person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant denotes > someone who > > has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? > > If I remember, an anagami is a non-returner (will be reborn in the some > heavenly abode and there attain Parinibbana), whereas an arahant (Arhat) has > eradicated all the fetters and will enter Parinibbana, upon the death of > their physical bodies. thanks, Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6766 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 10:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Dear Robert, Thank you for your helpful and concise explanations [I may study conciseness from you], and for the link site. I appreciate the information. Robert E. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- > > > Dear Robert, > > Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I > > am not too familiar > > yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a > > sotapanna is an enlightened > > person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant > > denotes someone who > > has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? > > > > I think it is interesting that the sotapanna could still have > > attachment, although > > a positive, sort of pure attachment, in the form of love for > > her husband, and that > > the arahant would have transcended even this positive relation > > to others, and be, > > I suppose, 'completely free' of either positive or negative > > attachments or > > aversions. > > > > If you could say a bit more about the conditions of these > > different attainments, > > it would be of great interest to me. If this is too redundant > > for the group, I > > would be happy to be referred to an appropriate passage on the > > web. > > > > Nice again to be in your company! > > > > ____________________ > Dear Robert E. > Thanks for the questions. > > Just to reiterate, Nibbana is not consciousness, it is the > object of mind. When vipassana wisdom is highly developed, the > mind of the ordinary person changes to the mind of the Noble > One. This change is called path moment. It is followed > immediately by path fruition. Both have nibbana as their object. > The four paths to enlightenment are stream-winner, once > returner, non-returner, and fully-enlightened or Perfect One > (the Arahant). There are ten fetters keeping us from full > enlightenment: > > 1) Wrong view of self > > 2) Doubt about the Buddha's teaching > > 3) Clinging to rules and rituals > > 4) Sensual desire > > 5) Hatred > > 6) Desire for fine material existence > > 7) Desire for immaterial existence > > (Fine material existence is an existence where there is still > body. Immaterial existence is where there is only nama. So both > of these fetters (6 and 7) refer to craving for types of > heavenly existence.) > > 8) Pride > > 9) Restlessness > > 10) Ignorance > > The First Path, the stream-winner path-moment erases the first > three fetters; for the Second Path, the once-returner > path-moment weakens the next two fetters; for the Third Path, > the non-returner path-moment erases the two weakened fetters; > and for the Fourth Path, the arahatta path moment erases the > five remaining fetters. > > The first path also eradicates all stinginess; the sotapanna is > naturally generous. > > The sotapanna's attachment to husband of wife can be just as > impure as ours. What they don't have anymore is attachment to > selfview, they cannot see any dhamma as self . > The wisdom developed to see dhammas as they are is gradual, over > lifetimes; the one who attains to nibbana will have no doubt > about this matter according to the teaching. It is deep wisdom > that penetrates to nibbana. > This book mark will take you to a list of websites highly > recommended by the moderators of dhammastudygroup > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > best wishes > robert > > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6767 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 11:36pm Subject: Sorry About Extra "a" : Suttam For Annihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Dear Tadao And Derek How are you? I mistyped "pajanati" as "pajana"tia". Apology for this extra "a" after "pajanati". Derek Thank you for correcting the spelling mistake for Tadao and all of us. Sincerely, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- ppp wrote: > > Hi, Suan Lua and Jim: > > What kind of ending is 'pajana"tia"? > > I need your help. tadao > > Tadao, > > I think that final "a" must be a typo. > > Ruupa.m vibhavissatiiti yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati > > "He understands as it is: 'Form will cease to exist'" > > Derek. 6768 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 11:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! >Dear Sarah and Erik, (Sarah-glad you made it home safely and what a relief >it must be to have your computer) Thank you for this exchange which I find relevant at the moment. >Okay, I'm gonna dive in on a point I've been meaning to raise here >for some time. We talk about "self" and no controlling, so on, so >forth. But CONVENTIONALLY we have to talk at this level. I see so >much semantic contortionism here on DSG in HOW things are spoken of, >that to even speak of something a certain way conventionally implies >a view of self, etc. NO NO NO!!! Language is the problem here, I >think, Sarah, and getting hung up on language is to miss the point >entirely--it's actually getting caught in names & terms--views, >again! Really. I consider this point a vital one. > >We can easily (and indeed must) at some level speak about >conventional self, dukkha at the conventional level, practice at the >conventional level: that to do this is to get that. When this arises, >that arises; when this ceases, that ceases. Yes! >There is no other way to even discuss practice using language, and >while it is vital to understand WHAT is "self" and what is clung to >as self, there can be a degree of overkill on semantics (which I have >so often observed here) that makes communication very difficult if >too much emphasis is given to the way things are phrased rather than >their deeper meaning. Language is just another fabrication! We must >let even language go! And more yes! >Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close >to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is >no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. >This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by >some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and >have no volitional control. > >Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says otherwise. >In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have to get >out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and forget >practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a >difference. In The Wings to Awakening Thanissaro Bhikku writes: The fact that the kammic process relies on input from the present moment means that it is not totally deterministic. Input from the past may place restrictions on what can be done and known in any particular moment , but the allowance for new input from the present provides some room for free will. It seems that in fact everything we can consciously choose to do must be within the scope of this present kamma-how we choose to practice and how we live our lives (obviously not excluding conditions we have no control over). This does not negate teachings on anatta, but paradoxically is the means by which we can come to realise the teaching. ...And what , monks, is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech or with the intellect. This is called new kamma... And what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this noble eightfold path...this is called the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. S.XXXV.145 Thanissaro continues: The teaching of dependent origination helps to provide more detailed instructions on this point, showing precisely where the cycle of kamma provides openings for more skillful present input. '. >While it is agreed we can't control vipaka, we can (and MUST, if >we're serious about the path) strive to purify the mind with directed >practice, even practices that will by definition partake of notions >of "self"--until at least sotapatti-magga-nana. That is the entire >point of bhavana. We need heaps of merit to even get rid of self-view >in the first place, and I believe in placing the horse before the >cart here and will simply restate the stock formula of dana, sila, >bhavana, in order, one laying the foundation for the next, knowing >that "self view" at some level is ALWAYS present until bhavana is >developed to the degree sakkayaditthi is finally terminated. > >I think of, for example, my arch-nemesis kukuccha, which through a >number of sessions I was able to pinpoint at the root, so that now, I >can catch it (mostly, still not always) while it is still tiny, >before it snowballs into something that drags me into the muck for >minutes, hours, or longer. Do you realize what a coup this has been >in my own practice? Many congratulations on this kusala accomplishment. I think it is good practice to recognise these achievements when they occur as it increases saddha and viriya for you as well as for others. Of course self-delusion is something we always have to be aware of, but with mindfulness, we can catch this as well. >There are few pracftices which are ther equal of meditation on the >Bhramaviharas. Sadhu X 3 Erik for this reminder. >This proclivity to experiment is, I think, a function of nearly- >insatiable curiosity, 'If we are truly curious, we investigate without any preconceptions. We suspend our beliefs and and just observe, just notice.' > and I'm willing to try anything that may be of >benefit (read conencted with the Goal in some way), even >tangentially, as a way of getting to the bottom of things, the whys >and wherefores, in other words. This is the very reason I'm studying >the Abhidhamma, because I see it as a way to "reverse-engineer" many >aspects and experiences of the Dhamma that have arisen in the course >of my own practice, as well as wishing to have a technical way to >unpack, in detail, how and why certain practices perform the >functions they do, and how they all hang together. One of the monks >in my bikkhu-sangha once called me the "mad scientist" because of my >love of this sort of experimentation. It has held me in good stead so >far, and I see no reason to stop playing, since there is so much yet >for me to learn. Thanks for the interesting discussion. Metta, Victoria 6769 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 0:12am Subject: Sańńa Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana : To Erik Re: Nibbana annihilation? Dear Erik How are you? Me again. You are very welcome, and I am glad to know that my efforts help. The Buddha's teachings are to help us to become clearer and clearer about reality principles (Dhamma). If my way of presenting them gave you some eye-opening, I as well as you make some progress along the noble way (samma patipada). Due to these meritorious deeds, we could even meet up in Deva Loka before our final awakening and liberation. By the way, your reply came from "Sańńa Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana PART (1)". I hope you have already read "Sańńa Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana Full Message" as well. Thank you for your kind response to my message. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Erik wrote: > --- 243181214009248125169154072026132253136158139046209 wrote: > > > Dear Erik, Robert Epstein, And Anders Honoré > > > > How are you? > > Speaking of my conventional self, great, and even moreso thanks to > your amazingly lucid reply. What you have just managed to do is to > clarify for me (in a way I hadn't expected at all) something I have > been churning through for about three years now. I wish I could > express my gratitude in words, but words fail. In short, I can only > say, "WOW!" Thank you thank you thank you!!!! :) :) :) 6770 From: bruce Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 0:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello dsg - Ken greetings ken welcome aboard...i understand where you're coming from re: your post below; i go into pure-lurking mode rather often -- but i find that the best way to start participating is just to ask questions about things that are unclear and then try to learn from the responses....there are a lot of people who are willing to share what they know/have learned -- and amazingly for one of these lists, pretty much no one who tries to share what they merely pretend to know :-) .....i'm content having more questions than answers, so this seems to work out well for me.... looking forward to your contributions... mettacittena bruce > > I must say, taking part is more stressful than lurking. I have the > > accumulations of a shy recluse and writing on the most difficult of > > subjects -- for mass scrutiny -- is outside the job description. > > > > Kind regards > > Ken Howard > 6771 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 0:54am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Epstein Dear Robert Epstein How are you? You wrote: "Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an expression],but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' [which also makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not actually the object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of consciousness both before and after it has been experienced." My answer follows. In general, nibbana is the object of consciousness for awakeners at the moment of transworldly resultant consciousness, for example, while they (outside that moment) as well as the non-awakeners may take the idea or concept of nibbana as a stimulus. You wrote: "Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being apprehended, even while being 'experienced' as one's own state." What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you meant that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts do not support it. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it out. You wrote: " But memory forming a concept in order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to the concept as a pointer towards Nibbana itself." I agree with the above statement. I will discuss your other statements at a later date. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- 243181214009248125169154072026132253136158139046209 wrote: > > >>So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function > of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs.<< > > Dear Suan, > Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an expression], > but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' [which also > makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not actually the > object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of consciousness both > before and after it has been experienced. > > Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being apprehended, even > while being 'experienced' as one's own state. But memory forming a concept in > order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to the concept > as a pointer towards Nibbana itself. > > It also seems to me that every experience is exactly like this in truth, because > no experience actually is apprehended as an object while being experienced, and > ultimately all experiences are likewise 'signless'. Only objects have something > to apprehend, and even this is only done by maintaining the concept of the object > for a duration of more than a moment and turning it into a remembered or known > object beyond the immediate experience. > > Thus, if I am not missing something which I hope you'll point out to me, this > would be a proof that all experiences actually partake of the same signlessness > and primordial reality of Nibbana, and that Nibbana is not only our very and only > actual nature, outside of concepts of one kind or another including memories, but > it is also the very and only signless reality of all existence. > > Robert E. > > 6772 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana --- Suan wrote: > I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > out. Hi, Suan, I tried to go to your site but couldn't see where to click to view your paper? Derek. 6773 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 2:26am Subject: Re: thailand/west --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > I haven't heard about the drugs or porno in temples yet > but I suppose that will come. Unfortunately so. One official estimated that 10% of monks have sought rehab for drug problems. See Bangkok Post, March 27, 2001 at http://scoop.bangkokpost.co.th/bangkokpostnews/bp20010327/270301_news0 4.html (you'll probably have to cut and paste that link, I think it's too long to create the correct hyperlink). Derek. 6774 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 23, 2001 9:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sorry About Extra "a" : Suttam For Annihilation: To Mike, Bob, Gayan Hi, Suan Lua: Don't worry about the type. Derek kindly corrected it for us. Udaana is one of the oldest Pali texts, which tend to have archaic endings. So I thought that what I saw previously was one of those. Thak you for your citation, tadao 6775 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 4:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Derik >> >--- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > I haven't heard about the drugs or porno in temples yet > > but I suppose that will come. > >Unfortunately so. One official estimated that 10% of monks have >sought rehab for drug problems. See Bangkok Post, March 27, 2001 at >http://scoop.bangkokpost.co.th/bangkokpostnews/bp20010327/270301_news0 >4.html (you'll probably have to cut and paste that link, I think it's >too long to create the correct hyperlink). > >Derek. > Glad to know that your eyes are wide open and you don't need to beautify reality in order to cope. Love Cybele 6776 From: Ken Howard Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 4:40am Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life --- Erik wrote: > > I'm not sure how far I can go with the gift simile, but perhaps > > it could be said that, while there is satipatthana, the time may be > > right for formal practice -- while there is no satipatthana, we > are > > back to where we need to accept the gift (to listen to the > > Buddha's > > teaching). > > I would agree with this if I understand your meaning correctly. In I can see that by itself, it sounds correct but I can't take credit for that. Those lines were a part of some theorising which I now think was leading nowhere. > > I am wondering if formal practice might be intended for the > disciple > > in whom satipatthana is currently arising strongly and consistently > > (in whom there is, for some considerable time, no notion of self), > > and who is ready for a catalyst or impetus to push him on to the > next > > stage (e.g. of Stream-entry) (?) > >I think this makes a lot of sense. There's no sense putting the cart before the horse. What was most helpful for me is the Tibetan pedagogy called "trang-gye," which is a contraction meaning to "lead out" (of wrong view) and lead in (to Right View). Thank you for the informative explanation which followed this paragraph. But I think we may be talking about two different things. What I had in mind was a technique attributed to the Buddha for shocking his disciples into Stream Entry. For example in the Fire Sermon, the fire metaphor was reputedly chosen to shock a group of monks who had, until they heard the Dhamma, worshipped fire. Their highly developed minds had grasped the Dhamma with right understanding but they needed this little push. And sure enough, they attained even while the Buddha was speaking. So might not such practices as the cemetery contemplations be designed for the same purpose? It is hard to see how they could have been intended for the development of satipatthana; Wouldn't the sight and smell of all those corpses have only akusala reactions in anyone who was not already firmly established in right view? Even jhana meditation, when followed by the insight, `this state too is anicca,dukkha and anatta,' might spark the required disenchantment in someone who had spent countless lifetimes cultivating jhanna. Kind regards Ken 6777 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:13am Subject: Re: thailand/west --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > I haven't heard about the drugs or porno in temples yet > > but I suppose that will come. > > Unfortunately so. One official estimated that 10% of monks have > sought rehab for drug problems. See Bangkok Post, March 27, 2001 at Not just in Thailand, either--in our bikkhu-sangha at least one monk has "gone out" and come back again with exactly such problems ("hard" drugs in other words). I was addicted to alcohol at one point in my life as well, and fought a mean battle against it before defeating it- -which was ONLY possible because of the teachings of the Holy Dhamma and the blessings of my lama. That this sort of thing happens should not be surprising--we all have our kilesas and our battles to fight with these nasty, brutal, and deadly enemies. And we are all addicted at some level, whether to notions of self, views, anger, aversion, etc. I still smoke cigarettes, for example, and based on much experience quitting (I love Mark Twain's quite: "quitting smoking is easy, I've quit hundredds of times!"), I figure the only way I'll ever be able to give it up at this point is anagami-magga-nana, and I've just given up worrying about it much these days. Fortunately I've never found smoking to interfere in the least with Dhamma practice (and actually helps stabilize my wacky brain chemistry and makes meditation a bit easier vis-a-vis the uddhacca thing). And to rationalize (love that addictive thinking! :) :) :), I still have far bigger fish to fry in terms of overcoming the deadliest poison of all: dosa, given I exhibit characteristics the Visuddhimagga associates with "hating temperament." Anyway, to rationalize my lobha, I figure smoking can only kill you once; anger will kill me again and again and again, and my Tibetan "lojong slogans" emphasizes attacking the biggest problems first. Which only makes sense to me--in the 80/20 rule and Pareto analysis (to drag in modern biz-speak into the Dhamma). I recall reading somewhere that something like 75% of the Thai bikkhu- sangha smokes, and I often see a figure of this revered old monk (whose name I asked one shopkeeper but can no longer recall) around BKK here, squatting, holding a big fat cigar. Does anyone recall his name? I found it amusing to see this revered monk smoking en flagrante this way--so shockingly un-PC for many Westerners, who can't comperhend the idea that one can be both a smoker and a sincere spiritual practitioner! :) 6778 From: Christine Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:20am Subject: Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... Hi Derek and Everyone, Please bear with me through this explanatory paragraph. :-) I didn't make the link you quoted below - not proficient enough with the computer to cut and paste. But I put http://www.bangkokpost.net/ into Google and arrived at the home page. Then clicked on 'Xtra'and then on 'Current Issues', then to 'Dhammakaya Temple' - realised it wasn't what you were alluding to - so, clicked on 'related links' then to 'dhammakaya.org' and somehow got sidetracked into clicking on 'concentration.org(English)', thence to meditation(beginners). (This is a bit like my monkey-mind in meditation - except the computer won't go back to the breath!) My point is that though I never did find the story you were referring to - I ended up being fascinated by 18 Astral bodies etc..... I settled on Theravada as seeming to me to be the least altered since the Buddhas' time. But (as has been explained to me elsewhere, and I am coming to realise), my tendency is to want a certainty that maybe doesn't exist about what are absolute tenets of Buddhism. Dhammakaya is Theravadin isn't it, so, if one is a meditator, is this worthwhile to try? metta, Christine --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > I haven't heard about the drugs or porno in temples yet > > but I suppose that will come. > > Unfortunately so. One official estimated that 10% of monks have > sought rehab for drug problems. See Bangkok Post, March 27, 2001 at > http://scoop.bangkokpost.co.th/bangkokpostnews/bp20010327/270301_news0 > 4.html (you'll probably have to cut and paste that link, I think it's > too long to create the correct hyperlink). > > Derek. 6779 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:36am Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life --- <> wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > >I think this makes a lot of sense. There's no sense putting the cart > before the horse. What was most helpful for me is the Tibetan > pedagogy called "trang-gye," which is a contraction meaning to "lead > out" (of wrong view) and lead in (to Right View). > > > > Thank you for the informative explanation which followed this > paragraph. But I think we may be talking about two different things. I don't think we are--I think they're a part of the same continuum. > What I had in mind was a technique attributed to the Buddha for > shocking his disciples into Stream Entry. Yes, I am so glad to hear you mention "shocking" someone into stream- entry. This is really a very important idea to understand about awakening. The great Tibetan Mahasiddha Tilopa whacked (the great Mahasiddha) Naropa on the head with his sandal the moment Naropa was ripe, precipitating his awakening on the spot. In Rinzai Zen training they use the "enlightenment stick" (kyosaku) to "whack" you into awakening--this is a standard feature of this system. And then there's koan practice, meant to annihilate discursiveness, to snap the grip of the ratiocination machine that keeps us bound to views and concepts. Countless aspirants have awakened this way, being shocked out of their conceptualization by the totally irrational nature of a koan, for example. Awakening is instantaneous (post-awakening cultivation is gradual, though, just to short-circuit a long debate on subitism vs. gradualism on this one at the moment), and for one with the appropriate accumulations, sometimes all it takes is a really powerful "whack" and BANG! That can happen in many ways, but there often seems to be a real component of "shock" involved someplace in the process, because it is impossible to gradually get rid of sakkayaditthi; it happens suddenly. The fruit ripens gradually on the tree, but drops all at once when you shake the tree, in other words. Great post, Ken! 6780 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: thailand/west --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Glad to know that your eyes are wide open and you don't need to beautify > reality in order to cope. Cybele, You flatter me! But carry on ... I like it! :-)) Actually, I was pretty shocked when I heard about the drugs in the temples. But then I got to reflecting on how I've never heard of anyone who had perfect conditions for practice. In Tibet it was the cold and a diet of salted yak-butter tea. For those old-time forest monks it was tigers and malaria. And now it's traffic fumes and drug-crazed temple boys. So you think the future of the dhamma is in the West? It's possible. Most of my instruction has come from monks, but from reading Tricycle magazine I get the impression that most Westerners prefer lay teachers rather than monks, and retreat centers rather monasteries. I just wonder if the whole thing won't eventually become very shallow, diluted, watered-down. What do you think? Derek. 6781 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 3:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Ripka21 (Sorry, I cannot indentify your name) and Derek: When we discuss how corrupted the Thai Sangha is, we have to regard that the Thai Sangha is not only a religous intitution but a socio-economic intitution, whose funcions include various non-relgious activities. We may get a far better understading of the Sangha if we view it from Anthopological/Sociological perspectives. We may then understand why there are many (or could be majority of the) monks who stay in the Sangha without much religiouis motivation. What is interesting with the Thai Sangha is, however, that despite various problems it has been faceing, it is still well supported by the people and well respected. And the Thai think that without the Sangha, they would not be able to hand their religion from one generation to the next. It is said that what the Dutch do not toleratnce is "intolerance", probably, so do the Thai. (Being less judgmental in nature,) their tolerance level must be much much higher than ours. (Probably, if they can find just a single pious monk among 10 or so monks in average, then, they may come to their satisfactory generalization that the Sangha is functioning well.) tadao 6782 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek I hope you’ll excuse a rather brief and non-textual reply, since I have limited time during the week to dig into texts (i am happy to provide support for any view expressed later). --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Please do join in. I'm glad I'm not the only one on the planet who's > interested in the sutta-s! > > On the question of what is necessary for enlightenment ... when the > Buddha gave talks, he didn't, as far as I know, say: "Practice X is > the *only* way to nibbaana." What he did say was: "A monk does > practice X, and nibbaana follows." So, no exclusivism, and no mention > of necessity. But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of vipassana leads to enlightenment. And the development of vipassana is the same for all, monk or layperson – ie. the understanding by direct experience of the characteristic of a reality appearing at the present moment. > Now, while the path of a Buddha is different from that of an arahant, > the Buddha does *not* talk about acquiring the three knowledges as > being only for himself. In some places, he describes the monk's path > as including the acquisition of the three knowledges (e.g., in the > Saamańńaphala Sutta, DN 2). I of course agree that the Buddha encouraged the development of all kinds of kusala, but I think he should be understood as doing so in the context of the development of satipatthana/vipassana, since the development of kusala other than of those levels does not lead to release from samsara. All these forms of kusala you mention here and below, if developed without understanding at the level of vipassana, only add further fuel to continued round of existence. > In fact, in other places the monk's path includes the development of > even more supernormal powers, including the ability to walk on water > and fly through space (e.g. SN 51.11). Mahaa Kassapa had developed > these powers, apparently with the Buddha's approval (SN 16.9). They > are all the result of concentration practices (Iddhipaada-sa.myutta, > SN 51). > > In other places, however, it is the cultivation of the 4 > brahmavihaara-s that is given as the intervening step between the > Noble Eightfold Path and nibbaana (e.g., The Simile of the Cloth, MN > 7). > > And in other places, the Noble Eightfold Path is presented in a bare- > bones form, without any additional attainments (e.g. MN 141). > > And, as we all know, in the Satipa.t.thaana Sutta (MN 10) the Buddha > says that its methods alone (formal and informal sati practice) are > enough to bring one to nibbaana -- apparently without a concentration > practice. > > This omission of concentration seems to represent a later stage in > the Buddha's teachings. I’m not sure what you mean by this, or what you base this on. Perhaps you could elaborate? > Elsewhere, he says that lack of respect for concentration meditation > is one of the five factors that will lead to loss of knowledge of the > true Dhamma (SN 16.13), a deterioration which was apparently > happening even during the Buddha's own lifetime. I understand this to mean that the lack of respect for samatha development is indicative of a decline of interest in the teachings. > > how is samma samadhi of the eightfold path to be > > developed, according to the texts? > > Right concentration is always defined as the 4 jhaana-s. Except, of > course, in those places where it's defined as the 8 jhaana-s! You are referring I think to right concentration of the Eightfold Path. In my view, the classic statement of the Eightfold Path is descriptive of a moment of path consciousness – it describes the mental factors (cetsikas) that accompany such moments. The factors are not given in a prescriptive way for individual development, to be a condition for the arising of a moment of path consciousness. Satipatthana is the key to the development of the various path factors. Derek, sorry for the rushed reply, but I look forward to further discussion on this topic. Jon 6783 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:54am Subject: Re: thailand/west Erik, --- Erik wrote: > I still smoke cigarettes, for example Me too! Derek. 6784 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Hi, Kom You are wondering if I am suggesting or implying that the development of samatha up to jhana levels is no longer possible. The answer is, I am not (at least, not intentionally!). But since I'm not sure how that question arises from my earlier post, Kom, it might be better if I re-state the points I was trying to make. 1. The understanding by direct experience of the characteristic of kusala and akusala moments of consciousness is panna of the level of samatha. (This understanding is qualitatively different from the understanding that, for example, if there is unpleasant feeling it is dosa and so must be akusala.) 2. The development of samatha begins with the development of this understanding. It seems to me that only when this understanding has been developed to some considerable degree can the question of a particular meditation subject be considered, since without that developed discrimination it is not possible to know whether the moments of concentration on the chosen subject are kusala or akusala. 3. Knowledge about the development of samatha to the level of jhana existed before the Buddha’s enlightenment, and is not regarded as knowledge exclusive to a Buddha. I hope this clarifies your query --please say if not. Jon --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Mike > > > > What I also find interesting is that, although this knowledge (ie. > > knowledge by direct experience of the characteristic of kusala vs. > akusala > > mind states) comes to us as part of the Dhamma, it is in fact > knowledge > > that remains extant during periods when the Dhamma is no longer > > I am quite interested in hearing this part. You sound as if the > development of tranquil meditation up to the Jhana level is no longer > possible. How do I reach this conclusion? > > > alive. It > > is this that is the basis for the development of samatha. Only when > this > > knowledge has been developed to a certain degree can the training of > > 'taking a meditation subject' comes into play, as far as I understand > it. > > > > I am somehow got caught in the loop that developing Satipathanna must > be enormously harder than developing Samatha vipassana because of the > all the conditions involved (and developing Satipathana is still > possible > nowadays). There are still ascetics out there who don't care much about > > the 5 sensualities. What would prevent them from developing such > practices? > > kom 6785 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Considering Erik Thanks for raising this point. My statement that in reality there is no choice was perhaps somewhat cryptic. It was intended to be read in the context of my post shortly before that to Herman, where I said-- "Yes, this is life. But even the 'choosing' is just another moment of intention conditioned by our previous accumulations (and other factors). So there is no more control over this moment (ie. to express it in conventional terms, over 'what we choose') than over the fact that, say, we like one flavour but not another." In other words, there is no paramattha dhamma called 'choice'. The reality we take for choice is really the intention cetasika that we have been discussing lately. Intention is a conditioned dhamma; it is by nature conditioned, just as are our likes and dislikes. But intention is susceptible to conditioning by factors such as hearing dhamma, the company we keep, etc. I don't know if this clarifies my earlier post, Erik? In the sutta you have quoted, the views being refuted are views that deny the efficacy of kamma (deeds) [see also NDB p. 61, GS I p.157]. I of course did not mean to suggest that at all. Jon --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Bruce > > > > --- bruce wrote: > hi nina > > > > > > thanks also for this very appropriate quotation, although i must > admit > > > that > > > i'm stumped by the exhortation at the end to "apply" and "be > aware", as > > > though there were a choice in the matter.... > > > > Yes, it does appear that way to us, and conventional language of > course is > > couched in terms that reflect this. But we are told that the > reality is > > that there is not in fact any choice. > > In whose reality, Jon? The reality of those sectarianis the Buddha > explicitly refuted this view in the Tittha Sutta? > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-062.html > > "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold > that...whatever a person experiences...is all caused by what was done > in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold > that...whatever a person experiences...is all caused by what was done > in the past?' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to > them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings > because of what was done in the past. A person is a > thief...unchaste...a liar...a divisive speaker...a harsh speaker...an > idle chatterer...greedy...malicious...a holder of wrong views because > of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done > in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort > [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When > one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be > done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously > refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous > refutation of those priests & contemplative who hold to such > teachings, such views." 6786 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Ken Thanks for articulating (below) so clearly and succinctly this concern, which I now recall has been expressed before. It is indeed a good one. In addition to your own helpful thoughts, I would like to add my own. --- Ken Howard wrote: > Dear Bruce, > I should point out that I am now a convert to the `other > side' -- happy to toe the party line -- but even so, we seem to > be seeing the issue from similar perspectives. For example, you are > asking why it seems to be OK to listen to the Dhamma with the > delusion that there is a self who is listening, but it is not OK to > meditate in the same way. Actually, neither is OK, if you are talking about moments of actual wrong view, and perhaps no-one has said exactly that. What might have been said is one or other of the following (or something close to it)— 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition for the development of awareness/understanding, while meditating is not. 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to have more understanding about the false idea of self and about why that notion is not in accordance with reality, while meditating is not likely to be conducive to that. Nonetheless, the question still arises, why the difference? I don’t expect my answer to be convincing, since my own understanding of what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain it to another. The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing awareness or understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue of that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the path, since there must be an idea of self involved (‘if I do this correctly, awareness/understanding may arise’). By ‘any kind of practice’ I would include so-called ‘daily life’ practice as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the same idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one action is OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or view with which the action is done. But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise to awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it is almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with that practice. So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than intended. I should perhaps elaborate on how listening to or studying the dhamma may differ from this, but I'm afraid i'm out of time for this session and must leave it for a later post. Ken, I don’t know if you think this addresses the question you have identified. I do know it's bound to be controversial! Jon > For all the excellent material on the > overall issue, I haven't noticed any answers to precisely that > question. But I have my own theories! > > I find it helpful to think of the Dhamma as a gift given by the > Buddha, specifically to worldlings like us. So at the initial stage > of accepting the gift, it is proper and Dhamma-consistent that we do > so with the [involuntary] worldling's delusion that there is a self > who accepts. The magic of the gift is that, at the moment we > `take hold of it', the delusion of self slips away and we > have understanding at the level of satipatthana. > > I'm not sure how far I can go with the gift simile, but perhaps > it could be said that, while there is satipatthana, the time may be > right for formal practice -- while there is no satipatthana, we are > back to where we need to accept the gift (to listen to the > Buddha's > teaching). > > I am wondering if formal practice might be intended for the disciple > in whom satipatthana is currently arising strongly and consistently > (in whom there is, for some considerable time, no notion of self), > and who is ready for a catalyst or impetus to push him on to the next > stage (e.g. of Stream-entry) (?) > > Kind regards > Ken Howard 6787 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:06am Subject: Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... Christine, Yes, those long URLs don't come out well here. Here's another way to find it, if you're still interested (it's only a short article). 1. Go to http://www.bangkokpost.com/ 2. Click on SEARCH Complete Archives somewhere down on the leftmost column 3. In the Find the Story box, type in the name of the official, which is Polparin 4. It comes up with 1 document, with a clickable link Sorry to have to say this, but if you type in dhammakaya as your search term, you'll get some idea of the scandals about that one too. Derek. 6788 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:07am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Kom > > You are wondering if I am suggesting or implying that the development of > samatha up to jhana levels is no longer possible. The answer is, I am not > (at least, not intentionally!). But since I'm not sure how that question > arises from my earlier post, Kom, it might be better if I re-state the > points I was trying to make. OK. I looked at that message one more time. I think I was just mis- interpreting what you said and hence, came the wrong conclusion. Thanks for answering. > 1. The understanding by direct experience of the characteristic of kusala > and akusala moments of consciousness is panna of the level of samatha. > (This understanding is qualitatively different from the understanding > that, for example, if there is unpleasant feeling it is dosa and so must > be akusala.) > > 2. The development of samatha begins with the development of this > understanding. It seems to me that only when this understanding has been > developed to some considerable degree can the question of a particular > meditation subject be considered, since without that developed > discrimination it is not possible to know whether the moments of > concentration on the chosen subject are kusala or akusala. > > 3. Knowledge about the development of samatha to the level of jhana > existed before the Buddha's enlightenment, and is not regarded as > knowledge exclusive to a Buddha. > > I hope this clarifies your query --please say if not. > This clarifies what you said. I still have other questions related to this area. If you will be with the India trip, maybe I will get an opportunity to ask.. kom 6789 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 3:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life To Ken(?): About "Shocks": (Since I deleted the oritinal mail, I cannot be quire sure whom I am addressing.) I do not recall even a single sutta, where the Buddha gives a talk in order to create dosa/akusala among his listerns. So if he is shocking his listerns, the shock he is giving cannot be akusala but kusala (no restlessness, no aversion involved). You may have said that looking at corpuses with their various states of decay must be quite shocking. In reality it is not, it is rather poplar oppostie. Seeing corpuses induce you a calming effect, which may be best described by the term "serinity". During my Bagkok era, in a semi-regular base, a buch of foreign monks at Wat Bown used to go to Mahidon Medical University to obeserve corpuses with verious states of disembodyment (?spelling?). Besides the feeling of respect to the individuals who passed away, we always experienced a king of "serinity", knowing that one day we will be in the same state. So, if one has the right frame of mind, any so-called shocking scences can be perceived as the opportunity to develop kusala, not akusala. tadao 6790 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Erik Dear Derek > >Erik, > >--- Erik wrote: > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > >Me too! > >Derek. > Bleah, disgusting! I give up any intention of kissing any of you! Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) LOve Cybele 6791 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:28am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of vipassana leads > to enlightenment. And I am sure you will agree that there is NO step in the Noble Eightfold Path called Right Vipassanaa! :-) Derek. 6792 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:36am Subject: Re: thailand/west --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Erik > Dear Derek > > > > >Erik, > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > >Me too! > > > >Derek. > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! Forget what I said before about not quitting, I finally have some real incentive to give it up now, Cybele!!! > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) (this one is going to keep me giggling all day :) :) :) 6793 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:37am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > This omission of concentration seems to represent a later stage in > > the Buddha's teachings. > I'm not sure what you mean by this, or what you base this on. Perhaps you > could elaborate? This is my take on the problem of the stratification of the nikaaya- s. But perhaps this issue would be too academic for most people ... no? Derek. 6794 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:48am Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life --- ppp wrote: > knowing that one day we > will be in the same state. Tadao, I think you're exactly right there. The Buddha says: "If [a monk] were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground -- one day, two days, three days dead -- bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body: 'This body, too; such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'." Derek. 6795 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:49am Subject: Re: Considering --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Erik > > Thanks for raising this point. > > My statement that in reality there is no choice was perhaps somewhat > cryptic. It was intended to be read in the context of my post shortly > before that to Herman, where I said-- > > "Yes, this is life. But even the 'choosing' is just another moment of > intention conditioned by our previous accumulations (and other factors). > So there is no more control over this moment (ie. to express it in > conventional terms, over 'what we choose') than over the fact that, say, > we like one flavour but not another." I hear what you're saying Jonothan, but I just want to emphasize this idea that we're conditioned by the past can be taken too far, to the point it engenders a deadly form of fatalism. I do not disagree even a tiny bit that we are conditioned by our accumulations. Anyone who's tried giving up a bad habit knows just how difficult it is to undo that conditioning. But that is not the point. The point is we have a choice right here and now. We CAN undo that conditioning, because we have volition. It can be bruitally difficult to do so, but again, even though those accumulated tendencies may be deeply entrenched and very difficult to overcome, the point is we can (and MUST) use our volition to progress on the path. I was only responding to what I perceived as possibly taking this consideration of accumulated tendencies too far, to the point of fatalism. > In other words, there is no paramattha dhamma called 'choice'. The > reality we take for choice is really the intention cetasika that we have > been discussing lately. Intention is a conditioned dhamma; it is by > nature conditioned, just as are our likes and dislikes. But intention is > susceptible to conditioning by factors such as hearing dhamma, the company > we keep, etc. Right, and this is merely what I was wishing to emphasize boldly, because this is where the rubber meets the road in terms of practice. That volition is our tiny window of opportunity out of this mess. It may be heavily conditioned; old habits may seem intractable and perhaps even appear insurmountable, yet, that tiny sliver of volition exists, and that is our ticket out of here. I much prefer to emphasize this aspect rather than the fact we're so heavily conditioned. That is obvious to anyone who's ever tried to make deep and lasting changes. What may not be so obvious, as a result of this, is that we CAN change. Consider my raising issue this merely a minor rudder adjustment, Jon. :) > I don't know if this clarifies my earlier post, Erik? In the sutta you > have quoted, the views being refuted are views that deny the efficacy of > kamma (deeds) [see also NDB p. 61, GS I p.157]. I of course did not mean > to suggest that at all. I didn't think you were suggsting that, but the way you put it, it could easily be read that way, and I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page on this point, and also that no one else would become confused by misintepreting your intent. 6796 From: Christine Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:57am Subject: Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... Derek, Thanks. Found the article, and also checked out dhammakaya. Don't think I'll pursue any contact there. metta, Christine --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > Christine, > > Yes, those long URLs don't come out well here. Here's another way to > find it, if you're still interested (it's only a short article). > 1. Go to http://www.bangkokpost.com/ > 2. Click on SEARCH Complete Archives somewhere down on the leftmost > column > 3. In the Find the Story box, type in the name of the official, which > is Polparin > 4. It comes up with 1 document, with a clickable link > > Sorry to have to say this, but if you type in dhammakaya as your > search term, you'll get some idea of the scandals about that one too. > > Derek. 6797 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 5:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi, Derek: It's very interesting, isn't it? Usually we think that we would be disgusted with seeing dead bodies. Somehow we wouldn't. (I had hard time living in Sri Lanka, encoutering snakes regulary. I HATE snakes. They caused me a real Shock more than a few times. tadao 6798 From: Derek Cameron Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 0:22pm Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > It's very interesting, isn't it? Usually we think that we would be > disgusted with seeing dead bodies. Somehow we wouldn't. > (I had hard time living in Sri Lanka, encoutering snakes regulary. > I HATE snakes. They caused me a real Shock more than a few times. tadao Hi, Tadao, Yes. I think it's partly cultural. In Western cultures (and maybe Japan too? I don't know) we don't see that many dead bodies. But if you'd lived on the banks of the Ganges all your life, you'd probably see dead bodies almost every day. Luangphor Viriyang Sirintharo (also a disciple of Ajahn Mun, of the Thai forest tradition) asks the rhetorical question: "Why don't undertakers all get enlightened?" I'm sure everyone on this list can supply their own answers to that one! Derek. 6799 From: Howard Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:00am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Derek (and Jon) - In a message dated 7/23/01 11:29:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Derek writes: > Hi, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of > vipassana leads > > to enlightenment. > > And I am sure you will agree that there is NO step in the Noble > Eightfold Path called Right Vipassanaa! :-) > > > Derek. > ============================ I think you make a rather good point, Derek! [Not that it contradicts Jon's point, inasmuch as it *is* the development of insight (resulting, of course, from the practicing of the 8-fold path) which leads to the paths and fruits.] 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) 6800 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 3:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Erik, > I recall reading somewhere that something like 75% of the Thai bikkhu- > sangha smokes, and I often see a figure of this revered old monk > (whose name I asked one shopkeeper but can no longer recall) around > BKK here, squatting, holding a big fat cigar. Does anyone recall his > name? I found it amusing to see this revered monk smoking en > flagrante this way--so shockingly un-PC for many Westerners, who > can't comperhend the idea that one can be both a smoker and a sincere > spiritual practitioner! :) I recognize the squat but not the smoking, but I think you are talking about Loong Phor Koon. You should listen to him, its worse than his smoking. Sukin. 6801 From: bruce Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... hi christine there was an excellent post by ken and visakha on the d-last many months ago explaining why they thought Theravada is definitely *not* dhammakaya.... i'll try to search the archives... bruce > Dhammakaya is Theravadin isn't it, so, if one is a meditator, is this > worthwhile to try? 6802 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Erik > > > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > > > >Me too! > > > > > >Derek. > > > > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! > >Forget what I said before about not quitting, I finally have some >real incentive to give it up now, Cybele!!! Wow! See I am accumulating merits with my wantoness. This is a perfect example to illustrate how akusala can lead to kusala! Hehehehehehehehehe, gigling, gigling! > > > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) > >(this one is going to keep me giggling all day :) :) :) Hehehe, Sarah says that I flirt with all males in the list but I can't resist. This is like a harem reversed; all males, we are very few women, too tempting for me... :-))))) And the males here are brainy, I go mad for brainy men! hehehehehehe! Love Cybele 6803 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi Derek > >Hi, Tadao, > >Yes. I think it's partly cultural. In Western cultures (and maybe >Japan too? I don't know) we don't see that many dead bodies. But if >you'd lived on the banks of the Ganges all your life, you'd probably >see dead bodies almost every day. However you would smell them. Benares along the river has the smell of death, bodies in decomposition floating in the water and people bathing themselves nearby. India is a spiritual lesson at any corner everyday; you have to SEE the naked truth. Cybele 6804 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Even though i was being selective and have done some drastic pruning, this post is still rather long, so I'm slicing it up to help digestion for anyonone other than Erik who needs no help;-) Part 1 >> you were talking >>about >> getting rid of what is unpleasant in life. >Right, which is dukkha. The entire point of the path. There are different meanings of dukkha , but when we talk about (or when the Buddha talks about) dukkha in the 4NT , what is being referred to are ALL conditioned realities which are unsatisfactory because of being impermanent: 'sankhittena pancupadanakkhandha dukkha - briefly, the five factors of attachment are suffering'. The point of the path, as I see it, is to develop understanding of any realities appearing now, not just those trying to get rid of that which seems unpleasant..... > We can easily (and indeed must) at some level speak about > conventional self, dukkha at the conventional level, practice at the > conventional level: that to do this is to get that. When this arises, > that arises; when this ceases, that ceases. It's true we use conventional language and sometimes we can and do misinterpret what others mean by it....here we only have the language to go by, but we begin to get a sense of the views being expressed by each other I think.... > > There is no other way to even discuss practice using language, and > while it is vital to understand WHAT is "self" and what is clung to > as self, there can be a degree of overkill on semantics (which I have > so often observed here) that makes communication very difficult if > too much emphasis is given to the way things are phrased rather than > their deeper meaning. Language is just another fabrication! We must > let even language go! Many would agree with you, but then, as we know, the details need a lot of fine tuning and the language is the means by which we listen and communicate. I don't hold to the school that we don't need to hear the details and should just open our hearts or see the fine example of those who have never listened to or heard the dhamma in detail. I know you don't either Erik and that you appreciate the fine tuning as much as anyone which is why I responded to your message! > What I was driving at here is that we need strategies for effectively > dealing with dukkha in its many aspects, and Right View is simply one > tool among many. What is certain is that insight alone is not enough > to get rid of dukkha until arahata magga. If anyone believes > otherwise they are in for one very rude and nasty shock! The > Sabbasava Sutta for this reason details many other methods the Buddha > expounded for terminating the asavas. I've made my comments about your first point. We read over and over again that it is the noble eightfold path which leads to the cessation of dukkha and that samma-ditthi (right view) is the first and most essential factor.: "Herein a householder is wise: he is endowed with wisdom that understands the arising and cessation (of the five aggregates of existence); he is possessed of the noble penetrating insight that leads to the destruction of suffering. This is called the accomplishment of wisdom." Anguttara Nikaya VIII.54,Vyagghapajja Sutta, Conditions of Welfare http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-054.html 6805 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Part 2 I'm reading the Sabbasava Sutta (MN2) again as I type. My quotes are from B.Bodhi's translation. (MA refers to the commentary). It discusses in detail how wise attention (yoniso manasikara) attends to what is skilful and understands what is 'unfit for attention'. In other words, comprehends what is kusala and akusala. n36 'MA makes the important point that there is no fixed determination in things themselves as to whether they are fit or unfit for attention. The distinction conisists, rather, in the mode of attention. That mode of attention that is a causal basis for unwholesome states of mind should be avoided, while that mode of attention that is a causal basis for wholesome states should be developed.' In other words it is not the object of citta that matters (however akusala or unpleasant) but the citta and cetasikas (consciousness and mental factors) cognizing it that counts. The four Noble Truths are treated as a 'subject of contemplation and insight'. n41 'MA says that up to the attainment of the path of stream-entry, attention denotes insight (vipassana), but at the moment of the path it denotes path-knowledge. Insight directly apprehends the first two truths, since its objective range is the mental and material phenomena comprised under dukkha and its origin; it can know the latter two truths only inferentially. Path-knowledge makes the truth of cessation its object, apprehending it by penetration as object (arammana). .'..When he attends wisely in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: personality view, doubt, and adherence to rules and observances. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by seeing.' (n35 'the word 'seeing' (dassana) here refers to the first of the 4 supramundane paths (sotapattimagga) so designated because it offers the first glimpse of Nibbana.' There are one of two points here I'd stress which are relevant and to the nibbana debates, but I'll try not to get side-tracked for now! (I could side-track all day;-) Nowhere here does it say that right view or right attention is one tool among many or that we need strategies. By developing right understanding , it understands what is wholesome, what is unwholesome, what is right view and what is wrong view of self. The Sutta continues to talk about restraint of the senses (with awareness, which as we know accompanies rt understanding). It then discusses other useful 'guidelines' the monks use in their daily life reflections or reminders for living such as avoiding unsuitable places or friends because 'taints, vexation, and fever might arise in one who does not avoid these things'...For example, we read: 'Here a bhikkhu, reflecting wisely, avoids a wild elephant, a wild horse, a wild bull, a wild dog, a snake, a stump, a bramble patch, a chasm, a cliff, a cesspit, a sewer'!! Common sense as we might advise a child ....it doesn't mean there can't be awareness whilst being chased by the wild elephant though! Finally there is a discussion of the 7 bojjhanga (enlightenment factors) 'supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, and ripens in relinquishment...' These factors are developed to realize the higher supramundane paths. BB says (n48) 'The terms 'seclusion' (viveka), 'dispassion' (viraga), and 'cessation' (nirodha) may all be understood as referring to Nibbana. 'MA explains the word vosagga, rendered as 'relinquishment' has the 2 meanings of 'giving up' (pariccaga) i.e. the abandonment of defilements, and 'entering into' (pakkhandana), i.e. culminating in Nibbana.' I just mention these terms as they are often interpreted in other ways. Some people read 'supported by seclusion' and think this means they have to withdraw from ordinary life, for example. Semantics? 6806 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Part3 > > In reality, no self, no control, no strategy, no trip...just > realities to be > > known even at these times, however/whatever/wherever conditions > lead us. > > I see we're coming into accord now--at least I think... let's > continue... ;-)) > Okay, that was a tad dogmatic-sounding. I meant this more generally, > that when we're overwhelemed by suffering we're ususually too wrapped > up in notions of "self" and pain to think of much else. I look into > my own mind for this, nowhere else. And of course we can have moments > of insight arising when overwhelmed by dukkha, ;-)) > But some situations ARE more conducive to insight. Please, Sarah, > think carefully about what you're saying here. What you say sounds so > fatalistic, as if there is no reason at all to seek out favorable > conditions for practice! Whoa!!! Why then, is there emphasis on > finding a queit place for meditation, why is there so much emphasis > in the Visuddhimagga, for example, on establishing the appropriate > external conditions conducive to meditation? Please explain your > position to me in light of what the Vis. III.28 speaks of regarding > conditions for meditation. Are these or are these not "situations?" These (as in yr ref) are favourable 'situations' for advanced levels of samatha as discussed in the Vis under the Concentration section, not under the Wisdom or Vipassana section. There have been plenty of discussion on these issues. Where does the Buddha say that for the development of insight (shown to be the 'key) for the eradication of dukkha (as in 4NT) that a certain place or time or position is necessary? It may turn out that in Rob's case there are often more moments of awareness when he's amongst the crowds in the Japanese underground, in a forest or at a karaoke bar. For me it may be that awareness arises when I'm huddled up in cattle-class, listening to my aunt's account of all the coach trips she's been on since I last saw her or playing in the snow in Switzerland. This doesn't mean that we go and try to repeat the experiences..that would show a very strong clinging to sati and wrong view of its conditioned nature....agreed? Hmm... > > Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close > to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is > no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. > This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by > some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and > have no volitional control. If I may be so bold, your reasoning sounds like most realities are conditioned and beyond control, but a few really pesky, unpleasant ones, with a little controlling cetana and conventional self should be exterminated or sent running with a few well-trained strategies which are perfectly under control until one is a sotapanna.. (I know I'll get a hammering for this ;-)) > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says otherwise. > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have to get > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and forget > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > difference. Sorry, but cetana is conditioned too..It arises with every citta, even vipaka citta, as you know. It coordinates 'the associated dhammas on the object and has the function of 'willing' in moral (kusala) and immoral (akusala) states. It's perfectly true that nothing 'we' do will make any difference, but this doesn't mean there is anything fatalistic about the path. The factors of the eightfold path can and must be developed. There can be awareness right now if we have heard and considered what it is and and have a clear idea of what the objects of awareness can and should be. However, if we think awareness can be aware of 'sitting' or 'eating' or that another time or place would be more suitable, there certainly won't be any awareness. Cetana (volition or intention) is not a factor of the 8fold path, so without more quotes (I'm already getting v. nervous about the length of this post), how can it be EVERYTHING? > > While it is agreed we can't control vipaka, we can (and MUST, if > we're serious about the path) strive to purify the mind with directed > practice, even practices that will by definition partake of notions > of "self"--until at least sotapatti-magga-nana. ;-((( That is the entire > point of bhavana. We need heaps of merit to even get rid of self-view > in the first place, and I believe in placing the horse before the > cart here and will simply restate the stock formula of dana, sila, > bhavana, in order, one laying the foundation for the next, knowing > that "self view" at some level is ALWAYS present until bhavana is > developed to the degree sakkayaditthi is finally terminated. Different moments..unless there begin to be moments when awareness and understanding penetrate and know realities as they are at this moment as seeing, hearing, hardness or whatever, without any self in the characteristic appearing, then deeper or higher levels of understanding won't develop...of course they will be blurry and infrequent and surrounded by doubts and wrong views in the beginning....but at those moments of insight, there is no wrong view or ignorance. (I'm not talking about anusayas or latent tendencies here). 6807 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 8:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Part4 > If you believe tears of gratitude and love > are a form of dosa, then I can only say I hope you sometime have the > experience of knowing what such tears of love and joy feel like. I believe there are different realities at these times, Erik. I don't for a moment doubt the genuine gratitude and love you have for your teachers. I'm sure there are many moments of metta too. In my experience, when there are tears, they are an indication of moments of dosa amongst those of metta. Only you can tell and I hope I didn't cause any offence and I certainly didn't mean any disrespect for your teachers or your practice > There are few pracftices which are ther equal of meditation on the > Bhramaviharas. And why, I must ask, is there practicelly NO emphasis > here given to this indispensible practice? It's not like it's even > controversial from the Theravada perspective, and all I can do is > encourage people study the Visuddhimagga IX and meditate, meditate, > meditate on the Four Immeasurables until such tears of joy and > gratitude have the conditions to arise. Can there be metta now? We're trying to help each other and others to appreciate the dhamma....isn't this a good time to show kindness or consideration? What about when you sit on a bus in Bkk? Can there be friendliness and kindness to the other people you have contact with then? I think there is a lot of emphasis on understanding all realities including metta and the other brahmaviharas in Theravada and in developing ALL kinds of wholesomeness, including the brahmaviharas with understanding. ...Another post, but in brief, for me, a lot of what I used to take for metta before I read and heard some details really wasn't metta at all. This is the value of the abhidhamma and I need to hear and read a lot more. > This is the very reason I'm studying > the Abhidhamma, because I see it as a way to "reverse-engineer" many > aspects and experiences of the Dhamma that have arisen in the course > of my own practice, as well as wishing to have a technical way to > unpack, in detail, how and why certain practices perform the > functions they do, and how they all hang together. So we agree here...though I'd say Abhidhamma is not a technical way but the practical way to unpack.......I don't distinguish between abhidhamma and practice..both are about the development of satipatthana now. Have fun unpacking in Bkk, Erik and you never know, we may follow your fine example and get a plane over on a whim too..... Thanks for the encouragement ;-) Pls know that I always enjoy our debates and when I'm unable to continue it's b/c of time restraints only. Sarah 6808 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 8:14pm Subject: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! b --- Erik wrote: > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > otherwise. > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > to get > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > forget > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > difference. > > ___________________ Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over them.." http://www.abhidhamma.org/majjhima_nikaaya35_i.htm an extract:""Aggivessana, do you say Matter is my self. Feelings are my self. Perceptions are my self. Determinations are my self. Conscioussness is my self.? Good Gotama, I say. matter is my self. Feelings are my self. Perceptions are my self. Determinations are my self. Consciousness is my self, so also this large crowd says it. What does this large crowd say about your view? You should dispute on your view. Good Gotama, I say, matter is my self. Feelings are my self. Perceptions are my self. Determinations are my self, and conscioussness is my self. Then, I will cross question you on this and you may reply, as it pleases you..Aggivessana, do head anointed warrior kings like king Pasenadi of Kosala, king Ajaatasattu of Magadha wield power over their kingdoms, to execute those that have to be executed, to produce those that have to be produced, and to banish those that have to be banished?Yes, good Gotama, the head anointed warrior kings such as king Pasenadi of Kosala and king Ajaatasattu of Magadha wield power in their kingdoms to execute those that have to be executed, to produce those that have to be produced, and to banish those that have to be banished. Even the leaders, gathered here, of the Vajjis and Mallas, wield power in their kingdoms to execute those that have to be executed, to produce those that have to be produced and to banish those that have to be banished, so there are no doubts, about head anointed warrior kings, like king Pasenadi of Kosala and king Ajaatasattu of Magadha. Aggivessana, you say matter is your self, do you wield power over that matter, as may my matter be thus and not thus?. When this was said Saccaka the son of Nigan.tha became silent. For the second time, the Blessed One asked, Aggivessana, you say matter is your self, do you wield power over that matter, as may my matter be thus and not thus?. [and the same for the other aggregates] robert 6809 From: Robert Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:48pm Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Epstein --- Suan wrote: > > > > What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you meant > that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts > do not support it. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > out. > ____________ Dear Suan, Thanks for your help on these matters. I also read your excellent article showing that vinnana, citta and mano are indeed synonyms - and have made a link to your site on abhidhamma.org robert 6810 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Conditions and Insight - Sarah --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: Whew! What a fun (and challenging) this exchange is for me! :) > > But some situations ARE more conducive to insight. Please, Sarah, > > think carefully about what you're saying here. What you say sounds so > > fatalistic, as if there is no reason at all to seek out favorable > > conditions for practice! Whoa!!! Why then, is there emphasis on > > finding a queit place for meditation, why is there so much emphasis > > in the Visuddhimagga, for example, on establishing the appropriate > > external conditions conducive to meditation? Please explain your > > position to me in light of what the Vis. III.28 speaks of regarding > > conditions for meditation. Are these or are these not "situations?" > > These (as in yr ref) are favourable 'situations' for advanced levels of samatha > as discussed in the Vis under the Concentration section, not under the Wisdom > or Vipassana section. As Derek noted, where is Right Vipassana in the Noble Eightfold Path? ;) While there's no point speaking dogmatically by suggesting the approach I've been taught and practiced is the ONLY way, it is impossible to say with certainty other approaches, such as the one you appear to be advocating here, actually work. I remain skeptical and unconvinced, because I have not collected enough evidence demonstrating their efficacy at present. Based on the teachings of my lineage and my interpretation of the suttas, creating favorable conditions for insight is essential. (So is the union of samatha & vipassana, and this has been debated before in detail here.) I remain skeptical of any approach that doesn't give concentration its proper due, and Right Concentration, in my experience, and in the passages from the Suttas, requires appropriate conditions for its arising. The approach I am advocating here--practicing the union of samatha & vipassana--definitely works, and is fully supported in the Suttas, in fact emphasized. And again, Right Concentration is indispensible as a factor of the path; there can be no debate on this point by anyone who calls him or herself a Buddhist: "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful, & fully alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, and of him the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." (SN XLV.8) > There have been plenty of discussion on these issues. Where does the Buddha say > that for the development of insight (shown to be the 'key) for the eradication > of dukkha (as in 4NT) that a certain place or time or position is necessary? Would you accept the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta on this one? "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself? "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." Is this or is this not creating a "situation?" I do not interpret the Satipatthana Sutta saying this is the ONLY way, but if I am interpreting what you're saying correctly, and you're implying that favorable situations aren't helpful or conducive to the path, then this serves as a direct refutation to that notion. Combine this passage with the instruction on Right Concentration above, and there should be little doubt special conditions are, if not extremely beneficial, essential for awakening. And let's get down to brass tacks here. What I'm parroting here is not some random interpretation; it's been demonstrated to work unequivocally--at least in my own experience and interpretation. It also happens to come down one of the most polished teaching lineages in all Tibetan Buddhism. My lama is abbot of the renowned Sera monastery, one of the "Three Pillars of Tibet." He's considered the "first among the first" as Geshe Hlarampa, the highest degree possible in the Gelug-pa lineage (the lineage of the Dalai Lamas), which represents unsurpassed excellence in scholarship and debate (and much, much more), in a lineage renowned for rigorous scholarship and debate, whose (im)personal teachers were the Dalai Lama's private tutors, Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche and Kyabje Ling Rinpoche, as well as the renowned Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche. He is considered by many to be a living Buddha. It simply doesn't get any better than this in terms of representing the distilled heart-essence of the Tibetan Dharma, and if one is going to find correct Dharma coming out of Tibet, then this is where it's most likely to be found, because these are the very best possible conditions for it I can think of. And any teacher or teaching I come across will be weighed very carefully against this backdrop. So when I encounter teachings which appear at variance with what's been handed down to me and demonstated to work, then permit me some healthy skepticism. Note I am not going dogmatic and rejecting the importance of watching realities in daily life--that is in fact one important reason I am here, after all, to learn this way of understanding the Dhamma. But know well that now proximity to your teaching lineage is no longer an issue, I will be observing very, very carefully over time for evidence that it is in fact correct Dharma (and I am giving the benefit of the doubt at the moment and assuming it is). > > Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close > > to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is > > no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. > > This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by > > some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and > > have no volitional control. > > If I may be so bold, your reasoning sounds like most realities are conditioned > and beyond control, but a few really pesky, unpleasant ones, with a little > controlling cetana and conventional self should be exterminated or sent running > with a few well-trained strategies which are perfectly under control until one > is a sotapanna.. (I know I'll get a hammering for this ;-)) Not "perfectly under control." See my post to Jon earlier--cetana IS conditioned by past action, no disagreement there. But, the fact is we have cetana, volitional choice all the same, and that is the ONLY way we have of getting out of samsara. If there no volition then we'd have no hope at all. May as well put a gun to our collective head and pull the trigger. > It's perfectly true that nothing 'we' do will make any difference, but this > doesn't mean there is anything fatalistic about the path. Choice DOES make a difference, all the difference. Again, we do not disagree cetana is conditioned by accumulations, but we still have a degree of freedom in choosing our responses to situations right now, which is our tiny window of opportunity, the only one we have. > However, if we think awareness can be > aware of 'sitting' or 'eating' or that another time or place would be more > suitable, there certainly won't be any awareness. Sarah, I must strongly disagree with this, again, for the reasons listed above. Do you know for certain what you're saying here is correct? Because this directly contradicts my own experience and that of many others. In my experience suitable conditions are incredibly helpful for the arising of insight, if not necessary (by "conditions" I include everything up from dana, sila, to bhavana, to "external" factors such as time & place, etc.). Anyway, if I'm sounding all fired up in this post it's because I'm thrilled to be in BKK and coming off a high after spending the most delightful afternoon discussing the Dhamma with our friend Sukin, whose unbelievable kindness in giving me the gift of Dhamma is appreciated with the deepest gratitude I know. I again have "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" among my collection of books, as well as Bikkhu Bodhi's take on the "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma," with all the tables and charts of classifications I've been looking for for so long now. And Sarah, you and Jon need to go with your impulses and hop on that plane (what is it, a three-hour ride?), because you're invited to my apartment-warming this weekend (and besides I want to give a huge hug to everyone). 6811 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > b > --- Erik wrote: > > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > > otherwise. > > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > > to get > > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > > forget > > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > > difference. > > > > ___________________ > > Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of > formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. > > Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who > sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as > self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they > are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over > them.." Robert, can we choose in a conventional sense? Yes or no? If you say no then you agree with the sectarians the Buddha refuted in the passage I quoted earlier. What is the definition of non-controlling here as a feature of anatta? It all hangs on your interpretation of what that means. I am not suggesting AT ALL there is a "driver" behind actions, because that implies a view of self. That view is explicitly refuted in the Tibetan interpretation as well, one we learn to do away with in "trangye" (study of what constitutes Right vs. wrong view). Yet anatta doesn't mean things don't exist conventionally, and cetana, volition, choice, DOES exist conventionally. If it didn't we'd have no hope of getting out of samsara at all. Thanks to your wonderful inspiration to read the Vis. (I'm still working on it, and haven't read as much lately given I've been very busy) I now know how to return fire using your ordnance, you know. :) Vis. XIX.19: "But he sees clearly with Right View that the wise say 'doer' when there is doing and 'experiencer' when experiencing simply as a mode of common usage." So Phhhhhbt!!!! :) :) :) To further go to the heart of this issue, and on this I think we're in agreement: Hence the Ancients have said: 'There is no doer of a deed or one who reaps a result; Phenomena alone flow on-- No other view than this is right. [...]' So as you can hopefully see by now (let's put this one to bed once and for all), I am not at all denying no-self by talking about volition conventionally. It is an exremely helpful convention indeed, otherwise we'll just get twisted into silly semantic contortions trying to discuss the Dhamma. How else are we to speak of practice other than in terms of mere conventions? All we have is language, and it's by definition deceptive. Again, it is ditthi all the same to get caught up in these very sorts of semantics. That is ditthi just as much as belief in a truly existent "self" or "driver" is ditthi. The Buddha expounded the Middle Way betwen extremes. Can we not use conventional designations helpfully, while not forgetting there is no "core," no ultimate controlling at the same time? That to me represents the Middle Way in terms of this issue of semantics here. 6812 From: Howard Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 6:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Robert (and Erik) - In a message dated 7/24/01 8:37:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert writes: > --- Erik wrote: > > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > > otherwise. > > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > > to get > > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > > forget > > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > > difference. > > > > ___________________ > > Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of > formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. > > Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who > sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as > self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they > are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over > them.." > ============================== For sure volition is conditioned. All dhammas other than nibbana are conditioned. If something were to arise without conditions, then its arising would be random. However, how is the path to be followed except by exercise of volition? Progress on the path requires that volition be consistently exercised, a very strong volition, and a very great effort made as a result of that strong volition. 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) 6813 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:03pm Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana:To Derek Cameron Dear Derek How are you? The article can be found by clicking "The Science And Academic Journal Of Bodhiology". When you get there, you will see the Content page". When you click it, the content with a list of categories will appear. The article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under Bodhiology" is in the category "Academic Articles". If you would like to read an article on Dhamma discussed from the scientific perspective, you simply click on the category "Science Articles". Hope this would help. Now your turn! I once saw your message in Triplegem long time ago with a link to a Tipitaka website when you answered someone's inquiry about "mahabuta". If you still remember it, could you please post that link again on this list for all of us? With regards Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- Suan wrote: > > I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > > out. > > Hi, Suan, > > I tried to go to your site but couldn't see where to click to view > your paper? > > Derek. 6814 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Epstein --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > Dear Robert Epstein > > How are you? I'm pretty well. Thanks for your response! > You wrote: > > "Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an > expression],but it seems to me that what you are saying is that > Nibbana 'itself' [which also makes it sound like an object rather > than an awakened state] is not actually the object of consciousness, > but the concept of it is the object of consciousness both before and > after it has been experienced." > > My answer follows. > > In general, nibbana is the object of consciousness for awakeners at > the moment of transworldly resultant consciousness, for example, > while they (outside that moment) as well as the non-awakeners may > take the idea or concept of nibbana as a stimulus. I'm not quite clear whether I understand the above statement, but it sounds like you're saying that for awakeners and non-awakeners, Nibbana is only apprehended as an idea or concept, but never experienced directly as an object of mind. If that is what you are saying, that is what I thought, that Nibbana being signless could only be apprehended not as itself, but in a secondary form as a concept of idea. But I also contended that this is true of everything, that nothing is apprehended directly by the mind except as an idea or concept, because the mind filters all human experience *except* Nibbana, which overtakes the mind, but never becomes an object *of* the mind except as a concept. In other words, I believe this would mean that one would be saying that Nibbana is the only existent reality that is actual, not fabricated and not indirect. > You wrote: > > "Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being > apprehended, even while being 'experienced' as one's own state." > > What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you meant > that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts > do not support it. I guess I'm not clear enough about how to put that, but I simply meant that when one is awakened, that this experience is still not apprehended directly by the mind. If anything the mind would be overtaken by that experience, but that experience would never be objectified by the mind, except as a concept or idea, as you put it, because it is not an object of consciousness. This came out of the discussion over whether Nibbana was the object of higher states of consciousness that were just prior to realization or awakening. My [admittedly uneducated] take on it was that Nibbana being signless, it could never *actually* be an object of any consciousness, although the idea or concept of it could be an object of consciousness which was using it to direct its efforts towards the goal of Nibbana in an advanced stage. But Nibbana itself would only be experienced as a 'reality' [whatever that means.....], not as an object of the mind. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > out. I will do so. > You wrote: > > " But memory forming a concept in order to mark and communicate the > presence of Nibbana, would refer to the concept as a pointer towards > Nibbana itself." > > I agree with the above statement. I'm glad to hear that, because that makes sense to me. It's hard to conceive of how Nibbana could *actually itself* be directly apprehended by the mind. > I will discuss your other statements at a later date. I will very much look forward to that. Thanks for your clarity on these issues. Best, Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6815 From: Robert Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > b > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > > > otherwise. > > > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > > > to get > > > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > > > forget > > > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > > > difference. > > > > > > ___________________ > > > > Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of > > formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. > > > > Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who > > sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as > > self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they > > are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over > > them.." > So as you can hopefully see by now (let's put this one to bed once > and for all), I am not at all denying no-self by talking about > volition conventionally. It is an exremely helpful convention indeed, > otherwise we'll just get twisted into silly semantic contortions > trying to discuss the Dhamma. How else are we to speak of practice > other than in terms of mere conventions? All we have is language, and > it's by definition deceptive. Again, it is ditthi all the same to get > caught up in these very sorts of semantics. That is ditthi just as > much as belief in a truly existent "self" or "driver" is ditthi. > > The Buddha expounded the Middle Way betwen extremes. Can we not use > conventional designations helpfully, while not forgetting there is > no "core," no ultimate controlling at the same time? That to me > represents the Middle Way in terms of this issue of semantics here. ___________ Dear Erik, I know you feel this is just semantics but I happen to think it goes to the heart of what the Buddha taught. Cetana arises with kusala or akusala. Conventionally, of course, someone might decide " I will get enlightened. I will follow only the true teaching. I will do whatever it takes." They can think that and next week join the moonies and still have this same strong volition. Someone wrote to me a while back who feels that no control is a dangerous idea. They want to stress control and volitional intention which is what they believe that Buddha really taught and they feel uncontrollabilty to be a 'pernicious belief leading to apathy.' "I have a choice whether to get angry in the present moment." the writer said. I replied "Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new kamma. However, they are also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most important book of the Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 paccaya (conditions). Some of which are past and some present. But even the present ones do not simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because "I" want them to. The processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and there is no "person" who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even the cittas that are arising at this moment are conditioned by previous cittas as well as well as by other conditions that are present at the same time. This is not the place to go into details but it is well worth studying the Patthana. It gives us a glimpse of the profundity of the path and the wisdom of the Buddha." They further wrote that "we are not just helpless automata acting out our old kamma - that is absurd. I hope the above helps overcome the despair that comes from the belief that we are a slave to our conditioning." I said "This sounds like the debates that western Philosophy used to have (and still does) about Free-will versus Determinism. The Buddha's analysis of the world is neither, it is the middle path. Thus the statement about "we being helpless automata acting out our old kamma" misses the point. There is no "we" to be anything. And kamma is not the only condition. Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the deep teachings on anatta, are a condition for understanding. This understanding leads to energy: energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the study and practice of vipassana. It leads to the type of determination that will gladly keep developing understanding moment after moment, life after life, aeon after aeon, no matter how long it takes. And if understanding grows then there will be detachment from the idea of self and of control. Then there is no more despair about the path - because "I" have been taken out of the equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that we want to be happy, get enlightened .Then, as the Visuddhimagga says, there is a path but no one on the path." robert 6816 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Wow, what a great discussion. If we talk about 'self' in language, and accept the idea that this is a convention, the question still arises, what then are we talking about? Are we illuminating that which we are calling 'self' by talking about it, or are we obscuring it by creating a concept which is not 'it', and implicitly substituting that subtle or not-so-subtle concept for the reality of 'self' we are trying to describe? If we talk about Nibbana and even say 'Nibbana is not an object; it is signless', etc., what is created by talking about 'Nibbana' in those statements as if the word refers to something called 'Nibbana'? Even while saying 'Nibbana is formless and signless and not subject to any conditions' the original noun-subject 'Nibbana' slips by in that sentence as an implicit 'thing'. It takes an awfully crafty and wary speaker to speak consciously enough to avoid these implicit concepts, which reduce what we want to illuminate to mere objects of conception in the mind. On the other hand, if we were to speak consciously, realizing that every word we use raises conceptual images in the mind, and actually be mindful of these concepts and images arising, trying to discern them for what they were at the time of speaking, what would be left of our original intention to say something about the realities we strive for? I think we might find that the original intention to say something about that which we call 'Nibbana' would be redirected to an intention to observe the contents of the mind, because that is what we are really in contact with. Mindfulness, I think, dictates that we make firm contact with what we are really involved with at the moment and discern *its* true nature, not the true nature of something that has been reduced to an abstraction. That is why talking about Nibbana and all the other states and signs of progress on the path, although necessary to know what the path *is*, has limited usefulness in moment-to-moment practice, and even obscures the real work when it is overdone. The mind can play freely with philosophical concepts and never get to the task of discerning the true nature of this mind now, and what our true nature really is in this moment. I am happier to use general indicators like 'true nature' and 'the mind' than 'Nibbana' in this context, because they point to what we are generally striving for, but its hard to form an image of 'true nature'. It is just a general description. When I say 'Nibbana' my mind is so full of images of the ultimate state, even though that state may be imagined to be imageless or stateless, it is like a romantic wash across consciousness, full of feelings of relief, pride, spiritual attainment, and images of broad space, emptiness, peace and vastness, what have you. It is laden with hopes and expectations, not to mention mythology. Maybe for you folks who are more seriously instated in the sure stages of the path, and really have made a lot of distinctions between what the spiritual items of the path are and are not, it is not such a false set of images and expectations. But I'll bet there's still a lot of stuff around the attainment of Nibbana. Might be interesting to inventory here what kind of baggage we're all carrying around about such things. On the other hand, the constant task of mindfulness and discernment, which actually distinguishes in the moment what items of consciousness are, and what is real and what is not real, slowly and surely, whether practiced through meditation or contemplative exploration in the mind, creates the real possibility of that which we call 'Nibbana' in this moment, and in future moments that will pick up where these moments of mindfulness leave off. It seems a lot of times that I am more comfortable talking about the flowery attainments of the path, than actually practicing it, and this is something I have to look at. When I stop talking and look at the mind, that reality is difficult, plodding, sometimes boring, and almost always hard work. Clearly to be avoided! Anyway, I hope it doesn't sound like I am anti-talking. I realize that insight can come from sharing and clarifying understandings of all the items of the path. I just think that it's important to practice mindfulness on the subtle level of observing the reality of what is said, and discerning the mental images that gather around our words. And that when we talk about 'self', even knowing that this is a convention, we still let the word 'self' slip by as if beyond the convention there is an object that the word imperfectly refers to. Do we really know 'self' and is it an object? Is there really a 'Nibbana' and can it be attained? Anyway, I'll be interested to hear what anyone has to say. I also found the conversation about volition to be very interesting and important, but I'll save any response to that for another time. Best, Robert E. --------------------------------------- --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > >Dear Sarah and Erik, (Sarah-glad you made it home safely and what a relief > >it must be to have your computer) > > Thank you for this exchange which I find relevant at the moment. > > >Okay, I'm gonna dive in on a point I've been meaning to raise here > >for some time. We talk about "self" and no controlling, so on, so > >forth. But CONVENTIONALLY we have to talk at this level. I see so > >much semantic contortionism here on DSG in HOW things are spoken of, > >that to even speak of something a certain way conventionally implies > >a view of self, etc. NO NO NO!!! Language is the problem here, I > >think, Sarah, and getting hung up on language is to miss the point > >entirely--it's actually getting caught in names & terms--views, > >again! Really. I consider this point a vital one. > > > >We can easily (and indeed must) at some level speak about > >conventional self, dukkha at the conventional level, practice at the > >conventional level: that to do this is to get that. When this arises, > >that arises; when this ceases, that ceases. > > Yes! > > > >There is no other way to even discuss practice using language, and > >while it is vital to understand WHAT is "self" and what is clung to > >as self, there can be a degree of overkill on semantics (which I have > >so often observed here) that makes communication very difficult if > >too much emphasis is given to the way things are phrased rather than > >their deeper meaning. Language is just another fabrication! We must > >let even language go! > > And more yes! > > > >Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close > >to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is > >no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. > >This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by > >some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and > >have no volitional control. > > > >Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says otherwise. > >In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have to get > >out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and forget > >practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > >difference. > > In The Wings to Awakening Thanissaro Bhikku writes: > The fact that the kammic process relies on input from the present moment > means that it is not totally deterministic. Input from the past may place > restrictions on what can be done and known in any particular moment , but > the allowance for new input from the present provides some room for free will. > > It seems that in fact everything we can consciously choose to do must be > within the scope of this present kamma-how we choose to practice and how we > live our lives (obviously not excluding conditions we have no control > over). This does not negate teachings on anatta, but paradoxically is the > means by which we can come to realise the teaching. > > ...And what , monks, is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the > body, with speech or with the intellect. This is called new kamma... And > what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this > noble eightfold path...this is called the path of practice leading to the > cessation of kamma. S.XXXV.145 > > > Thanissaro continues: > The teaching of dependent origination helps to provide more detailed > instructions on this point, showing precisely where the cycle of kamma > provides openings for more skillful present input. > > '. > > >While it is agreed we can't control vipaka, we can (and MUST, if > >we're serious about the path) strive to purify the mind with directed > >practice, even practices that will by definition partake of notions > >of "self"--until at least sotapatti-magga-nana. That is the entire > >point of bhavana. We need heaps of merit to even get rid of self-view > >in the first place, and I believe in placing the horse before the > >cart here and will simply restate the stock formula of dana, sila, > >bhavana, in order, one laying the foundation for the next, knowing > >that "self view" at some level is ALWAYS present until bhavana is > >developed to the degree sakkayaditthi is finally terminated. > > > >I think of, for example, my arch-nemesis kukuccha, which through a > >number of sessions I was able to pinpoint at the root, so that now, I > >can catch it (mostly, still not always) while it is still tiny, > >before it snowballs into something that drags me into the muck for > >minutes, hours, or longer. Do you realize what a coup this has been > >in my own practice? > > Many congratulations on this kusala accomplishment. I think it is good > practice to recognise these achievements when they occur as it increases > saddha and viriya for you as well as for others. Of course self-delusion is > something we always have to be aware of, but with mindfulness, we can catch > this as well. > > >There are few pracftices which are ther equal of meditation on the > >Bhramaviharas. > > Sadhu X 3 Erik for this reminder. > > >This proclivity to experiment is, I think, a function of nearly- > >insatiable curiosity, > > 'If we are truly curious, we investigate without any preconceptions. We > suspend our beliefs and and just observe, just notice.' > > > and I'm willing to try anything that may be of > >benefit (read conencted with the Goal in some way), even > >tangentially, as a way of getting to the bottom of things, the whys > >and wherefores, in other words. This is the very reason I'm studying > >the Abhidhamma, because I see it as a way to "reverse-engineer" many > >aspects and experiences of the Dhamma that have arisen in the course > >of my own practice, as well as wishing to have a technical way to > >unpack, in detail, how and why certain practices perform the > >functions they do, and how they all hang together. One of the monks > >in my bikkhu-sangha once called me the "mad scientist" because of my > >love of this sort of experimentation. It has held me in good stead so > >far, and I see no reason to stop playing, since there is so much yet > >for me to learn. > > Thanks for the interesting discussion. > Metta, > Victoria ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6817 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 0:34am Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana:To Derek Cameron Hi, Suan, --- Suan wrote: > Hope this would help. Yes, I found it, thanks. > I once saw your message in Triplegem long time ago with a link to > a Tipitaka website when you answered someone's inquiry about > "mahabuta". If you still remember it, could you please post that link > again on this list for all of us? I'm sorry, but I don't remember that post or the link. Derek. 6818 From: Christine Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:26am Subject: Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... Hi Bruce, That would be much appreciated. I'll have a look too. metta, Christine --- bruce wrote: > hi christine > > there was an excellent post by ken and visakha on the d-last many months > ago explaining why they thought Theravada is definitely *not* dhammakaya.... > > i'll try to search the archives... > > bruce > > > Dhammakaya is Theravadin isn't it, so, if one is a meditator, is this > > worthwhile to try? 6819 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 1:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi, Derek: There must be many many ways of veiwing dead bodies. They may be a condition for aversion, for an indifferent feeling, or for a codition for having a wholesome thought that our body is the same in nature with what we have been seeing. Or if dead bodies are exposed to one who has developed high level of wisdo, then, the dead boy may become a conditioin (in a conventional sense) for his enlightenment. The point is that any object can be a conditon for experiencing either kusala or akusala citta. The sight of the Buddha may condition akusala for some people In contrast, the dead body, which in nature must be asobhana (unpleasant non-beatiful), could induce kusala citta, if one views it in the right frame of mind. So, whether undertakers can or cannot be enlightened in seeing a dead body depends solely on whether he has the right understandind of the Dhamma and on the right path for the development of the Dhamma. tadao 6820 From: Ken Howard Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 1:24pm Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Erik and Tadao, Thank you both for responding to my post. Tadao, I didn't mean to imply that the Dhamma includes shocking people into akusala reactions, quite the reverse. However I take your point that the cemetery meditations have a calming effect on people. So that does weaken my theory a little. While we're on the subject, I had to dispose of a rotting bullock carcass on one occasion. The gasses were so thick in the air, I could taste them as much as smell them. I had to keep backing off for fear of vomiting. Without disputing what you say, I am genuinely amazed that this could be calming. Erik, thank you for once again providing me with new and helpful information. I hope to find the Tipitaka origins of the practices you described. Kind regards Ken --- ppp wrote: > To Ken(?): About "Shocks": > (Since I deleted the oritinal mail, I cannot be quire sure whom > I am addressing.) > I do not recall even a single sutta, where the Buddha gives a talk > in order to create dosa/akusala among his listerns. So if he is shocking > his listerns, the shock he is giving cannot be akusala but kusala > (no restlessness, no aversion involved). You may have said that looking > at corpuses with their various states of decay must be quite shocking. > In reality it is not, it is rather poplar oppostie. Seeing > corpuses induce you a calming effect, which may be best described by the term > "serinity". During my Bagkok era, in a semi-regular base, a buch of > foreign monks at Wat Bown used to go to Mahidon Medical University to > obeserve corpuses with verious states of disembodyment (?spelling?). > Besides the feeling of respect to the individuals who passed away, > we always experienced a king of "serinity", knowing that one day we > will be in the same state. > So, if one has the right frame of mind, any so-called shocking > scences can be perceived as the opportunity to > develop kusala, not akusala. tadao 6821 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 2:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > This clarifies what you said. I still have other questions related to > this > area. If you will be with the India trip, maybe I will get an > opportunity to > ask.. I certainly hope to be going to India. So far it still looks likely (but I have not forgotten that I had to pull out of the last trip at very short notice). I'm looking forward very much to meeting you and others and to renewing old acquaintances from the Bay Area group. Why not raise your questions now on the list? Then others can contribute or benefit also. Jon 6822 From: Ken Howard Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Jon I really would like to know the correct approach to the Buddhadhamma. I want to know exactly what those disciples in the suttas meant when they exclaimed, "I take refuge in the Dhamma from this day until life's end!" On many occasions, when I have been reading messages posted by you and other members of this list, the penny has dropped.There are lucid moment when everything seems to fall into place. I wish I could hold on to those moments but they go and I find myself making the same mistakes -- thinking I can control things. I only hope that you will not get tired of giving these explanations. I need to see them time and time again. Regards Ken --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken > > Thanks for articulating (below) so clearly and succinctly this concern, > which I now recall has been expressed before. It is indeed a good one. > In addition to your own helpful thoughts, I would like to add my own. > > --- <> wrote: > Dear Bruce, > > I should point out that I am now a convert to the `other > > side' -- happy to toe the party line -- but even so, we seem to > > be seeing the issue from similar perspectives. For example, you are > > asking why it seems to be OK to listen to the Dhamma with the > > delusion that there is a self who is listening, but it is not OK to > > meditate in the same way. > > Actually, neither is OK, if you are talking about moments of actual wrong > view, and perhaps no-one has said exactly that. What might have been said > is one or other of the following (or something close to it)— > > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition for the > development of awareness/understanding, while meditating is not. > > 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to have more > understanding about the false idea of self and about why that notion is > not in accordance with reality, while meditating is not likely to be > conducive to that. > > Nonetheless, the question still arises, why the difference? > > I don't expect my answer to be convincing, since my own understanding of > what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain it to > another. The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind > that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing awareness or > understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue of > that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the path, > since there must be an idea of self involved (`if I do this correctly, > awareness/understanding may arise'). > > By `any kind of practice' I would include so-called `daily life' practice > as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include > listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the same > idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one action is > OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or view with > which the action is done. But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, > if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise to > awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it is > almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with that > practice. So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, > the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than intended. > > I should perhaps elaborate on how listening to or studying the dhamma may > differ from this, but I'm afraid i'm out of time for this session and must > leave it for a later post. > > Ken, I don't know if you think this addresses the question you have > identified. I do know it's bound to be controversial! > > Jon > > > > For all the excellent material on the 6823 From: Victor Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 3:54pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > The Buddha expounded the Middle Way betwen extremes. Can we not use > conventional designations helpfully, while not forgetting there is > no "core," no ultimate controlling at the same time? That to me > represents the Middle Way in terms of this issue of semantics here. Yes we can use conventional designation skillfully and helpfully. For example, the Buddha taught: "Form is not self." The word "self" can be seen as a pronoun for conventional designation, which is further specified in "Form is to be regarded as it actually is with right discernment thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'"* The word "self" can also be used in the expressions of speculative views such as "there is a self" and "there is no self". In these statements, the word "self" is not used for conventional designation as a pronoun. Language is used for communication. Skillful use of language can lead to truth and understanding. Unskillful use of language can be deceiving and confusing. Metta, Victor *Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html 6824 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > This omission of concentration seems to represent a later stage > in > > > the Buddha's teachings. > > I'm not sure what you mean by this, or what you base this on. > Perhaps you > > could elaborate? > > This is my take on the problem of the stratification of the nikaaya- > s. But perhaps this issue would be too academic for most people ... > no? Why don't you give it a try! I'm sure that with your evident skills of exposition, you could summarise the issue for us in a reasonably palatable form, Derek. Jon 6825 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of > vipassana leads > > to enlightenment. > > And I am sure you will agree that there is NO step in the Noble > Eightfold Path called Right Vipassanaa! :-) An interesting point! You may like to consider the following. 'Vipassana bhavana' refers to the development of the understanding that knows the characteristic of a reality presently appearing. And as you know, this understanding (aka wisdom) is the cetasika (mental factor) called 'panna'. Now this same panna cetasika is in fact the factor of the Eightfold path called samma ditthi (right view). So there is actually a very direct correlation her. However, I would like to question the significance you seem to place on this connection. You refer to the factors of the Eightfold Path as 'steps', and I believe this is how they are commonly viewed. I think this perception is not particularly accurate or helpful. To my reading of the texts, the statement of the Eightfold Path is given to describe the consciousness at that moment, to tell us *what is happening* at the level of the citta, rather than to tell us *how to develop* towards achievement of that path moment. It is a snapshot of the instant, rather than a roadmap to the destination. It is suttas such as the Satipatthana Sutta that are the roadmap. Thinking of the Eightfold Path as a series of steps, or as a number of separate factors/qualities each to be developed separately, leaves a lot of questions unanswered. For a start, these factors when developed separately can only be developed at a level that is non-path. No matter to what extent they are developed in this manner, they can never somehow 'become' path factors,. A moment of satipatthana, on the other hand, is a moment of mundane path citta, at which moment all 5 path factors (the 8 less the 3 abstinences) arise and are developed together *as path factors* . Jon 6826 From: Erik Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:35pm Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: Okay, a little forceful bluntness for you Jon (and please accept this in the appropriate spirit--it is not spoken in anger, but in forceful directness as your true friend in the Dhamma). > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition for the > development of awareness/understanding, Agreed. > while meditating is not. Jon, this is definitely wrong understanding of practice. Meditation is an absolutely necessary condition for the type of development that leads to Right View. At the risk of sounding dogmatic THERE IS NO OTHER WAY, unless you consider any of the steps of the Noble Eightfold Path to be optional. What is observing realities here and now if not a form of meditation? There are so many ways to meditate, standing, sitting, you name it. Some types of meditation are definitely more conducive than others to insight, and some, if you accept wha tht Buddha actually taught in the Suttas, such as Right Concentration, are necessary elements of the path. Not optional, in other words. To say otherwise is to deny the necessity of Right Concentration, to deny the Noble Eightfold Path, to deny the most essential teachigns of Lord Buddha! To recap: "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful, & fully alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, and of him the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." (SN XLV.8) Do you agree or disagree with this, Jon? Because the arguments you've provided given flat-out reject what the Buddha acctually taught in the Suttas! To me the above passage is quite unambiguous. Forget the Abhidhamma or anything else you've herd from anyone at the moment. Do you or do you not accept this passage as a canonical teaching of the Buddha? > 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to have more > understanding about the false idea of self and about why that notion is > not in accordance with reality, Agreed. > while meditating is not likely to be conducive to that. This is totally incorrect! Right Concentration is an essential aspect of the path, if you accept the 4NT an N8FP as the core teachings of the Buddha. If you really mean what you're saying here, your arguments are flat-out denying the necessity of Right Concentration as an aspect of the path, and to draw out the full impliation of your contention, you're essentially rejecting the most essential aspect of the Dhamma, and by extension the Buddha! > I don't expect my answer to be convincing, since my own understanding of > what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain it to > another. Then permit me to be blunt here, and say that if your understanding of these realities is unclear, as you say, then I believe it is VERY unwise to make categorical-sounding statements about the lack of need for applied meditation. To say it is your mere opinion would be fine. Then we can debate that. But to speak as if mere opinion is truth is, in my opinion, to fall into serious error, not only for the reason that sort of thinking has a negative effect on one's own understandiong, but can also lead others directly into wrong forms of praice if they take those opinions as gospel. And there are many who may not yet have developed enough understanding of the Dhamma to be able to discern opinion from actual knowledge, and it is for the sake of these sentient beings my reply here is so forceful on these points. I am sorry to respond in a way that sounds so harsh, but as time goes on I am becoming less and less convinced some of the methods being expounded here in DSG can possibly lead to liberation, because what I see are examples of some very serious distortions and misrepresentations and serious omissions of the Buddha's actual, canonical teachings as found in the Pali Suttas, which are accepted by ALL extant schools of Buddhism I know of, Tibetan, Theravada, and Zen included. > The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind > that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing awareness or > understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue of > that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the path, > since there must be an idea of self involved (`if I do this correctly, > awareness/understanding may arise'). This is wrong understanding of practice again. Aagin, over tuime, wrong views are loosened. But this doesn't happen all at once. Only thourhg careful and applied development can this occur. It is "good enough" to work even with wrong view at first. Again, therre needs to be great merit for insight to arise at all. It's not random. We can acccumulate merit even WITH wrong view, and eventually that will lead us to the appropriate teachers, teachings, and understanding. But to simlpy think we can jump into Right View without having established the basics first is seriously in error. There are no doubt SOME who have such wholesome accumulations from the past that their practice can begin observing realities as they arise without spending too much time slogging through the basics of dana and sila and kusala bhavana. But from what I've seen,, and from my own experience (I began in Zen, where they jsut toss you into emptiness without emphasizing these factors--and I made practically NO progress in practice until I adopted the more basic and mundane practices to help accumulate merit and purify heavy dosa), more often than not people seriously overestimate their own abilities in this regard, and think they can just skip the basics and go straightaway into the highest-level practices. > By `any kind of practice' I would include so-called `daily life' practice > as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include > listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the same > idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one action is > OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or view with > which the action is done. This is an important distinction. Again, Jon, we must recognize that there is always sakkayaditthi involved until it's terminated at the moment of sotapatti-magga-nana. So why get uptight about this unavoidable fact? That's just the way it's gonna be until Right View arises. So long as we're aware of this fact, I don't see much of a problem. Of course I believe it is essential to constantly study and meditate on the teachings on Right View, chruning, churning, churning, until the coarsest mistaken conceptions are seen for the delusions they are. And then that should be taken to the deepest levels in actual formal seated meditation whre one can observe these realities in their most subtle aspects, employing the practice of samatha, because by stilling the mind in such a way we have far better conditions for spotting the ever-incresingly subtle wrong understanding that arises in the mind from omoment-to-moment. Without this, the odds of even getting near to right understanding of what paramattha dhammas really are are is quite slim, in my opinion. Just to add a bit of detail, it is vital to understand what anatta really means, what anicca means, what dukkha means intellectually. That is a form of meditation in itself, in fact, this sort of intellectual meditation and pariyatti serves as the basis for knowing precisely what to look for in our concentration practice. I feel it important to emphasize we can't meditate with any expectation of a result (which is definitely wrong practice), nevertheless, it is ESSENTIAL that the appropriate conditions be present for insight to arise. They MUST be present, though even with the appropriate conditions for insight, there is is no guarantee true insight and Right Understanding will arise (which is why clinging to notions of progress in meditation is a hindrance), what IS certain is that if the appropriate conditions are absent, then insight will NEVER have opportunity to arise. This point cannot be emphasized enough. It is a basic fact. > But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, > if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise to > awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it is > almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with that > practice. It is inevitable anyway, Jon, but over time, through careful study AND MEDITATION on what we have studied (both in daily life AND in seated meditation where we devlop what the Buddha actually taught in the Suttas as Right Concentration (if we believe the Pali Suttas record the words of the Buddha), we will gradually loosen our fixed conceptions of self, and at some point, all the appropriate conditions will come together and true insight will arise fof the fiirst time and finally put to end all fabrications and conceptions of self. But we have to begin where we are, and that always means we begin with wrong view, with the idea of "self." This is just a simple, unavoidable fact, and again there's no reason to get overwrought about this fact. It just is. It is also key to understand that clinging too tightly to worries about the threat of self view is absolutely a hindrance! Our Dhamma practice need not be perfect, it need merely be "good enough." > So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, > the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than intended. I could not possibly disagree more with you on this, and the entire contents of this post, strenuously. Okay, enough harshness for the day! :) As you know I deeply respect you Jonothan, and truly appreciate our exchanges, and as always look forward to more, and especially to meet you in the flesh as soon as possible! :) 6827 From: Erik Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:45pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Derek > > --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Jon, > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of > > vipassana leads > > > to enlightenment. > > > > And I am sure you will agree that there is NO step in the Noble > > Eightfold Path called Right Vipassanaa! :-) > > An interesting point! You may like to consider the following. 'Vipassana > bhavana' refers to the development of the understanding that knows the > characteristic of a reality presently appearing. And as you know, this > understanding (aka wisdom) is the cetasika (mental factor) called 'panna'. Actually, I'm not denying the need for vipassana even a little--I just tossed that one out for fun. I interpret dhamma-vicaya, among the bojjhangas, as representing this. > Now this same panna cetasika is in fact the factor of the Eightfold path > called samma ditthi (right view). So there is actually a very direct > correlation her. Agreed. > However, I would like to question the significance you seem to place on > this connection. You refer to the factors of the Eightfold Path as > 'steps', and I believe this is how they are commonly viewed. I think this > perception is not particularly accurate or helpful. Steps, not steps, I see them more holistically, nevertheless, all are necessary. > To my reading of the > texts, the statement of the Eightfold Path is given to describe the > consciousness at that moment, to tell us *what is happening* at the level > of the citta, rather than to tell us *how to develop* towards achievement > of that path moment. It is a snapshot of the instant, rather than a > roadmap to the destination. I see them as representing both ways--the N8FP can be read and understood at many levels, lokiya as well as lokuttara, in terms of path-factors as well as guidelines for bhavana. 6828 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:06pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 2:30 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > Dear Anders > > > > > >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. > > > > > > Everything is worth noting for me Anders. > > > And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my assumed > >attack > > > on 'nationalism'. > > > >Yes, isn't it? Nonetheless, the test of those words lies in your own use of > >them, not some German philosopher's. > > > Yes but you cannot dismiss the fact that quotating the philosopher you > burden the message of a particular indeniable significance 'connected'. > Difficult noting without considering the cultural/social aspect in this case > for me. > Cultural conditionings are extremely hard to uproot. All of this that you are talking about here is just the fabrications of your own mind. If I had said that it was said by Ajahn Mun instead, I bet your perception of it would be quite different, wouldn't it? There are no 'but's when it comes to truth. Accept it or deny it, but no buts. 6829 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Just thought I'd add this to the thread: "But as for any priests or contemplatives endowed with right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, & right concentration: If they follow the holy life even when having made a wish, they are capable of obtaining results. If they follow the holy life even when having made no wish, they are capable of obtaining results. If they follow the holy life even when both having made a wish and having made no wish, they are capable of obtaining results. If they follow the holy life even when neither having made a wish nor having made no wish, they are capable of obtaining results. Why is that? Because it is an appropriate way of obtaining results. Bhumija Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn126.html mike 6830 From: Victor Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:00pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > Anyway, I hope it doesn't sound like I am anti-talking. I realize that insight > can come from sharing and clarifying understandings of all the items of the path. > I just think that it's important to practice mindfulness on the subtle level of > observing the reality of what is said, and discerning the mental images that > gather around our words. The reality observed is impermanent, dukkha, to be regarded as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self."* And that when we talk about 'self', even knowing that > this is a convention, we still let the word 'self' slip by as if beyond the > convention there is an object that the word imperfectly refers to. When there is speculation about "what a self is", the word "self" is used beyond the conventional usage as a pronoun. Examples for such usage are the expressions of the views "there is a self" and "there is no self".** Do we really > know 'self' and is it an object? A description of 'self' is a speculative view.*** Metta, Victor *Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html **Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html ***Maha-Nidana Sutta, The Great Causes Discourse http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn15.html 6831 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:41pm Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Erik >--- Jonothan Abbott wrote: >Erik: >Okay, a little forceful bluntness for you Jon (and please accept this >in the appropriate spirit--it is not spoken in anger, but in forceful >directness as your true friend in the Dhamma). > >Jon: > > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition >for the development of awareness/understanding, > >Agreed. >Jon: > > while meditating is not. > >Eric: >Jon, this is definitely wrong understanding of practice. Meditation >is an absolutely necessary condition for the type of development that >leads to Right View. At the risk of sounding dogmatic THERE IS NO >OTHER WAY, unless you consider any of the steps of the Noble >Eightfold Path to be optional. Erik, I am delighted!!!!!! I declare unconditional love to you! I am your devoted slave! But don't take it too literally...;-) You are my hero, my model, my guru! This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex (almost) Pure bliss, I have been projected into Jhana states with this assertion! Celestial visions and peacefulness... Eric you saved my day!!!! I surrender to your wisdom. From your devoted slave Cybele > >What is observing realities here and now if not a form of meditation? >There are so many ways to meditate, standing, sitting, you name it. >Some types of meditation are definitely more conducive than others to >insight, and some, if you accept wha tht Buddha actually taught in >the Suttas, such as Right Concentration, are necessary elements of >the path. Not optional, in other words. To say otherwise is to deny >the necessity of Right Concentration, to deny the Noble Eightfold >Path, to deny the most essential teachigns of Lord Buddha! To recap: > >"And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- >quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) >qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure >born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. >With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & >remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, >unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- >internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in >equanimity, mindful, & fully alert, and physically sensitive of >pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, and of him the >Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable >abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the >earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in >the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither >pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." (SN XLV.8) > >Do you agree or disagree with this, Jon? Because the arguments you've >provided given flat-out reject what the Buddha acctually taught in >the Suttas! To me the above passage is quite unambiguous. Forget the >Abhidhamma or anything else you've herd from anyone at the moment. Do >you or do you not accept this passage as a canonical teaching of the >Buddha? > > > 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to >have more > > understanding about the false idea of self and about why that >notion is > > not in accordance with reality, > >Agreed. > > > while meditating is not likely to be conducive to that. > >This is totally incorrect! Right Concentration is an essential aspect >of the path, if you accept the 4NT an N8FP as the core teachings of >the Buddha. If you really mean what you're saying here, your >arguments are flat-out denying the necessity of Right Concentration >as an aspect of the path, and to draw out the full impliation of your >contention, you're essentially rejecting the most essential aspect of >the Dhamma, and by extension the Buddha! > > > I don't expect my answer to be convincing, since my own >understanding of > > what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain >it to > > another. > >Then permit me to be blunt here, and say that if your understanding >of these realities is unclear, as you say, then I believe it is VERY >unwise to make categorical-sounding statements about the lack of need >for applied meditation. To say it is your mere opinion would be fine. >Then we can debate that. But to speak as if mere opinion is truth is, >in my opinion, to fall into serious error, not only for the reason >that sort of thinking has a negative effect on one's own >understandiong, but can also lead others directly into wrong forms of >praice if they take those opinions as gospel. And there are many who >may not yet have developed enough understanding of the Dhamma to be >able to discern opinion from actual knowledge, and it is for the sake >of these sentient beings my reply here is so forceful on these points. > >I am sorry to respond in a way that sounds so harsh, but as time goes >on I am becoming less and less convinced some of the methods being >expounded here in DSG can possibly lead to liberation, because what I >see are examples of some very serious distortions and >misrepresentations and serious omissions of the Buddha's actual, >canonical teachings as found in the Pali Suttas, which are accepted >by ALL extant schools of Buddhism I know of, Tibetan, Theravada, and >Zen included. > > > The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind > > that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing >awareness or > > understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue >of > > that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the >path, > > since there must be an idea of self involved (`if I do this >correctly, > > awareness/understanding may arise'). > >This is wrong understanding of practice again. Aagin, over tuime, >wrong views are loosened. But this doesn't happen all at once. Only >thourhg careful and applied development can this occur. It is "good >enough" to work even with wrong view at first. Again, therre needs to >be great merit for insight to arise at all. It's not random. We can >acccumulate merit even WITH wrong view, and eventually that will lead >us to the appropriate teachers, teachings, and understanding. But to >simlpy think we can jump into Right View without having established >the basics first is seriously in error. > >There are no doubt SOME who have such wholesome accumulations from >the past that their practice can begin observing realities as they >arise without spending too much time slogging through the basics of >dana and sila and kusala bhavana. But from what I've seen,, and from >my own experience (I began in Zen, where they jsut toss you into >emptiness without emphasizing these factors--and I made practically >NO progress in practice until I adopted the more basic and mundane >practices to help accumulate merit and purify heavy dosa), more often >than not people seriously overestimate their own abilities in this >regard, and think they can just skip the basics and go straightaway >into the highest-level practices. > > > By `any kind of practice' I would include so-called >`daily life' >practice > > as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include > > listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the >same > > idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one >action is > > OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or >view with > > which the action is done. > >This is an important distinction. Again, Jon, we must recognize that >there is always sakkayaditthi involved until it's terminated at the >moment of sotapatti-magga-nana. So why get uptight about this >unavoidable fact? That's just the way it's gonna be until Right View >arises. So long as we're aware of this fact, I don't see much of a >problem. Of course I believe it is essential to constantly study and >meditate on the teachings on Right View, chruning, churning, >churning, until the coarsest mistaken conceptions are seen for the >delusions they are. > >And then that should be taken to the deepest levels in actual formal >seated meditation whre one can observe these realities in their most >subtle aspects, employing the practice of samatha, because by >stilling the mind in such a way we have far better conditions for >spotting the ever-incresingly subtle wrong understanding that arises >in the mind from omoment-to-moment. Without this, the odds of even >getting near to right understanding of what paramattha dhammas really >are are is quite slim, in my opinion. > >Just to add a bit of detail, it is vital to understand what anatta >really means, what anicca means, what dukkha means intellectually. >That is a form of meditation in itself, in fact, this sort of >intellectual meditation and pariyatti serves as the basis for knowing >precisely what to look for in our concentration practice. > >I feel it important to emphasize we can't meditate with any >expectation of a result (which is definitely wrong practice), >nevertheless, it is ESSENTIAL that the appropriate conditions be >present for insight to arise. They MUST be present, though even with >the appropriate conditions for insight, there is is no guarantee true >insight and Right Understanding will arise (which is why clinging to >notions of progress in meditation is a hindrance), what IS certain is >that if the appropriate conditions are absent, then insight will >NEVER have opportunity to arise. This point cannot be emphasized >enough. It is a basic fact. > > > But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, > > if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise >to > > awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it >is > > almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with >that > > practice. > >It is inevitable anyway, Jon, but over time, through careful study >AND MEDITATION on what we have studied (both in daily life AND in >seated meditation where we devlop what the Buddha actually taught in >the Suttas as Right Concentration (if we believe the Pali Suttas >record the words of the Buddha), we will gradually loosen our fixed >conceptions of self, and at some point, all the appropriate >conditions will come together and true insight will arise fof the >fiirst time and finally put to end all fabrications and conceptions >of self. > >But we have to begin where we are, and that always means we begin >with wrong view, with the idea of "self." This is just a simple, >unavoidable fact, and again there's no reason to get overwrought >about this fact. It just is. It is also key to understand that >clinging too tightly to worries about the threat of self view is >absolutely a hindrance! Our Dhamma practice need not be perfect, it >need merely be "good enough." > > > So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, > > the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than >intended. > >I could not possibly disagree more with you on this, and the entire >contents of this post, strenuously. > >Okay, enough harshness for the day! :) As you know I deeply respect >you Jonothan, and truly appreciate our exchanges, and as always look >forward to more, and especially to meet you in the flesh as soon as >possible! :) > > > 6832 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:54pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Hi Anders > > Dear Anders > > > > > > > > >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. > > > > Me: > > > > Everything is worth noting for me Anders. > > > > And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my > > >> > > > >assumed attack on 'nationalism'. > > > > > >Yes, isn't it? Nonetheless, the test of those words lies in your own >use >of > > >them, not some German philosopher's. > > Me: > > Yes but you cannot dismiss the fact that quotating the philosopher you > > burden the message of a particular indeniable significance 'connected'. > > Difficult noting without considering the cultural/social aspect in this >case > > for me. > > Cultural conditionings are extremely hard to uproot. You: > >All of this that you are talking about here is just the fabrications of >your own mind. If I had said that it was said by Ajahn Mun instead, I bet >your >perception of it would be quite different, wouldn't it? >There are no 'but's when it comes to truth. Accept it or deny it, but no >buts. > I disagreee. You deny social and cultural reality: you deny INTENTIONS. The intentions of what a person declares can pollute the words or distort the significance or reveal another facet of the issue. Things are not so plain and transparent only because we would like them to be so. Conditionings and prejudices are there and manipulate reality. However we live inside a historycal, cultural and social context and being buddhists doesn't change the fact that you have to understand things in the right perspective. As I carry past accumulations and my background and this influence my mentality and choices in life, the very same applies to Nietszche or Ajah Mun. And yourself for that matters. Love Cybele 6833 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 3:54 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > I am ardent, passionate, intuitive, misruled, never abstract, always > referring to actual experience, very openminded to different sources of > knowledge. Sounds very Zen :-) But it's quite ironic that the school which is 'a teaching outside the scriptures' is also the school that has produced the most literature of any Buddhist school in China to this day. Seems the point is missed. > Sometimes communication just doesn't occur, the right conditions are not > there and my skills are limited by my own conditionings and I feel quite > frustrated, powerless. I get impatient. > I try to 'listen' to others and not only to my self just seeking reassurance > on my 'beliefs'. > But often I don't feel 'exchange', there is a kind of impermeability. > Whether no one is listening or I am totally unable to communicate in a > intelligible language for this list. Or both. > Perhaps I should consider the Zen saying: > > Say one word with your mouth shut! I tried, but all I got out was: "moun ouurgh" :-) > And as Erik say mind 'my own bhavana' instead of struggling to communicate. > Anyway whatever I have to express is certainly not so important uttering. Or > listening. I do appreciate your thoughts on the group myself and hope you decide to stay on. I hope that you do learn to be more patient, because that is really all that's needed on a group like this. Kind regards Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6834 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:28pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 4:19 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... > Translate sweetheart, my knowledge of Newton is only worse than my cooking > and I can tell you my cooking is cathastrofic. > > > > >Why limit yourself to males? Is this some sort of moralistic > >repression? :-) If I remember correctly, his fourth law was: For every 'action', a responding an equally strong re-action must take place. Something like that anyway. > Why? Because I am heterosexual but no prejudices. > Now you should ask me why I am so sure of being heterosexual considering > mostly I base my knowledge on actual experience... ;-) One of my gay friends tried to score me last year (he conveniently decided that I should be the first to know he was gay when he started kissing me). I considered it, but it just didn't appeal to me. 6835 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 4:15 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > OK. I thought perhaps you were referring to kamma and vipaka. But my > comment still applies. I was trying to make the point that understanding > 'cause and effect' is not the same as understanding the characteristic of > a reality presently appearing. Vipassana involves the latter. It is only > this that leads eventually to the eradication of defilements. Our task in > this life is to develop understanding at the level of vipassana to the > degree possible. To what extent there is understanding of dependent > origination is another matter. > Glad you agree, Anders! As I'm sure you know, applicable objects include > rupas as well as mental factors and consciousness, something that people > sometimes overlook. Everyone wants to know the mind, but no-one seems > interested in boring old visible object, sound etc. When you stare at them long enough, your fingers are actually quite visually interesting. :-) > In fact, we have > exactly the same misconceptions (ie. wrong view) about these objects when > they appear as we do about mental objects -- we take them for self (not > always 'our' self, but self nonetheless), so they need to be known as they > are, too. Yup. It's always 'I' am thinking, but that 'I' is another mental construct. A clever one at that, but if the path were easy... > It's there all the time, if only we knew how to recognise it. Again, I > think there is often a tendency, for obvious reasons, to want to see the > realities that are kusala rather than those that are akusala (eg, the > equanimity rather than the clinging). In fact, there is so much of the > latter but so little of the former. Yeah, there is often a tendency to dwell on one's attainments rather than faults, thinking 'I am equanimous about my clingings'. But already you are b eing dragged around around by another clinging when you do that (even though there is no 'I' to be dragged around). > Having the idea that certain realities are more desirable or more worth > knowing about than others can be an obstacle to the arising of awareness > of a reality appearing at the present moment. Yes, I recall a Mahayana Sutra which says: "All defilements are equal [in reality]. I have realized that equality through right practice. Therefore, I neither detach myself from the defilements nor abide in them. If a sramaga or brahmin claims that he has overcome passions and sees other beings as defiled, he has fallen into the two extreme views. What are the two? One is the view of eternalism, maintaining that defilements exist; the other is the view of nihilism, maintaining that defilements do not exist. " (http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen-writings/demonstration-of-buddhahood-s utra.htm) That's equanimity as I see it. 6836 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:22pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:25 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Yet anytime I hear "THIS IS THE ONLY WAY" regarding any aspect of the > path I only recall the last of the Four Bonds that wrongly > believes "This alone is truth..." Four Bonds? Would you mind elaborating on them for me? > I'm not disputing the necessity of insight, and yet, I wonder if it > really IS the only way. Perhaps there are other ways as well. I mean, > the Buddha NEVER went further in his own statements (to my limited > knowledge at least) than saying other teachers' systems and teachings > may not (MAY, not dogmatically WON'T)) to lead to the same result as > the Buddha's way. And that leaves things somewhat open, as I see it. Yup, me too. I'm glad to find that I am not alone in that regard. BTW, could you provide some sutta reference for that point? > Even in Zen, for example, you hear talk > of one's "Original Face" (which I think fits in with some f what > Ansders has been talking about if I read his points as he intended > them) and even, Indra forbid, Self! Even though all Zennists > adamantly deny self-existence and remain in perfect accord on this > point with all other systems of Dharma (this so-called "Self" in this > case has nothing to do with atta, not being "truly" or "inherently" > existent). > Does anyone else here have any thoughts on this? If so, I'd be quite > curious to hear other interpretations. Well, in Zen (and Mahayana in general) the notion of self=Nirvana is actually quite accepted. Those Zennists who claim that Zen teaches that there is no self should start to read some original Zen literature, rather than listening to modern day 'pop' Zen teachers. Hui-neng, the Sixth patriarch, who is generally acknowledged as the 'true' founder of Zen explicitly stated that Nirvana is the self-nature. Nagarjuna, whom most Mahayanist schools trace their lineage back to (or at least they would like to) said the same thing. I can provide tons of quotations, both from Zen and the canon Mahayana Sutras to support this if you would like to. The Shurangama Sutra even says: "If this [true Mind i.e.. Nirvana) is not your true self, then what is?" To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the belief that there is no self. 6837 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:06pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 6:22 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life > --- ppp wrote: > > Hi, Derek: > > It's very interesting, isn't it? Usually we think that we would be > > disgusted with seeing dead bodies. Somehow we wouldn't. > > (I had hard time living in Sri Lanka, encoutering snakes regulary. > > I HATE snakes. They caused me a real Shock more than a few times. I love snakes! They are so wonderful to touch. You could learn a trick or two from that Australian Steve Irwin fella. He's plain crazy ("Oh, would you look at that. This is one of the most poisonous snake in the world." And of course he has to go and pick it up in front of the camera). 6838 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:54pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 5:16 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > Anders and Erik > > Sorry to be coming in late (just when you're ready to drop the subject, > Anders). Well, I felt it was a stale-mate :-) > I think this represents the orthodox Theravadin doctrine. Thanks for the input. 6839 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:14 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west > > Dear Erik > Dear Derek > > > > >Erik, > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > >Me too! > > > >Derek. > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) Then you'll be happy to know that I only smoke cigars on special occasions. -:) I used to smoke regularly when I was around 14-15. Then I ran out of money and had to quit ("alright! It's either the beers or the cigarettes. What's it gonna be?"). Haven't bothered touching cigarettes since. On the other hand, I am sure my breath could knock down a cow when I wake up in the morning after a night out on bars and discos :-) 6840 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:36pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajaan Chaa ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 2:22 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajaan Chaa > Hi All, > > Thank you Cybele, Tadao, Bruce for your discussion of the relative > merits of the style and content of the teachings of Ajahn Chah. I > benefit immensely from all the posts on this list, though I lack the > ability to join in the debates. Even unpopular or unsupported views > teach me a lot, because I spend much time with Google seeking out > further information to help me understand. > This time I found a link which may be familiar to all of you, but > which may be helpful to any others like myself still struggling > across the misty flats with the mountain ahead yet to be climbed! > > http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/theravada-writings.htm > > Three or four complete books here by Ajahn Chah, as well as others. Haha, small world. That is actually my website that you managed to come across there. I am surprised that it's found on Google. 6841 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:32pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Erik ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 4:22 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Erik > Question 2: Is Theravaada Buddhism the only way? > > On that one, it seems that for me personally Theravaada Buddhism is > the best way, the one that's most suited to me. But I wouldn't say it > was the only way for everyone everywhere. I've found wise sayings of > Jesus, and in the Bhagavad Giitaa, and so on. And in real life I've > come across some wonderful teachers, not all of whom have been > Buddhists. Yes, teachings of Christians like Dionysius the Areopagite and Meister Eckart on God are so similar to the Buddha's teachings on Nibbana that I found it hard to believe at first. Different expedient means for different people. 6842 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Why don't you give it a try! Okay, here goes. There's various clues you can use to differentiate between earlier and later material. Tadao mentioned one a few days ago -- namely, the use of archaic word-forms in early material. I won't list all possible tools used to stratify the nikaaya-s. Instead I'll just refer to those that are relevant to our discussion of the Mahasatipa.t.thaana Sutta (DN 22). (1) Over time, ordinary words become used in specialized, technical meanings. Look at the word dhamma. In the early materials, it just means teaching. But later on it comes to have the specifically Buddhist meaning of mind-object. And in DN 22 we can already see the word used in this later sense. The fourth section of DN 22, the section on dhammaanupassanaa uses the word dhamma not only for teachings, but also for mind-objects such as the five hindrances. So, this is an indication of the lateness of the material. (2) Literary form. The early material consists of simple statements and propositions. Later materials take the form of explanations, analysis and commentary. Now, look at the presentation of the Four Noble Truths toward the end of DN 22. We have the usual statement that birth is suffering, old age is suffering, etc. But THEN in DN 22 we have analysis of each of these terms -- what is birth? what is old age? Each of these terms is commented upon within the sutta itself. The use of the commentarial formal is again an indication of relative lateness. (3) Elaboration of simple ideas comes after the simple ideas themselves. The early material presents sati (mindfulness) without much in the way of elaboration. But here we have a whole discourse on what just this one point means. Again, this suggests it is later than the simple proposition of the Noble Eightfold Path. (4) Absence of concentration meditation as part of the path. The Noble Eightfold Path is a core, early teaching -- it occurs almost everywhere. But in DN 22 we have sati without samaadhi. Since the early teachings and the Buddha's own practice included samaadhi, and this one doesn't, we can infer that DN 22 is late rather than early. Derek. 6843 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:55pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Anders Actually you are the only one who notice my messageand caught my intention, nobody gave a toss - this people here don't indulge to my whinings! ;-) >> > > I am ardent, passionate, intuitive, misruled, never abstract, always > > referring to actual experience, very openminded to different sources of > > knowledge. > >Sounds very Zen :-) But it's quite ironic that the school which is 'a >teaching outside the scriptures' is also the school that has produced the >most literature of any Buddhist school in China to this day. Seems the >point >is missed. Ahi,Ahi, Ahi you dare to read something else than Tipitaka? Horror, scandle, disgraceful, you should be ashamed of yourself!!! In another list I quotated a Zen teacher Charlotte Joko Beck and have been warned that by my heresy I could reborn in a lower realm. I am already resigned to be a cockroach. Well you will keep me company. > > > Sometimes communication just doesn't occur, the right conditions are not > > there and my skills are limited by my own conditionings and I feel quite > > frustrated, powerless. I get impatient. > > I try to 'listen' to others and not only to my self just seeking >reassurance > > on my 'beliefs'. > > But often I don't feel 'exchange', there is a kind of impermeability. > > Whether no one is listening or I am totally unable to communicate in a > > intelligible language for this list. Or both. > > Perhaps I should consider the Zen saying: > > > > Say one word with your mouth shut! >I tried, but all I got out was: "moun ouurgh" :-) My problem is that 'I cannot keep my mouth shut!!!' hehehehehehe > > > And as Erik say mind 'my own bhavana' instead of struggling to >communicate. > > Anyway whatever I have to express is certainly not so important >uttering. >Or listening. > >I do appreciate your thoughts on the group myself and hope you decide to >stay on. I hope that you do learn to be more patient, because that is >really all that's needed on a group like this. > >Kind regards >Anders Honore > Yes please indulge me, yes, yes. Love it! ;-) And regarding patience, is the most important thing on the path, otherwise we 'freak out'! LOve Cybele 6844 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi Anders > > > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > > > >Me too! > > > > > >Derek. > > > > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! > > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) > >Then you'll be happy to know that I only smoke cigars on special >occasions. -:) I used to smoke regularly when I was around 14-15. Then I >ran >out of money and had to quit ("alright! It's either the beers or the >cigarettes. What's it gonna be?"). Haven't bothered touching cigarettes >since. >On the other hand, I am sure my breath could knock down a cow when I wake >up >in the morning after a night out on bars and discos :-) > My...a bit more of romanticism. Like this you don't inspire me! Ah these scandinavians, no poetry, no latin sugary talk... ;-) Do an effort please. Cybele 6845 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:10pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:41 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) > > Dear Erik > > >--- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > >Erik: > >Okay, a little forceful bluntness for you Jon (and please accept this > >in the appropriate spirit--it is not spoken in anger, but in forceful > >directness as your true friend in the Dhamma). > > > >Jon: > > > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition > >for the development of awareness/understanding, > > > >Agreed. > > >Jon: > > > while meditating is not. > > > >Eric: > >Jon, this is definitely wrong understanding of practice. Meditation > >is an absolutely necessary condition for the type of development that > >leads to Right View. At the risk of sounding dogmatic THERE IS NO > >OTHER WAY, unless you consider any of the steps of the Noble > >Eightfold Path to be optional. > > > Erik, I am delighted!!!!!! > I declare unconditional love to you! > I am your devoted slave! But don't take it too literally...;-) > You are my hero, my model, my guru! > This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex (almost) > > Pure bliss, I have been projected into Jhana states with this assertion! > Celestial visions and peacefulness... > Eric you saved my day!!!! > I surrender to your wisdom. > > From your devoted slave > > Cybele hrmm, at the risk of ruining your good mood............ I disagree.... 6846 From: Victor Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: [snip] > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. If interested, you might want to refer to Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html Metta, Victor 6847 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:20pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:54 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > I disagreee. You deny social and cultural reality: you deny INTENTIONS. > The intentions of what a person declares can pollute the words or distort > the significance or reveal another facet of the issue. Intention is valid for the speaker of those words and his own progression. When it comes to the perception created in the mind of others of another saying, then it is a created image, not actual fact, but merely sense data which your own mind interprets, hence creating more volition. > Things are not so plain and transparent only because we would like them to > be so. Indeed, they aren't reliable at all! Yet you rely on the conditioned (and uncertain if the Buddha is to believed) information on Nietszche as a person to affect your own conditioned perception of his sayings. > Conditionings and prejudices are there and manipulate reality. Should say "and manipulate conditioned reality." > However we live inside a historycal, cultural and social context and being > buddhists doesn't change the fact that you have to understand things in the > right perspective. True. That's what I was aiming at. As long as you have a perspective, you're off the track. > As I carry past accumulations and my background and this influence my > mentality and choices in life, the very same applies to Nietszche or Ajah > Mun. > And yourself for that matters. All of this asserts that there is an 'I' being influenced. 6848 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:29pm Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Ken, I would like to contribute to this thread a little. --- <> wrote: > Jon > I really would like to know the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. I want to know exactly what those disciples in the > suttas meant when they exclaimed, "I take refuge in the Dhamma > from this day until life's end!" On many occasions, when I > have > been reading messages posted by you and other members of this list, > the penny has dropped.There are lucid moment when everything seems to > fall into place. I wish I could hold on to those moments but they go > and I find myself making the same mistakes -- thinking I can control > things. I think the most important thing is obviously hearing the dhamma, contemplating (considering) the dhamma, and knowing the characteristics of the realities as they truly are. Beyond that, I heard K. Sujin say that one of the meaning of taking refuge is to adopt other Buddha's teachings in increasing one kusala to "let go" of the akusala (when one is not doing kusala, for the most part, one has akusala). When I post a mesage to DSG, sometimes I am reminded of the Sutta that teaches us when to say something about the dhamma, that has the following pattern: (will have to look it up): can't get the person out of the akusala -> don't say it. can get the person out of the akusala, even when it may make the other person uncomfortable, and even it may be an uncomfortable position for the speaker -> know the proper time and the proper way and say it. Obviously, this teaching is very subtle, just like many other Buddha's teachings. What is dhamma? How do we know what we say will condition kusala in other people? How do you know what we say is correct and in accord with the Buddha teachings? What is kusala? What is akusala? What is the proper time and the proper way to say such things? I consider saying something that refers to the dhamma, refers to Vinaya, that would increase the kusala in other people (and myself) good things indeed. kom 6849 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:37pm Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Kirkpatrick Dear Robert How are you? You are very welcome, and glad to know that they make sense to you. But, there are some who found the full message to be not quite to their previous learning. So it seems I may need to do more work. By the way, I believe you had noticed the beginings of the Vithi tradtion can be found in the Pali Cannon itelf when you read the second section of the article. I have included abhidhamma.org in the Links page on the bodhiology website many weeks ago. With regards, Suan --- <> wrote: > --- Suan wrote: > > > > > > > What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you > meant > > that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts > > do not support it. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on > this > > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > > out. > > > ____________ > Dear Suan, > Thanks for your help on these matters. > I also read your excellent article showing that vinnana, citta and > mano are indeed synonyms - and have made a link to your site on > abhidhamma.org > robert 6850 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:35pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:00 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west > >On the other hand, I am sure my breath could knock down a cow when I wake > >up in the morning after a night out on bars and discos :-) > > My...a bit more of romanticism. > Like this you don't inspire me! > Ah these scandinavians, no poetry, no latin sugary talk... ;-) > Do an effort please. Well, I do speak a bit Italian and French that I could indulge in if that would make any difference ;o) 6851 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:33pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 4:55 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > Dear Anders > > Actually you are the only one who notice my messageand caught my intention, > nobody gave a toss - this people here don't indulge to my whinings! ;-) Always happy to be of assistance :-) > >Sounds very Zen :-) But it's quite ironic that the school which is 'a > >teaching outside the scriptures' is also the school that has produced the > >most literature of any Buddhist school in China to this day. Seems the > >point > >is missed. > > Ahi,Ahi, Ahi you dare to read something else than Tipitaka? > Horror, scandle, disgraceful, you should be ashamed of yourself!!! > In another list I quotated a Zen teacher Charlotte Joko Beck and have been > warned that by my heresy I could reborn in a lower realm. > I am already resigned to be a cockroach. > Well you will keep me company. Sure. It's the condemned lot of Bodhisattvas, you know. They have to be reborn somewhere, so why not hell? ;-) > Yes please indulge me, yes, yes. > Love it! ;-) > And regarding patience, is the most important thing on the path, otherwise > we 'freak out'! WhharrgghBuLUUU Hepza!!! 6852 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 0:31am Subject: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:25 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipatthana - Kom > > Yet anytime I hear "THIS IS THE ONLY WAY" regarding any aspect of the > > path I only recall the last of the Four Bonds that wrongly > > believes "This alone is truth..." > > Four Bonds? Would you mind elaborating on them for me? > > > I'm not disputing the necessity of insight, and yet, I wonder if it > > really IS the only way. Perhaps there are other ways as well. I mean, > > the Buddha NEVER went further in his own statements (to my limited > > knowledge at least) than saying other teachers' systems and teachings > > may not (MAY, not dogmatically WON'T)) to lead to the same result as > > the Buddha's way. And that leaves things somewhat open, as I see it. > > Yup, me too. I'm glad to find that I am not alone in that regard. BTW, could > you provide some sutta reference for that point? I can't recall the specific Sutta unfortunately, but I do recall clearly the intent. I guess you'll just have to trust me on this one :) Regarding the Four Bonds from the Abhidhamma: (iv) There are four (bodily) Ties (5): 1. Covetousness, 2. Ill will, 3. Adherence to rites and ceremonies, 4. Dogmatic belief that 'this alone is truth'. Reference: http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_7.htm > > Even in Zen, for example, you hear talk > > of one's "Original Face" (which I think fits in with some f what > > Ansders has been talking about if I read his points as he intended > > them) and even, Indra forbid, Self! Even though all Zennists > > adamantly deny self-existence and remain in perfect accord on this > > point with all other systems of Dharma (this so-called "Self" in this > > case has nothing to do with atta, not being "truly" or "inherently" > > existent). > > Does anyone else here have any thoughts on this? If so, I'd be quite > > curious to hear other interpretations. > > Well, in Zen (and Mahayana in general) the notion of self=Nirvana is > actually quite accepted. Okay, let's forget the linguistic term "self" altogether and use the far less confusing term (for some! :) "emptiness,' instead. That should clarify I think. Emptiness=anatta in definition, so when we say "no self" in the Pali system it refers specifically to "self-nature" of things--"atta," in other words. See Vis. XXI.53, "Discerning Formations as Void" for what anatta refers to. XXI.55 "...he discerns [...] the eye (etc.) as (i) void of a self, (ii) or of a property of a self, (iii) or of permanence, (iv) or of lastingness, (v) or of eternalness, (vi) or of non-subjectness to change..." Also se Vis. XX.16-- detailing "absence ;f 'core,'" another take on this. Anatta (no-self) then implies that all dhammas are void of intrinsic, true, non-produced identity. The above six meditations are ways of negating the wrong view of "self" or "atta." It is what all dhammas are void of. So if you want to use the term "self" you have to be REALLY careful, because it can be confusing. This is why I much prefer "emptiness," because there is far less confusion. There is no disagreement that all dharmas are empty in ANY system, Theravada, Zen, Tibetan. it is even quiet trivial to reason to--that no phenomena have "core" or "true existence." Where there are many points of debate, though, is what constitutes emptiness, particularly between schools. The Yogacaras, for example, suggested that "mind" exists absolutely, "by way of its own entitiness." That there is "thingness" there that is uncaused. This entails not only a logical absurdity, it implies "self existence" or rather, to be more precise, "true existence." > Those Zennists who claim that Zen teaches that > there is no self should start to read some original Zen literature, rather > than listening to modern day 'pop' Zen teachers. Hui-neng, the Sixth > patriarch, who is generally acknowledged as the 'true' founder of Zen > explicitly stated that Nirvana is the self-nature. We have to be VERY careful here in the terms used. This is why I said that I do not disagree when one mentions, as in Zen, "Original Face." Nibbana is NOT annihilation, that we can all agree on. It is NOT nothingness, though signless. Where all of this becomes a problem is when you have schools that use the term "self" to refer to one thing and other schools use self to refer to something else altogether. This is why I find emptiness less confusing as a term and way of describing anatta. Nowhere does Nagarjuna imply any notion of self, either, anders. I will be happy to quote you chapter and verse from the Mulamadhyamakakarika where Nagarjuna thoroughly rejects any notion of "essence" or "true nature"--what the anatta refers to when it refers to "self," or atta. Atta is a totally impossible condition that implies non-production. Nagarjuna, in the MMK, simply threads the Scylla and Charybdis of the two extreme views of annihilationism and eternalism by noting there is not true being, not no true being, nor both, nor neither. But this is merely a strategic way of nuking the fabrications (papanca) and clinging to views. As Nagarjuna said: emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. But the relinquishing of all views is NOT annihilation. And non-self-existence is NOT the extreme of annihilationism, which implies that a composed phenomenon is non-produced, meaning, it has always been and always will be, and is not subject to conditional arising. > Nagarjuna, whom most > Mahayanist schools trace their lineage back to (or at least they would like > to) said the same thing. I can provide tons of quotations, both from Zen and > the canon Mahayana Sutras to support this if you would like to. Please do! The > Shurangama Sutra even says: "If this [true Mind i.e.. Nirvana) is not your > true self, then what is?" As an aside, the Surangama Sutra is considered by some to be apocryphal and some challenge its accuracy on some points, though I don't recall specifically which ones. I have read some of it (particularly the various "experiences" one can have and mistake for supramundane wisdom, which I found very useful--even more helpful than the list of the "corruptions to insight" listed in the Visuddhimagga XX.105 for example). I wouldn't use the Surangama in a debate among even some Mahayana schools, though, since not all accept it. And there is riotous debate on the Yogacara school's (Mind Only) interpretation of emptiness in my lineage, for example--it's demonstrated to be a species of wrong view because it asserts that mind "truly exists" (meaning is NOT empty of intrinsic existence). But again, this is for pedagogical purposes only, to help one eradicate notions that even "mind" exists "truly" or "by way of its own entitiness." As Nagarjuna said, those who believe "emptiness is a 'thing' I declare incurable!" But again, these pedagogical strategies are merely skill-in-means to get past clinging to views and the tendency to see things as exiting "truly"--especially the "self" (in the puggala sense). For example, I don't reject either the Yogacara school when interpreted correctly, not even the Thathagatagharba doctrines, because many have misunderstood their inner meaning and makes a hash of them due to improper interpretation and right understanding of their pedagogical intent. My favorite rendering on emptiness and dependent origination, and how they fit together, is from Je Tsongkhapa's (founder of the Tibetan Gelug-pa lineage and guru to the First Dalai Lama) "Fourteen Root Verses on Lam Rim (Stages on the Path), dealing with Right View: "A person is 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 have 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 have no longer alternate, come together; just seeing that interdependence never fails brings realization that destroys how you hold objects, and then your analysis with view complete. "In addition, the appearance prevents the existence extreme; emptiness that of non-existence, and if you see how emptiness shows cause and effect. You will never be stolen off by extreme views." This echoes what is found in the Visuddhimagga (XVII.21) in the chapter on dependent origination: "The first component [paticca] will deny the false view of eternity And so on, and the second [samuppada] will prevent The nihilistic type of view and others like it, While the two together show the true way is meant." Though this is not an exact match semantically, it is in meaning, since paticca directly implies anatta (indeed Nagarjuna equates the two as inseparable, so this should brook only a few semantic quibbles- -the meanings are identical though). > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. It's there, if you understand what is meant by "no self" is the direct equivalent of the meaning of emptiness. It's the language thing again, and this is perhaps one reason I think understanding the exact definitions of the terms we use to communicate with each other is vital. Fret not Anders. It took me a while to get comfortable with the language of the Tipitaka. Trust me when i say it all hangs together, and if one understands the actual meaning of what's being pointed at, one will not find even a hair of contradiction between the Mahayana and the Pali presentations. 6853 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 0:58am Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > hrmm, at the risk of ruining your good mood............ I > disagree.... Rather than merely saying you disagree, I'd be very interested in hearing specifics on why you disagree. What point do you disagree with--that Right Concentration is an essential factor of the N8FP? That jhana meditaion is unnecessary (if you disagree on that you are in good company here, though not in such good company elsewhere, all of Mahayana Buddhism for example)? Let's haev at it, Anders! :) 6854 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 2:27am Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Erik, I am delighted!!!!!! > I declare unconditional love to you! As you do to all other sentient beings. At least I hope! :) > I am your devoted slave! But don't take it too literally...;-) I don't believe in slavery; I always pay for all services rendered, one way or another. (And often, in retrospect, far too dearly.) > You are my hero, my model, my guru! I love your twisted sense of humor Cybele! :) As if I were guru material. Hell, I haven't even managed to give up smoking! > This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex (almost) If you don't think jhanas are/can be better than sex, all I can say is keep practicing. So rarely is sex anything other than a recipe for dukkha of the very worst sort--so much distracting bullshit and nonsese. About the only honest form of sex, in my opinion, is prostitution. > Pure bliss, I have been projected into Jhana states with this assertion! > Celestial visions and peacefulness... Enjoy the bliss while it lasts Cybele--just don't do what I've done far too many times and get upset when it too, like all impermanent things, inevitably passes. > I surrender to your wisdom. The only wisdom to surrender to is to your own innate wisdom, the expression of your true, uncontrived nature. And I know you're only kidding with me in all this here as is your wont, but it still reminds me of one of the most important points in studying the Dharma, which is to always focus on the teachings, NOT the teacher. And I'm not implying from this I consider myself anyone's teacher. I still consider myself very much a student. 6855 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 2:51am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Jon, You're correct that "steps" is a misleading word to describe the parts of the Noble Eightfold Path. That was sloppy translation on my part. I guess "limbs" would be a better word, although talking about a path having limbs does sound odd in English. ("Nobre Caminho Óctuplo" for my Brazilian friends -- I just learned that today!) As for claiming that Right View (sammaa di.t.thi) and pańńa are the same thing, I think you're conflating the eight limbs to point where it becomes a "Noble 1-fold Path." It's true that there is a sutta (Mahaa Cattaariisaka Sutta, MN117) that shows how all the parts of the path are related to each other: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html But even here Right View is said to be the "forerunner" of everything else, and NOT a substitute or equivalent for everything else. In fact, this sutta suggests that right concentration (sammaa samaadhi) is what's most important, and everything else plays the part of its supports and prerequisites. Derek. 6856 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:22am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:12 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: [snip] > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. >If interested, you might want to refer to >Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html Thanks. I am writing a small paper on it myself for my website, which I'll probably post here, so the hardcore Pali translators can tear the wrong usage of words apart. :-) 6857 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:43am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:58 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > hrmm, at the risk of ruining your good mood............ I > disagree.... >Rather than merely saying you disagree, I'd be very interested in hearing specifics on why you disagree. What point do you disagree with--that Right Concentration is an essential factor of the N8FP? That jhana meditaion is unnecessary (if you disagree on that you are in good company here, The Theravada perspective, I'd 'cover' with this link: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/jhanas/jhanas06.htm > though not in such good company elsewhere, all of Mahayana Buddhism for example)? Let's haev at it, Anders! :) All of Mahayana? Well, there's a generic statement I don't subscribe to :-) As many times before, I'd direct you to the Platform Sutra of Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch of Zen (available at my website). There's one who doesn't emphasise seated meditation. I'm sure there are others as well, but I haven't got the quotes on hand. Get back to you later, while you read the Platform Sutra? 6858 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:47am Subject: No-Self - Anders Part 2 Note: This little paper of mine is not directed at Theravada Buddists as such, but rather spiritualists in general, hence some of the remarks which may seem irrelevant to most people here. Anyway, I'll look forward to seeing you guys tearing my arguments to shreads with you extensive quotations and refutations of the translations I've used :-) Self & Buddhism What is self? In my own, opinion the one who made it most clearly what is not the self was Gautama Buddha when he taught about the five skandhas (heaps) which are categorically not the self, but because of the ignorance of mankind, they mistake it to be their selves: "Form, monks, is not self. If form were the self, this form would not lend itself to disease. It would be possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' But precisely because form is not self, form lends itself to disease. And it is not possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' Feeling is not self... Perception is not self... [Mental] fabrications are not self... Consciousness1 is not self." (SN XXII.592) Elsewhere he teaches that all things are ultimately impermanent, unsatisfactory and not the self. From this, it would follow that what is the Self is that which is not impermanent and unsatisfactory, meaning Nirvana (Nibbana in Pali), which is generally accepted in Mahayana Buddhism (and most other spiritual traditions) but not much in the Theravada tradition, which is the oldest school of Buddhism still alive. There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though. In the Buddha's second sermon (SN XXII.59) that he held after his awakening to the Unconditioned, it is even implied that Nibbana is the self. The Buddha explains how the five skandhas are impermanent, and asks twice: "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" Thus it is implied that what is fitting to regard as the self is that which is not inconstant, stressful and subject to change, i.e. Nibbana. The Buddha did refute just about every possible view on self imaginably though: "To what extent, Ananda, does one delineate when delineating a self? Either delineating a self possessed of form and finite, one delineates that 'My self is possessed of form and finite.' Or, delineating a self possessed of form and infinite, one delineates that 'My self is possessed of form and infinite.' Or, delineating a self formless and finite, one delineates that 'My self is formless and finite.' Or, delineating a self formless and infinite, one delineates that 'My self is formless and infinite.' Now, the one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as possessed of form and finite, either delineates it as possessed of form and finite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become possessed of form and finite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self possessed of form and finite lies latent [within that person]. The one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as possessed of form and infinite, either delineates it as possessed of form and infinite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become possessed of form and infinite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self possessed of form and infinite lies latent [within that person]. The one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as formless and finite, either delineates it as formless and finite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become formless and finite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self formless and finite lies latent [within that person]. "The one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as formless and infinite, either delineates it as formless and infinite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become formless and infinite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self formless and infinite lies latent [within that person]." (DN 15) Obviously, it would be much easier for him to simply deny the existence of a self, period, rather than go to such lengths to deny such different views of self, if it really was the case that there was no self, yet there is no such statement to be found in the Pali Canon. A curious note is the inclusion of a 'formless and infinite self' in this case, but it should be noted that the Buddha refers to a fixed view of such a self and the delineations that a person with such a view holds are all, as with the rest of the delineations, to be regarded as erroneous. I will elaborate below. Another passage which is interesting in this regard is the following (MN 2): "As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self ...or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self ...or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self ...or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine -- the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions -- is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress." Of interest is the last self mentioned, "the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity", an obvious pointer to Nibbana, yet this is not actually refuted. It is merely stated that this is not the same as the [false] self "that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions." Notice the views of self and no self are both stated as inappropriate. The reason for that, as made clear in the above passage about the delineations of self, is that all views of self carry some inherent inconsistencies simply because they are views, and as such grounded in ignorance and thus not in accord with true reality. As the Buddha himself said when asked what view or position he held on the nature of reality (MN 72): "A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata [Buddha] has done away with." See, is self really is Nibbana, how could it possibly be defined? Since any perception of self is categorically not the self (the skandha of perception having been refuted by the Buddha as not-self), it would be futile to even talk of self. The moment we affirm a self, we are off the track, because that cannot possibly be the self! To envision Nibbana in any way (as being the self, not-self or anything else for that matter) is erroneous, since that would require you to form an image of Nibbana, something that it is inherently free of itself. As long as you harbour any perception or view of self or Nibbana, then you are not free from the conditioned cycle of existence, you are still bound by ignorance. One of the most heavily debated discourses in the Pali Canon which has been interpreted in a variety of ways, is the one where the Buddha is asked if there is a self or not (SN XLIV.10) and simply remains silent. What I propose, something that undoubtly was not the Buddha's original intention of this silence, is that this silence is taken not as a mode of communication, but as an actual way of understanding self. Since any view of self is inherently wrong and an obstruction on the path, simply maintain no position whatsoever on such matters, and practise for the uprooting of the inherent and habituated views that "you" still harbour. When the awakening which unquestionably follows upon the uprooting of self-identity comes, you will know the truth of the matter for yourself, without having to resort to views, which ultimately, are not the self and cannot lead you to realise the true nature of self. I only discuss this matter from the point of view of the Pali Canon and Theravada Buddhism, because in Mahayana Buddhism (and most other spiritual traditions aimed at the ending of the conditioned cycle of existence), it is generally acknowledged that Nirvana is to be equated with the true self-nature (or at least it should be acknowledged by those Mahayanists who bothers to read the Canon Mahayana scriptures, such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra and the Shurangama Sutra, which makes it quite clear that self-nature is Nirvana). Nonetheless, as the Buddha pointed out, any view of self, existent or non-existent, is still an obstruction towards true awakening, and this holds true regardless of whether you are a Theravada or Mahayana Buddhist or belong to any other spiritual tradition for that matter. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1: When The Buddha speaks of consciousness here, he refers to the grasping consciousness which dwells on objects, as opposed to the Unconditioned Awareness (Nirvana) which doesn't dwell anywhere. 2: These abbreviations found throughout this text, are references to specific suttas (Pali: discourses) of the Buddha. To read these suttas and more in their entirety, please visit: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ 3: The scriptural body of Theravada Buddhism, the Pali Canon is the oldest collection of sermons spoken by the Buddha or his students 6859 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:31 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders A very interesting post here. --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: >> Well, in Zen (and Mahayana in general) the notion of self=Nirvana is >> actually quite accepted. >Okay, let's forget the linguistic term "self" altogether and use the far less confusing term (for some! :) "emptiness,' instead. That should clarify I think. Yup. >Anatta (no-self) then implies that all dhammas are void of intrinsic, true, non-produced identity. The above six meditations are ways of negating the wrong view of "self" or "atta." It is what all dhammas are void of. So if you want to use the term "self" you have to be REALLY careful, because it can be confusing. This is why I much prefer "emptiness," because there is far less confusion. There is no disagreement that all dharmas are empty in ANY system, Theravada, Zen, Tibetan. it is even quiet trivial to reason to--that no phenomena have "core" or "true existence." Well, please see part 2 of this thread for my view on this (I agree with Nagarjuna's quotations by you, btw). >Where there are many points of debate, though, is what constitutes emptiness, particularly between schools. The Yogacaras, for example, suggested that "mind" exists absolutely, "by way of its own entitiness." That there is "thingness" there that is uncaused. This entails not only a logical absurdity, it implies "self existence" or rather, to be more precise, "true existence." Or Nirvana? >We have to be VERY careful here in the terms used. This is why I said that I do not disagree when one mentions, as in Zen, "Original Face." Nibbana is NOT annihilation, that we can all agree on. It is NOT nothingness, though signless. Where all of this becomes a problem is when you have schools that use the term "self" to refer to one thing and other schools use self to refer to something else altogether. This is why I find emptiness less confusing as a term and way of describing anatta. Yup, I'll buy that one. >Nowhere does Nagarjuna imply any notion of self, either, anders. I will be happy to quote you chapter and verse from the Mulamadhyamakakarika where Nagarjuna thoroughly rejects any notion of "essence" or "true nature"--what the anatta refers to when it refers to "self," or atta. Damn second hand quotations. Hold on for a few days while I get a hold of the source... >Please do! And here we go..... (this will be a damn long post) 1. The Awakening of Faith Shastra (very much canon in most schools): "The Mind, though pure in its self-nature from the beginning, is accompanied by ignorance." ..."From the beginning, Suchness in its nature is fully provided with all excellent qualities; namely, it is endowed with the light of great wisdom, the qualities of illuminating the entire universe, of true cognition and mind pure in its self-nature; of eternity, bliss, Self, and purity; of refreshing coolness, immutability, and freedom." 2. The Mahayana Realm Without Distinction Shastra, by Bodhisattva: "What is its self-nature? The self-nature is to be untainted by clingings, Like the fire jewel, space, and water. The light Dharma that is consummated Is just like the king of mountains" .... "Arriving at the seat of Buddhahood Is not called bodhicitta But rather is called the worthy (aarhan), The liberation of purity, self, joy, and constancy" 3. THE LION'S ROAR OF QUEEN SRIMALA SUTRA: "When sentient beings have faith in the Tathagata and those sentient beings conceive [him] with permanence, pleasure, self, and purity, they do not go astray. Those sentient beings have the right view." 4. Maha Parinirvana Sutra: "The world renouncer [enlightened one] also has permanence, pleasure, self, and purity.".... "The self is the Tathagata."..... "If one wishes to depart from the four inversions, he should know thus the permanent, pleasant, self, and pure."...... "Bhiksus, you should know that the heretics have said that the self is like the insect who eats wood, mates, and makes offspring merely. This is why the Tathagata proclaims that in the Buddha-dharma there is no self. It is for the sake of taming sentient beings, knowing the time, and that such selflessness has been the cause and condition that he also says that there is a self. He is like that physician who well knew the elixirs that were medicinal and not medicinal. It is not like that self the ordinary man reckons to be his own or the ordinary man who meets someone and reckons that they have a self. Some have said that it is as large as the thumb and finger, some that it is like the mustard seed, some that it is like a grain a dust. The Tathagata says that the self is not like any of these. This is why he says that things (dharmas) are selfless. Really it is not that there is no self. What is the self? If something is the true, the real, the constant, the master, the foundation with a nature that is unchanging, this is called the self. Just as that great doctor well understand the medicinal elixir, the Tathagata is also so. For the sake of sentient beings, in the Dharmas that he speaks there really is a self. You and the four assembles must thus cultivate the Dharma."...... "The worldly person surely says that there is a self. And those in the Buddha Dharma also say that there is a self. Although worldly person says there is a self, there is no the Buddha-nature [in that]. This then is called being in the selfless and giving rise to the idea of a self. This is called an inverted view. Those of the Buddha Dharma have a self that is the Buddha-nature." 5. Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra: "'Self' and 'selflessness' are dualistic. Since the existence of self cannot be perceived, what is there to be made ' selfless'? Thus, the nondualism of the vision of their nature is the entrance into nonduality." (basically an argument for both sides. Or neither!) 6. Shurangama Sutra: "Ananda, you now want to cause your seeing, hearing, sensation, and cognition to return to and tally with the eternity, bliss, true self, and purity of the Tathagata." 7. Platform Sutra: "Learned Audience, our Essence of Mind (literally, self-nature) which is the seed or kernel of enlightenment (Bodhi) is pure by nature, and by making use of this mind alone we can reach Buddhahood directly." 8. Zen Teachings of Bodhidharma (founder of Zen): "All others, trapped by the impure mind and entangled by their own karma, are mortals. They drift through the three realms and suffer countless afflictions and all because their impure mind obscures their real self."..... "That which is truly so, the indestructible, passionless Dharma-self, remains forever free of the world's afflictions." 9. Zen Teachings of Hui Hai: "The noumenon is profoundly mysterious and not easily revealed, whereas names and forms are easy to grasp. Those who do not perceive their self-nature refuse to believe in it; those who do perceive their self-nature are called Buddhas." 10. Zen Teachings of Linji (Rinzai): "If you want to be free, get to know your real self. It has no form, no appearance, no root, no basis, no abode..." 11. Genjo Koan (by Dogen): "When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. But dharma is already correctly transmitted; you are immediately your original self." 12. Zen Teachings of Huangpo: "Mind and self-nature are not different. One's self-nature is Mind. One's Mind is self-nature. It is frequently said that the recognition and realization of this identification of mind and self-nature is beyond comprehension."....."Since there is, in reality, neither self nor non-self, how then can there be a Buddha to save or sentient beings to be saved?" ----------------- Well, I hope that's enough for now. Let me know if you need any more :-) >As an aside, the Surangama Sutra is considered by some to be apocryphal and some challenge its accuracy on some points, though I don't recall specifically which ones. I have read some of it (particularly the various "experiences" one can have and mistake for supramundane wisdom, which I found very useful--even more helpful than the list of the "corruptions to insight" listed in the Visuddhimagga XX.105 for example). Yup, it's great in that regard. >I wouldn't use the Surangama in a debate among even some Mahayana schools, though, since not all accept it. And there is riotous debate on the Yogacara school's (Mind Only) interpretation of emptiness in my lineage, for example--it's demonstrated to be a species of wrong view because it asserts that mind "truly exists" (meaning is NOT empty of intrinsic existence). But again, this is for pedagogical purposes only, to help one eradicate notions that even "mind" exists "truly" or "by way of its own entitiness." As Nagarjuna said, those who believe "emptiness is a 'thing' I declare incurable!" Haha, he was a great guy, that Nagarjuna. > But again, these pedagogical strategies are merely skill-in-means to get past clinging to views and the tendency to see things as exiting "truly"--especially the "self" (in the puggala sense). >For example, I don't reject either the Yogacara school when interpreted correctly, not even the Thathagatagharba doctrines, because many have misunderstood their inner meaning and makes a hash of them due to improper interpretation and right understanding of their pedagogical intent. > My favorite rendering on emptiness and dependent origination, and how they fit together, is from Je Tsongkhapa's (founder of the Tibetan Gelug-pa lineage and guru to the First Dalai Lama) "Fourteen Root Verses on Lam Rim (Stages on the Path), dealing with Right View: >"A person is 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 have 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 have no longer alternate, come together; just seeing that interdependence never fails brings realization that destroys how you hold objects, and then your analysis with view complete. >"In addition, the appearance prevents the existence extreme; emptiness that of non-existence, and if you see how emptiness shows cause and effect. You will never be stolen off by extreme views." Great quotes. Thanks. > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. >It's there, if you understand what is meant by "no self" is the direct equivalent of the meaning of emptiness. It's the language thing again, and this is perhaps one reason I think understanding the exact definitions of the terms we use to communicate with each other is vital. Fret not Anders. It took me a while to get comfortable with the language of the Tipitaka. Trust me when i say it all hangs together, and if one understands the actual meaning of what's being pointed at, one will not find even a hair of contradiction between the Mahayana and the Pali presentations. Well, I am looking forward to your comments (in both part 1 and 2). Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6860 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:46am Subject: Pali Tadao (and others), Did you see someone has set up a group specifically for Pali? It's: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali Regards, Derek. 6861 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life HI, Ken: Thank you for your reply with respect to "dead matters". I knew clearly what your point was. Somehow I've twisted your point (just to exemply that any thing can be a condition for experiencing kusal cittas). tadao 6862 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:30am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi, Derek: Every thing is conditioned. With respect to snakes, I developed "dislikes" towards them since neibhour-hood kids used to harass me by using them. That bad feelings with my childhood experiences must be the main reason why I do like snakes. (However, when I stair at their eyes, I can see how beautiful they are.) Again, a non-Dhamm talk! Please forgive me. tadao 6863 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Derek: Thank you for your description of how to judge whether some texts are older than the others. To add to your descriptions, I would like to say, it is safe to say that the original words of the Buddham had been memoried as verse forms. So we can be very certain that these verses compiled, for instance, as "Dhamma-pada" and "Sutta-nipaata" are very much the exact words the Buddham may have uttered. Many of these verses contain archaic word formation. (And Giger's book must the best tool to understand these forms, which are not mentioned in introductory grammar books, such as Warder's.) tadao 6864 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Hi, Derek: Thank you for the information on the Pali Weg site. Somebody once told me that there is CD's or Web site which list all the Pali Tiplitaka texts. Are you aware of such a material? (I am asking the question becuase here I do not have many Pali texts) tadao 6865 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:57am Subject: Re: Pali --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > Thank you for the information on the Pali Weg site. > Somebody once told me that there is CD's or Web site > which list all the Pali Tiplitaka texts. Are you > aware of such a material? (I am asking the question > becuase here I do not have many Pali texts) tadao Hi, Tadao, The one I use is http://www.tipitaka.org/ where the VRI people have made available the entire Tipitaka, including commentaries and subcommentaries. It's free! (That other link was just a discussion group like this one, but concentrating on Pali.) Derek. 6866 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 2:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali Hi, Derek: Fantastic!!! I will check the site. Can you do "word-search" easily? (There is one sntactic construction I am interested in, which is called 'cognate object' construction: e.g., kamma.m karoti, where the object noun and the verb share the same root with rather vacous semantic significance attached to the object noun.) If word-search is possible, I can collect all the instances of the construction.) Sorry, Again, not a Dhamma talk. You can see why I disrobed. I have strong attachment to "learning" rather than to the development of "detachment". tadao 6867 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:23am Subject: Re: Pali Hi, Tadao, --- ppp wrote: > Can you do "word-search" easily? No. For Pali word search CD-ROMs, I think Sean is very knowledgeable. You can contact him on the list for Pali translators: http://www.smartgroups.com/message/listbydate.cfm?GID=269858 > (There is one sntactic construction I am > interested in, which is called 'cognate > object' construction: e.g., kamma.m karoti, > where the object noun and the verb share the > same root with rather vacous semantic > significance attached to the object noun.) That's a great way of putting it -- "vacuous semantic significance"! On the new Yahoo! group I mentioned ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali ) we are discussing MN 18 and there's a good one in there: phassapańńatti.m pańńaapessati. > Sorry, Again, not a Dhamma talk. No problem for me ... I love this stuff. But maybe the others here are getting tired of Pali talk on the list? > You can see > why I disrobed. I didn't know you were a monk. Have you already told your story on this list? I'd like to know more. Derek. 6868 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali Hi, Derek: Yes, I think that most of the DSG subsribers already know that (when I was much much younger) I spent 8 years as a monk in Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. (Jonothan, Sarah, Kun Nina, and Kun Sujin are all my old friends/teachers.) tadao 6869 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Victor wrote: > A description of 'self' is a speculative view.*** I think I understand your answer, which in a sense is a caution not to speculate about the nature of the self. My point, however, is that there is an underlying concept or speculation or assumption about self inherent in the mind when we talk about it, whether conventionally or not, and that this ought to be discerned with mindfulness. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6870 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:31 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:25 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipatthana - Kom > Nagarjuna, in the MMK, simply threads the Scylla and Charybdis of the two extreme views of annihilationism and eternalism by noting there is not true being, not no true being, nor both, nor neither. But this is merely a strategic way of nuking the fabrications (papanca) and clinging to views. As Nagarjuna said: emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. But the relinquishing of all views is NOT annihilation. And non-self-existence is NOT the extreme of annihilationism, which implies that a composed phenomenon is non-produced, meaning, it has always been and always will be, and is not subject to conditional arising. And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders strikes a telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named Dharmatroll, who likes to write stuff like that :-) Anyway, I found the exact quote from Junie: "To him who understands the meaning in the teaching of the Buddha and grasps the truth of derived name, he has taught that there is "I"; but to one who does not understand the meaning in the teachings of the Buddha and does not grasp the truth of the derived name, He has taught, there is no "I." - Nagarjuna - I am still trying to find out where the quote comes from. 6871 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Conditions and Insight - Sarah IN BKK!!!!!;-) Dear Erik, Bruce, Rob & Sukin, --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter Abbott > wrote: > > Whew! What a fun (and challenging) this exchange is for me! :) Such fun and so challenging that.... > And Sarah, you and Jon need to go with your impulses and hop on that > plane (what is it, a three-hour ride?), ......following yr advice, for once Erik (and thanks a lot to Cathay for an unbelievavle 2nts promotion), we'll see you after that 3hr hop TOMORROW (Fri) arriving midday, departing Sun afternoon. So We'll have live exchanges as well and please keep everyone here updated with them as I'm sure they'll all want to hear your version of your exchanges with everyone! I'm very glad you and Sukin have already got together. Staying at the Peninsula hotel. Any of you are very welcome to come over in the afternoon if you're free (say after 3pm) or on Sat morning/breakfast/early lunch before the afternoon discussion as we're on the way.....let us know OFF-list w/yr ph no. etc Rob, I just noted that you won't be arriving til Sat pm- look f/w to seeing you on Sunday morning. You're welcome to join us for b/fast on Sun morning. (and besides I want to give a huge hug > to everyone). Lots of hugs (or wais coming)..;-)) and really looking f/w to meeting you and Bruce and catching up with Rob and Sukin. Sarah p.s DEREK, I was told you'd be there but I think that was a mistake as you said here at the end of August....if it's changed, of course you're included in this! 6872 From: Binh Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:00pm Subject: Nagarjuna ... Re: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Nagarjuna - > > I am still trying to find out where the quote comes from. -------------- BA: G'day. If you're interested in Nagarjuna's work, you might like to visit this website: Kalavinka Dharma World http://www.teleport.com/~dh-mitra/jewels/jewlhome.htm There is a treatise on the role of Jhana (Dhyana) meditation as well. Metta, Binh 6873 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Victor, Just a quickie to say that i'm enjoying your contributions to the list (like the one below) with your neat and helpful references (maybe I'll print some out to read on the flight. Subtle but useful and important points. Thank you. Sarah --- Victor wrote: > > Yes we can use conventional designation skillfully and helpfully. > For example, the Buddha taught: "Form is not self." The word "self" > can be seen as a pronoun for conventional designation, which is > further specified in "Form is to be regarded as it actually is with > right discernment thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is > not my self.'"* > > The word "self" can also be used in the expressions of speculative > views such as "there is a self" and "there is no self". In these > statements, the word "self" is not used for conventional designation > as a pronoun. > > Language is used for communication. Skillful use of language can > lead to truth and understanding. Unskillful use of language can be > deceiving and confusing. > > Metta, > Victor > > *Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html > 6874 From: Robert Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:16pm Subject: Re: Conditions and Insight - Sarah IN BKK!!!!!;-) Dear Sarah, great news! I'll skip the breakfast- too early. You know we are meeting at 10am on sunday and also Khun Sujin has arranged a meeting at 2pm on monday....--- see you sunday. robert Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Erik, Bruce, Rob & Sukin, > > --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter > Abbott > > wrote: > > > > Whew! What a fun (and challenging) this exchange is for me! :) > > Such fun and so challenging that.... > > > And Sarah, you and Jon need to go with your impulses and hop on that > > plane (what is it, a three-hour ride?), > > ......following yr advice, for once Erik (and thanks a lot to Cathay for an > unbelievavle 2nts promotion), we'll see you after that 3hr hop TOMORROW (Fri) > arriving midday, departing Sun afternoon. So We'll have live exchanges as well > and please keep everyone here updated with them as I'm sure they'll all want to > hear your version of your exchanges with everyone! I'm very glad you and Sukin > have already got together. > > Staying at the Peninsula hotel. Any of you are very welcome to come over in the > afternoon if you're free (say after 3pm) or on Sat morning/breakfast/early > lunch before the afternoon discussion as we're on the way.....let us know > OFF-list w/yr ph no. etc > > Rob, I just noted that you won't be arriving til Sat pm- look f/w to seeing you > on Sunday morning. You're welcome to join us for b/fast on Sun morning. > > (and besides I want to give a huge hug > > to everyone). > > Lots of hugs (or wais coming)..;-)) and really looking f/w to meeting you and > Bruce and catching up with Rob and Sukin. > > Sarah > > p.s DEREK, I was told you'd be there but I think that was a mistake as you said > here at the end of August....if it's changed, of course you're included in > this! > 6875 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi Derek >("Nobre Caminho Óctuplo" for my Brazilian friends -- I just learned >that today!) Do you have Brazilian friends, BB brazilian buddhists and you don't share this with me? Shame on you! > >As for claiming that Right View (sammaa di.t.thi) and pańńa are the >same thing, I think you're conflating the eight limbs to point where >it becomes a "Noble 1-fold Path." Good point. I agree. > >But even here Right View is said to be the "forerunner" of everything >else, and NOT a substitute or equivalent for everything else. In >fact, this sutta suggests that right concentration (sammaa samaadhi) >is what's most important, and everything else plays the part of its >supports and prerequisites. > I am delighted with all this interesting and fruitful discussion. Eventually the 'meditators wing' came out of an apparent obliviousness in this list. So glad indeed. Love Cybele I was feeling so lonely and marginalized. 6876 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:08pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nagarjuna ... Re: No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 11:00 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nagarjuna ... Re: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Nagarjuna - > > I am still trying to find out where the quote comes from. -------------- >BA: G'day. If you're interested in Nagarjuna's work, you might like to visit this website: Kalavinka Dharma World http://www.teleport.com/~dh-mitra/jewels/jewlhome.htm >There is a treatise on the role of Jhana (Dhyana) meditation as well. Wow, thanks a million. I don't think I have ever come across a website with so many writings by Nagarjuna. It looks great. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6877 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:11pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:23 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali >No problem for me ... I love this stuff. But maybe the others here are getting tired of Pali talk on the list? Well, I can't speak for others, but I find it kinda interesting too, even though I don't know anything about Pali. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6878 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:00pm Subject: Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Amara, Robert, Sarah, Jon, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, and any other of the BKK contingent, please accept my heartfelt invitation to my place Saturday night for a "housewarming." Must get this place prioperly prepped with kusala cittas and real Dhamma discussion, and, good food and drinks (NON-ALCOHOLIC, of course!). Seven PM onward, to however late anyone wishes to stay (I normally stay up til at least 2AM to keep in sync with my NY colleagues' schedules). Sat. eve seemed the best (really the onkly possible time) given everyone's time constraints. I live on Sukhumvit Soi 10, so it's easy-acces via BTS Nana station. Sukin also has full details as well and my phone # in case anyone misses me for any reason. This is TRULY exciting! :) :) :) 6879 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:12pm Subject: Re: Pali --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > Yes, I think that most of the DSG subsribers already > know that (when I was much much younger) I spent 8 years > as a monk in Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. > (Jonothan, Sarah, Kun Nina, and Kun Sujin are > all my old friends/teachers.) tadao Eight years?! That's a lot of merit! Derek. 6880 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:18pm Subject: Re: Conditions and Insight - Sarah IN BKK!!!!!;-) --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > p.s DEREK, I was told you'd be there but I think that was a mistake as you said > here at the end of August....if it's changed, of course you're included in > this! Thank you, but multiple changes of plan ... it's now the end of August/start of September. I'm going to my local wat in Vancouver this weekend to talk with a monk who has some friends at Wat Dhammamongkhol. Derek. 6881 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:21pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Do you have Brazilian friends Whoops! Did I give the game away? > BB brazilian buddhists and you don't share > this with me? But honey, you know that of all my lovers, you are my favorite! :-) Derek. 6882 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Der?k Ahhh, Derek You know how to flatter a woman; it's all delusion but it feels so goood, pleasant sensation, hhmmm! ;-) Hugs Cybele > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Do you have Brazilian friends > >Whoops! Did I give the game away? > > > BB brazilian buddhists and you don't share > > this with me? > >But honey, you know that of all my lovers, you are my favorite! :-) > >Derek. > > 6883 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 Dear anders, You wrote-> "There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though." But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha sabbe 'dhamma' anatta sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. rgds 6884 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Erik > > You are my hero, my model, my guru! > >I love your twisted sense of humor Cybele! :) As if I were guru >material. Hell, I haven't even managed to give up smoking! Ahi, Ahi, Ahi and I thought I have given you enough incentive! :-) > > > This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex >(almost) > >If you don't think jhanas are/can be better than sex, all I can say >is keep practicing. So rarely is sex anything other than a recipe for >dukkha of the very worst sort--so much distracting bullshit and >nonsense. About the only honest form of sex, in my opinion, is >prostitution. Regarding the jhanas they are not the aim of my practice; I had more than enough of 'blissful states' while practicing Sri Aurobindo Yoga in India. And about sex, I reckon it seems that all practitioners are sex-phobics in all religions apart Tantric Paths. But I wonder how it comes that you despise so much this 'gross carnal' involvement but most of you if not all and feel free to disclaim if is not true, continue being engaged in such activities - how it comes? I never got married, I never attached myself to anybody in particular as I believe that most of such relationships are delusional. You talk about non attachment, delusion, self restraint but most are married, with children, and a normal sexual activity. All this 'sublimation concern' seems unrealistic to me anyway, Suppression doesn't change deeply rooted biological and emotional patterns. Unless one is nihilist in his approach to life. I am talking in generic sense not aiming at you in particular Erik. Just the remark led me to ponder about it. :-) Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this path? Love Cybele 6885 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Anders Honoré wrote: > In the Buddha's second sermon (SN XXII.59) that he held after his > awakening to the Unconditioned, it is even implied that Nibbana is > the self Hi, Anders, My two cents' worth: I still think that talking about nibbaana as though it were an object is what linguistic philosophers call a "category error." You can construct sentences that make grammatical sense, but semantically they're meaningless. From the way the word is used, it's clear that it's a state, or the event that begins that state. It often comes at the end of one of those lists of near-synonyms: "the stilling of all formations, the relinquishing of all attachments, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbaana." (That one's from MN 26.) Derek. Derek. 6886 From: Howard Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Hi, Anders - In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Anders Honore writes: > And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders strikes a > telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! > Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named Dharmatroll, > who likes to write stuff like that :-) > ======================== He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I believe 'Tom' is his true given name. Tom used to be on several Buddhist groups that I and others here were also on. He is a brilliant "troublemaker" with whom I became rather much of a cyber-friend despite his tendency to walk (and often cross over) the thin line between right and wrong speech. Please tell him Howard says "hello" in case you correspond with him. 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) 6887 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:23pm Subject: Record numbers Dear Group, Recently the volume of posts to the list has been very high (1000 for this month). We are of course pleased that members are making such good use of the forum and we're delighted to read so many excellent messages. Without wishing to spoil anyone's fun, we would ask members to refrain as far as possible from posts on dsg that are pure banter, simple 'me too' messages or too off-topic (not relating to the Buddha's Teachings in the Theravada tradition -- which of course doesn't exclude comparisons with other teachings). If you have any comments or questions about this issue or the guidelines, pls send them to us OFF-LIST. Thanks for your cooperation. (Note:This is not directed at any particular person or any particular recent posts.) Jon & Sarah 6888 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:32pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- Howard wrote: > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I believe 'Tom' is > his true given name. I thought his real name was Gary McCullough? Derek. 6889 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:34pm Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Regarding the jhanas they are not the aim of my practice; I had more than > enough of 'blissful states' while practicing Sri Aurobindo Yoga in India. Cybele, Blissful states are only the low-level jhaana-s. In the 4th jhaana they have disappeared. Derek. 6890 From: Howard Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 Hi, Gayan (and Anders) - In a message dated 7/26/01 9:01:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Gayan Karunaratne writes: > Dear anders, > > You wrote-> > > > "There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account > of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN > III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that > often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is > only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave > dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, > there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a > different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are > impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the > word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning > Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. > Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which > specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists > no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to > explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one > scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and > finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though." > > But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha > sabbe 'dhamma' anatta > > sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) > sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. > > rgds > ============================== I agree with you that the change from 'sankhara' to 'dhamma' is probably significant in this triplet. Moreover, at places in the suttas nibbana is referred to as "the ultimate emptiness", which is an unlikely epithet for a self, especially considering that the primary sense of 'empty' is "empty of self and what is related to self". With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 6891 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 11:06pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Anders - > > In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders strikes a > > telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! > > Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named Dharmatroll, > > who likes to write stuff like that :-) > > > ======================== > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I believe 'Tom' is > his true given name. Tom used to be on several Buddhist groups that I and > others here were also on. Do you include in this talk.religion.buddhism on Usenet? If so, ever read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him among Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly precious treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true Buddhist Master in ever sense of the word. 6892 From: Howard Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Hi, Derek - In a message dated 7/26/01 10:35:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Derek writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I > believe 'Tom' is > > his true given name. > > I thought his real name was Gary McCullough? > > ======================== As Tom would say: "Heh, heh, heh!! ;-)) No, as a matter of fact, they didn't get on so well (to understate!). 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) 6893 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) >> >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Regarding the jhanas they are not the aim of my practice; I had >more than > > enough of 'blissful states' while practicing Sri Aurobindo Yoga in >India. > >Cybele, > >Blissful states are only the low-level jhaana-s. In the 4th jhaana >they have disappeared. > >Derek. I meant to be only ironic alluding to my past experiences and anyway my present practice doesn't include jhanas. Don't take me too literally! ;-) Cybele 6894 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 2:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Record numbers By the way Sarah and Jon could you remind people to TRIM their posts. The replies comes with all the previous mails and my account memory is always overloaded. Not to mention who reads in digest form that struggle a lot. Metta Cybele >From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Record numbers >Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:23:31 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Group, > >Recently the volume of posts to the list has been very >high (1000 for this month). We are of course pleased >that members are making such good use of the forum and >we're delighted to read so many excellent messages. > >Without wishing to spoil anyone's fun, we would ask >members to refrain as far as possible from posts on >dsg that are pure banter, simple 'me too' messages or >too off-topic (not relating to the Buddha's Teachings >in the Theravada tradition -- which of course doesn't >exclude comparisons with other teachings). > >If you have any comments or questions about this issue >or the guidelines, pls send them to us OFF-LIST. > >Thanks for your cooperation. > >(Note:This is not directed at any particular person or >any particular recent posts.) > >Jon & Sarah > 6895 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali Hi, Derek: At least I've become less spoiled person than I had been (as an only-child). tadao 6896 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Wow, what a gathering. I already feel left out , ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:00 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- > > Amara, Robert, Sarah, Jon, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, and any other of the > BKK contingent, please accept my heartfelt invitation to my place > Saturday night for a "housewarming." Must get this place prioperly > prepped with kusala cittas and real Dhamma discussion, and, good food > and drinks (NON-ALCOHOLIC, of course!). Seven PM onward, to however > late anyone wishes to stay (I normally stay up til at least 2AM to > keep in sync with my NY colleagues' schedules). Sat. eve seemed the > best (really the onkly possible time) given everyone's time > constraints. > > I live on Sukhumvit Soi 10, so it's easy-acces via BTS Nana station. > Sukin also has full details as well and my phone # in case anyone > misses me for any reason. > > This is TRULY exciting! :) :) :) > > 6897 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 5:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Record numbers Thanks Cybele, Yes, pls just keep relevant parts of the post you're replying to and delete the rest, inc. the yahoo blurb at the end etc. We all forget sometimes in our haste, I know. S. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > By the way Sarah and Jon could you remind people to TRIM their posts. > The replies comes with all the previous mails and my account memory is > always overloaded. > Not to mention who reads in digest form that struggle a lot. 6898 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 2:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Hi, Erik - In a message dated 7/26/01 11:11:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Anders - > > > > In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > <> writes: > > > > > > > And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders > strikes a > > > telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! > > > Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named > Dharmatroll, > > > who likes to write stuff like that :-) > > > > > ======================== > > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I > believe 'Tom' is > > his true given name. Tom used to be on several Buddhist groups that > I and > > others here were also on. > > Do you include in this talk.religion.buddhism on Usenet? If so, ever > read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill > University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him among > Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would > never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly precious > treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true Buddhist > Master in ever sense of the word. > > ============================= I've had many pleasant and rewarding cyber-conversations with Richard in the past. We disagree on a couple points, but I have enormous respect for him as a scholar and a Buddhist. 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) 6899 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 7:19am Subject: Fwd: Meditation, passivity and khamma: a new translation of Samyutta Nikaya Hi group On the thread about meditation I decided to forward this interesting mail that illustrates my quest: how a so-called genuine buddhist who extrenuously defend a position of faithfulness to the original teachings can dismiss meditation in his practice. Sorry but I am still wondering... And for obvious reasons I erased the name of one of the interlocutors. >Layperson very much commited on Abhidhamma studies but who doesn't has > >ever practiced meditation: > > > This should read: But while they might be called passive, > > the experience and memory of the nana citta by panna is cause for > > firm right understanding and right memory as well as a host of > > kusala cetasika to arise and accumulate more cause for further > > development of panna in the future as well. > >Bhikkhu (or so he claims to be) replying: > >The point about whether one is practicing passively or not can be >taken in the context of samadhi or Jhŕna development. If one is >diligently practicing vipassana in the sense of 'choice less >awareness' or not having much sitting/walking practice at all, say >under 3 or 4 hours a day, or if ones 'practice' is dhamma book study >and reflection on these truths, then one can be said to be practicing >passively. > >If one is dedicated to development of jhana, actively determined to >bring cessation of body (by sitting still at first then later still >the breath), to bring cessation of verbal (at the level of second >jhana) and cessation of mental (at the supreme jhana level call the >void, deathless, emptiness, cessation of feeling and perception) then one >can say the practice is active. > >Naturally there will be friends who are into 'choice less awareness' >vipassana and will say things like: We are taught to practice >passively this way. We should not try to control anything. The answer lies >in the question of how does one eradicate the hindrances without active >mental development. Then they may ask Oh yah!, what is a >hindrance? To that we can look at MN108. (stay logged in for a >rundown on the hindrances and how they prevent vipassana.) > >Then these friends may say, We are taught that one can get stuck in >jhana, liking it too much. The Blessed Ones answer to that can be >found in the Anapannasati Sutta Mn118 where Vipassana is incorporated into >the Jhana development in the fourth tetrad where/when the jhana state >becomes unstable, starts to fade away, and ceases, the jhana is >relinquished and be 'let go' with clear comprehension. > >If one is also dedicated to watching the breath moment by moment, >developing unremitting (thats unremitting) mindfulness of the breath, >determined to not allow anything at all into the mind that will >disturb the breath watching, all day, every hour, every minute, every >breath, then one can say that this is the active mindfulness that >becomes the first of seven factors of awaking (Pali sambojana.) > >It can also be said that practicing this way one may have cessation >of khamma. > >Presented here is a new translation of Samyutta Nikaya 35.146 > V New and OLd Khamma >Bhikkhus, I will teach new and old khamma, the cessation of khamma >and the way leading to the cessation of khamma. Listen to this >closely, attend well. > >What is old khamma? The eye, ear, nose, tongue, tactile body, and >mental formations, all to be understood as concocted by willful >action and can be felt. This is old khamma. > >What is new khamma? All action done by body, vocal (internal and >external), and mind. This is new khamma. > >What, bhikkhus, is the cessation of khamma (nirodha)? When one is >free of them through virtue/jhana/vipassana, this is called >the cessation of khamma. > >What Bhikkhus is the method (way) leading to the cessation of khamma? >It is the eight fold Noble path: right view right willful intention, >right verbal action, right body action, right living, right effort, >right mindfulness, right concentration. > >Now, bhikkhus I have taught old khamma, new khamma, cessation of >khamma and the method leading to the cessation of khamma. Whatever >should be done by a compassionate teacher out of compassion for >students, hoping for their welfare has been done for you. Now it is >up to you to practice diligently. There are empty kutis (huts) and >the foot of trees here. Go practice jhana, bhikkhus, do not be >negligent, maybe you will regret it later. This is our instruction to >you, practice jhana diligently. >..........end Samyutta >=================== > >Here as in many hundreds of places the Blessed one encouraged jhana >meditation practice. > > >And now for folks who may have misunderstood the above part about old >and new khamma another new translation is offered. Samyutta Nikaya >36. 21 > > The 108 kinds of feeling: part 1 > >"Gotama, master, there are some samana and brahmin who hold the >following: 'Whatever someone experiences be it pleasant, unpleasant >or in between, all that is caused by old khamma.' What do you say >about old past khamma? > >"Some feelings arise here coming from stomach and lower tract >disorders, chest and breathing disorders, coming for imbalances, or a >change of weather, produced from careless behavior, produced from >being attacked by emenies, one can know for oneself, these feelings >with these sources are to be considered true in general society. When those >samana and brahmin hold this kind of view and belief, teaching it as >doctrine: 'Whatever someone experiences be it pleasant, >unpleasant or in between, all that is caused by old (past) khamma' >they go overboard. They go beyond what is considered true in general >society. Therefore I say it is wrong on the part of those samana and >brahmin. >=================== >Dear ........ > >You have a beautiful gift to regurgitating the modern commentators of >the Abhidhamma. Did you think about the fact that the original >writers of the Abhidhamma were jhana mediators? They were speaking >from their own experiences. They were writing what they found inside >of their own mind. This kind of investigation can happen when the >jhana starts to fade and the mind starts to deteriorate from its one >pointed peak into diversity. It is good that you have a grasps of >your favorite commentators. What may not be so good about this >intellectual knowledge; it by being third hand on your part, is >missing the key ingredient, your own jhana practice. You say that you are >interested in vipassana, are you also interested in seeing in >your own mind as what you write about so tediously? It is called >tedious because it is so full of Pali mixed with modern language that it is >a lot of work to sift through the words to arrive at any >meaning. It would be helpful for everyone if you could state your >case in words that we are willing to spend time on. > >Sorry to see you taking a break. Perhaps you think this list is a bit over >your head, Dhamma wise. But that is not the case. You have >proven that you can retain complex ideas. Surly you can also grasps >the teachings of the Blessed One, all you need to do is spend a few >hours each day in samadhi/jhana/vipassana, and sutta study. That is >the way to understand the teachings of the Blessed One. > >May you be well, may you be happy. May we hear from you real soon now. >Dhamarati Metta Cybele 6900 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 7:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Dear Gayan >>Wow, what a gathering. > >I already feel left out , Don't dear friend, remember our 'heretic club' meeting in Ella! ;-) Love Cybele > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >>Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:00 AM >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- > > > > > > Amara, Robert, Sarah, Jon, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, and any other of the > > BKK contingent, please accept my heartfelt invitation to my place > > Saturday night for a "housewarming." Must get this place prioperly > > prepped with kusala cittas and real Dhamma discussion, and, good food > > and drinks (NON-ALCOHOLIC, of course!). Seven PM onward, to however > > late anyone wishes to stay (I normally stay up til at least 2AM to > > keep in sync with my NY colleagues' schedules). Sat. eve seemed the > > best (really the onkly possible time) given everyone's time > > constraints. > > > > I live on Sukhumvit Soi 10, so it's easy-acces via BTS Nana station. > > Sukin also has full details as well and my phone # in case anyone > > misses me for any reason. > > > > This is TRULY exciting! :) :) :) > > > 6901 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 7:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Of course!! the Heretix Club! This shameful mind.. always fantasizing and chasing , thinking that grass is greener on the other side.. unsatisfactoriness, unsatisfactoriness.... dear cybele , thanks for the trigger for contemplation. :7) rgds ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 7:22 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- > > Dear Gayan > > >>Wow, what a gathering. > > > >I already feel left out , > > Don't dear friend, remember our 'heretic club' meeting in Ella! ;-) > > Love > > Cybele > > > 6902 From: Ken Howard Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:15am Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Kom In a message to Jon, I wrote; "I really would like to know the correct approach to the Buddhadhamma. I want to know exactly what those disciples in the suttas meant when they exclaimed, "I take refuge in the Dhamma from this day until life's end!"" You kindly responded with a very helpful explanation. Your post was a striking example of its content. It certainly created some kusala moments for me (or should I say, I think they were kusala). Thank you. Kind regards Ken > > I think the most important thing is obviously hearing the dhamma, > contemplating (considering) the dhamma, and knowing the characteristics > of the realities as they truly are. Beyond that, I heard K. Sujin say that > one of the meaning of taking refuge is to adopt other Buddha's teachings > in increasing one kusala to "let go" of the akusala (when one is not doing > kusala, for the most part, one has akusala). > > When I post a mesage to DSG, sometimes I am reminded of the Sutta that > teaches us when to say something about the dhamma, that has the > following pattern: (will have to look it up): > > can't get the person out of the akusala -> don't say it. > can get the person out of the akusala, even when it may make the other > person uncomfortable, and even it may be an uncomfortable position for > the speaker -> know the proper time and the proper way and say it. > > Obviously, this teaching is very subtle, just like many other Buddha's > teachings. What is dhamma? How do we know what we say will > condition kusala in other people? How do you know what we say is > correct and in accord with the Buddha teachings? What is kusala? What > is akusala? What is the proper time and the proper way to say such > things? > > I consider saying something that refers to the dhamma, refers to Vinaya, > that would increase the kusala in other people (and myself) good things > indeed. > > kom 6903 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:19am Subject: Question re Nibbana Hi all, I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions regarding this topic. What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their object, as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or mind door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through a door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of consciousness? Thank you in advance Herman 6904 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:21am Subject: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? What is brahmacariya (celibacy)? Is it raaga-sati (mindfulness of lust) or raaga-dosa (hatred of lust)? I would like to invite your insights on this topic. Derek. 6905 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 0:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Hi, ripka21 (Sorry, I cannot identify your name): I am sorry for my slow responce to your comment on Jainism. You kindly pointed out that there are some similarities beween Jainism and Buddhism. It is my understanding that many Indic religious notions, such as kamma-vipaaka (deed-result), sansaara (round of births and deaths), and nibbaana (enlightment), are nothing unique to Buddhism. Throughout the development of (earlier) Vedism, Indians had developed the notions that experiencing the endless series of births and deaths is nothing but suffering, and that the only way to 'escape' from this miserable state is to attain nibbaana. Then, to attain nibbaana, one has to first forsake household and sensual desires associated with it. Either joining a religous order or developing one's own practice, one purifies oneself to the extent that one can attain so-called nibbaana. The attainment of nibbaana is regarded as the end of all the sufferings. All these religous notions were already there even before Gotama Buddha's era. What is unique about Buddhism is, as you have pointed out, the way to attain nibbaana. Being different from your view of Buddhism, however, I, first, think that the Buddha uses different terminology to define this way to nibbaana. Secondly, regardless of the difference in his use of terminogly, when we read the Tipitaka carefully, all his dicourses point at the single direction: i.e., knowing/understanding what one experiences through one's doo-ways as they are. This teaching is uniquely Buddhism. tadao 6906 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Derek: With respect to Brahama-cariya, I think, it can be defined by many many ways. It can be defined, in its vaguest sense, as (any types of) religious practices. Or in a less vague sense, it can mean any religous practices which induce kusala (but not akusala). The term, in its ultimate sense, must mean, as far as the Buddha's teaching is concerned, the development of wisdom whose strength is adequate/strong enough to experience nibbaana. So, if a house hold wife attains nibbaana, she should be regarded as Brahamacaarinii (a lady who practices Brahamacariya) despite the fact that she has never officially joined a order). tadao 6907 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 9:51am Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this path? I enjoy sex too, but I find it very difficult to walk while in the throes :-) I'd say when you are enjoying sex you are enjoying sex. It's when you are not enjoying sex, one tends to think and talk a lot about it. People don't tend to think about food when they are not hungry. Love Herman 6908 From: Robert Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 9:59am Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana --- Dear herman, Just very briefly. In the extremely short process known as magga- vitthi (path process) the following cittas arise in order: parikamma (preparatory)-takes one of the thre characteristics of a paramattha dhamma as object upacara -(access) -3 characteristics as object anuloma -(conformity) -characteristics Gotrabhu - (change of lineage) -nibbana as object Magga citta - nibbana as object Phala-citta - nibbana as object phala-citta -nibbana as object this process arises as the culmination of the correct development of insight. robert Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions > regarding this topic. > > What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their object, > as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or mind > door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through a > door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of > consciousness? > > Thank you in advance > > > Herman 6909 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:01am Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Tadao, What about the specific meaning of brahmacariya as celibacy? Is it a powerful spiritual practice? Or is it just repression? If it is an effective practice, then is there a right attitude and a wrong attitude to bring to it? Derek. 6910 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:25am Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana Robert, thank you for this. At the risk of pressing a point, is there a door-adverting process involved, or do I assume there isn't? Thanks again Herman --- <> wrote: > --- > > > Dear herman, > Just very briefly. In the extremely short process known as magga- > vitthi (path process) the following cittas arise in order: > parikamma (preparatory)-takes one of the thre characteristics of a > paramattha dhamma as object > upacara -(access) -3 characteristics as object > anuloma -(conformity) -characteristics > Gotrabhu - (change of lineage) -nibbana as object > Magga citta - nibbana as object > Phala-citta - nibbana as object > phala-citta -nibbana as object > > this process arises as the culmination of the correct development of > insight. > robert > > Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions > > regarding this topic. > > > > What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their > object, > > as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or > mind > > door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through a > > door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of > > consciousness? > > > > Thank you in advance > > > > > > Herman 6911 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 3:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Derek: There must be tons of definitions on Brahama-cariya in the Tipitakas and commentaries. Celibacy must be an (underlying) assumption because those who would like to detach themselves from all the sential pleasures are quite unlikely to have parters to pusure their religous goals. (Celibacy is not as difficult as you may think. Once you are ordained and live in rather isolated places and spend most of your time reading suttas, etc., you won't think much about it.) I do not think Brahamacariya must necessarily be a powerful religous practice. Is taking one mean a day a powerful religous practice? I do not think so. Is living in a totally secluded place (hardly talking with anybody for weeks) a poweful religous practice? I do not think so. If you would like, you can have such types of experiences very easily, without having notion of "powerful". One thing you have to remember is that the Buddha's teaching is of the Middle Path, which very much negates any notion of "powerful". With respect to your last question, let us assume that you are going to become a monk (regardless of the duration). Then it is your wisdom (not necessarily pa~~nnaa but sampaja~~nna (wise/skilful/consideration) which will guide you and tell you what is a wrong and right attitude. tadao 6912 From: Robert Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana --- Good question Herman. Yes I only gave the javanna section. Someone should check this I am doing it from memory (of the texts , not the experience:)To fill in: the full process: 1. Vibrational bhavanga 2. arrest bhavanga 3. mind-door adverting consciousness the rest follows as below in my first post. The phala citta repeats either once or twice. Then bhanvanga cittas arise, then minddoor adverting, then a series of seven javana cittas arise which review the magga citta just attained (they know what has happened). Then more bhavanga , then minddoor adverting, then a series of javanna cittas which review the fruition (phala) citta (they know what has happened. robert Herman wrote: > Robert, thank you for this. > > At the risk of pressing a point, is there a door-adverting process > involved, or do I assume there isn't? > > Thanks again > > Herman > > > --- <> wrote: > > --- > > > > > > Dear herman, > > Just very briefly. In the extremely short process known as magga- > > vitthi (path process) the following cittas arise in order: > > parikamma (preparatory)-takes one of the thre characteristics of a > > paramattha dhamma as object > > upacara -(access) -3 characteristics as object > > anuloma -(conformity) -characteristics > > Gotrabhu - (change of lineage) -nibbana as object > > Magga citta - nibbana as object > > Phala-citta - nibbana as object > > phala-citta -nibbana as object > > > > this process arises as the culmination of the correct development > of > > insight. > > robert > > > > Herman wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions > > > regarding this topic. > > > > > > What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their > > object, > > > as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or > > mind > > > door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through > a > > > door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of > > > consciousness? > > > > > > Thank you in advance > > > > > > > > > Herman 6913 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Ripka21: This is a responce to your old message about living in a wrong place/country. I feel the same way as you do in the sense that although I've been in Canada for the last 20 years, I haven't met many "stimulting" people here. Fortunately, we've been linked by the Net, so it may be a time for us to stop feeling sorry for ourselves. In essence, Realities defy Concepts (of Canada, Canadians, USA, Americans, etc.) tadao 6914 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 0:37pm Subject: Lumbini In Danger! India built barrage could submerge Lumbini Post Report KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, also listed as the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the Russiyal-Khurda Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River on the Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 years old Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. The 6-metre high Russiyal-Khurd Lautan barrage will directly affect Lumbini's archaeological site and its adjacent area, which is just 2-meter higher than the water level at the barrage site," said Netra Prasad Dhital, a geographer of Tribhuwan University. He said the barrage being constructed is just 6-km southeast of Lumbini. The Indian side unilaterally started construction of the main barrage and two other supportive structures about five months ago. Nepali officials monitoring the construction of the barrages said that all the barrages are almost complete. The construction of the 10-km long earthen embankment east of Russiyal-Khurd Lautan barrage and south of Bhairahawa, the district headquarters of Rupandehi, will block the natural water flow of waters in the Danav River and its tributaries like Dandakhola. Experts fear that the barrage and its supportive embankment will inundate over 200 villages of the 18 Village Development Committees in Marchawar. Majority of the densely-populated and fertile area of the district will come under the water after the construction of the barrage. Bavani, Bhagwanpur, Sipuwa, Majhagawa, Bogadi, Betkuia, Roinihawa, Pharena, Asuraini, Pipra, Silauriya, Raypur, Simra, Karautiya and other Village Development Committees are feared of being inundated too. Presenting field-study report in an interaction programme in the Capital today, Dhital stated that the barrage is being constructed only 200 metres south of the Nepal-India border. "It is against the Helsinki Convention and other international laws, which require consultations between the two countries before any construction is made within the range of 8 kilometre from the international border," said Dhital. Lawmaker and chairman of the CPN-UML aligned Democratic National Youth Federation Nepal (DNYFN), Gokarna Bista, said the Nepali people will protest, to any extent, if the Indian government does not stop the construction of the controversial barrage. "The federation demands the construction be suspended and urged the governments of both the countries to seek solution on the issue," he said. Karki was one of the 16 lawmakers who visited the site on July 20 and analysed the geographic situation of the area. Including Karki, the 16 lawmakers of Nepal Communist Party (United Marxist-Leninist) issued a release Wednesday asking all the political parties, organisations and civic societies to show solidarity to safeguard Nepal's sovereignty and the ancient site of Lumbini from the inundation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- NSP for constitutional amendment KATHMANDU, July 25 (PR)- The Nepal Sadbhawana Party today demanded amendment of the Constitution saying that it is the only way for solving the existing Nepali citizenship problem. Demand for the amendment of the Constitution by the Nepal Sadbhawana Party (NSP) comes after the Supreme Court on Monday declared void over 30,000 citizenship certificates issued four years ago. The court even issued mandamus to the Home Ministry ordering "to distribute citizenship only as per the Constitution and the existing laws" and that "there is no legal provision to distribute citizenship certificates by issuing a directive" as the certificates then was issued through a directive. "There is no way but amend the Constitution to solve the citizenship problem as it is impossible to solve the citizenship issue confining to the present Constitution," says Rajendra Mahato, NSP General Secretary. Mahato lays stress that the Constitution should be amended in the current session of the parliament itself. "The verdict of the court has raised several questions which would be solved in due course," says Mahato. Mahato further said that the government should take quick initiatives for the "legality" of the "void declared" over 30,000 citizenship certificates. According to Mahato Terai people are the most affected from the court's decision. Mahato blames the government for not being sincere in solving the citizenship issue. "Even various government reports show that there are more than four million people affected from citizenship problem and as the present Constitution stands as a hurdle, there is no option but to amend it," says Mahato pointing out the need for the government and other political parties to agree to it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- 6915 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 0:44pm Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana Dear Roberts and Herman, This link has the detail: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat8.html My observations: 1) The phala citta repeats 3 times if there is no parikamma. 2) With the descriptions of the processes, there are no doubts that the person attaining knows that they have attained. kom --- <> wrote: > --- > Good question Herman. > Yes I only gave the javanna section. > Someone should check this I am doing it from memory (of the texts , > not the experience:)To fill in: > the full process: > 1. Vibrational bhavanga > 2. arrest bhavanga > 3. mind-door adverting consciousness > the rest follows as below in my first post. > > The phala citta repeats either once or twice. > Then bhanvanga cittas arise, then minddoor adverting, then a series > of seven javana cittas arise which review the magga citta just > attained (they know what has happened). > Then more bhavanga , then minddoor adverting, then a series of > javanna cittas which review the fruition (phala) citta (they know > what has happened. > robert 6916 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:17pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Derek, This is from: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn148.html "Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there arises what is felt either as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain. If, when touched by a feeling of pleasure, one relishes it, welcomes it, or remains fastened to it, then the underlying tendency to passion lies latent within one. If, when touched by a feeling of pain, one sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats one's breast, becomes distraught, then the underlying tendency to resistance lies latent within one. If, when touched by a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling, then the underlying tendency to ignorance lies latent within one. That a person -- without abandoning the underlying tendency to passion with regard to a feeling of pleasure, without abolishing the underlying tendency to resistance with regard to a feeling of pain, without uprooting the underlying tendency to ignorance with regard to a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, without abandoning ignorance and giving rise to clear knowing -- would put an end to suffering & stress in the here & now: such a thing isn't possible. It looks like to me that delighting (lobha), grieving (dosa), and not knowing the realities as they truly are (moha), all adds to the latent tendencies, which, having enough, one cannot attain the arahatship. Thus, one should see faults in all sort of lobha (including sex) from the standpoint of adding to the latent lobha, which contradicts the goal of eradicating all akusala latent tendencies. Of course, only an anagami has eradicated all clinging and aversion to the 5 sensualities. There is a commentary story about a householder who reached the stage of sotapanna, sakatagami, and anagami succesively (not all at the same time). Only at the point of becoming an anagami that he stopped having sex with his wife. Since we are not (or I am not) an anagami, then we can totally expect that the delights in the 5 sensualities are arising, and will arise. At the same time, we should know that adding to the latent tendencies is in everyway "adding trouble for oneself." One will seek to reduce them if one sees their faults. Repression without panna, I suspect, doesn't last for long (even in this life time) and obviously doesn't bring the highest fruit as abstaining with panna would. One does need to eat to live, but one certainly doesn't need to have sex to live... kom --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > Hi, Tadao, > > What about the specific meaning of brahmacariya as celibacy? Is it a > powerful spiritual practice? Or is it just repression? > > If it is an effective practice, then is there a right attitude and a > wrong attitude to bring to it? > > Derek. 6917 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: thailand/west --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Ripka21: Tadao--just FYI "rikpa21" is really Erik, so you don't forget now (kindof a mnemonic for my name--actually "rikpa" means "panna" in Tibetan, and with unspeakable arrogance I appopriated that email adderss) :) :) :) > This is a responce to your old message about living in a > wrong place/country. I feel the same way as you do in the > sense that although I've been in Canada for the last > 20 years, I haven't met many "stimulting" people here. > Fortunately, we've been linked by the Net, so it may be > a time for us to stop feeling sorry for ourselves. > In essence, Realities defy Concepts (of Canada, > Canadians, USA, Americans, etc.) tadao I have met the most astounding acharyas where I've lived in NYC, so for me it isn't an issue of place per se. You can find the Dhamma anyplace. Tha Dhamma lives in our hearts anyway, and has nothing to do with geograpic location. My lama, for example, lives in New Jersey! And there there are none superior to him in my eyes, as I consider him a living Buddha. My response was merely to indicate I find it wonderful to live in a place where I'm surrounded by all the symbols of the Dhamma, and that they serve as reminders all the time. From the scads of monks wandering around Panthip plaza (and what are monks doing eyeing pirated software is what I'd like to know?), to the wats, chedis, and so on. In other words I agree entirely with your sentiment, but it still is wonderful nonethelss to be living in a land where the Dhamma is a central aspect of the culture and all the symbols that truly matter to me fill my field of vision wherever I go. 6918 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 2:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- Victor wrote: > Hi Anders, > > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > [snip] > > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon > for the > > belief that there is no self. > > If interested, you might want to refer to > Ananda Sutta, To Ananda > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html > > Metta, > Victor I went and read the excerpt you referred to in the Sutta, and I cannot see it as refuting the existence of a self, only refuting wrong views of self. According to Sutta, Buddha is confirming that: 1/ there is no permanent, unchanging soul [that does not mean there is no self] 2/ that consciousness is not annihilated with the death of the body [certainly doesn't mean that there is no self] 3/ that all phenomena are not-self [this would mean that a self would have to be outside of phenomena] 4/ that it is wrong to assert that there is no self [since it would lead to the idea that one's previous self no longer existed] Based on the above, the only possible self that could be accepted by the Buddha would be a self that was ouside of conditioned phenomena. The only existent beyond phenomena is Nirvana, and so the true self would have to be Nirvana and nothing else. This is, I believe, Anders' contention, that the true self is neither a soul nor an existent phenomena, and that it is not personal, but is Nirvana itself, and that Nirvana is the true identity of all beings. Anders, I may have overspoken. If you're around, please correct. I would also be happy to see if others feel this assertion should be refuted. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6919 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 3:30pm Subject: Re: Lumbini In Danger! Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in danger. And certainly impermanent. Herman --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" <081176234213158209227038213248130208071048> wrote: > India built barrage could submerge Lumbini > > Post Report > > KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, also listed as > the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the Russiyal-Khurda > Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River on the > Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 years old > Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. > > "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. etc 6920 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 5:02pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Erik - Howard, how ya doin'? ever > > read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill > > University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him among > > Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would > > never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly precious > > treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true Buddhist > > Master in ever sense of the word. > ============================= > I've had many pleasant and rewarding cyber-conversations with Richard > in the past. We disagree on a couple points, but I have enormous respect for > him as a scholar and a Buddhist. Believe me, I've had a number of heated disagreements with Mubul in the past (and got my ass justifiably kicked when I tried atking him on in more than one debate), and it was those very debates and disagreements that did more to clarify my understanding of the Dharma (and terminate some very serious ditthi) than just about anything else I can think of! He is an acharya to be taken VERY seriously indeed, as a Master of Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, the Suttas, AND meditation. And he's a true "One Vehiclist" and proponent of Right View if there ever was one. He plays the "bad cop" role on so many occasions, and that role, for these accumulations, did more to loosen fixed and wrong conceptions of what is and is not the path than nearly anything else. Many many many deep bows to the great Master Dayamati Dharmachari! 6921 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Hi, Erik - In a message dated 7/27/01 5:06:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Erik - > > Howard, how ya doin'? > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm fine! Anumodana on your Thai venture. ------------------------------------------------------- > ever > > > read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill > > > University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him > among > > > Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would > > > never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly > precious > > > treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true > Buddhist > > > Master in ever sense of the word. > > ============================= > > I've had many pleasant and rewarding cyber-conversations > with Richard > > in the past. We disagree on a couple points, but I have enormous > respect for > > him as a scholar and a Buddhist. > > Believe me, I've had a number of heated disagreements with Mubul in > the past (and got my ass justifiably kicked when I tried atking him > on in more than one debate), and it was those very debates and > disagreements that did more to clarify my understanding of the Dharma > (and terminate some very serious ditthi) than just about anything > else I can think of! > > He is an acharya to be taken VERY seriously indeed, as a Master of > Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, the Suttas, AND meditation. And he's a > true "One Vehiclist" and proponent of Right View if there ever was > one. He plays the "bad cop" role on so many occasions, and that role, > for these accumulations, did more to loosen fixed and wrong > conceptions of what is and is not the path than nearly anything else. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: He's a very down-to-earth, no-nonsense guy who acts a bit roughly at times with some folks, but has always treated me wonderfully. (Maybe he thinks I'm on the fragile side! ;-) I've learned a great deal from him. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Many many many deep bows to the great Master Dayamati Dharmachari! > > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well .. I'd put it a bit more like "Much friendship and respect to Richard!". ;-) ============================= 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) 6922 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:31pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Tadao, I'm grateful for your encouragement. What you say about "detach from all sensual pleasures" fits in my my reading of the sutta-s, namely, that nothing in the world of the five senses is to be grasped at. That seems to me to be the way the Buddha taught it. But often (at least here in the West) that original teaching seems to get lost. It's not put across as clearly as that. Thank you. Derek. 6923 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:39pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Since we are not (or I am not) an anagami, then we can totally expect > that the delights in the 5 sensualities are arising, and will arise. At the > same time, we should know that adding to the latent tendencies is in > everyway "adding trouble for oneself." One will seek to reduce them if > one sees their faults. Repression without panna, I suspect, doesn't last > for long (even in this life time) and obviously doesn't bring the highest fruit > as abstaining with panna would. One does need to eat to live, but one > certainly doesn't need to have sex to live... Thank you, Kom. I was talking to a Thai monk about what it's like to be a monk, and he said: "You have to understand it properly." I think that's what you're saying too. BTW, I asked him what he meant by understanding it properly, and all he said was: "You know, all the stuff we learned when we were very young." And that was it. Well, of course, I'm not Thai, so I didn't learn to understand it when I was very young! Derek. 6924 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 9:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Herman >>Dear Cybele, > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this >path? > > >I enjoy sex too, but I find it very difficult to walk while in the >throes :-) > >I'd say when you are enjoying sex you are enjoying sex. It's when you >are not enjoying sex, one tends to think and talk a lot about it. > >People don't tend to think about food when they are not hungry. > >Love > >Herman > In my experience people is talking always about food! And indeed that's a good point, accordingly with you then people would not talk about sex unless they were 'hungry' for it - therefore why should we deny this fact and believe that is a frivolous issue? LOve CYbele 6925 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Derek > >What is brahmacariya (celibacy)? > >Is it raaga-sati (mindfulness of lust) or raaga-dosa (hatred of lust)? > >I would like to invite your insights on this topic. > >Derek. I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness of lust but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes raaga-dosa, aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the wise men. Cybele 6926 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:08pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness of lust > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes raaga-dosa, > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. Hi, Cybele, You've met many monks. Can you tell just by looking at the way they behave whether they're practicing correctly or not? > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the wise men. Ah ha! Just as I thought! Derek. 6927 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:02am Subject: Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Tadao, Do you think it is accurate to say that the Buddha's very first teaching -- the middle way between the indulgent householder and the self-mortifying ascetic -- was an innovation? In other words, up to this point, everyone in India was either self-indulgent and self- mortifying, but the Buddha introduced a new way of life? Derek. 6928 From: Erik Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness of lust > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes raaga-dosa, > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the wise men. Fortunately not tantric practitioners, who all share the ROOT VOW of NEVER disparaging women, and to see all women as the Dakini. 6930 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 3:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! Tell that to the people living there. Have you visited there? I find your post just a bit too dismissive using a convenient way to bow out. Pay it forward --- or do you know what that means? Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 3:30 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in danger. > And certainly impermanent. > > Herman > > --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > <081176234213158209227038213248130208071048> wrote: > > India built barrage could submerge Lumbini > > > > Post Report > > > > KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, also > listed as > > the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the > Russiyal-Khurda > > Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River on > the > > Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 years > old > > Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. > > > > "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. > > etc > > 6931 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 7:37am Subject: Dakini it was Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Sweetheart >>--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness >of lust > > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes >raaga-dosa, > > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. > > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the >wise men. Erik: >Fortunately not tantric practitioners, who all share the ROOT VOW of >NEVER disparaging women, and to see all women as the Dakini. > Indeed honey that's what I observed in that post to you: that apart in Tantra practices all religions are very much sex-phobic and lust-fearing and as a consequence misogenous and depreciating of women. So glad to know that I am a Dakini. ;-))))) For those who doesn't know what about are we blattering and correct me if I am not accurate enough Erik: A Dakini in Vajrayana Buddhism is the inspiring power of consciousness, usually depicted in iconography as a wrathful naked female figure (form of manifestation). As semiwrathful or wrathful - yidam, the dakini has the task of integrating the powers liberated by the practitioner in the process of visualization (sadhana). In Tibetan, Dakini is translated as khadroma. Kha means 'celestial space', emptiness (shunyata) become an image; dro has the meaning of walking and moving about; ma indicates the feminine gender in substantive form. Thus the khadroma is a female figure that moves on the highest level of reality; her nakedness symbolizes knowledge of truth unveiled. The homeland of the dakinis is said to be the mystic realm of Urgyen. In Tantra Yoga the personification of the female energy is the Shakti - in sanskrit literally 'force, power, energy': the consort of Shiva and personification of primal energy, the force of - brahman, the dynamic aspect of God. Indeed Tantrism is also called Shaktism. Hindus believe that Shakti's grace is needed in order to grasp the transcendent aspect of God and worship her as the creative force that makes all life possible and maintains the universe. The goddess Cybele is a shakti. ;-) Beware of pissing me off. :-)))) Metta Cybele 6932 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Derek > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness >of lust > > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes >raaga-dosa, > > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. > >Hi, Cybele, > >You've met many monks. Can you tell just by looking at the way they >behave whether they're practicing correctly or not? Well Derek, I don't wear rose-tinted glasses as you know and in my experience most of monks because of the strict rules plus social pressure and their ignorance on sexual matters if they have been ordained too young as is common in the East are quite clumsy and ankward while relating with females. I find there is a lot of sexual tension and incapacity of dealing with their own sexual energy and suppression is largely diffused. In many countries they have radical positions - or extreme control, eyes on the floor and avoiding carefully contact with women or they become far too indulgent and touch you even unnecessarily and are flirtatious, yes they are. The young monks are very much curious about the female gender and always you are surrounded by young bhikkhus in the temples what is most tender and amusing sometimes because some are very candid, shy while others are quite smart and daring. They want to get also the chance to practice English and if they manage to grab you it's a fight to set free. In Sri Lanka the monks tend to be quite open and they shake hands and accept invitations for a meal in public places without particular fuss. In Thailand they are apparently a bit more conservative but many times I had physical contact and have been interviewed alone without chaperon with only the door open to prevent gossips and blame. In the temples I have been offered tea or juice and sat down chatting with them most with a translator. Sometimes they even forget that they are not supposed to touch you and hand out things directly. In Burma they are pretty conservative specially Mahasi type but even so they are prone to be much more indulgent with westerners but they never interview a woman without a male present in the room. Outside the context of retreats they are much more relaxed. In Malaysia I met very nice monks but they are a bit constricted in a traditionalist chinese buddhist-taoist society. Visuddhacara who was my teacher would prepare me coffee himself, never allowed me to wash his dishes and always received me privately in his room and would shake hands as pass me objects. BUT in front of the sangha he was much more careful in order to don't provoke consternation. He was personally very concerned that I had to rent a place for myself while in the meditation center there was a spare room free that I could not occupy only because of my gender. However in my perception there is a lot of sexual tension due to suppression and most of the unfairness in the dhamma trasmission happens exactly because of aversion adding heaviness to the rules already very strict. I find the ones that have ordained late after leading a life as householders married men less self conscious, more relaxed sexually. However as you may know MOST of the monks DISROBE because they cannot deal with the sexual and affective issue. They disrobe to marry or because they acknowledge they spend much more time fantasizing than meditating or whatever else. You know Derek is so strange, sometimes you meet monks like Sumeddho that gives you the impression they are extremely happy being monksa nd they treat women as equal, are most fair and caring with them and you don't feel any sexual tension; while others are so stiff and tensed up, displaying a firm attitude and tough manners that are soon revealed for what they are - hatred and FEAR of women and hatred and fear of their own desires they believe we evil creatures instigate on them, and doing so they justify themselves and deny their sexual urges. > > > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the >wise men. > >Ah ha! Just as I thought! > >Derek. > Please if you become a monk and start ill treating me or any woman I will personally provide to kick you on your behind Derek to awake you from self deceit! ;-) Now I will reveal you something amusing - do you know I wanted to be a buddhist nun? And don't dare to laugh!!!! And you know what all the western monks have discouraged me while the eastern ones thought that I was quite meant to be a nun, isn't funny? Well being a nun in Theravada is trapping yourself very much in a male world. But this is already another issue. Love Cybele 6933 From: Erik Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:50am Subject: Dakini it was Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Indeed honey that's what I observed in that post to you: that apart in > Tantra practices all religions are very much sex-phobic and lust- fearing and > as a consequence misogenous and depreciating of women. > So glad to know that I am a Dakini. ;-))))) Yes, but of whioch sort I'm still trying to figure out (wrathful, semi-wrathful, or peaceful) :) If I take my cue from your name (and I take appellations with regard to dakinis VERY seriously indeed), the historical cult of Cybele always involved castration of the priests who served her. Eek! Perhaps I may be forgiven for having just a bit of The Fear regarding you, Cybele! :) :) :) > For those who doesn't know what about are we blattering and correct me if I > am not accurate enough Erik: You are absolutely correct in what you've said here. In fact, what a "convenient coincidence" you posted this just now, given the wonderful conversation Bruce and I had last night discussing Dhamma here at my place, where this very issue came up and I attempted to describe to him the role and symbolism of the dakini (khadro-ma), which as you note, means "sky-dancer" literally in the Tibetan, representing, as you also noted, represents the primordial wisdom of shunyata. My quick attempt to describe this to Bruce was far poorer than your excellent descriptions here of the function and symbolism of the dakini. > A Dakini in Vajrayana Buddhism is the inspiring power of consciousness, > usually depicted in iconography as a wrathful naked female figure (form of > manifestation). And as a side-note, those hooked-knives (gri-gug) they carry are NOT mere decorative accessories, but symbolize the function fo the dakini in severing all attachment, and at the very deepest levels of grasping. All tantric practitioners MUST at some point have encounters with the dakini--several actually, some wrathful, some semi-wrathful, some peaceful. These encounters are a necessary aspect of the tantric path leading to supreme Buddhahood according to tantric Buddhism. The dakini is one of the "Three Roots" (Guru, Yidam, Dakini), which are the inner and "secret" manifestations of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. The tales of the great tantric sages, the Mahasiddhas, are replete with stories of their encounters with the dakini, who are the supreme teacher manifested in feminine form--many times as ugly old hags, or those suffering great sickness. Sometimes as beautiful temptresses, who demonstrate the destructiveness of clinging to sensuality. > As semiwrathful or wrathful - yidam, the dakini has the task of integrating > the powers liberated by the practitioner in the process of visualization > (sadhana). And in their wrathful manifestation destroying ALL fixed conceptions of reality, using those vicious hooked knives to sever grasping and attachment at its very root. Mercilessly. > In Tibetan, Dakini is translated as khadroma. > Kha means 'celestial space', emptiness (shunyata) become an image; dro has > the meaning of walking and moving about; ma indicates the feminine gender in > substantive form. > Thus the khadroma is a female figure that moves on the highest level of > reality; her nakedness symbolizes knowledge of truth unveiled. > The homeland of the dakinis is said to be the mystic realm of Urgyen. > In Tantra Yoga the personification of the female energy is the Shakti - in > sanskrit literally 'force, power, energy': the consort of Shiva and > personification of primal energy, the force of - brahman, the dynamic aspect > of God. > The goddess Cybele is a shakti. ;-) There has never been a single moment of doubt in my mind about this, Cybele. > Beware of pissing me off. :-)))) I guess from this I can guess you're "only" semi-wrathful. That would be a nice change from the wrathful "destroyer" (or as my lama said to me in Sanskrit, "sudana") variety, for sure. Bruce should get a REAL kick out of this little thread, given our conversation last night!!! Love and HEALTHY respect, Erik 6934 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 9:28am Subject: The Philosophy of Emptiness I found this short article on line quite interesting. It's a good subject for careful pondering. Love Cybele The Philosophy of Emptiness (adapted from Zen and Western Thought, by Prof. Masao Abe, edited by Prof. William R. LaFleur, 1985, Honolulu 1989) In early Buddhism the theory of dependent origination and the philosophy of emptiness were still naively undifferentiated. It was Abhidharma Buddhism which awakened to a kind of philosophy of emptiness and set it up in the heart of Buddhism. But the method of its process of realization was to get rid of concepts of substantiality by analysing phenomenal things into diverse elements and thus advocating that everything is empty. Accordingly, Abhidharma Buddhism's philosophy of emptiness was based solely on analytic observation - hence it was later called the 'analytic view of emptiness'. It did not have a total realization of emptiness of the phenomenal things. Thus the overcoming of the concept of substantial nature or 'being' was still not thoroughly carried through. Abhidharma fails to overcome the substantiality of the analysed elements. Beginning with the Prajńaparamita-sutra, Mahayana Buddhist thinkers transcended Abhidharma Buddhism's analytic view of emptiness, erecting the standpoint which was later called the 'view of substantial emptiness'. This was a position which did not clarify the emptiness of phenomena by analysing them into elements. Rather, it insisted that all phenomena were themselves empty in principle, and insisted on the nature of the emptiness of existence itself. The Prajńaparamita-sutra emphasizes 'not being, and not not being'. It clarified not only the negation of being, but also the position of the double negation - the negation of non-being as the denial of being - or the negation of the negation. It thereby disclosed 'Emptiness' as free from both being and non-being, i.e. it revealed prajńa-wisdom. But it was Nagarjuna who gave this standpoint of Emptiness found in the Prajńaparamita-sutra a thorough philosophical foundation by drawing out the implications of the mystical intuition seen therein and developing them into a complete philosophical realization. Nagarjuna criticized the proponents of substantial essence of his day who held that things really exist corresponding to concepts. He said that they had lapsed into an illusory view which misconceived the real state of the phenomenal world. He insisted that with the transcendence of the illusory view of concepts, true Reality appears as animitta (no-form, or non-determinate entity). But Nagarjuna rejected as illusory, not only the 'eternalist' view, which took phenomena to be real just as they are, but also the opposite 'nihilistic' view that emptiness and non-being are true reality. He took as the standpoint of Mahayana Emptiness an independent stand liberated from every illusory point of view connected with either affirmation or negation, being or non-being, and called that standpoint the 'Middle Way'. 6935 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 10:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dakini it was Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Erik > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Indeed honey that's what I observed in that post to you: that apart >in Tantra practices all religions are very much sex-phobic and lust- >fearing and as a consequence misogenous and depreciating of women. > > So glad to know that I am a Dakini. ;-))))) > >Yes, but of which sort I'm still trying to figure out (wrathful, >semi-wrathful, or peaceful) :) You are too smart, difficult try techniques of mind control with you Erik; the cult leaders would have a hard time with you and me. ;-) You continue trying to figure out and let me know when you draw some conclusion. If you need any clue, feel free to investigate. :0) > >If I take my cue from your name (and I take appellations with regard >to dakinis VERY seriously indeed), the historical cult of Cybele >always involved castration of the priests who served her. Eek! >Perhaps I may be forgiven for having just a bit of The Fear regarding >you, Cybele! :) :) :) Don't worry I reassure you that I would never waste such powerful energy demanding sacrifice of castration. You can express your devotion in other modalities much more appropriate. I would change the ritual in something much more celebrative, joyful and less truculent. ;-) > > > For those who doesn't know what about are we blattering and correct >me if I > > am not accurate enough Erik: > >You are absolutely correct in what you've said here. In fact, what a >"convenient coincidence" you posted this just now, given the >wonderful conversation Bruce and I had last night discussing Dhamma >here at my place, where this very issue came up and I attempted to >describe to him the role and symbolism of the dakini (khadro-ma), >which as you note, means "sky-dancer" literally in the Tibetan, >representing, as you also noted, represents the primordial wisdom of >shunyata. My quick attempt to describe this to Bruce was far poorer >than your excellent descriptions here of the function and symbolism >of the dakini. Being a representative of the kind I must live up expectations! Great, print it for him to read and give my warm regards plus a 'pull of ears' because he abbandoned me totally on d-l while I was suppporting him on a discussion he proposed, the coward male! ;-) I am joking, I could deal quite well. But I am envious, I wish I were there with you... :-( not fair, you have all the fun! By the way when you go to my room check on the books: apart the erotic ones ;-), I have some on Tantra, the left hand kind if might interest you. And off list I will give you the directions to visit a tantric temple in Chinatown area. Wow I would love drag you both around in all magic places I know there. But I will in future, I am sure. > > > A Dakini in Vajrayana Buddhism is the inspiring power of >consciousness, > > usually depicted in iconography as a wrathful naked female figure >(form of > > manifestation). > >And as a side-note, those hooked-knives (gri-gug) they carry are NOT >mere decorative accessories, but symbolize the function fo the dakini >in severing all attachment, and at the very deepest levels of >grasping. All tantric practitioners MUST at some point have >encounters with the dakini--several actually, some wrathful, some >semi-wrathful, some peaceful. These encounters are a necessary aspect >of the tantric path leading to supreme Buddhahood according to >tantric Buddhism. The dakini is one of the "Three Roots" (Guru, >Yidam, Dakini), which are the inner and "secret" manifestations of >Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. > >The tales of the great tantric sages, the Mahasiddhas, are replete >with stories of their encounters with the dakini, who are the supreme >teacher manifested in feminine form--many times as ugly old hags, or >those suffering great sickness. Sometimes as beautiful temptresses, >who demonstrate the destructiveness of clinging to sensuality. I am not an ugly old hag I warn you! ;-))) > > > As semiwrathful or wrathful - yidam, the dakini has the task of >integrating > > the powers liberated by the practitioner in the process of >visualization > > (sadhana). > >And in their wrathful manifestation destroying ALL fixed conceptions >of reality, using those vicious hooked knives to sever grasping and >attachment at its very root. Mercilessly. > > > In Tibetan, Dakini is translated as khadroma. > > Kha means 'celestial space', emptiness (shunyata) become an image; >dro has > > the meaning of walking and moving about; ma indicates the feminine >gender in > > substantive form. > > Thus the khadroma is a female figure that moves on the highest >level of > > reality; her nakedness symbolizes knowledge of truth unveiled. > > The homeland of the dakinis is said to be the mystic realm of >Urgyen. > > In Tantra Yoga the personification of the female energy is the >Shakti - in > > sanskrit literally 'force, power, energy': the consort of Shiva and > > personification of primal energy, the force of - brahman, the >dynamic aspect > > of God. > > > The goddess Cybele is a shakti. ;-) > >There has never been a single moment of doubt in my mind about this, >Cybele. Good to know that your mind is so clear, Erik! :) Some males are a bit slow to understand it. > > > Beware of pissing me off. :-)))) > >I guess from this I can guess you're "only" semi-wrathful. That would >be a nice change from the wrathful "destroyer" (or as my lama said to >me in Sanskrit, "sudana") variety, for sure. Well that I know the Male Yidam are peaceful: bhagavat - active semiwrathful: daka - sympathy wrathful: heruka - compassion Female Yidam peaceful: bhagavati - knowledge of semiwrathful: dakini - supreme wrathful: dakini - reality Yidam is Tibetan and means lit. 'firm mind'. Which one could I be related to? The most widely invoked are Chenresi, Green - Tara or Diamond Sow Dorje Phagmo. :-) To give you a clue - in Thailand all monks give me an amulet with a female deity - Kuan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy. I have a beautiful statue in porcelain in my room that I bought in China, in Shanghai where there is an important temple. In India they would identify me as shakti with the characteristics of 'divine mother' but not Kali, which one would you guess? >Bruce should get a REAL kick out of this little thread, given our >conversation last night!!! > >Love and HEALTHY respect, >Erik > Sweetheart I accept your devotion and grant my blessings over you, all over! :) Love and divine cuddles Cybele 6936 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > Dear anders, > > You wrote-> > > > "There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account > of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN > III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that > often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is > only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave > dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, > there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a > different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are > impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the > word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning > Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. > Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which > specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists > no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to > explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one > scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and > finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though." > > But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha > sabbe 'dhamma' anatta > > sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) > sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. is nibbana an unconditioned phenomenon? is it a phenomenon at all, or a pre-existing condition? would a condition be a 'dhamma' of any kind? a 'thing' of any kind? I wouldn't think so, unless, in my acknowledged ignorance, I am misunderstanding the scope of the word 'dhamma'. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6937 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this path? Just to get personal, are you attached to your enjoyment, or can you take it or leave it? That would seem to me to be the important issue, not the 'enjoyment'. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6938 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 1:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Anders Honoré > wrote: > > In the Buddha's second sermon (SN XXII.59) that he held after his > > awakening to the Unconditioned, it is even implied that Nibbana is > > the self > > Hi, Anders, > > My two cents' worth: > > I still think that talking about nibbaana as though it were an object > is what linguistic philosophers call a "category error." You can > construct sentences that make grammatical sense, but semantically > they're meaningless. > > From the way the word is used, it's clear that it's a state, or the > event that begins that state. It often comes at the end of one of > those lists of near-synonyms: "the stilling of all formations, the > relinquishing of all attachments, the destruction of craving, > dispassion, cessation, nibbaana." (That one's from MN 26.) what if true selfhood is also a state, rather than an object, a state with nothing added or subtracted, and the Buddha was reluctant to assert or deny anything about a 'self' because it would implicitly turn 'self' into an object by attributing properties or negative properties to 'it'? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6939 From: Christine Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 4:37pm Subject: Animals - Nivarana/Jhananga Dear All, Way back in response to my post no. 6275, gayan, Robert and Suan were most helpful with their responses. I have been browsing through a book 'The Abhidharma' by Peter Della Santina http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm (under Books) which also seems to hint at a potential in animals to be able to be helped to a better rebirth. In Chapter 4 he says, "Five factors of absorption (Jhananga) are crucial to developing the states of meditation that result in the type of consciousness belonging to the form and formless spheres: (i) initial application (vitakka), (ii) sustained application (vichara) (iii)interest, enthusiasm, or rapture (piti) (iv) happiness or bliss (sukha) and (v) one-pointedness (ekaggata). These five factors are also evident in most types of consciousness, including the sense-sphere consciousness and even the consciousness of some of the more developed animals. In Chapter 11 he says The five hindrances (nivarana) are typical of very low levels of conscious development, such as the consciousness of animals, which is saturated with these factors. The presence of these hindrances means that ones' mind is totally conditioned and manipulated by various stimuli. In opposition to these five hindrances are the five factors of absorption, which are also present even in the consciousness of animals. The five absorptions counter and eventually eliminate the five hindrances. Thus we can reduce the controlling power of the hindrances to whatever extent we can cultivate the absorptions. In a sense we are standing at the cross-roads. All ten factors, hindrances and absorptions, are present in our minds, and it is a question of whether we allow the hindrances to dominate or develop the factors of intensification so that they begin to dominate our minds. This is a very important battle because as long as the hindrances predominate we are very likely to see the results in this life and in the next life, in the form of rebirth in unfavourable or miserable states. But if our minds are raised by cultivating the five factors of absorption, we reach a higher level of development in both this life and the next." So, with regard to the Hindrances - perhaps one can help by having a well-trained and disciplined animal,who is prevented(?) from doing too much wrong in order to assist it in having a better likelihood of a more favourable rebirth? But - what to do with regard to factors of absorption - I wonder how they are evident in animal consciousness and how they can be intensified? metta, Christine 6940 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Cybele, > Well Derek, I don't wear rose-tinted glasses as you know I know you don't -- that's why I asked you about it! It's interesting what you say about the monks' curiosity. I think you're absolutely right about them getting ordained too young. For *most* people, I think they really should have some experience of life before they ordain. But, of course, that's not the way it is. There's a travel book I really, really enjoyed by Italian journalist Tiziano Terzani called "A fortune teller told me." In it he writes that young women flirt with the temporary monks (you know, that 3- month ordination they do in Thailand) because they figure that handsome, well-behaved monk = handsome, well-behaved husband. But that's temporary monks, and that's different, I think. And I'm shocked (but only slightly!) to hear about monks shaking hands with you. Quite apart from the vinaya, it seems like a loss of the old-fashioned way of doing things to me. I was even surprised one day when a monk shook hands with *me*. I'd have been much more comfortable with the wai and smile routine. > Please if you become a monk and start ill treating me or > any woman I will > personally provide to kick you on your behind Derek to > awake you from self > deceit! ;-) I believe you, I believe you! :-) > Now I will reveal you something amusing - do you know I > wanted to be a > buddhist nun? And don't dare to laugh!!!! I wouldn't dare! > And you know what all the western monks have discouraged > me while the > eastern ones thought that I was quite meant to be a nun, > isn't funny? You would be a very good nun. You would bring a great freshness of perspective to it. But I'm assuming you don't want to do it any more? Anyway, I thank you for sharing your experiences. You're an astute observer of life, and you've been so many places. Thank you. Derek. 6941 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 6:04pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Robert Epstein wrote: > what if true selfhood is also a state, rather than an object, a state with nothing > added or subtracted, and the Buddha was reluctant to assert or deny anything about > a 'self' because it would implicitly turn 'self' into an object by attributing > properties or negative properties to 'it'? Yes. I think there's an approach to Christian theology called the "via negativa" where they come to understand God by removing false attributes rather than by adding positive ones. I also see parallels between early Buddhism and the "neti, neti" method of the Upanisads. One of my observations from reading the texts is that early Buddhism was essentialy a practice. But somehow it transitioned (at least in the literature) into a philosophical endeavor. Derek. 6942 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Robert > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this >path? > >Just to get personal, are you attached to your enjoyment, or can you take >it or leave it? I am attached to many things Robert not only sex, why are you free of attachments? There are people who are not able to quit smoking or drinking coffee and aim to practice celibacy. I am prone to be realistic. And about attachments, you have to consider many other factors as past accumulations and present kamma; it's never a mere question of sheer will dealing with attachments. > >That would seem to me to be the important issue, not the 'enjoyment'. > >Robert E. > Well if you take a single sentence of what I declare from the original context, you are distorting the meaning I implied and using it to demonstrate your view. Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? Looking forward to it. Love Cybele 6943 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Howard (with PS to all) --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Erik) - > For sure volition is conditioned. All dhammas other than nibbana > are > conditioned. If something were to arise without conditions, then its > arising > would be random. > However, how is the path to be followed except by exercise of > volition? Progress on the path requires that volition be consistently > exercised, a very strong volition, and a very great effort made as a > result > of that strong volition. Quite so. But let's not forget that the volition that is the conditioned dhamma (it is a cetasika, in fact) is not the same as the volition that conventionally speaking we exercise almost continually in our lives, the latter being a concept which represents a number of different conditioned dhammas/realities. I think this may also be the source of some of the different ideas about effort. The effort that we exert (conventionally speaking) is not the same as the cetasika/conditioned dhamma of the same name and that is also a factor of the Eightfold Path). When trying to understand about the dhammas referrd to in the teachings, it is always helpful to remember that they differ from the convnetional concept of the same name. Jon PS to all: We have just finished an interesting day of dhamma discussion here in Bangkok. Erik and Bruce joined regulars Sukin, Betty, Amara, Ivan and Ell in a fairly lively session with Khun Sujin. Robert joins the discussion when it continues tomorrow morning. Sarah and I have enjoyed meeting Erik and Bruce. Both have very keen interest and will undoubtedly both benefit from and contribute to the regular weekly discussions while they are here. 6944 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Robert E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > >>So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function > of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs.<< > > Dear Suan, > Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an > expression], > but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' > [which also > makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not > actually the > object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of > consciousness both > before and after it has been experienced. > > Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being > apprehended, even > while being 'experienced' as one's own state. But memory forming a > concept in > order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to > the concept > as a pointer towards Nibbana itself. You may not have seen my earlier post in which i summarised a number of propositions found in the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha on these points (i have posted these again below). It is clear from the first 3 of those propositions, as I read them, that nibbana has an individual essence capable of being experienced by consciousness (and marked by sanna), and that nibbana is itself the object of consciousness for the person attaining each of the stages of enlightenment. Propositions 4 and 4.1 explain what exactly 'signlessness' means as an attribute of nibbana. It clearly does not refer to the lack of a characteristic or mark capable of being experienced by consciousness. Difficult to grasp, I know. I dont' pretend to understand, but simply quote this as the accepted orthodox teaching on this point. Jon 1. Nibbana is classified as one of the ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas). Ultimate realities are distinguished from concepts in that they exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhava). 2. Nibbana is the object of each of the 8 supramundane cittas (ie. the path and fruition cittas of the 4 stages of enlightenment) 3. Nibbana has one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the unconditioned deathless element totally transcendent to the conditioned world. 4. Nibbana has 3 different aspects-- 4.1 It is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of greed, hatred, and delusion, and because it is devoid of all that is conditioned. 4.2 It is called signless (animitta) because it is free from the signs of greed, etc., and free from the signs of all conditioned things. 4.3 It is called desireless (appanihita) because it is free from the hankering of greed, etc., and because it is not desired by craving. 5. Nibbana is excluded from the category of the 5 aggregates because it lacks differentiation (such as past, present , future). [References: CMA Ch I, #2, #26-28; Ch VI, #31; Ch VII, #40] > It also seems to me that every experience is exactly like this in truth, > because > no experience actually is apprehended as an object while being > experienced, and > ultimately all experiences are likewise 'signless'. Only objects have > something > to apprehend, and even this is only done by maintaining the concept of > the object > for a duration of more than a moment and turning it into a remembered or > known > object beyond the immediate experience. > > Thus, if I am not missing something which I hope you'll point out to me, > this > would be a proof that all experiences actually partake of the same > signlessness > and primordial reality of Nibbana, and that Nibbana is not only our very > and only > actual nature, outside of concepts of one kind or another including > memories, but > it is also the very and only signless reality of all existence. > > Robert E. 6945 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 9:22pm Subject: What is vipassanaa? Nowadays there are many books, teachers and centers teaching vipassanaa. Of course, they use the word to designate a certain way of practicing. But how is the word vipassanaa used in the original sutta-s? It's actually a relatively rare word in the sutta-s. The most often- mentioned meditation practices there are sammaa-sati and sammaa- samaadhi. And when the word vipassanaa does appear, it's generally in the pair samatho ca vipassanaa ca (e.g. DN 33). The DN commentary glosses these as samatho = samaadhi, and vipassanaa = pańńa. But in SN 43.12, samatha, vipassanaa, samaadhi and sati are all treated separately -- as though they were distinct. And in SN 35.245 samatha and vipassanaa are compared to a "swift pair of messengers." So, in the sutta-s themselves, what exactly does vipassanaa mean? And why the samatha-vipassanaa pairing as well as samaadhi-sati? Derek. 6946 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/28/01 8:56:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard (with PS to all) > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Erik) - > > > For sure volition is conditioned. All dhammas other than nibbana > > are > > conditioned. If something were to arise without conditions, then its > > arising > > would be random. > > However, how is the path to be followed except by exercise of > > volition? Progress on the path requires that volition be consistently > > exercised, a very strong volition, and a very great effort made as a > > result > > of that strong volition. > > Quite so. But let's not forget that the volition that is the conditioned > dhamma (it is a cetasika, in fact) is not the same as the volition that > conventionally speaking we exercise almost continually in our lives, the > latter being a concept which represents a number of different conditioned > dhammas/realities. > > I think this may also be the source of some of the different ideas about > effort. The effort that we exert (conventionally speaking) is not the > same as the cetasika/conditioned dhamma of the same name and that is also > a factor of the Eightfold Path). > > When trying to understand about the dhammas referrd to in the teachings, > it is always helpful to remember that they differ from the convnetional > concept of the same name. > > Jon > =============================== Well, I don't know. The following, which deals with the path factor of right Effort, is copied from the Access to Insight site. It all sounds quite conventional to me. It seems to discuss something which is *do-able*, whereas a "right effort" dealing with abhidhammic citta factors and "ultimate realities" seems to me to be something rather beyond practicing. The material follows. 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) ********************************************************** Right Effort samma vayamo Right Effort is the sixth of the eight path factors in the Noble Eightfold Path, and belongs to the concentration division of the path. The definition (the four Right Exertions): > "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk > generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his > intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates > persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of > evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, > endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake > of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He > generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his > intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, > development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, > monks, is called right effort." > >> -- SN XLV.8 > Abandon the unskillful, develop the skillful > "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is > unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would > not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to > abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If > this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I > would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this > abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I > say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. > It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to > develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is > skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to > you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful > were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is > skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to > benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" > >> -- AN II.19 > Abandoning the wrong factors of the path > "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's > right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into right > resolve: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong speech & > to enter into right speech: This is one's right effort... "One tries to > abandon wrong action & to enter into right action: This is one's right > effort... "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into right > livelihood: This is one's right effort." > >> -- MN 117 > 6947 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 9:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi again, Jon - In a message dated 7/28/01 12:37:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard writes: > > Well, I don't know. The following, which deals with the path factor > of > right Effort, is copied from the Access to Insight site. It all sounds > quite > conventional to me. It seems to discuss something which is *do-able*, > whereas > a "right effort" dealing with abhidhammic citta factors and "ultimate > realities" seems to me to be something rather beyond practicing. The > material > follows. > > With metta, > Howard > ================================= Also relevant to the notion of the importance of volition on the path is, I think, the path factor of Right Intention, which, again, seems (to me) to be quite conventional. With regard to this, I give the link to Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments on the Noble 8-Fold Path from the Access to Insight site. Chapter 3 deals with Right Intention. The link is http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html An important disclaimer, Jon: Obviously, the material covered at this link, and the material quoted in my last post, is material I think is relevant, but it is *not* anything I think you don't already know all about! I just thought these references might be of general interest with regard to this specific topic, and I put them forward only to help express my thinking on this matter. (I'm well aware that your knowledge of the Dhamma goes way beyond mine!) With metta and respect, 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) 6948 From: gayan Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 8:18am Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear robert e., 'dhamma' is the word with the greatest scope , found in pali. rgds. > > > > But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, > > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha > > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha > > sabbe 'dhamma' anatta > > > > sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) > > sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. > > is nibbana an unconditioned phenomenon? is it a phenomenon at all, or a > pre-existing condition? would a condition be a 'dhamma' of any kind? a 'thing' > of any kind? I wouldn't think so, unless, in my acknowledged ignorance, I am > misunderstanding the scope of the word 'dhamma'. > > Robert E. > > > 6949 From: Erik Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 8:49am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... As usual, Howard, (and Sarah was commenting on how appreciated your insights are here and I could only agree vehemently), you go STRAIGHT to the heart of the matter, bypassing any the irrelevant junk, and somehow always seem to find the exact passages where Lord Buddha speaks clearly, succinctly, on the matters under discussion. If the definition of wisdom is "knowing what to put down and what to take up," I can only offer many deep bows to the wisdom you CONSISTENTLY demonstrate here in DSG. And anyone who didn't take the time to read the passages quoted or the links given may wish to do so and read and meditate on them very carefully. And, on a different note, I offer MANY MANY thanks to Khun Sujim who I finally met yesterday for some of the most amazing Dhamma discussion I've ever had the privilege to participate in, and the kindness demonstrated and amazing gifts offered by ALL the DSG'ers I've somehow had the amazing kamma to come in contact with so far: Amara, Betty, Sukin, Bruce, Jonothan & Sarah, Robert, Ivan, and "Rin- chen" (meaning "great jewel" in Tibetan, who has offered to help teach me Thai!) :) It's obvious there is so much to learn from these wonderful, wonderful friends in the Dhamma! 6950 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 5:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Erik - Thanks for your very kind words, and for reporting on Sarah's. 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) 6951 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 6:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Erik: Sorry for not knowing your real name. So, do you know Tibetan? tadao 6952 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 6:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Derek: As for the Majjhima Patipataa, I do think that it is uniquely Buddhism. It is generally equated to the Eight Noble Eightfold Path. If you ask what the Middle Path to such people as Kun Sujin and Kun Nina, they would say that whenever there is sammaa sati, you are right on the Middle Path at that moment. I think this kind of answer desribes the Middle Path in its ultimate sense. Its more conventional sense is what you have already refered to: i.e, avoiding the both extremes. I think the notion of the Middle Path can be very vague and "wide", which can fit to desribe any practices of any individuals who understand the Dhamma to a certain extent. I think that this vaguenss is not the shortcoming but the beautiy of the Buddhism. And I think that this vagueness applies to the most of the Buddhist concepts. (I am slightly deviating from the main issue here.) In my interpretation, the Buddha was like some GP having his clinic in downtown Vancouver, he refused to be a medical professor at UBC. All the records he left for us were the medical files of his patients. His successors tried to establish the Medical Philosophy based on his medical files. But given that the Buddha's main goal was the treatment of his patients, there are tentions between the Medical philosophy created by his sucessors and the medical descriptions found in his files. So, there are many many Buddhist concepts which may appear to be very vague if you treat him as a medical professor or medical encycopedia. (Further deviating from the main topic) When I teach, I always tell my undergradutes that they should not treat me like a walking encyclopedia or even as an instructor, but should treat me as a facilitator, who is providing them with teachig materials. It is students' duty to do their best to understand the materials. I also tell them that I am providing just one wheel, and they have to come up with another wheel so that they can assemble a bycycle to travel. I think the Buddha's teaching is very much like that. You cannot exptec the Buddha to define everything. He is providing just a wheel, you have to come up with your own wheel so that you can travel to, say, Halifax (=nibbaana). The quality of your bycyle is totally depends on your own effort. Those who are interested mostly in Buddhist philosophy are those who are travelling to Halifax by a unicyle. And those who try to travel there by crawling on the ground are those who are on one extreme. And those who rather stay in the beautiful British Columbia or try to go to Las Vegas with their SUV are on the other exreme. The point I wanted to make is that the actual definition of the Middle Path is highly idiosycratic. As long as one is willing to assemble a bycycle, he should be regarded as one who is on the Middle Path (despite the fact that its ultimate sense refer to the Nobel Eightfold Path.) tadao (Sorry, my brain is not working today) 6953 From: Erik Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 4:06pm Subject: Abhidharma, Translation, Etc. --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Erik: > Sorry for not knowing your real name. > So, do you know Tibetan? Ha! I've been tutored personally by one of Jeffrey Hopkins' top Tibetan (and Sanskrit) Ph.D students, and due to the rpsence of too many mental obscurations (inappropriate conditions at present--in the same way there were too many obscurations in the mind before recently to begin Abhidharma studies in depth), the words just don't seem to stick. And anyway, I have far bigger fish to fry at the moment with Abhidharma studies, and I wish to remain as uundistracted as possible to assimilate as clearly as possible this profound and subtle system of teaching. I can read Tibetan characters and recite from Tibetan (or could, at least, when I was in better practice), but as far as comprehending the thorny syntactical structure of scriptural Tibetan, or even recalling all but the most basic terms, forget about it--too much ma- rik-pa (avijja). Also, there's a huge difference between scriptural Tibetan and colloquial Tibetan, and new students (even native Tibetans) of the Tibetan Dharma have a big vocabulary to get rolling, so it's not a "gimme" by any means. My intention, however, is to become a lotsawa (translator), but given I'm in Thailand at present I have to first cover Thai just to get by here, then Pali, to ensure I am able to complete the foundational studies of the Abhidhamma I feel is a requirement to become an effective translator. So the in-depth study of the Tibetan language is quite a few years off yet as I see it (but then who knows what vipaka will arise in the next moment?) And of course, to be REALLY serious, at some point I will have to learn Sanskrit as well--following the example of my teachers and senior studens of my lama, who have translated the Abhidharmakosa from both Tibetan AND Sanskrit, as a part of their Abhidharma study and learning exercise. At present, my strategy for learning the Abhidharma--other than paying careful attention to Khun Sujin per Amara's kind reminder to this voluble debate fanatic to shut the hell up and listen! :)--is working on the computerized input of the primary categories (khanda, cittas, cetasikas, paramattha dhamma, bodhipakkiya dhammas, paticca samuppada) and at least the basic relations (paccaya) among them to hyperconnect the exact wording of the Pali (and later Sanskrit & Tibetan) texts, into an "AI" Knowledge-Based System (KBS) (which I have worked with career-wise at Xerox's AI labs many years ago) which conveniently happens to have a hypertext web front-end! Incidentally, this KBS is structured EXACTLY the same way as the Patthana. Funny how AI researchers (through trial-ane-error) and Abhidhammists wound up arriving at the same way of representing knowledge, eh? Basically, this means modeling "entities" (for us, non-self-existent entities, of course!) and the relations (paccaya) between these entities, for example the way avijja paccaya sankhara, which opccaya, using the rpecise wording gfrom the Pali texts describing these relations. I expect this to take quite some time, however, and have only begun and input the barest outline so far. Perhaps at some point it will be something that can be made available for peoklpe freely on the Web. Perhaps not. Regardless, it's a wonderful exercise for working with the actual Abhidharma texts, which is my primary motivation for doing this at present. Once the next three years of Abhidharma studies are complete, I will return full-bore to Tibetan language and Dharma studies and probably spend some significant time at my home monastery, Sera Mey, for study of both the FULL classical Tibetan Gelug-pa presentation of the Dharma to learn the equivalent knowledge of a Geshe (though I can't become a real Geshe since I'm not a monk) and the Tibetan scriptural (and colloquial) Tibetan, to prepare for a career as a lotsawa (translator), which is reallty the focus of the group I've wound up in (http://www.world-view.org/directors/index.html). Actually, our group in New Jersey is where the Gelug-pa lineage "landed" in North America (believe it or not, there are three, em THREE!, Gelug-pa temples in this little backwater Jersey town), with Geshe Wangyal, who was Robert Thurman's (whose daughter actress Uma may be better know to those outside of the Tibetan scholarship realm) teacher and the first Geshe to come to North America. Based solely on what is happening there and the function being performed, our group is the American equivalent of the Tibetan "Kadampa" lineage (NOT the "New Kadampa" group based in the UK, which is altogether a different question). The Kadampas were the students of the Dharma (and later gurus, inclding the famed Marpa Lotsawa, guru of the great Tibetan yogi Milarepa who some on this list, from last evening, may recall hearing a little story about thanks to Mr. Khun Sukin's extraordinary gift to me) who transmitted the Indian Buddhist Dharma to Tibet (many dying of illness going to and from the Land of Snows to India--TRULY dedicated to the point of even gicving up their lives for the Dharma), who served as the translators (and transmitters and lineage gurus for the present system of Tibetan Buddhism) of the Sanskrit texts into Tibetan. Given the Buddha said the Dharma should be taught to us in our native tongue, this is a critical exercise in terms of transmitting this living (and extremely high-voltage) lineage to North America. It simply cannot be lost! I feel compelled beyond logical reason to be a "preserver of the Dharma" in whatever very limited capacity I am able to assist in this process. At present, the top overall priority is the inputting of the precious (and unspeakably rare) Tibetan texts into ASCII, a project which was begun by Geshe Michael Roach--the first American Geshe and senior student of my lama. He began the "Asian Classics Input Project" (http://www.asianclassics.org,/ and for a neat story--the author Erik Davis is NOT THIS Erik!!!, see this link: http://www.levity.com/figment/dharma.html). The other and concurrent priority is the translation of the most essential Tibetan texts into English, which has also begun. The original transmission of the Dharma from India to Tibet took around 400 years, and I'm hoping with the Internet now, and the speed of communications, and the possibility of on-line collaboration, this process can be speeded greatly. This is another reason I'm interested in seeing the Abhidharma (both the Pali version AND the Abhidharmakosa) input into a form that can be used as reference using full hyperlinking between terms and relations, because of how I suspect this may assist the translation process in terms of clarifying certain subleties in terms & definitions--which are ovbvioously critical whenever embarking on any major and systematic translation effort. Already this has begun (at least in concept and design, if not in execution) with portions of the ACIP texts, though not using the entities & relations method of "sankhara paccaya sankhara" as in the Abhidharma--rather, more straightforward indexing and cross- referencing via text-search facilities, which is still a major coup-- quite probably "good enough" as is (but what the heck, perhaps a hyperlinked structure of the Abhidharma would be of assistance as well). To be honest, it was Geshe Michael Roach who inspired this nascent effort (and as transmitter of the CORRECT Dharma inspired me to pursue the equivalent understanding of geshe as well). And I hope this seriously flawed collection of khandas will be able to do some tiny justice, in whatever feeble and imperfect way it will surely be, to this enormously important undertaking--for the sake of all sentient beings. Anyway, that's a bit more than I imagine you'd expected for such a simple question! :) :) :) *** May all beings have happiness and the causes of happiness; May all be free from suffering and the causes of suffering; May all never be separated from the sorrowless joy; And may all live in equanimity, free from the afflictions of greed, hatred, and delusion. 6954 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 9:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] What is vipassanaa? op 28-07-2001 15:22 schreef Derek Cameron op Derek: > Nowadays there are many books, teachers and centers teaching > vipassanaa. Of course, they use the word to designate a certain way > of practicing. But how is the word vipassanaa used in the original > sutta-s? > > It's actually a relatively rare word in the sutta-s. The most often- > mentioned meditation practices there are sammaa-sati and sammaa- > samaadhi. > > And when the word vipassanaa does appear, it's generally in the pair > samatho ca vipassanaa ca (e.g. DN 33). > > The DN commentary glosses these as samatho = samaadhi, and vipassanaa > = pańńa. > > But in SN 43.12, samatha, vipassanaa, samaadhi and sati are all > treated separately -- as though they were distinct. > > And in SN 35.245 samatha and vipassanaa are compared to a "swift pair > of messengers." > > So, in the sutta-s themselves, what exactly does vipassanaa mean? And > why the samatha-vipassanaa pairing as well as samaadhi-sati? Dear Derrek, the development of vipassana, of satipatthana or of the eightfold Path, it all amounts to the same. It is the development of pa~n~naa that clearly knows the characteristics of dhammas. This has been taught in all parts of the scriptures, even though the word vipassana may not often occur. For example, in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Fourth Fifty Ch 3, § 204, Judas tree) the word dassana.m, seeing is used: translated by the PTS as insight. Dassati and passati (in vipassanaa) are both seeing. We should consider what should be seen? How is this seeing pure? We read, "friend, when a monk understands as they really are the arising and the destruction of the sixfold sense-sphere, to that extent is his insight fully developed." Thus, seeing all realities that appear through the six doors as they are, as impermanent. Is that not the goal? As Jon recently explained so clearly, we should not see the factors of the eightfold Path as a series of steps or a number of qualities each to be developed separately. Even if they are treated separately, they have to developed together. Without pa~n~naa the other factors are not factors of the eightfold Path. Jim explained the word vipassanaa: < the Patisambhidhamagga com. gives the following interpretation of vipassanaa: "Aniccataadivasena vividhehi aakaarehi dhamma passatii ti vipassanaa." It sees realities in various aspects by way of impermanence and so on.> In the "Path of Discrimination" you will find many passages on insight and the stages of insight, Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XVII, Behaviour. Buddhaghosa in his commentaries uses the word vipassana very frequently: it should know the khandhas, the dhatus, the ayatanas, thus whatever appears through the six doors, again and again. Jim mentioned that the Buddha Vipassii was given this name, I am delighted with this viceyya, viceyya passati, he sees constantly investigating. I need this reminder, I forget "good old seeing and good old visible object" as Jon so aptly remarked. It reminds me that just investigating once or twice is not enough. It is really difficult to know what is hearing and what is sound, how we mix up the two. But we find this not interesting enough, we rather think of "stories" about people and things. We may find situations very important. But, as Sarah recently wrote to Cybele, Robert wrote to Sukin:< When we are listening to dhamma or discussing or reading the texts, what cittas are present? Isn't there seeing and visible object, sound and hearing, bhavangacittas... It all points to understand the anattaness of dhammas that are arising now. These dhammas are arising right while listening or considering- now is the time to understand.> I believe that in this way we shall understand what vipassana is, we shall not worry how often this word is used in early texts, or whether it has been used more often in later texts. It is the message we find in the whole Tipitaka that counts: investigation of realities appearing now, so that we gradually can understand their true nature of anatta. "Constantly investigating he sees. " Best wishes, Nina. 6955 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 10:14pm Subject: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Dear Friends, Just back to Hong Kong after a really wonderful weekend in Bangkok..... Such a treat to listen to Khun Sujin (who didn't even know we were coming and thought I was calling her from Hong Kong), to see old friends and especially to meet and spend time with Bruce and Erik for the first time. Erik is just as intense in real life as here - like he's just come off the NY trading floor - and very excited to have so many new friends who are so happy to debate with him. He talks at ten times the pace (and quantity) of most Thais but everyone appreciates his sincere interest in dhamma and many topics were brought up by him which have been discussed here....Bruce, on the other hand, as here, is very happy lurking in a corner and could have come out of a zen temple.....As on dsg, he's happy to bring up the right questions and make appropriate witty comments as occasion arises. This morning Rob joined us too and as we hadn't seen him in 18mths or so. Time with him would have made the trip worthwhile in itself for me. Lots and lots of lobha (so natural as Cybele reminds us), buts lots of opportunities for helpful reminders and reflections which I'm sure will be so useful when I start back teaching tomorrow after quite a long break! Some of the topics that come to mind quickly before I get ready for bed and tomorrow: intention, rt effort, dukkha, consideration of the Teachings, hindrances, samatha, realities and concepts, nibbana, meditation, anatta, characteristic vs intrinsic nature, nothingness vs emptiness, suitable conditions for awareness!!! I also enjoyed getting to know Bruce and Erik socially over breakfasts and lunches and spending time with the others inc. Sukin and Betty from dsg. Tadao, K.Sujin is so little changed from the old days in both appearance, manner and word.... whatever the story, she always so gently and kindly reminds us of realities now in just the same way as before....she was very happy to hear that you've joined dsg and are interested to discuss dhamma again. Gayan and others, don't worry, we're going to keep working hard so we can make the rounds and visit you all in time (unless you have a chance to meet us in Bkk)!! Best wishes for now, Sarah p.s Howard, yes, I was interested to hear that Erik had met you and we excanged positve comments....of course, that doesn't mean we always agree!! More later! Cybele, Bruce sent his regards and says he's often 'too busy and too lazy to write...' 6956 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 11:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hello, Derek, Have you ever compiled a list of what you take to be early vs. later material? Would make interesting reading I think. mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Why don't you give it a try! > > Okay, here goes. > > There's various clues you can use to differentiate > between earlier > and later material. Tadao mentioned one a few days > ago -- namely, the > use of archaic word-forms in early material. I won't > list all > possible tools used to stratify the nikaaya-s. > Instead I'll just > refer to those that are relevant to our discussion > of the > Mahasatipa.t.thaana Sutta (DN 22). > > (1) Over time, ordinary words become used in > specialized, technical > meanings. Look at the word dhamma. In the early > materials, it just > means teaching. But later on it comes to have the > specifically > Buddhist meaning of mind-object. And in DN 22 we can > already see the > word used in this later sense. The fourth section of > DN 22, the > section on dhammaanupassanaa uses the word dhamma > not only for > teachings, but also for mind-objects such as the > five hindrances. So, > this is an indication of the lateness of the > material. > > (2) Literary form. The early material consists of > simple statements > and propositions. Later materials take the form of > explanations, > analysis and commentary. Now, look at the > presentation of the Four > Noble Truths toward the end of DN 22. We have the > usual statement > that birth is suffering, old age is suffering, etc. > But THEN in DN 22 > we have analysis of each of these terms -- what is > birth? what is old > age? Each of these terms is commented upon within > the sutta itself. > The use of the commentarial formal is again an > indication of relative > lateness. > > (3) Elaboration of simple ideas comes after the > simple ideas > themselves. The early material presents sati > (mindfulness) without > much in the way of elaboration. But here we have a > whole discourse on > what just this one point means. Again, this suggests > it is later than > the simple proposition of the Noble Eightfold Path. > > (4) Absence of concentration meditation as part of > the path. The > Noble Eightfold Path is a core, early teaching -- it > occurs almost > everywhere. But in DN 22 we have sati without > samaadhi. Since the > early teachings and the Buddha's own practice > included samaadhi, and > this one doesn't, we can infer that DN 22 is late > rather than early. > > Derek. > > > > ===== nothing personal... 6957 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 11:52pm Subject: Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) --- "m. nease" wrote: > Have you ever compiled a list of what you take to be > early vs. later material? Would make interesting > reading I think. Mike, This is a subject that fascinates me. One thing I've quickly learned is that, even after a century and a quarter of scholarship, there are very few unanimously-agreed conclusions. Still, I continue to read the sutta-s with an historical, text-critical awareness. When I was at university I took some courses on the Old Testament and the New Testament, and this is where I learned to approach texts from this perspective. One angle that interests me right now is to notice who the audience is in the sutta-s. I distinguish three phases: (1) The Buddha's earliest audiences were people who were already ascetics. There was no need for them to leave their homes and "go forth" because they had already gone forth. Moreover, they lived alone, as solitary recluses, rather than in organized communities of monks. (2) In a second stage of development, people (men first, women later) would leave their homes and go forth specifically to follow the Buddha. They began to live in monastic communities, with buildings specifically donated to them, as opposed to living alone. (3) In a third stage, householders would remain householders -- i.e., NOT go forth -- and yet still follow the Buddha. For example, the Sigaalaka Sutta, Advice to Householders (DN 31) is clearly late by these criteria. The most extensive analysis I know of is G. C. Pande's "Studies in the Origins of Buddhism," 4th edition published 1995 by Motilal Banarsidass. I bought my copy mail order from Vedams Books in India http://www.vedamsbooks.com/relbuddh.htm but in the U.S. you may also be able to get it from South Asia Books http://www.southasiabooks.com/ Derek. 6958 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) Hello, Derek, This IS an interesting approach, nice to see something good come out of biblical study. I now recall asking nearly the same question a long time ago, of whom I forget (Jinavamsa, maybe?)--he recommended the same book. Thanks again. mike p.s. Actually, your points about the progression (-expansion) of the teaching over the Buddha's lifetime are fairly self-evident in the Suttas (in the Vinaya too)--I was more curious about the construction angle, verses being an older form and so on. I've always taken the Dhammapada verses, for example, as being later--what about the Udana verses? --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > Have you ever compiled a list of what you take to > be > > early vs. later material? Would make interesting > > reading I think. > > Mike, > > This is a subject that fascinates me. One thing I've > quickly learned > is that, even after a century and a quarter of > scholarship, there are > very few unanimously-agreed conclusions. Still, I > continue to read > the sutta-s with an historical, text-critical > awareness. When I was > at university I took some courses on the Old > Testament and the New > Testament, and this is where I learned to approach > texts from this > perspective. > > One angle that interests me right now is to notice > who the audience > is in the sutta-s. I distinguish three phases: > > (1) The Buddha's earliest audiences were people who > were already > ascetics. There was no need for them to leave their > homes and "go > forth" because they had already gone forth. > Moreover, they lived > alone, as solitary recluses, rather than in > organized communities of > monks. > > (2) In a second stage of development, people (men > first, women later) > would leave their homes and go forth specifically to > follow the > Buddha. They began to live in monastic communities, > with buildings > specifically donated to them, as opposed to living > alone. > > (3) In a third stage, householders would remain > householders -- i.e., > NOT go forth -- and yet still follow the Buddha. > > For example, the Sigaalaka Sutta, Advice to > Householders (DN 31) is > clearly late by these criteria. > > The most extensive analysis I know of is G. C. > Pande's "Studies in > the Origins of Buddhism," 4th edition published 1995 > by Motilal > Banarsidass. I bought my copy mail order from Vedams > Books in India > http://www.vedamsbooks.com/relbuddh.htm but in the > U.S. you may also > be able to get it from South Asia Books > http://www.southasiabooks.com/ > > Derek. > > ===== nothing personal... 6959 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:13am Subject: Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Tadao, > I think the notion of the Middle Path can be very vague and "wide", > which can fit to desribe any practices of any individuals who > understand the Dhamma to a certain extent. > I think that this vaguenss is not the shortcoming but the beautiy of > the Buddhism. Me too. Imagine what would have happened if the Buddha has spoken just the first few words of the first sermon -- not this extreme, not that extreme (SN 56.11) -- and then stopped there, and never said another word. Probably very few people would have understood what he was saying. But yes, I think there is a beautiful, clean aesthetic in teaching by denying negatives rather than asserting positives. Nothing to hold on to. > And I think that this vagueness applies to > the most of the Buddhist concepts. Particularly the teaching about the five aggregates not being self. This form of teaching makes no statements, either way, about whether there is or is not a self. Again, nothing to hold on to. > In my interpretation, the Buddha was like some > GP having his clinic in downtown Vancouver, he refused to be a > medical professor at UBC. Love the Canadian-content in your example! > When I teach, I always > tell my undergradutes that they should not treat me like a walking > encyclopedia or even as an instructor, but should treat me as a > facilitator, who is providing them with teachig materials. And can we go so far as to say that about the dhamma? That dhamma can be learned, but not taught? > (Sorry, my brain is not working today) For someone whose brain is not working, you make some pretty good points! Best regards, Derek. 6960 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > I think there is a beautiful, clean aesthetic in > teaching by denying negatives rather than asserting positives. > Nothing to hold on to. Bingo. 6961 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 8:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 7/29/01 10:15:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah Procter Abbott writes: > p.s Howard, yes, I was interested to hear that Erik had met you and we > excanged > positve comments....of course, that doesn't mean we always agree!! More > later! > > ============================ ;-)) Yes, I'm aware that we don't always agree! Likewise, there is not always agreement between Jon and me, between Robert and me, and between Amara (who I dearly wish would return to DSG) and me, and even between Erik and me, but I respect and admire all of you (and OF COURSE Nina!), and I learn a great deal from you all. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 6962 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:00am Subject: Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) > I was more curious about the construction > angle, verses being an older form and so on. I've > always taken the Dhammapada verses, for example, as > being later--what about the Udana verses? Hi, Mike, I'm afraid my Pali isn't up to commenting on metre and archaisms. Maybe Sean or Jim can say something about this? Derek. 6963 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 2:07am Subject: Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) --- "m. nease" wrote: > what about the Udana verses? Mike, I just realized that Peter Masefield, who has published translations of both the Udaana and its commentaries, is a contributor to the new Pali group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali Derek. 6964 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Derek: With respect to your question of whether the Dhamma can be learnt/ can be taught, I think, there have always been insightful people, due possibly to their previous accumulation of wisdom, who were able to figure out what the essense of the Buddha's teaching is all about. (In my own view, Khun Sujin is one of those rather rare people.) The Buddha's successors did their best to comment on the orignal teaching of the Buddha as in details as possible so that its essence (documented as integral part of the Theravada Buddhism) would retain its recovebility. (think a sailboat here) In the above sense, we can safely say that the Dhamma is learnable. But, as well illustrated in the famous sutta with a hypothetical guy with a pierced arrow, if one pursues the Dhamma with the attitude that one has to get a clear explantion on every Buddhist concept, then, that person would possibly get disappointed. (For that type of people, we may say that the Dhamma is not learnable.) The above seemingly shortcoming of the Buddhism should, however, not be treated as that the Dhamma is untautable. If it were, Gotama Buddha wouldn't have done so. The fact that he himself spent for decades to spread his teaching indictes that the Dhamma is taughtable. Even thought the Dhamma is taughtable, it is not meant for everybody. Even in suttas, we can see that there were occationally people who refused to accept hit teaching. So, Dhamma can be taught only to those who are willing to listen, willing to see the value in his teaching, willing to put one's effort, and who are not going to lose the sight of what the Buddhism is all about (ie. cessestion of all the sufferings). (The Buddha as a GP can prescribe a medicene, but it is not his position to force his patients to swallow it. It's all up to us.) tadao 6965 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Erick: It's nice to hear that you've finally met Khun Sujin, and impressed by her "qualities" (gu.na). tadao 6966 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:03pm Subject: the moment in between Dear all, I was lurking a while because I couldn't really make head or tail what are all of you are discussing... however I have a question... in between the arising and falling of a resultant kamma, is there 1) a moment where no resultant kamma arise (be it bad or good) ex... say a resultant kamma having a cycle of 10 days, will the next resultant kamma follow immediately after the dissipation of the first resultant kammic energy ?... or 2) will there be a reprieve of a few minutes or days or event moments... where nothing happens... sort of like waiting for the next resultant kamma to happen kind of thing...??? I hope you get what I am trying to say.... May you all be well and happy... Loke 6967 From: Herman Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:17pm Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Cybele, Be assured that I don't consider sex to be a frivolous issue. On a psychological level I believe with Maslow that sex is one of the "higher" needs of human beings, and that a fulfilling sexual relationship is an avenue for transcending the little self. And on a biological level, neither you, I or anyone else would be here if it were not for sex. Such enormous creative power is given to each of us!!!! For myself I believe abstinence would be very difficult, I just suspect I would be forever fighting with ghosts in my head. To be succesfully celibate, I imagine one has to die to one's sexuality. On the other hand, parenting requires the death of self in an other way. I find that parenting requires 24x7x365x? dana, but it is oh, so rewarding (and you learn heaps about yourself) Love Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Herman > > > >>Dear Cybele, > > > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this > >path? > > > > > >I enjoy sex too, but I find it very difficult to walk while in the > >throes :-) > > > >I'd say when you are enjoying sex you are enjoying sex. It's when you > >are not enjoying sex, one tends to think and talk a lot about it. > > > >People don't tend to think about food when they are not hungry. > > > >Love > > > >Herman > > > > In my experience people is talking always about food! > And indeed that's a good point, accordingly with you then people would not > talk about sex unless they were 'hungry' for it - therefore why should we > deny this fact and believe that is a frivolous issue? > > LOve > > CYbele > 6968 From: Herman Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:35pm Subject: Re: Lumbini In Danger! Hi there, No, I don't know what you mean by pay it forward, my guess is "forward this post to others" . Is that anywhere near correct? When I read your post re Lumbini, I thought : How would I react if your post said Nazareth or Bethlehem is going to be destroyed (I am an ex Christian, I understand more fully and immediately what these towns mean to religious Christianity) . My feeling was that neither Nazareth nor Bethlehem add one iota to anyone's liberation, and there would be a great possibility that clinging to these mere symbols would only add to the ignorance and suffering we share. I then assumed the same about Lumbini. The Buddha is not to be found there, just as Jesus is not in those other places. Still, I would be very pissed off if Westminster Abbey, the Dom at Koln, the Buddha statues in Afghanistan were mindlessly blown up. Where you writing about Lumbini as a sacred site? Regards Herman --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" wrote: > Tell that to the people living there. > > Have you visited there? > > I find your post just a bit too dismissive using a convenient way to bow > out. > > Pay it forward --- or do you know what that means? > > Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 3:30 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > > > Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in danger. > > And certainly impermanent. > > > > Herman > > 6969 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 2:51pm Subject: News reports/Lumbini In Danger! Dear Friends, >From: "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:07:08 -0400 >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini >In Danger! This thread is off-topic for dsg. Please do not post any further messages on the subject. Thank you for your cooperation. Jon & Sarah 6970 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > what if true selfhood is also a state, rather than an object, a > state with nothing > > added or subtracted, and the Buddha was reluctant to assert or deny > anything about > > a 'self' because it would implicitly turn 'self' into an object by > attributing > > properties or negative properties to 'it'? > > Yes. I think there's an approach to Christian theology called > the "via negativa" where they come to understand God by removing > false attributes rather than by adding positive ones. > > I also see parallels between early Buddhism and the "neti, neti" > method of the Upanisads. Yes, I was amazed when I discovered how simiilar the views of the Advaita Masters are to those of advanced Buddhists. It seems that the most advanced Hindu Vedantists sometimes reached a parallel development from basic Hindu beliefs to the non-dual realization of the Buddha. After all, he was an enlightened Brahmin. > One of my observations from reading the texts is that early Buddhism > was essentialy a practice. But somehow it transitioned (at least in > the literature) into a philosophical endeavor. very interesting comments, which I appreciate. I think it would make sense to say that Buddha initially wanted to share the way in which he found freedom with as many people as possible. As he ran into the mental and emotional obstacles that people confronted him with, he developed skillful ways to help them get into the correct orientation to receive the 'real' teachings. It is also possible that the Buddha himself developed a more intimate and clear relationship to his own enlightenment as he integrated it into his own life and teaching, and that he thus was more concerned with advanced issues of integration in the later part of his teaching career. I am not as familiar with the progression of all the sutras in the order in which they were created as many on this list. But I think it would be of great interest to hear from someone what they feel the pattern of development is in the progression from sutra to sutra. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6971 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:23pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert > > > > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this > >path? > > > >Just to get personal, are you attached to your enjoyment, or can you take > >it or leave it? > > > I am attached to many things Robert not only sex, why are you free of > attachments? > There are people who are not able to quit smoking or drinking coffee and aim > to practice celibacy. > I am prone to be realistic. > And about attachments, you have to consider many other factors as past > accumulations and present kamma; it's never a mere question of sheer will > dealing with attachments. > > > > > >That would seem to me to be the important issue, not the 'enjoyment'. > > > >Robert E. > > > > Well if you take a single sentence of what I declare from the original > context, you are distorting the meaning I implied and using it to > demonstrate your view. > Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is > worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. > Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? > Looking forward to it. > Oh I wasn't trying to distort anything, and I wasn't criticizing you either, dear Cybele. I do think it's interesting to see if we can experience the ups and downs of life and even of desires and defuse the aspect of suffering and insecurity by letting go of attachment. To me, it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active way to take the pressure and resistance out of living without having to resist the forces of life itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. As for past factors controlling the possibility of letting go, this may be somewhat true, but may also be an excuse for clinging. We can either let go or not, if not, that's okay, but if so, then it is an opportunity in the moment. I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll have a contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment while trying to relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I see tension as usually accumulating around any desire. The self-organism decides that it 'needs' whatever it desires, and it goes into the 'survival' category instead of the 'experiencing' category. When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends to make others into objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and to go freely as possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the moment and sometimes hav sex, sometimes not. Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that I do not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or anything of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what you initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still falling into empty rhetoric? Robert E. 6972 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- > Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > >>So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function > > of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs.<< > > > > Dear Suan, > > Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an > > expression], > > but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' > > [which also > > makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not > > actually the > > object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of > > consciousness both > > before and after it has been experienced. > > > > Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being > > apprehended, even > > while being 'experienced' as one's own state. But memory forming a > > concept in > > order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to > > the concept > > as a pointer towards Nibbana itself. > > You may not have seen my earlier post in which i summarised a number of > propositions found in the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha on these points (i have > posted these again below). > > It is clear from the first 3 of those propositions, as I read them, that > nibbana has an individual essence capable of being experienced by > consciousness (and marked by sanna), and that nibbana is itself the object > of consciousness for the person attaining each of the stages of > enlightenment. > > Propositions 4 and 4.1 explain what exactly 'signlessness' means as an > attribute of nibbana. It clearly does not refer to the lack of a > characteristic or mark capable of being experienced by consciousness. > > Difficult to grasp, I know. I dont' pretend to understand, but simply > quote this as the accepted orthodox teaching on this point. > > Jon Thank you, Jon. I know you are not claiming to understand this difficult formulation, but I wonder what your take is on how consciousness, which is still a conditioned phenomena [?] can itself grasp Nibbana, whose 'one intrinsic nature' is being 'totally transcendent to the conditioned world'. This seems to be on the face of it wholly self-contradictory and therefore impossible. It would need an unconditioned, transcendent consciousness to grasp an object or state with a totally transcendent characteristic. If that consciousness is indeed transcendent and unconditioned, it seems to me that this is a redundant statement of the definition of Nibbana itself. Therefore the proposition is reduced to Nibbana experiencing Nibbana. But this separates Nibbana into subject and object, whereas there is no subject-object separation in Nibbana, and Nibbana is one not two. If anyone can respond to this, I will be happy to remove the clouds from my mind. Robert ------------------------------------------- > 1. Nibbana is classified as one of the ultimate realities (paramattha > dhammas). Ultimate realities are distinguished from concepts in that they > exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhava). > 2. Nibbana is the object of each of the 8 supramundane cittas (ie. the > path and fruition cittas of the 4 stages of enlightenment) > 3. Nibbana has one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the > unconditioned deathless element totally transcendent to the conditioned > world. > 4. Nibbana has 3 different aspects-- > 4.1 It is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of greed, > hatred, and delusion, and because it is devoid of all that is conditioned. > 4.2 It is called signless (animitta) because it is free from the signs of > greed, etc., and free from the signs of all conditioned things. > 4.3 It is called desireless (appanihita) because it is free from the > hankering of greed, etc., and because it is not desired by craving. > 5. Nibbana is excluded from the category of the 5 aggregates because it > lacks differentiation (such as past, present , future). > > [References: CMA Ch I, #2, #26-28; Ch VI, #31; Ch VII, #40] > > > > > > It also seems to me that every experience is exactly like this in truth, > > because > > no experience actually is apprehended as an object while being > > experienced, and > > ultimately all experiences are likewise 'signless'. Only objects have > > something > > to apprehend, and even this is only done by maintaining the concept of > > the object > > for a duration of more than a moment and turning it into a remembered or > > known > > object beyond the immediate experience. > > > > Thus, if I am not missing something which I hope you'll point out to me, > > this > > would be a proof that all experiences actually partake of the same > > signlessness > > and primordial reality of Nibbana, and that Nibbana is not only our very > > and only > > actual nature, outside of concepts of one kind or another including > > memories, but > > it is also the very and only signless reality of all existence. > > > > Robert E. > > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6973 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- gayan wrote: > dear robert e., > > 'dhamma' is the word with the greatest scope , found in pali. so it would be correct to say that Nibbana is an unconditioned dhamma? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6974 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 7:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) Thanks, Derek, I got the invite too but didn't realize Masefield was there. I'm already subscribed to a couple of Pali sites but may visit there with my question. Thanks again for the tip. mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > what about the Udana verses? > > Mike, I just realized that Peter Masefield, who has > published > translations of both the Udaana and its > commentaries, is a > contributor to the new Pali group: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali > > Derek. > > 6975 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Tadao, After considerable searching I was able to find the name of the north american distributor of the CSCD, then lost it--apparently accidentally deleted while cleaning out my old email. If memory serves his name is Richard Crutcher for what that's worth. I'll look into it again and pass it along if I can find it. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > Thank you for the information on the Pali Weg site. > Somebody once told me that there is CD's or Web site > which list all the Pali Tiplitaka texts. Are you > aware of such a material? (I am asking the question > becuase here I do not have many Pali texts) tadao > 6976 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear robert e. > so it would be correct to say that Nibbana is an unconditioned dhamma? > > Robert E. yes, that would be correct. rgds. 6977 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Herman Sadhu x 3!!!!!! Non self deceit, great. Love Cybele >Dear Cybele, > >Be assured that I don't consider sex to be a frivolous issue. On a >psychological level I believe with Maslow that sex is one of >the "higher" needs of human beings, and that a fulfilling sexual >relationship is an avenue for transcending the little self. > >And on a biological level, neither you, I or anyone else would be >here if it were not for sex. Such enormous creative power is given to >each of us!!!! > >For myself I believe abstinence would be very difficult, I just >suspect I would be forever fighting with ghosts in my head. To be >succesfully celibate, I imagine one has to die to one's sexuality. > >On the other hand, parenting requires the death of self in an other >way. I find that parenting requires 24x7x365x? dana, but it is oh, so >rewarding (and you learn heaps about yourself) > >Love > >Herman > 6978 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:33pm Subject: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Robert E Robert Epstein wrote: > I do think it's interesting to see if we can experience the ups and downs > of life and even of desires and defuse the aspect of suffering and insecurity by > letting go of attachment. To me, it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active > way to take the pressure and resistance out of living without having to resist the > forces of life itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. The so-called technique of 'letting go' is indeed a well-worn one. To my mind it connotes a rather strong idea of someone who is 'seeing' the attachment and is able to let go. In fact there is attachment and aversion arising most of the time, if only we knew it, and these accumulations are so much stronger than any intention to 'let go' of the kilesa. > I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll have a > contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment while trying to > relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I see tension as usually > accumulating around any desire. The self-organism decides that it 'needs' > whatever it desires, and it goes into the 'survival' category instead of the > 'experiencing' category. > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends to make others into > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and to go freely as > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the moment and sometimes > hav sex, sometimes not. I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say anything in dhamma terms? > Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that I do > not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or anything > of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what you > initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. > > So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still falling > into empty rhetoric? I can't really see where this is leading, but you are welcome to relate it to the teachings if possible. Jon 6979 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Objection! Objection, your honor! I actually found Robert's observations insightful. Derek. --- <> wrote: > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends > to make others into > > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and > to go freely as > > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the > moment and sometimes > > hav sex, sometimes not. > > I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like > so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship > advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone > who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say > anything in dhamma terms? 6980 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 3:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! Reply in context below: ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:35 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > Hi there, > Hi, > No, I don't know what you mean by pay it forward, my guess > is "forward this post to others" . Is that anywhere near correct? > It comes from a movie of the same title. "Pay it forward" means that one returns the kindnesses and good deeds that have been done for them by doing kind things and good deeds to others. There is no "pay back" so one can "pay forward".. > When I read your post re Lumbini, I thought : How would I react if > your post said Nazareth or Bethlehem is going to be destroyed (I am > an ex Christian, I understand more fully and immediately what these > towns mean to religious Christianity) . > The problem is "react". I would respond with the same concern. These places belong to humanity. > My feeling was that neither Nazareth nor Bethlehem add one iota to > anyone's liberation, I disagree. > and there would be a great possibility that > clinging to these mere symbols would only add to the ignorance and > suffering we share. > It is not about clinging to symbols. It is about preserving the best of humanity for humanity. > I then assumed the same about Lumbini. > Perhaps that is the problem in a nutshell --- assuming. > The Buddha is not to be found there, just as Jesus is not in those > other places. > It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. The very statement implies they could be found somewhere else, but they are dead. (Discussion of Tathagata deferred!) > Still, I would be very pissed off if Westminster Abbey, the Dom at > Koln, the Buddha statues in Afghanistan were mindlessly blown up. > Afghanistan? Don't tell me you do not know what happened there. (And despite the religious fury about "graven images", the Taliban made a pretty penny on selling priceless art works --- again, what belonged to humanity.) > Where you writing about Lumbini as a sacred site? > Wow, some people really do not get it at all. What is "sacred"? The whole Earth is a sacred site, and if Lumbini is a place that few people care about and are willing to ignore, this speaks to what is happening with the rest of the Sasana. The Dhamma will not be obscured, but people will do a fine job obscuring it. So much for the New Age... Ha! > Regards > > Herman > Dhammapiyo Bhante > > --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > wrote: > > Tell that to the people living there. > > > > Have you visited there? > > > > I find your post just a bit too dismissive using a convenient way > to bow > > out. > > > > Pay it forward --- or do you know what that means? > > > > Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 3:30 AM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > > > > > > Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in > danger. > > > And certainly impermanent. > > > > > > Herman > > > > > > --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > > > wrote: > > > > India built barrage could submerge Lumbini > > > > > > > > Post Report > > > > > > > > KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, > also > > > listed as > > > > the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the > > > Russiyal-Khurda > > > > Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River > on > > > the > > > > Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 > years > > > old > > > > Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. > > > > > > > > "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. > > > > > > etc > > > 6981 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 3:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] News reports/Lumbini In Danger! Ooops. I answered Herman's post before seeing your post below. I am sorry. And just out of curiosity, why is this thread of-topic? With Metta, Dhammapiyo Bhante ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah and Jonothan Abbott" Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 2:51 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] News reports/Lumbini In Danger! > Dear Friends, > > >From: "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:07:08 -0400 > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini >In > Danger! > > This thread is off-topic for dsg. Please do not post > any further messages on the subject. > > Thank you for your cooperation. > > Jon & Sarah > 6982 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: The main point of my post was that people usually deal with desire in one of two ways: 1/ they follow desire 2/ they suppress desire Those who have decided that desire is 'bad' tend to try to get rid of it. Sometimes this involves sweeping it under the rug and making believe it isn't there, or trying to expel it by main force. My point is that by working with desire we are in a more honest relationship to it and can face it and gradually erode it. I don't think that having a forceful struggle with desire gets rid of it. I think it adds a secondary complication, that one has desire and on top of that is in a state of struggle. Treating desire with mindfulness is more effective than suppressing it. Allowing for the natural occurence of sexuality as part of life without suppressing it but without succumbing to it or being addicted to it, seems like a way to work with it. Is this pop psychology? [I've now moved from tired rhetoric to pop psychology. Oh well!] I don't know. If one wants to be celibate and work with desire as it arises, that's fine. But if one is married, as I am, or otherwise has sexual relations, then the question is: how do you work with sexuality and how do you work with desire. No conclusion, but those are my thoughts. How would you work with sexuality and desire in order to free yourself from attachment and aversion? It seems like you are saying that such a task is nearly impossible. So what is your approach that you think is most sensible for the path? Robert ---------------------------------- --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert E > > Robert Epstein wrote: > > > I do think it's interesting to see if we can experience the ups > and downs > > of life and even of desires and defuse the aspect of suffering > and insecurity by > > letting go of attachment. To me, it's not worn out or rhetorical, > but an active > > way to take the pressure and resistance out of living without > having to resist the > > forces of life itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. > > The so-called technique of 'letting go' is indeed a well-worn one. > To my mind it connotes a rather strong idea of someone who is > 'seeing' the attachment and is able to let go. In fact there is > attachment and aversion arising most of the time, if only we > knew it, and these accumulations are so much stronger than any > intention to 'let go' of the kilesa. > > > I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some > day we'll have a > > contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment > while trying to > > relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I see tension > as usually > > accumulating around any desire. The self-organism decides > that it 'needs' > > whatever it desires, and it goes into the 'survival' category > instead of the > > 'experiencing' category. > > > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends > to make others into > > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and > to go freely as > > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the > moment and sometimes > > hav sex, sometimes not. > > I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like > so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship > advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone > who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say > anything in dhamma terms? > > > Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the > sense that I do > > not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are > attached or anything > > of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based > on what you > > initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. > > > > So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I > am still falling > > into empty rhetoric? > > I can't really see where this is leading, but you are welcome to > relate it to the teachings if possible. > > Jon > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6983 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Objection! --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Objection, your honor! > > I actually found Robert's observations insightful. > > Derek. thanks. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6984 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 4:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear robert e. > > > > so it would be correct to say that Nibbana is an unconditioned dhamma? > > > > Robert E. > > yes, that would be correct. thanks. I will have to try to understand the definitional scope of 'dhamma' a bit more to try to absorb this idea, since I don't in any way understand Nibbana as a 'thing'. What an 'unconditioned 'thing'' would be I cannot cognize, since a thing's 'thingness' consists of its conditioning. I guess I'm off to an area I know nothing about: Pali and Sanskrit, where the original words are lodged. Best, Robert E. 6985 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 5:42am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein > Thank you, Jon. I know you are not claiming to understand this difficult > formulation, but I wonder what your take is on how consciousness, which is still a > conditioned phenomena [?] can itself grasp Nibbana, whose 'one intrinsic nature' > is being 'totally transcendent to the conditioned world'. This seems to be on the > face of it wholly self-contradictory and therefore impossible. > > It would need an unconditioned, transcendent consciousness to grasp an object or > state with a totally transcendent characteristic. If that consciousness is indeed > transcendent and unconditioned, it seems to me that this is a redundant statement > of the definition of Nibbana itself. Therefore the proposition is reduced to > Nibbana experiencing Nibbana. But this separates Nibbana into subject and object, > whereas there is no subject-object separation in Nibbana, and Nibbana is one not > two. > > If anyone can respond to this, I will be happy to remove the clouds from my mind. > There were a fair number of discussions about nibbana since Erik and Anders have joined us in the group. I hope you have had the chance to read some of it. As I have mentioned in the past, the following book: http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf explains in details how the realities condition one another. If you understand what Nina wrote in this book, you would understand some of the members' position why nibbana is cognizable (by the citta and co- arising mental factors which are conditioned realities). I personally don't understand some of the members' position that something that is cognizable by conditioned realities must necessarily be conditioned itself. Maybe you would explain this to me? By patthana explanation, there are other objects (real and not real) that condition the nama that cognize them but are not themselves conditioned by the nama. The example of this is: 1) The visible object (real) outside our bodies are not conditioned by the seeing consciousness. In this case, the visible object conditions seeing consciousness, but the seeing consciousness doesn't condition the visible object. 2) When we think of the concepts (unreal), the concept is conditioning the thinking consciousness, but the thinking consciousness is not conditioning the concepts. kom 6986 From: Jon and Sarah Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 7:37am Subject: Re: News reports Ven Dhammapiyo, --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" wrote: > Ooops. I answered Herman's post before seeing your post below. I am sorry. > > And just out of curiosity, why is this thread of-topic? It is off-topic because it does not fall within the scope set out in the guidelines, which we have referred you to before. If you have any furher queries on this, please contact us off-ist. The guidelines may be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files Jon and Sarah 6987 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Hi, Mike: Thank you for your information on CD's. If you come up with the accurate information, please pass it to me. Thanks again, tadao 6988 From: Herman Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:01am Subject: Teachings Then / Now Jon, --- <> wrote: > I can't really see where this is leading, but you are welcome to > relate it to the teachings if possible. > Do you believe it is possible and necessary to fit all experience into the idiom of the teachings? For example: I think that not many people today would actively use the periodic table of the elements as expounded in the Abhidhamma, to describe physical realities (rupas). This is not ascribing a deficiency to the Abhidhamma roadmap of rupas, it was sufficient for its time, and way beyond it in insight. But these days the equipment used to investigate physical realities has a far greater resolution than the sense bases, and consequently different depths of the same realities are being observed and described. Hence the periodic table of elements containing things such as Na , Cl, H , O is in use. And it's use has significant consequences for humanity today. Anyone who has ever taken medicine has benefitted from the efforts of those who have sought to investigate realities beyond what was accepted as final in their time. The reality at this moment is that we are all using 21st century technology to communicate at a very impersonal level with each other. Apparently it is very useful to be more discriminating than to have just two types of reality, absolute and conventional. Regards Herman 6989 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:17am Subject: Fwd: Emptiness is a mode of perception > >Emptiness is a Mode of Perception >(adapted from Emptiness, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Geoffrey DeGraff), >Theravada Text Archives, Internet 1997, revised 1999) > > >Emptiness is a mode of perception, a way of looking at experience. It adds >nothing to and takes nothing away from the raw data of physical and mental >events. You look at events in the mind and the senses with no thought of >whether there is anything lying behind them. This mode is called emptiness >because it is empty of the presuppositions we usually add to experience to >make sense of it: the stories and world views we fashion to explain who we >are are and the world we live in. Although these stories and views have >their uses, the Buddha found that some of the more abstract questions they >raise - of our true identity and the reality of the world outside - pull >attention away from a direct experience of how events influence one another >in the immediate present. Thus they get in the way when we try to >understand and solve the problem of suffering.. > >To master the emptiness mode of perception requires training in firm >virtue, concentration and discernment. Without this training, the mind >tends to stay in the mode that keeps creating stories and world views. And >from the perspective of that mode, the teaching of emptiness sounds simply >like another story or world view with new ground rules.. In terms of your >views about the world, it seems to be saying either that the world does not >really exist, or else that emptiness is the great undifferentiated ground >of being from which we all came [and] to which someday we shall all return. >These interpretations not only miss the meaning of emptiness but also keep >the mind from getting into the proper mode.. > >Now, stories and world views do serve a purpose. The Buddha employed them >when teaching people, but he never used the word emptiness when speaking in >this mode. He recounted the stories of people's lives to show how suffering >comes from the unskillful perceptions behind their actions, and how freedom >from suffering can come from being more perceptive. And he described the >basic principles that underlie the round of rebirth to show how bad >intentional actions lead to pain within that round, good ones lead to >pleasure, while really skillful actions can take you beyond the round >altogether. In all these cases, the teachings were aimed at getting people >to focus on the quality of the perceptions and intentions in their minds in >the present - in other words, to get them into the emptiness mode. Once >there, they can use the teachings on emptiness for their intended purpose: >to loosen all attachments to views, stories, and assumptions, leaving the >mind empty of all greed, anger, and delusion, and thus empty of suffering >and stress. > 6990 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Teachings Then / Now Dear Herman I agree with you. Being too strict leads to dualism indeed. I appreciate your consideration. Metta Cybele > >Apparently it is very useful to be more discriminating than to have >just two types of reality, absolute and conventional. > > >Regards > > >Herman > > 6991 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:52am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Robert E. > > Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is > > worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. > > Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? > > Looking forward to it. > > >Oh I wasn't trying to distort anything, and I wasn't criticizing you >either, dear Cybele. I do think it's interesting to see if we can >experience the ups and downs of life and even of desires and defuse the >aspect of suffering and insecurity by letting go of attachment. To me, >it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active way to take the pressure and >resistance out of living without having to resist the forces of life >itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. Sweetheart Rob 2 (I have a thing with the Roberts in this list ;-)), happens that I am the one who has learned to take advantage of the streams and never swim against the current. I am Brazilian you know, I am always instinctively prone to chose what is opposing less resistance and imply less effort of 'sheer will' to fit in. I need to relax; la dolce vita.... Apart in my viewpoints where I am the one who contests but Derek spared me the chance this time. No pressure, no forcefulness with me. Therefore we agree. :-) >I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll >have >a contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment >while >trying to relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I am not tensed up Robert; the idea of the contest is appealling! ;-) > >Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that >I do >not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or >anything >of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what >you >initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. INDEED, it's a very interesting issue and I am willing to expand it. Let's proceed! I brought it up purposefully; I am wicked lady - I want to dissuade Derek from his monkhood intentions. I am joking Derek! ;-) Don't worry to address me, I don't exclude anything from my practice and sex and desire is a very important and dynamic part of it and only if you are in self deceit you would ignore it. > >So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still >falling >into empty rhetoric? > >Robert E. YES, now is not sterile rethoric but lively subject and I am pretty interested. Please wait for me, don't give up the discussion. Tomorrow I will be quite busy but for sure will arrange the time to join the sharing. I always feel grateful when I meet practitioners that are not sex repressed!!! Love Cybele 6992 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 9:51am Subject: Re: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > Just back to Hong Kong after a really wonderful weekend in Bangkok..... > > Such a treat to listen to Khun Sujin (who didn't even know we were coming and > thought I was calling her from Hong Kong), to see old friends and especially to > meet and spend time with Bruce and Erik for the first time. I just wanted to say how delightful it was to meet you and Jonothan, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, Kieaw, Robert & Alex & Roxanne, Ivan, and of course the dear Amara (who WILL rejoin DSG--I have something up me sleeve on that one I think may work to get her back here actively participating heh heh heh :), who has "mothered" me since arriving here in a way that has made me feel more to feel truly welcomed here than at any other time anywhere, anyplace. Excellent Dhamma discussions with Bruce a few evenings ago, and look forward to many more during his stay here, as well as getting hooked up with his teacher at Section 5 at Wat Mahatat who teaches walking meditation. It was such an unmitigated pleasure to finally meet Khun Sujin, to even have such an incredible opportunity at all is the cause for many many moments of kusala citta. > Erik is just as intense in real life as here - like he's just come off the NY > trading floor [...] > and very excited to have so many new friends who are so happy > to debate with him. He talks at ten times the pace (and quantity) > of most Thais Well, Sarah, you may or may not know this but I literally DID work ON the trading floor at one point on Wall St. (actually, the World Financial Center--but not the "trading pits" with all the shouting and hand-waving like the NYSE--these are computerized trading desks, but still an extremely intense environment where people burn out faster than Roman candles). And, FYI, all my partners in my company are all ex-Wall-Streeters as well, and my even my boss (who worked as a head trader for a decade at a very big Swiss bank) tells me I have to slow down! :) He particularly emphasized that to me before my leaving for SE Asia, not once, twice, but thrice, and now hearing it again reminds me to S-L-O- W down, so that I actually communicate with my interlocuters, rather than barrage them with an incomprehensible stream of syllables. And of course I mentioned before I am taking Amara's well-spoken advice to shut up and pay more attention, rather then keep flapping this yap! :) :) :) > but everyone appreciates his sincere interest in dhamma and many topics were > brought up by him which have been discussed here....Bruce, on the other hand, > as here, is very happy lurking in a corner and could have come out of a zen > temple..... I have been extremely impressed by Bruce's approach to the Dhamma since meeting. There is a Buddhist saying: "asking questions is the way to wisdom." And if that is a way to wisdom (it is), then wisdom MUST ripen as a result of this sort of inquiry. This is one erason I love Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs," because he really emphasizes the questioning aspect. I have also been so impressed by (Mr.) Sukin since meeting, for so many reasons. This is not to inflate any egos (I hope all this merely encourages the pursuit of the path--beacuse I know circumsatnce will find a way to deflate ego soon enough, so I'm not too worried), but I have to say (not knowing another's cittas lacking clairvoyance) that Sukin's actions truly exemplify the dana paramita. Sarah and Jonothan, such delightful breakfasts and discussions (and thank you again for providing nutriment for these five heaps to continue the pursuit of the path)! What a wonderful way to start a day! I look forward to many more discussions here and in person. And for Betty, I feel utterly privileged to have met you, particularly the gifts and assistance given. Those have given me MUCH to meditate on. The one regret is that I haven't had nearly enough time with Robert, given his busy schedule. I hope to remedy that at some point soon, especuially if I am to be going to Tokyo on business, which looks quite possible in the near future. 6993 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Objection! Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Objection, your honor! > > I actually found Robert's observations insightful. I'm glad to hear that. I should perhaps have been more constructive in my comments. Let the discussion continue! Jon > Derek. > > --- <> wrote: > > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends > > to make others into > > > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and > > to go freely as > > > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the > > moment and sometimes > > > hav sex, sometimes not. > > > > I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like > > so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship > > advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone > > who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say > > anything in dhamma terms? > 6994 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:40am Subject: Re: Fwd: Emptiness is a mode of perception --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > >Emptiness is a Mode of Perception > >(adapted from Emptiness, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Geoffrey DeGraff), > >Theravada Text Archives, Internet 1997, revised 1999) > >Now, stories and world views do serve a purpose. The Buddha employed them > >when teaching people, but he never used the word emptiness when speaking in > >this mode. He recounted the stories of people's lives to show how suffering > >comes from the unskillful perceptions behind their actions, and how freedom > >from suffering can come from being more perceptive. And he described the > >basic principles that underlie the round of rebirth to show how bad > >intentional actions lead to pain within that round, good ones lead to > >pleasure, while really skillful actions can take you beyond the round > >altogether. In all these cases, the teachings were aimed at getting people > >to focus on the quality of the perceptions and intentions in their minds in > >the present - in other words, to get them into the emptiness mode. Once > >there, they can use the teachings on emptiness for their intended purpose: > >to loosen all attachments to views, stories, and assumptions, leaving the > >mind empty of all greed, anger, and delusion, and thus empty of suffering > >and stress. Just wanted to re-quote this because it is so important--and thank you for posting this Cybele! It really is about the relinquishing of all suppositions and views, and, based on the Dmama discussions with Khun Sujin Sunday, we were in full agreement that this is precisely the reason to study paramattha dhammas is solely to get rid of suppositions and views, to experience things as they are, directly (yatha-bhuta-dasa-nana), which is the basis for the arising of the path-moments which are the ONLY way to permanently eradicate the ten fetters binding us to the wheel of samsara. Whether practiced from the perspective of paramattha dhammas, or by negating views via the study and meditation on emptiness, is the highest-level wisdom-mode practice that DIRECTLY leads to the termination of the fetters. And, as Thanisarro Bikkhu also notes (and I totally agree with him on this point), "to master the emptiness mode of perception requires training in firm virtue, concentration and discernment. Without this training, the mind tends to stay in the mode that keeps creating stories and world views." And of course those stories and world-views (pannati) are NOT "realities," are NOT seeing things as they are, but mere conceptual fabrication, papanca. See Bikkhu Bodhi's essay on this: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/bd8p/bd8p_16.htm I prefer to emphasize this part: "The Buddha calls this process of mental construction papanca, "elaboration," "embellishment," or "conceptual proliferation." The elaborations block out the presentational immediacy of phenomena; they let us know the object only "at a distance," not as it really is. But the elaborations do not only screen cognition; they also serve as a basis for projections. The deluded mind, cloaked in ignorance, projects its own internal constructs outwardly, ascribing them to the object as if they really belonged to it." In other words, taking objects for self. To add to the emptiness discussion, and as I mentioned to Mr. Sukin, Bikkhu Bodhi's understanding--if one is to go by the following essay-- of the teachigns on emptiness, are in serious error, because if he understood those teachings as intended, he'd know they PERFECTLY harmonize with what was quoted above. Anyway, here's the essay: http://www.quangduc.com/English/245Dhamma.html This representation of the so-called "non-dualism" of the emptiness teachings is a very serious distortion of actual Mahayana teachings on both emptiness and its so-called "non-dualism." It is apparent Bikkhu Bodhi has never studied under a qualified teacher of so-called "Mahayana" Buddhism nor Buddhist tantra (as if there were actually more than a single yana to begin with), or if he has, never comprehended it as intended, beacuse there could NEVER be cause for falling into the very serious error of denigrating the actual Ariyan Dharma as he has done here, which all extant lineages I am familiar with, Tibetan and Zen, most DEFINITELY are. To speak in such a way about what is the Ariyan Dharma is to disgrace the Three Jewels. That said, I give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that these views have been corrected by now. And it also doesn't mean I don't accept what he says when it IS correct Dharma, to be perfectly clear. But I can only restate that it is an expression of extreme unwisdom to such make categorical-sounding statements about a system with which one has no obvious familiarity. The sort of kamma created by denigrating what is in actuality the Ariyan Dhamma can't be good, that's for certain. And if one is not CERTAIN about another's system (and I speak to those dogmatists in my own lineage who have, for example, denigrated the Nyingma lineage's teachings of Tibetan Buddhism on Dzogchen as well on this), then one with wisdom will remain silent on such points until one knows for certain one way or another. 6995 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:52am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Robert E Thanks for your measured response to my provocative post! There is much that is useful in your message below, and one or two points which I would like to comment on later. Just to make one point at this stage. To see our kilesa as this or that kind of problem or situation (sex, alcohol, food, etc) is perhaps to lose sight of the fact that attachment is attachment is attachment. At such moments one is caught up in an idea of 'my problem', 'my situation'. This is perhaps particularly likely to be so where the situation involves the intimate presence of another person. The purpose of developing undestanding is to see realities as they are, so that attachment and pleaseant feeling can be realised as elements that appear but are not 'us', whether it is the attachment that arises in relation to a particular 'situation' or that arises when there is no discernable 'situation'. However, if we approach our kilesa in terms of problems areas to be 'dealt with', we are in effect looking at them on a purely conventional level, as something we should be rid of or at least to be kept to a manageable level. This will not be conducive to seeing the unwholesomeness as it really is as and when it arises, or to seeing the other realities that are arising at the same time. I am not saying we should ignore conventional problems. I am just trying to distinguish the development of the path from means of 'dealing with' such problems. Jon --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The main point of my post was that people usually deal with desire in > one of two > ways: > > 1/ they follow desire > 2/ they suppress desire > > Those who have decided that desire is 'bad' tend to try to get rid of > it. > Sometimes this involves sweeping it under the rug and making believe it > isn't > there, or trying to expel it by main force. > > My point is that by working with desire we are in a more honest > relationship to it > and can face it and gradually erode it. > > I don't think that having a forceful struggle with desire gets rid of > it. I think > it adds a secondary complication, that one has desire and on top of that > is in a > state of struggle. > > Treating desire with mindfulness is more effective than suppressing it. > Allowing for the natural occurence of sexuality as part of life without > suppressing it but without succumbing to it or being addicted to it, > seems like a > way to work with it. > > Is this pop psychology? [I've now moved from tired rhetoric to pop > psychology. > Oh well!] I don't know. If one wants to be celibate and work with > desire as it > arises, that's fine. But if one is married, as I am, or otherwise has > sexual > relations, then the question is: how do you work with sexuality and how > do you > work with desire. > > No conclusion, but those are my thoughts. > How would you work with sexuality and desire in order to free yourself > from > attachment and aversion? > > It seems like you are saying that such a task is nearly impossible. So > what is > your approach that you think is most sensible for the path? > > Robert 6996 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 0:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > There were a fair number of discussions about nibbana since Erik and > Anders have joined us in the group. I hope you have had the chance to > read some of it. As I have mentioned in the past, the following book: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf > explains in details how the realities condition one another. If you > understand what Nina wrote in this book, you would understand some of > the members' position why nibbana is cognizable (by the citta and co- > arising mental factors which are conditioned realities). > > I personally don't understand some of the members' position that > something that is cognizable by conditioned realities must necessarily be > conditioned itself. Maybe you would explain this to me? Well, let's say this: even though seen objects are not conditioned by seeing consciousness, the seen objects are limited insofar as they are taken in by seeing consciousness via the form of the seeing consciousness. If I don't notice a mark on an object, the seeing consciousness doesn't condition that object by 'removing the mark', but insofar as I am taking in the rock, the seeing of the rock is conditioned by the seeing consciousness and for me is missing that mark. If a conditioned [limited and particularly structured] consciousness is able to apprehend Nibbana, it will likewise be apprehending Nibbana according to its form and limitations, ie, its conditioning. Therefore, while Nibbana may be an object for this conditioned consciousness, the view of Nibbana that the limited consciousness apprehends will be a limited [untrue] version of Nibbana, not Nibbana itself. Since Nibbana is the only unlimited, unconditioned state, only Nibbana itself can apprehend Nibbana as it truly is, but if it were to theoretically split itself in order to be able to apprehend itself, it would instantly decline into a limited, divided consciousness of subject-object, with a limited, conditioned version of Nibbana apprehending itself as a limited, objectified version of itself. This is the logic by which I feel that Nibbana cannot possibly be apprehended by consciousness without objectifying, limiting and dividing it into a conditioned object or concept, which is to say, not Nibbana itself, but an apprehendable version of itself. I don't see how this logic can be refuted, but I'm sure if it has been refuted in the suttas themselves, then there is good reason why I am not understanding the dynamic of the advanced consciousnesses and their relation to Nibbana. This is very possible, since my education in Buddhism is somewhat limited itself. Anyway, I will look at the book, and see what it says about this. > By patthana explanation, there are other objects (real and not real) that > condition the nama that cognize them but are not themselves > conditioned by the nama. The example of this is: > > 1) The visible object (real) outside our bodies are not conditioned by the > seeing consciousness. In this case, the visible object conditions seeing > consciousness, but the seeing consciousness doesn't condition the visible > object. > > 2) When we think of the concepts (unreal), the concept is conditioning > the thinking consciousness, but the thinking consciousness is not > conditioning the concepts. I understand that an object that is assumed to be 'real' and have an objective reality beyond my perceiving of it, would be assumed to not be itself conditioned by my conditioned seeing consciousness's apprehension of it. But in the case of thinking of concepts, I don't see how the form of the thinking consciousness would not condition the concepts, since thoughts, unlike outer objects, are influenced by consciousness. If my consciousness is unable to understand the color red, the concept of the color red will not show up as the color red for that consciousness. Now maybe once again I am not understanding the use of 'consciousness' here. If it is merely a passive recorder of whatever concepts/objects happen to land on it, then your formulation would make sense to me, and objects and concepts would have the same status, in conditioning the consciousness that apprehends them, while not being conditioned by it themselves. But if consciousness is a dynamic force that interacts with perceptions and concepts, then I would see it as capable of shaping and conditioning that which it apprehends. Robert E. 6997 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:18pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert E. > > > > Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is > > > worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. > > > Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? > > > Looking forward to it. > > > > >Oh I wasn't trying to distort anything, and I wasn't criticizing you > >either, dear Cybele. I do think it's interesting to see if we can > >experience the ups and downs of life and even of desires and defuse the > >aspect of suffering and insecurity by letting go of attachment. To me, > >it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active way to take the pressure and > >resistance out of living without having to resist the forces of life > >itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. > > > Sweetheart Rob 2 (I have a thing with the Roberts in this list ;-)), happens > that I am the one who has learned to take advantage of the streams and never > swim against the current. > I am Brazilian you know, I am always instinctively prone to chose what is > opposing less resistance and imply less effort of 'sheer will' to fit in. I > need to relax; la dolce vita.... > Apart in my viewpoints where I am the one who contests but Derek spared me > the chance this time. > No pressure, no forcefulness with me. > Therefore we agree. :-) > > > >I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll >have > >a contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment >while > >trying to relax about it and let go of the tension around it. > > I am not tensed up Robert; the idea of the contest is appealling! ;-) > > > > > >Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that > >I do > >not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or > >anything > >of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what > >you > >initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. > > > INDEED, it's a very interesting issue and I am willing to expand it. > Let's proceed! > I brought it up purposefully; I am wicked lady - I want to dissuade Derek > from his monkhood intentions. > I am joking Derek! ;-) > Don't worry to address me, I don't exclude anything from my practice and sex > and desire is a very important and dynamic part of it and only if you are in > self deceit you would ignore it. > > > > >So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still > >falling > >into empty rhetoric? > > > >Robert E. > > YES, now is not sterile rethoric but lively subject and I am pretty > interested. > Please wait for me, don't give up the discussion. > Tomorrow I will be quite busy but for sure will arrange the time to join the > sharing. > I always feel grateful when I meet practitioners that are not sex > repressed!!! ha ha, well, we'll see what this subject brings up. I have just become very interested in the idea of discriminating the attachment and aversion to things. For instance, I quit smoking 20 years ago, but I don't think I ever stopped desiring to smoke. I just reached a point where I decided to let go of it. Now I am averse to it. I am annoyed by smokers and I can't stand to be around smoke. In terms of Buddhism is this any better? If I can't keep my equanimity around smoke, then I am just as involved with it in terms of Buddhism as when I *indulged*. I am on the other side of the coin and I have replaced attachment with aversion which is the same thing from the other angle. It is non-acceptance, separation and individual entity asserting itself in both cases. The smoker says "You can't tell me what to do - I can smoke if I want to", and the non-smoker says: "You can't smoke around me. You have to stop!" So I think in terms of Buddhism I would be better off if I could just be around smoke, accept people smoking without getting angry, and gently try to avoid the smoke when I can, and perhaps gently remind people that smoke is bad for them when it seems appropriate. So with sex, you have St. Paul in Christianity saying that if you love God enough, you don't need earthly love and lust. And then people have to prove how spiritual they are by giving up sex. But they then become the judges of sex and look down on people who still have sex as being 'animalistic' and savage, and not as spiritual as they are. It would be better to have sex, in my view, be moderate and compassionate in sexuality, try to be aware, which of course takes half the pleasure out of it [just joking] and gradually let go of attachment to sex, rather than taking sides for or against it, which just increases separation and replaces attachment with aversion. Imagine having a teenager who's thinking about having sex with her boyfriend. And you say: 'You'd better not fool around or I'll lock you in your room, goddamit! Sex is BAD for you and you're too young, blah blah.' Now imagine having a teenage girl and saying to her: 'How do you really feel when you're with this person? Have you ever really paid attention and seen what he's up to? Do you think he really likes you? How do you think you'll feel if you go through with this plan? Do you think you're ready? Why don't you try touching, holding hands, talking, and see how that feels. Are you really together, is there a mutual acknowledgment? Are you aware of who you are and how you feel when you're with him? Please pay attention and see what is real when you are with this person. Don't turn sex into something you *have* to do or *have to* not do. Where's your freedom here?' I'd rather have a child that uses mindfulness to make life decisions and really grows as an aware being, than one who is in a battle between should and shouldn't, between the false gods of attachment and aversion. I can't imagine a young person who would jump into bed with some sleezy guy if she really paid attention and cultivated her awareness of what was really there. At least, this seems to me to be a more sane way to grow into life than to either run towards things or away from them with eyes shut tight. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6998 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:32pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert E > > Thanks for your measured response to my provocative post! There is much > that is useful in your message below, and one or two points which I would > like to comment on later. > > Just to make one point at this stage. To see our kilesa as this or that > kind of problem or situation (sex, alcohol, food, etc) is perhaps to lose > sight of the fact that attachment is attachment is attachment. At such > moments one is caught up in an idea of 'my problem', 'my situation'. This > is perhaps particularly likely to be so where the situation involves the > intimate presence of another person. > > The purpose of developing undestanding is to see realities as they are, so > that attachment and pleaseant feeling can be realised as elements that > appear but are not 'us', whether it is the attachment that arises in > relation to a particular 'situation' or that arises when there is no > discernable 'situation'. However, if we approach our kilesa in terms of > problems areas to be 'dealt with', we are in effect looking at them on a > purely conventional level, as something we should be rid of or at least to > be kept to a manageable level. This will not be conducive to seeing the > unwholesomeness as it really is as and when it arises, or to seeing the > other realities that are arising at the same time. > > I am not saying we should ignore conventional problems. I am just trying > to distinguish the development of the path from means of 'dealing with' > such problems. Jon, Thanks for continuing the discussion. I have to say honestly that I 'sort of' know what you mean by the distinction you are making between thematizing areas of life as topics to be 'fixed' instead of seeing the arising of attachment as a feature of the conditioned self and to disidentify with it. If that is your main point -- to take a structural perspective towards the arising of all phenomena and reactivity, then I can understand that and I think it is a good point. I would only say two things: 1/ I really understand sex, relationship, intimacy, etc., as examples of the arising of attachment and aversion, rather than areas of living to be 'fixed up' by Buddhism in some way. We could be talking about eating, attachment to possessions, whatever you might like, just as examples in which attachment and aversion arise. 2/ My main point was that to see attachment and desire as 'not-self' is important, but if it is subtly replaced with aversion it is just as unhelpful. If one identifies with aversion as 'self' as opposed to attachment/desire as 'not-self', the essential separation of the illusory self is still bolstered, just from an opposite point of view. Robert ------------------------------- > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The main point of my > post was that people usually deal with desire in > > one of two > > ways: > > > > 1/ they follow desire > > 2/ they suppress desire > > > > Those who have decided that desire is 'bad' tend to try to get rid of > > it. > > Sometimes this involves sweeping it under the rug and making believe it > > isn't > > there, or trying to expel it by main force. > > > > My point is that by working with desire we are in a more honest > > relationship to it > > and can face it and gradually erode it. > > > > I don't think that having a forceful struggle with desire gets rid of > > it. I think > > it adds a secondary complication, that one has desire and on top of that > > is in a > > state of struggle. > > > > Treating desire with mindfulness is more effective than suppressing it. > > Allowing for the natural occurence of sexuality as part of life without > > suppressing it but without succumbing to it or being addicted to it, > > seems like a > > way to work with it. > > > > Is this pop psychology? [I've now moved from tired rhetoric to pop > > psychology. > > Oh well!] I don't know. If one wants to be celibate and work with > > desire as it > > arises, that's fine. But if one is married, as I am, or otherwise has > > sexual > > relations, then the question is: how do you work with sexuality and how > > do you > > work with desire. > > > > No conclusion, but those are my thoughts. > > How would you work with sexuality and desire in order to free yourself > > from > > attachment and aversion? > > > > It seems like you are saying that such a task is nearly impossible. So > > what is > > your approach that you think is most sensible for the path? > > > > Robert > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6999 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Hi Erik, It's great to see and hear what a good start you've got off to in Bkk and how hospitable everyone is to you (and would be to anyone else from here)! ..and of course you're so appreciative that it makes it a pleasure for everyone.... > > Well, Sarah, you may or may not know this but I literally DID work ON > the trading floor at one point on Wall St. (actually, the World > Financial Center--but not the "trading pits" with all the shouting > and hand-waving like the NYSE--these are computerized trading desks, > but still an extremely intense environment where people burn out > faster than Roman candles). Glad my comments about the 'intensity' were well taken .....just don't go burning out too soon with all that abhidhamma study ahead of you ;-)) Actually, what I really appreciate is seeing and reflecting on all the very different accumulations that make up this 'self' and other 'selves'. Whether male, female, fast, slow, intense, laid-back, left-brain or right-brain, the realities which the Buddha discussed, as appearing through the 6 doorways, are the same to be known. The problems and defilements(the kilesa) are the same and that's why we have these universal teachings. The stories (the panatti) maybe different, but the realities (paramattha dhammas)- the seeing, hearing, likes, dislikes etc are there to be seen as anatta for us all. It's not a matter of changing character or tempo but of developing understanding..but all this you know well! > > And, FYI, all my partners in my company are all ex-Wall-Streeters as > well, and my even my boss (who worked as a head trader for a decade > at a very big Swiss bank) tells me I have to slow down! :) He > particularly emphasized that to me before my leaving for SE Asia, not > once, twice, but thrice, and now hearing it again reminds me to S-L-O- > W down, so that I actually communicate with my interlocuters, rather > than barrage them with an incomprehensible stream of syllables. That's funny that even NY bankers give you this advice!! > > And of course I mentioned before I am taking Amara's well-spoken > advice to shut up and pay more attention, rather then keep flapping > this yap! :) :) :) I did notice her taking the microphone away from you on Sunday and how gracefully you took the reminders! > > I have been extremely impressed by Bruce's approach to the Dhamma > since meeting. There is a Buddhist saying: "asking questions is the > way to wisdom." And if that is a way to wisdom (it is), then wisdom > MUST ripen as a result of this sort of inquiry. This is one erason I > love Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs," because he really > emphasizes the questioning aspect. I haven't read the book, but yes, listening and considering can be more helpful than seeing oneself in 'combat'....;-)) On the otherhand, I can't imagine you EVER lurking in a corner!! > Erik, all your notes about everyone's help here are very touching. You're already bringing new life and interest to the discussions in Bkk as you have on dsg . It would be so boring if we all had the same approach! No need to compare;-) You'll do fine. I hope your business (software development for financial orgs. as I understand it) goes well enough for the NY company to be happy to keep you on our doorstep. Let us know when you're coming this way too. Yesterday we had lunch and a little dhamma chat with Kom's sister and Japanese brother-in-law who are on their way to Bkk (and stay in your Soi 10!!). They are interested to attend a discussion and have yr number. It's a bit of a shock getting back into office work and teaching after my trips...but even when hectic and speedy (yes, I get that way too) and over-tired, there are still those same paramatha dhammas waiting to be known! What a lovely weekend if was for us...keep us updated, Erik! Sarah