7000 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 5:22pm Subject: A late welcome Dear Asterix 7 (sorry, i don't know how else to address you), I think you quietly slipped in without my noticing or without any fanfare or welcome:-) I gather that, like Gayan, you live in Sri Lanka;-) I spent quite a long time there (living in a temple) and then later joining Khun Sujin, Nina and many friends from this list in the 70s, so it's rather a special place (read object of a lot of lobha) for me. I'm sure everyone would love to hear a little more about your background and interest in dhamma. You suggest you did not 'take refuge in the dhamma'- at a young age..were you brought up in Sri lanka? Where do you live? Hope to hear more form you and to visit Sri lanka again. Thank you for joining us here. Sarah p.s Do you know Gayan (one of our long-standing members now)? I notice you both sign off in the same way:-) -- Asterix 7 wrote: > dear cybele, > > > You live in paradise. Serendipy Island! ;-) > > Yeah, true to some point, only realised it after i started > globetrotting.. > ........... > > 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 7001 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 5:59pm Subject: toeing the party line....;-) Dear Ken, We followed up this point with Bruce in Bkk and this reminded me of your post here: --- Ken 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. Yes, he has a knack for this! > > 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. I'm sure there have been other repsonses by now, but let me add a little more as I see it. Anytime there is the delusion of self, it is wrong view and not OK in the sense that wrong view is never OK. Of course, there can be wrong view right now while we're reading dhamma, just as there can be wrong view whilst meditating, hiking in Switzerland or any other time. There can be an idea of being able to control life or realities at any of these times and the truth is totally hidden. Again it's the citta and accompanying cetasikas at any given moment that counts rather than the 'situation', the story which we take for being the reality. In the same way, panna (wisdom) and awareness can arise whenever there are the conditions for them to arise which may be at any of these times if there has been sufficient intellectual understanding and considering about the paramattha dhammas (realities) which are to be known. A moment of sati is very short. it doesn't wait for a special time and place. >>But I have my own theories! good! > > 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. I would say that at any moments of ignorance or wrong view, there is no accepting of the gift....only at moments of wholesomeness (kusala) and specifically at moment s with panna (wisdom) and sati (awareness). 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. OK > > 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 -- I would say that at moments of satipatthana, when sati is aware of paramattha dhamma, there is no idea of formal or any other practice. >while there is no satipatthana, we are > back to where we need to accept the gift (to listen to the > Buddha's > teaching). Moments of satipatthana can slip in while listening or at any other time...no rules at all...but it's true that unless we listen and consider a lot about realities and understand well in theory, there won't be conditions for the 'slipping in'. > > 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) (?) The development of satipatthana doesn't change at different stages or levels. It's always only the present reality which can be the object of awareness. The understanding grows deeper and more penetrating, but this doesn't mean it ever persists or needs a particular 'formal practice'. As wisdom grows it sees the more subtle aspects of wrong view and there are fewer and fewer conditions for these wrong views to arise. Thus, there are fewer conditions to have any idea of certain places or times or postions as being more favourable as it becomes clearer that it 's wrong view and ignorance that are blinding 'us', not Vancouver, being a layperson, too busy at work or whatever other story seems to be the 'block'. Not sure if this helps or confuses more! I'm actually hoping Bruce will get back on this to you with one of his 'colourful posts', but Erik will have to give him a nudge first (and I know he is very busy in Bkk for now). Thanks for your thoughtful posts always, Sarah p.s Cybele and friends, there's no party-line to toe here....;-))) What would there be to discuss if we all agreed on every point? 7002 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 6:48pm Subject: From Bangkok Dear Group, Just finished lunch with Acharn sujin, Amara and her mother, Betty, Sukin, Bruce, Ivan, Erik, Shin, my chidren, and others. We were at the Royal Bangkok Sports Cub (as the guests of Amara's mother). There was delicious food and pleasnt conversation. That was the story. We discussed the nature of the moment. In truth there was no luncheon, no sports club, no robert, too. Usuallly we live in this world of concepts and stories about life, thinking we are doing this or that. But what is there is only these insignificant dhammas . Understanding them means there is a breaking down of the 'whole'. There was a small tropical storm that we could see outside the room where we later discussed some more. In truth no storm but only seeing arising conditioned by visible object and then thinking processes that form up concepts. Panna can see the difference between paramattha dhammas and concepts and panna comes always associated with a level of detachment. Even when we discuss the dhamma we may have attachment to some idea -and if it is not seen as attachment (a dhamma that obscures) one will accumulate more attachment to that idea. Acharn Sujin noted how the understanding must be very firm so that all namas (mental phenomena) are known as simply nama (not self). There is not my dosa or my lobha or my wisdom or my seeing- they are all simply nama dhamma. Panna can understand too that moments of vipaka (result of past kamma) seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling are different from moments during which thinking, attachemnt, understanding, or ignorance etc, arise. We spoke about how no one can stop the next moment arising. No one can decide that the next moment should be sound or colour, seeing or hearing , or feeling, or thinking. we might worry what the next life will be, or we might have attachment to an idea of being born in a good place. However,now there is dukkha, again and again we are opressed by these different objects. It is by seeing dukkha that is occuring now that next life can be understood. And the more this is known the more there is detachemnt from the idea of a self who is reborn. There is only this moment and it can become habitual to investigate it. Hard to do so though without the idea of self. We have to see for ourselves whether it can be done. The dfference between understanding at levels of thiking and at levels of direct understanding can be known too. It is not a fast process I think. Better to go in the right direction slowly though than the wrong one quickly. robert Ps, Very nice to meet everyone and thanks for the party on saturday Erik. ert 7005 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 9:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Ken Thanks for your post and my apologies for being slow in replying. I am behind on the messages from last week, and am just starting to catch up. --- Ken 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!" Yes, wouldn't we all! But as Kom's reply to you made clear, it's the same path for everyone and there's no short cut. We on this list are very fortunate to have this goal in common and so hopefully can be of support to each other in this endeavour. > 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. Thanks for your kind and encouraging words. There is I hope no chance of ever getting tired of going over the same ground, since if there is one thing I have come to realise it is that one never gets beyond needing to be reminded again and again of the same basic truths -- that it is the reality appearing at the present moment that is to be known, that reality and nothing else. Jon 7006 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Erik --- <> wrote: > > 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. This as an important, even crucial, issue. It is intimately involved with the whole question of the development of the path generally and role of samatha in that development in particular. Just to restate, I am suggesting that references in the suttas to the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are references to the mental factors arising at a moment of path consciousness. On this reading, the Noble Eightfold Path is a path in the sense that moments of such path consciousness lead inexorably to nibbana; it is not a 'path of practice' for the worldling in the sense that each factor is to be developed separately. This path is also known as the stream that is entered at the first of the 4 stages of insight. Only the stream-winner and above are said to be on the noble eightfold path. (Note: there are, however, mundane path moments -- moments of vipassana -- which are moments of consciousness accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors.) This interpretation is supported by my reading of the Visuddhimagga and the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha. I find there references to treatment of the factors of the N8FP as cetasikas that accompany path-moments, but so far not to the path factors as 'guidelines for bhavana'. Here are some examples. In the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation CMA VII, #24-#38, it says-- "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths." The Visuddhimagga in its discussion of the 4 Noble Truths [XVI, 75 - 83] says that the different factors of the eightfold path "occur in a single moment on the occasion of the path". It explains how at such moments each factor performs its own function. Right concentration, for example, arises conditioned by (among other things) the right mindfulness that arises together with it-- "83. When his mind is thus guarded by supreme mindfulness, the unification of mind, which is associated with that right view, abolishes wrong concentration, and that is called right concentration. It has the characteristic of non-distraction. Its function is to concentrate. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong concentration." Right concentration of the Eightfold Path is explained here as the concentration that arises with right view and right mindfulness and abolishes wrong concentration. As we know from the suttas, it is concentration that is of the level of jhana, but this need only be so for the actual moment of eightfold path consciousness. I may be wrong, but I suspect that the idea of the Eightfold Path as a guideline for bhavana is an approach that has developed in relatively recent times. Jon 7007 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 529 Dear Robert, How beautifully you described the day today. . .and any day or any moment. Thank you for all the wonderful insights you share with us, which become conditions for insight to arise within for us (conventional us) as well. Anomodhana, Betty 7008 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 2:28am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Jon (and Erik) - In a message dated 7/31/01 10:10:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > > Erik > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > 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. > > This as an important, even crucial, issue. It is intimately involved with > the whole question of the development of the path generally and role of > samatha in that development in particular. > > Just to restate, I am suggesting that references in the suttas to the > factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are references to the mental factors > arising at a moment of path consciousness. On this reading, the Noble > Eightfold Path is a path in the sense that moments of such path > consciousness lead inexorably to nibbana; it is not a 'path of practice' > for the worldling in the sense that each factor is to be developed > separately. This path is also known as the stream that is entered at the > first of the 4 stages of insight. Only the stream-winner and above are > said to be on the noble eightfold path. (Note: there are, however, > mundane path moments -- moments of vipassana -- which are moments of > consciousness accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors.) > > This interpretation is supported by my reading of the Visuddhimagga and > the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha. I find there references to treatment of the > factors of the N8FP as cetasikas that accompany path-moments, but so far > not to the path factors as 'guidelines for bhavana'. Here are some > examples. > > In the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation CMA VII, #24-#38, it says-- > > "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths." > > The Visuddhimagga in its discussion of the 4 Noble Truths [XVI, 75 - 83] > says that the different factors of the eightfold path "occur in a single > moment on the occasion of the path". It explains how at such moments each > factor performs its own function. Right concentration, for example, > arises conditioned by (among other things) the right mindfulness that > arises together with it-- > > "83. When his mind is thus guarded by supreme mindfulness, the > unification of mind, which is associated with that right view, abolishes > wrong concentration, and that is called right concentration. It has the > characteristic of non-distraction. Its function is to concentrate. It is > manifested as the abandoning of wrong concentration." > > Right concentration of the Eightfold Path is explained here as the > concentration that arises with right view and right mindfulness and > abolishes wrong concentration. As we know from the suttas, it is > concentration that is of the level of jhana, but this need only be so for > the actual moment of eightfold path consciousness. > > I may be wrong, but I suspect that the idea of the Eightfold Path as a > guideline for bhavana is an approach that has developed in relatively > recent times. > > Jon > ============================== I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about Right Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And what of all the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the suttas? These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma understanding, then it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are further apart than i had realized. Perhaps I am totally missing what you are saying. Please lead me out of my confusion! 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) 7009 From: ppp Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] From Bangkok Hi, Erick: Thank you for reporting us on your convestion with Khun Sujin. An excellent reminder, indeed. tadao 7010 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 8:46am Subject: Noble Eightfold Path - Jonothan --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: Jonothan, what, can't go a day without spoiling for a good debate? The only people worse in this regard than lawyers are Gelug- pas! :) :) :) > > [Erik] 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. > > This as an important, even crucial, issue. You bet it is! > Just to restate, I am suggesting that references in the suttas to the > factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are references to the mental factors > arising at a moment of path consciousness. Rather than offer your own interpretation or that of commentators, why not examine the very words we both accept as canonical, the words the Buddha was reputed to have spoken in the Magga-Vibhanga Sutta (Analysis of the Path): Evam me suttam, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-008.html Nowhere in this Sutta does the Buddha mention anything about the Eightfold path referring to abstract "mental factors" at the arising of path consciosuness. If he did, please point it out to me, because these eyes can't see a single reference to the maggangas as fitting your interpretation. Let's begin at the beginning, as it were. "And what, monks, is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the stopping of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the stopping of stress: This, monks, is called right view." Note here, just for starters, the Buddha says NOTHING about recognizing the present moment. I just had to toss that out there for all those who seem to keep clinging to the IDEA about the recognizing realities in the present moment while totally neglecting the less glamorous conventional of practice the Buddha spent so much time harping on, if we go by how much the Buddha spoke a the conventional level, as in this sutta, vs. how much he spoke about the loftier aspects of the path, as he does in far fewer place, if one merely performs a quick scan of the suttas for their content. In other words, the Buddha understands this reality about us, and as a result teaches at a conventional level most of the time. In other words, what is suffering? What is its origination? And what is the way leading to its cessation? Or stated another way, what is the problem (First Noble Truth)? Where does this problem originate (Second Noble Truth)? How do we terminate the problem, now that we know where it lives (the Eightfold Path)? "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, abstaining from divisive speech, abstaining from abusive speech, abstaining from idle chatter: This, monks, is called right speech." Certainly when there is kusala citta one will be abstaining from all of these activities, since these are all motivated through the akusala-kamma-pathas of the speech-door. But he doesn't put it in those terms here. No, the Buddha explicitly speaks again at the most conventional of levels. There is no need to be a sotapanna to understand the meaning of this, is there? Any child with a basic grasp of these terms can understand this simple message. And put it into practice it, for that matter. I learned these basic teachings from my precious parents before I was five years old! "And what, monks, is right action? Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, abstaining from sexual intercourse: This, monks, is called right action." Again, when kusala cittas are present none of these activities will have condition to arise because they lack cause (following the infallible law of cause-and-effect, that all things depend on conditions for their arising), as before. But he isn't talking about some abstract supramundane path-factor here, as should be apparent to anyone reading this without a mind filled with preconceptions about what is and is not the path. These activities are not even reputed to be possible by sotapannas! So how on earth could the Buddha be talking about anything supramundane here at all? This is obviously a lokiya teaching. To suggest otherwise would entail the absurd consequence that the Buddha was preaching to those who had already terminated the conditions for the arising of these activities! Why would the Buddha waste precious time pedantically lecturing stream-winners on such points? And where here is there ANY mention of again, abstract notions of cittas and cetasikas and magga- nana here? But enough on that. And Howard has already mentioned Right Livelihood, etc. Let's get to one REALLY IMPORTANT ONE for DSG (because many of the responses I've seen here on intention and volition and effort indicate seriously wrong understanding about the notion of samma- vayama, Right Effort): "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." What about this reads like "path consciousness" in the magga-nana sense? Any kindergartener with a basic understanding of the terms used here can easily grasp this utterly simple message, and what the intent of these very simple and direct words regarding effort is. The meaning's plain as the noonday sun! > On this reading, the Noble > Eightfold Path is a path in the sense that moments of such path > consciousness lead inexorably to nibbana; it is not a 'path of practice' > for the worldling in the sense that each factor is to be developed > separately. I believe I have shown otherwise. Now you show me where my interpretation is the tiniest bit at variance with what Lord Buddha ACTUALLY taught in the Suttas ALL schools of Buddhism accept as the words of the Tathagata, the rightly self-awakened one. "And what, monks, is right mindfulness? (i) There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, aware, & mindful -- putting away greed & distress with reference to the world. (ii) He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves -- ardent, aware, & mindful -- putting away greed & distress with reference to the world. (iii) He remains focused on the mind in & of itself -- ardent, aware, & mindful -- putting away greed & distress with reference to the world. (iv) He remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, aware, & mindful -- putting away greed & distress with reference to the world. This, monks, is called right mindfulness. We all appear to agree that this aspect of practice is necessary, being vipassana and all. This is what I have been taught by my teachers and is what is taught in all systems one would associate with the label Buddha-dhamma. > This path is also known as the stream that is entered at the > first of the 4 stages of insight. Only the stream-winner and above are > said to be on the noble eightfold path. Sorry, but I could not disagree more. Sotapannas and "above" (as if there is something like "levels" rather than the termination of unwholesome qualities via absence) may have actualized certain aspects of the Eightfold path and be practicing it for the first time with Right View, but there is no need to be a sotapanna to practice ANY of the limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path. Must one be a sotapanna to practice Right Concentration, for example? How is one to realize the fruits of the Dhamma without this indispensable component being THOROUGHLY established in the first place? "And what, monks, is right concentration? (i) There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. (ii) With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, one-pointedness of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. (iii) With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & fully aware, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' (iv) 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, monks, is called right concentration." I just want to point out a key phrase here: "enters and remains in" as perhaps providing a clue as to the Buddha's meaning of what sort of jhana meditation to cultivate here. Where in these very simple words is there room for the notion of "khanika jhanas" that many use to avoid doing the specifically directed practices (Right Effort) of concentrating and unifying the mind? Where is there the slightest talk about "present moments"? Note I am not denying that awakening can and does often occur outside of seated meditation, but it would take a pretty liberal interpretation of this definition, repeated over and over again by Lord Buddha in so many places throughout his teaching career, to think that the Buddha was suggesting one could simply dispense with "entering AND REMAINING" in these states of highly-concentrated awareness for extended periods of time! And the reason for this is that concentration--true ekagatta in the jhana sense--is so hard to come by in the first place, that we need a whole slew of favorable conditions for its arising at all. And to forgo this type of directed meditation specifically aimed at cultivating concentration for extended periods of time, such that one attains mastery in concentration, is a recipe for further rounds in the wheel of samsara. Note I am not suggesting this necessarily be done in seated meditation, nor by following the breath. Only that it be done to the point master is attained to the point one can easily "enter and REMAIN" in this state of concentrated awareness at will, for extended periods of time. That may be accomplished by a number of means, but it is a requirement all he same. If it weren't you would not see this definition of Right Concentration repeated by the Buddha in so many places throughout the suttas. > (Note: there are, however, > mundane path moments -- moments of vipassana -- which are moments of > consciousness accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors.) All these are mere abstract concepts, leading nowhere but to further rounds on the wheel of samsara, Jonothan. > This interpretation is supported by my reading of the Visuddhimagga and > the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha. I find there references to treatment of the > factors of the N8FP as cetasikas that accompany path-moments, but so far > not to the path factors as 'guidelines for bhavana'. Here are some > examples. Set aside the Visuddhimagga! Set aside the Abhidhammata-Sangaha! In fact, take the entire Abhidhamma Pitaka, its commentaries and sub- commentaries, and set the WHOLE THING aside, until the essential points above are grasped in their entirety, because it is apparent the confusion engendered by these volumes of abstract categories and classifications and interpretations of interpretations of interpretations are directly occluding the actual (and so incredibly simple and direct) meaning of the very words Lord Buddha spoke to his disciples, which are so simple even a child can grasp them! > The Visuddhimagga in its discussion of the 4 Noble Truths [XVI, 75 - 83] > says that the different factors of the eightfold path "occur in a single > moment on the occasion of the path". It explains how at such moments each > factor performs its own function. Right concentration, for example, > arises conditioned by (among other things) the right mindfulness that > arises together with it-- Just to note, for the record, counsel, that you're saying the Visuddhimagga supports the notion that Right Concentration arises from conditions, that is has conditions as support. > "83. When his mind is thus guarded by supreme mindfulness, the > unification of mind, which is associated with that right view, abolishes > wrong concentration, and that is called right concentration. It has the > characteristic of non-distraction. Its function is to concentrate. It is > manifested as the abandoning of wrong concentration." Do you have direct experience if this type of concentration arising from the method of practice you've been taught? No need to answer, this is merely a question to reflect very carefully on, because it is in the most literal sense a matter of life and death. And the opportunities to encounter a human birth (let alone the holy Dharma during a Buddha-sasana) are so rare as to be nearly unfathomable: "Suppose a man threw into the ocean a yoke with one hole in it, and then the east wind blew it west and the west wind blew it east and the north wind blew it south and the south wind blew it north; and suppose there were a blind turtle that came up to the surface once at the end of each century. How do you conceive this, bikkhus, would that blind turtle eventually put his head through that yoke with the one hole in it? "He might, Lord, at the end of a long period. "Bikkhus, the blind turtle would sooner put his head through that yoke with a single hole in it than a fool, once gone to perdition, would find his way back to the human state." If this iosn't an exhortation to first rightly comprehend the intent of the Buddha's teachings, and then DILIGENTLY put those teachigns into practice with great effort, then I don't know what is. As I said to Robert yesterday, the methods on Right Concentration and the rest of the Noble Eightfold Path, as detailed in the Magga- Vibhanga Sutta by the Buddha above, the very one my teachers have taught, are known in no uncertain terms to have resulted in the fruits of the noble path. The EMPHASIS, specifically, found in other pedagogical modes of instruction, are not so certain to this collection of khandas. Not that I'm dismissing them outright, but I am awaiting serious evidence they actually yielded the fruits of the noble path. And that is where the rubber meets the road in the entire discussion of the Dharma. That is the entire point of the path, as discussed in Sunday's round-table with Khun Sujin. Points on which we both, by the way, totally agreed: that the entire reason for study and practice is to create the appropriate conditions for the arising of the path- consciousness, because ONLY through the moments of path-consciousness are the mental afflictions permanently terminated, and the round of suffering on the wheel of samsara brought to complete and total cessation. > I may be wrong, but I suspect that the idea of the Eightfold Path as a > guideline for bhavana is an approach that has developed in relatively > recent times. I seriously doubt that one, simply based on what the Buddha is reputed to have actually spoken during his forty-plus years helping suffering sentient beings terminate that suffering once and for all. As always, it's a pleasure, my friend in the Dhamma, Jonothan! :) :) :) (and now that you've seen my intensity firsthand you know where all this viriya comes from! -- plus, it's just such a great joy to be here in BKK sharing Dhamma with all my friends here--I find no activity more delightful than fully immmersing this body, speech, and mind in the Holy Dhamma!) :) :) :) 7011 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 10:00am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Howard Thanks for coming in with these queries which I am sure are shared by many (most?) on this list. Howard, I have not forgotten your earlier post where you quoted the standard sutta description of Right Concentration (as has Erik more recently) and also your previous comments on Right Effort as the 4 strivings. I do intend to refer to these in my next post which will follow on from the last one. Whether it will resolve confusion or add to it remains to be seen! But certainly, I am not questioning the sutta references for one moment -- it is a matter of how they are to be understood. As Erik so aptly put it, the tripitaka is to be read holistically; this means that each pitaka must be read in the light of the other 2 pitakas. Just briefly on the path factors that are the 3 abstinences (right speech, action and livelihood), yes, these too are cetasikas arising at the supramundane path moment (moment of enlightenment). At mundane path moments (moments of vipassana), however, these 3 cetasikas are absent and only the remaining 5 path-factor cetasikas arise. Jon --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Erik) - > > In a message dated 7/31/01 10:10:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Jonothan Abbott writes: > > > > > > Erik > > > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > This as an important, even crucial, issue. It is intimately involved > with > > the whole question of the development of the path generally and role > of > > samatha in that development in particular. > > > > Just to restate, I am suggesting that references in the suttas to the > > factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are references to the mental > factors > > arising at a moment of path consciousness. On this reading, the Noble > > Eightfold Path is a path in the sense that moments of such path > > consciousness lead inexorably to nibbana; it is not a 'path of > practice' > > for the worldling in the sense that each factor is to be developed > > separately. This path is also known as the stream that is entered at > the > > first of the 4 stages of insight. Only the stream-winner and above > are > > said to be on the noble eightfold path. (Note: there are, however, > > mundane path moments -- moments of vipassana -- which are moments of > > consciousness accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors.) > > > > This interpretation is supported by my reading of the Visuddhimagga > and > > the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha. I find there references to treatment of > the > > factors of the N8FP as cetasikas that accompany path-moments, but so > far > > not to the path factors as 'guidelines for bhavana'. Here are some > > examples. > > > > In the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation CMA VII, #24-#38, it says-- > > > > "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths." > > > > The Visuddhimagga in its discussion of the 4 Noble Truths [XVI, 75 - > 83] > > says that the different factors of the eightfold path "occur in a > single > > moment on the occasion of the path". It explains how at such moments > each > > factor performs its own function. Right concentration, for example, > > arises conditioned by (among other things) the right mindfulness that > > arises together with it-- > > > > "83. When his mind is thus guarded by supreme mindfulness, the > > unification of mind, which is associated with that right view, > abolishes > > wrong concentration, and that is called right concentration. It has > the > > characteristic of non-distraction. Its function is to concentrate. > It is > > manifested as the abandoning of wrong concentration." > > > > Right concentration of the Eightfold Path is explained here as the > > concentration that arises with right view and right mindfulness and > > abolishes wrong concentration. As we know from the suttas, it is > > concentration that is of the level of jhana, but this need only be so > for > > the actual moment of eightfold path consciousness. > > > > I may be wrong, but I suspect that the idea of the Eightfold Path as a > > guideline for bhavana is an approach that has developed in relatively > > recent times. > > > > Jon > > > ============================== > I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about Right > > Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And what of > all > the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the > suttas? > These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma understanding, > then > it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are > further > apart than i had realized. > Perhaps I am totally missing what you are saying. Please lead me > out > of my confusion! > > 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) > > 7012 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 10:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Good gracious!!! I am appalled, what happens with all this anglosaxons and one disguised scandinavian, they lost all composure!!1 All this lobha and overexcitement, they are flying high, no moderation at all! I am frankly shocked with your latin-like passionate behaviour. So disgraceful! Hope you all return to your habitual coldbloodedness otherwise I will feel overwhelmed by all this enthusiasm, lust for life and Dhamma. Really I am deeply concerned about this sangha; luckily I was not there to join in all this unrestrained behaviour so unlike my nature... ;-) Promise you make me feel a model of temperance. Please stop it otherwise I will lose my role in this list. ;-) My judicious regards Cybele >>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk >Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:10:02 +0800 (CST) > > 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). > 7013 From: ppp Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 3:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Noble Eightfold Path - Jonothan Hi, Erick: Here is just a short comment of mine with respect to your discussion on the Noble Eightfold Path with Khun Jonothan. What I would like say is that we are not wise enough to understand the essence of the Dhamma just picking up a sutta or severl suttas (regardless how important these suttas are). We have to cast our eyes rather widely and read as many discourses as possible. Based on such background knowldge of the discoures and favourably based on (some) understanding of the Abhidhamma and based on what other people have been arguing about the true nature of the Dhamma, we have to draw our (tentative) conclusion on what the Dhamma is all about. (Please do not think that I am saying that you are not a learned man.) There are so many formulaic(?spelling?) definitions of various Buddhist concepts. And I think it is rather dangerous to accept these formulaic definitions LITERALLY. (They are almost like a doctor's prescriptions; unless one has been trained in medicine/pharmacology, these are not understandable.) When we read the Sutta-Pitakas, there are hundred and hundered of discoures where the Buddha repeately describes that seeing is impermanent/non-self/suffering etc. By way of appreciating the signifiance of the Buddha repeating on the true nature of these phenomena, we can slowly work on the formulaic definitions of the Buddhist concepts (It takes time to apprecipate/understand the true meanings of these formulaic expresions. If these expressions were something which could be understood literally, Gotam Buddha's immeidate sucessors wouldn't have put so much effort to establish the pradigm which now we call "Theravada Buddhism".) tadao 7014 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 10:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] From Bangkok Dear Robert >Dear Group, >Just finished lunch with Acharn sujin, Amara and her mother, Betty, >Sukin, Bruce, Ivan, Erik, Shin, my chidren, and others. We were at >the Royal Bangkok Sports Cub (as the guests of Amara's mother). >There was delicious food and pleasnt conversation. >That was the story. > > We discussed the nature of the moment. In truth there was no >luncheon, no sports club, no robert, too. Usuallly we live in this >world of concepts and stories about life, thinking we are doing this >or that. But what is there is only these insignificant dhammas . From the deepest of my heart, there is no intention of merely provoking or teasing you but are you sure that you were LIVING THE PRESENT MOMENT in that occasion you described? You seem very much engrossed in ponder and elaborate the experience; analyzing obssessively. Could I suggest you to put aside Dhamma books for a while and read Zorba the Greek by Nikos Kazantzakis. Life and Dhamma are in your mind and your guts and you are far too much focussed in your mind but then what could I know - I am no expert in Abhidhamma nevertheless my mind is sharp and my heart is wideopen. I plead you to consider my suggestion. Don't lose your beginners mind, don't lose your heart. And don't scrutinize my mail as well! ;-) Above all don't lose your composure like your naughty friends, they are all overexcited - disgraceful! Love Cybele 7015 From: ppp Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 3:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] From Bangkok Sorry Robert: I didn't realize that it's you who has sent us such a nice reminder on sati from Bangkok. Thank you, tadao 7016 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 11:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Ken Just to elaborate on (perhaps 'elucidate' would be more apt) my earlier post ... --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken > --- Ken 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!" > > Yes, wouldn't we all! But as Kom's reply to you made clear, it's the > same > path for everyone and there's no short cut. We on this list are very > fortunate to have this goal in common and so hopefully can be of support > to each other in this endeavour. ... those disciples who took refuge on hearing the Buddha were the ones that could 'get it'. Because of accumulated wisdom, they understood the Buddha's words at a level that we today can only wish for. They were, relativley speaking, on the brink of enlightenment. So when in the suttas the buddha asked, for example, 'Is seeing permanent or impermanent?', their answer 'Impermanent' would have been given from an understanding based on direct experience of the reality at that moment. It is unlikely that we in this life will ever reach such a level of understanding (speaking for myself, at least), but it remains of course our aspiration for attainment at the appropriate time. Jon > > 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. > > Thanks for your kind and encouraging words. There is I hope no chance > of > ever getting tired of going over the same ground, since if there is one > thing I have come to realise it is that one never gets beyond needing to > be reminded again and again of the same basic truths -- that it is the > reality appearing at the present moment that is to be known, that > reality > and nothing else. > > Jon 7017 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Noble Eightfold Path - Jonothan Erik Thanks for the comprehensive and forceful response to my post. I intend to come back as soon as possible. --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Jonothan, what, can't go a day without spoiling for a good debate? > The only people worse in this regard than lawyers are Gelug- > pas! :) :) :) I am honoured by the comparison (I think). > (and now that you've seen my intensity firsthand you know where all > this viriya comes from! Not intensity, Erik, but good old-fashioned earnestness. It was a delight meeting you and sharing the week-end. -- plus, it's just such a great joy to be > here in BKK sharing Dhamma with all my friends here--I find no > activity more delightful than fully immmersing this body, speech, and > mind in the Holy Dhamma!) :) :) :) I am truly envious!! Jon 7018 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 0:18pm Subject: Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) --- Howard wrote: > > > > ============================== > I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about Right > Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And what of all > the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the suttas? > These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma understanding, then > it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are further > apart than i had realized. > Perhaps I am totally missing what you are saying. Please lead me out > of my confusion! > > With metta, > Howard ________________ Dear Howard and Ji\on, The following quote may be relevant here. From the atthasalini, p204 where they talk about the fivefold path: "For althogh the pAth is eightfold, yet, in the wordly consciousness the tthree abstinces are not obtained at one and the same instant. hence it is said to be fivefold only. BUT it may be objected, there is this scripture;'The path by which one came is a phrase for the eightfold ariyan path'(samyutta 1v 195)In this sutta the path of insight preceeding the transcendental path is eightfold. now since the mundane path as implied by the term 'path by which they came'is eightfold, should it not be eightfold here also?' Nay, it should not be. the suttanta teaching is carried out by expounding. In this way he said, for instance, 'verily his bodily acts, vocal acts and life were quite pure'(majhhimma 111 289). BUT this abhidhamma teaching is bare teaching without exposition. in the worldly consciousness the three abstinces are not obtained at one and the same instant and therefore the Path is fivefold"ENDQUOTE. It helps us to read the texts if we know that satipatthana and the eighfold (fivefold) path are identical. A moment of satipatthana is a moment of the fivefold path. it is the beginning of insight into paramattha dhamma. These things gradually become clearer to me over the years. robert 7019 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 0:41pm Subject: Fwd: Re: [OffList] A late welcome - Second welcome! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > > Hi Gayan, > > Well it does explain why you both sign off in the same way with rgds and no > name!!! Thanks for clearing this up.....and yes you do know each other!! I > expect others worked this out, but I'm a bit slow with this kind of thing! > > Interested to hear you're working in Boston now...sometime let us know what > you're doing there ;-)) > > Thanks Gayan and perhaps we can persuade you to put a name at the end as > you're > using different addresses..;-)) > > Sarah > > p.s Always glad to hear from you when you chip in on threads btw such as the > nibbana one. > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > oops , oops, > > 1000 apologies sarah! _/\_ > > > > asterix7 is my account, but when I respond from the site(groups.yahoo.com) > > it only registers the email address(since I havent entered the name there). > > > > i was just replying cybele, about what i think of SL's serendipity. > > and mumbling about how less stressful it would have been for me if the > > refuge was meaningful to me even earlier. > > > > sorry for the confusion, > > and it also states that no-one here can slip away from you :o) > > > > anyway another welcome is quite OK for me. > > > > regards > > gayan > > > > PS: currently I am working in Boston, another reason why I have to use > > several email accounts. 7020 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Noble Eightfold Path - Jonothan --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Erick: > Here is just a short comment of mine with respect to your discussion > on the Noble Eightfold Path with Khun Jonothan. What I would like say > is that we are not wise enough to understand the essence of the > Dhamma just picking up a sutta or severl suttas (regardless how > important these suttas are). We have to begin someplace, Tadao. If beginning where we are RIGHT NOW were not possible, the Buddha would never have taught this Holy Dharma. If even those with seriously stubborn attachments to wrong views like Yamaka can learn to see things as they are and terminate the effluents--with the Buddha strategically guiding Yamaka out of wrong view and into Right View using only a bit of basic reasoning-- what about those with even milder affectations? (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-085.html) Certainly, if were not possible to distinguish between wholesome and unwholesome qualities and activities, then the Buddha would never have assented to Brahma's request to teach the Holy Dharma at all, let alone instruct the "run-of-the-mill" persons, such as the Kalamas, thus-wise: "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." Again, we must begin where we are, and over time, reflecting thusly: "When [we] know for [ourselves] 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 [we] should abandon them." Likewise, "When [we] know for [ourselves] that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' -- then [we] should enter & remain in them." This teaching is something basic enough, again, for even a child to grasp and put into practice. And this very method will, practiced diligently, persistently, mindfully, over time, create the very conditions necessary for Right View to arise--which is the fruit of the ariyan path. Indeed, Lord Buddha begins his exposition on Right View at precisely this point: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html > We have to cast our eyes rather widely > and read as many discourses as possible. Based on such background > knowledge of the discourse and favourably based on (some) understanding > of the Abhidhamma and based on what other people have been arguing > about the true nature of the Dhamma, we have to draw our > (tentative) conclusion on what the Dhamma is all about. At least until we come to DIRECTLY know that reality, when all speculation is terminated and the meaning and intent of the Dhamma ceases to be a matter of doubt. At this point it also ceases to be possible to misinterpret the meaning & intent of the Buddha or the Dharma, since the goal, Nibbana (which is ultimately the absence of all fabrications and elaborations and clinging), has been experienced directly. > (Please do not think that I am saying that you are not a learned man.) > There are so many formulaic(?spelling?) definitions of various Buddhist > concepts. And I think it is rather dangerous to accept these formulaic > definitions LITERALLY. I really do not believe the Dhamma is at all complicated. I believe people tend to make it a WHOLE LOT more complicated than it really is. Indeed, if the Dharma is about relinquishing views, suppositions, fabrications, then simply letting go of all our clinging to views, suppositions, and fabrications by seeing how all composed things are ultimately suffering due to their impermanent nature, and that they do not belong to self, is sufficient to bring about direct knowledge of the ariyan path. It need not be any more complicated than this-- except we always want to make it a whole more complicated than this. This was rightly expounded by Anathapindika, the householder: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-093.html > (They are almost like a doctor's prescriptions; > unless one has been trained in medicine/pharmacology, these are not > understandable.) I could not disagree more if what you are suggesting is that one needs to know medical theory to be cured by taking the appropriately prescribed medicine at the appropriate time--which is exactly what it sounds like you're saying here! Most definitely the DOCTOR needs to know the precise remedy to prescribe the patient based on understanding the patient's specific ailment. But does it require a degree in medicine to take a tablet and wash it down with a glass of water? Hardly. And yet that medicine, taken according to such a very simple prescription (if the doctor is in fact knowledgeable in treating that particular ailment and has prescribed the appropriate remedy) will cure that patient whether or not the patient knows the first thing about medical theory, whether or not the patient even WANTS to be cured or not! > When we read the Sutta-Pitakas, there are > hundred and hindered of discourses where the Buddha repeatedly describes > that seeing is impermanent/non-self/suffering etc. Agreed. However, we are talking about beginning someplace, and the context of this specific debate was the contention that the Noble Eightfold Path can't be understood or practiced at the conventional, or so-called mundane, level. That is very clearly not the case if one reads the Buddha's most direct discourse on the Analysis of the Path. In many cases where the Buddha speaks plainly, as he does very much so in the Magga-Vibhanga Sutta, a literal interpretation is simply "good enough" to begin working with right away. The teachings enumerated in that particular Sutta are not at all difficult to grasp for one of even modest intellect, let alone the sorts of minds populating DSG! Again, why the need to complicate what is so simple, so nearer-than-near? More generally it is extremely problematic to wrongly believe that we can't practice the Dharma effectively unless we're trying to be aware of "paramattha dhammas" all the time, to the point of unhealthy clinging to the VIEW of "realities arising at present." Any practice can be taken to extremes, including the notions of being aware of the present moment, and this is especially pernicious when this is used as an excuse to neglect the more so-called "mundane" aspects of the path: dana, sila, the practice of accumulating merit and general kusala, for example. It is even worse when there is the wrong understanding that arises that wrongly believes the path to be unattainable in this very lifetime. To wrongly believe this way is to sign our own death warrant, because it will, MOST DEFINITELY, destroy the very aspiration and wholesome desire--not to mention directly undermine the persistence required--to actualize the fruits of the Holy Life IN THIS VERY LIFETIME, which is, if we lack direct knowledge of past and future lives, the ONLY ONE WE KNOW FOR CERTAIN WE WILL HAVE in which we have contact with the Holy Dharma and the ALL the appropriate conditions to bring this path to fruition, RIGHT HERE AND NOW. > By way of appreciating > the significance of the Buddha repeating on the true nature of these phenomena, > we can slowly work on the formulaic definitions of the Buddhist concepts > (It takes time to appreciate/understand the true meanings of these > formulaic expressions. If these expressions were something which could > be understood literally, Gotam Buddha's immediate successors wouldn't > have put so much effort to establish the paradigm which now we call > "Theravada Buddhism".) Again, Tadao, I think you're making this a whole lot more complicated than it needs to be. Is it not possible to take what the Buddha stated so very simply at face-value for starters, and work from there? Does it have to be run through layer after layer of cognitive filters to understand that when the Buddha talks about "wrong speech," for example, it can be comprehended and applied immediately in its simplest sense, even if Right View is not yet fully developed? Can one begin by attempting to refrain from making false speech, for example, without understanding anatta? Can one not place oneself in the position of another sentient being and consider that by taking their property without it being given would likely create grief, lamentation, despair for that being? Or diddling another's spouse? Does it require a through-going penetration of anicca, dukkha, and anatta to begin working with these oh-so-basic factors of the path right here and now? Again, we have to begin where we are. And that will mean there is wrong view until Right View has the appropriate conditions to arise. But the conditions for Right View to arise will never be established unless we actually begin at the beginning, by learning to discern what is and what is not wholesome--something again, possible even for a run-of-the-mill person who's received instruction in this most basic of practices. 7021 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 2:22pm Subject: Re: Noble Eightfold Path - Jonothan --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Erik > > Thanks for the comprehensive and forceful response to my post. I intend > to come back as soon as possible. Just to be clear, I didn't mean to be THAT forceful, on careful re- examination of my post to you. It's just that being here amongst all these fabulous friends in the Dhamma has gotten me more fired up than I've been in a long time, plus the relief from a lot of really intense dukkha of the past few years has released enormous stores of energy I haven't known in as long, and I'm not used to it at the moment, and have to restart formal samatha & concentration practice to work more skillfully with it. > > (and now that you've seen my intensity firsthand you know where all > > this viriya comes from! > > Not intensity, Erik, but good old-fashioned earnestness. It was a delight > meeting you and sharing the week-end. Likewise, likewise, my friend! :) 7022 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 2:56pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, Thanks for taking the time reply. I will be augmenting what you said only and won't be arguing because the scope of the topic is beyond my knowledge. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Well, let's say this: even though seen objects are not conditioned by seeing > consciousness, Whew! At least we agree on this point! > the seen objects are limited insofar as they are taken in by seeing > consciousness via the form of the seeing consciousness. You are saying here that the inherent characteristic of what is seen is not conditioned by the seeing consciousness. On the other hand, the characteristic as seen by the seeing consciousness is conditioned because the seeing consciousness itself is conditioned. Although I haven't seen this point explicitly mentioned in the text, it is certainly logical. Each individiual, depending on the eyesights, definitely sees differently. > 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. On the other hand, then none of the true nature of the dhammas (besides nibbana) can ever be penetrated (except maybe at some special moment), as it is always conditioned. By this logic, even the Buddha (unless you take his consciousness as being nibbana and is not conditioned) cannot penetrate the true nature of the dhamma fully. > > 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. I certainly only have heard about this explanation for the first time! > 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. Thanks again for the explanation. I think the logics is workable. I haven't seen any texts (except commentaries) that explicitly refutes or supports this explanation. > 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. The explanation that I have heard is that since concepts don't have actual characteristics. They don't rise, don't fall, and therefore, has no condition. I personally don't understand this explanation fully, as you have pointed, that it seems to be against logics... kom 7023 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 4:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) Rob Thanks very much for this passage from the Atthasalini, which is directly on point (more so perhaps than anything I have been able to find myself). --- Erik wrote: > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > > > ============================== > > I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about > Right > > Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And > what of all > > the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the > suttas? > > These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma > understanding, then > > it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are > further > > apart than i had realized. > > Perhaps I am totally missing what you are saying. Please lead > me > out > > of my confusion! > > > > With metta, > > Howard > ________________ > Dear Howard and Ji\on, > The following quote may be relevant here. > From the atthasalini, p204 where they talk about the fivefold > path: > "For althogh the pAth is eightfold, yet, in the wordly > consciousness the tthree abstinces are not obtained at one and > the same instant. hence it is said to be fivefold only. BUT it > may be objected, there is this scripture;'The path by which one > came is a phrase for the eightfold ariyan path'(samyutta 1v > 195)In this sutta the path of insight preceeding the > transcendental path is eightfold. now since the mundane path as > implied by the term 'path by which they came'is eightfold, > should it not be eightfold here also?' > Nay, it should not be. the suttanta teaching is carried out by > expounding. In this way he said, for instance, 'verily his > bodily acts, vocal acts and life were quite pure'(majhhimma 111 > 289). BUT this abhidhamma teaching is bare teaching without > exposition. in the worldly consciousness the three abstinces are > not obtained at one and the same instant and therefore the Path > is fivefold"ENDQUOTE. > > It helps us to read the texts if we know that satipatthana and > the eighfold (fivefold) path are identical. A moment of > satipatthana is a moment of the fivefold path. it is the > beginning of insight into paramattha dhamma. > These things gradually become clearer to me over the years. > robert If I may expand a little for the sake of the other members interested in this thread. The passage confirms, as I read it, that only at supramundane moments do all 8 path factors arise together, while at mundane moments 5 path factors arise. I of course agree, as I think Rob is suggesting, that references in the suttas to 8-fold path moments (moments which must necessarily be supramundane) can be read as referring also to the mundane 5-fold version(ie. moments of satipatthana) in appropriate contexts. The point is though that we are talking about a moment of consciousness that is accompanied by the path-factors, and this makes it a moment of a quality quite different to that of any other kusala moment (such as, for example, a moment of jhana), since kusala moments that are not of the level of satipatthana (ie. are not path-factor moments) do not lead away from samsara but to continuation in the round of existence. This is why the emphasis of the Buddha's teaching should be seen in terms of the development of satipatthana rather than of other forms of kusala, although we do not for one moment neglect the latter since without them the opportunity for continued development of satipatthana (ie. continued rebirth in planes where the dhamma is alive) will not be there. Jon 7024 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 1, 2001 6:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) Hi, Robert (and Jon) - In a message dated 8/1/01 12:20:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > > > ============================== > > I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about Right > > Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And > what of all > > the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the > suttas? > > These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma > understanding, then > > it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are > further > > apart than i had realized. > > Perhaps I am totally missing what you are saying. Please lead me > out > > of my confusion! > > > > With metta, > > Howard > ________________ > Dear Howard and Ji\on, > The following quote may be relevant here. > From the atthasalini, p204 where they talk about the fivefold > path: > "For althogh the pAth is eightfold, yet, in the wordly > consciousness the tthree abstinces are not obtained at one and > the same instant. hence it is said to be fivefold only. BUT it > may be objected, there is this scripture;'The path by which one > came is a phrase for the eightfold ariyan path'(samyutta 1v > 195)In this sutta the path of insight preceeding the > transcendental path is eightfold. now since the mundane path as > implied by the term 'path by which they came'is eightfold, > should it not be eightfold here also?' > Nay, it should not be. the suttanta teaching is carried out by > expounding. In this way he said, for instance, 'verily his > bodily acts, vocal acts and life were quite pure'(majhhimma 111 > 289). BUT this abhidhamma teaching is bare teaching without > exposition. in the worldly consciousness the three abstinces are > not obtained at one and the same instant and therefore the Path > is fivefold"ENDQUOTE. > > It helps us to read the texts if we know that satipatthana and > the eighfold (fivefold) path are identical. A moment of > satipatthana is a moment of the fivefold path. it is the > beginning of insight into paramattha dhamma. > These things gradually become clearer to me over the years. > robert > =============================== Wow! What a to-the-point post!! Very helpful. Thank you, 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) 7025 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 3:06am Subject: Offline Hi, folks, I've used up all my ISP time package so I'll be offline till around Aug 8 or 9. Derek. 7026 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 4:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Offline Hi derek, if u r in either US or Canada , u can use netZero. rgds gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Derek Cameron" Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 3:06 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Offline > Hi, folks, > > I've used up all my ISP time package so I'll be offline till around > Aug 8 or 9. > > Derek. > 7027 From: ppp Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 3:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) Hi, Rob and Jonothan: With respect to the Five/Eight-fold Path. I do not understand why sila is exluced. In my understanding, even in a very very very mudane moment of having a sati, at that moment, (in conventional terms,) one is on a solid ground of sila (vaca, kammanta, ajiva); without sila, one wouldn't otherwise experience the right kind of sati which experiences a reality. It is then not clear at all for me why these sila factors are excluded (when they disucss such far far higher levels of Path factors. In other words, I do not understand WHY Attha-salini supports the Five-Fold Path argument. tadao 7028 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 0:09pm Subject: Re: Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Rob and Jonothan: > With respect to the Five/Eight-fold Path. I do not understand > why sila is exluced. In my understanding, even in a very very > very mudane moment of having a sati, at that moment, (in > conventional terms,) one is on a solid ground of sila > (vaca, kammanta, ajiva); without sila, one wouldn't otherwise > experience the right kind of sati which experiences > a reality. It is then not clear at all for me why these sila > factors are excluded (when they disucss such far far higher > levels of Path factors. In other words, I do not understand > WHY Attha-salini supports the Five-Fold Path argument. > tadao ____________ Dear Tadao, At any moment of satipatthana there is no breaking of sila. There is guarding of the doors. However, there is not necessarily those specific types of cetasikas of "right livelihood etc.' Nevertheless, although the atthasalini talks only about the fivfold path it can also be sixfold if one of those type of cetasikas are present at moments of the fivefold path. However all 8factors are only present at the actual moments nibbana is experienced. Because we cling to concepts and stories we tend to think that there is sila all day if we are not doing anything obviously wrong. However, true sila only arises at moments of kusala citta (some). robert 7029 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 0:24pm Subject: Re: Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Rob and Jonothan: > With respect to the Five/Eight-fold Path. I do not understand > why sila is exluced. In my understanding, even in a very very > very mudane moment of having a sati, at that moment, (in > conventional terms,) one is on a solid ground of sila > (vaca, kammanta, ajiva); without sila, one wouldn't otherwise > experience the right kind of sati which experiences > a reality. It is then not clear at all for me why these sila > factors are excluded (when they disucss such far far higher > levels of Path factors. In other words, I do not understand > WHY Attha-salini supports the Five-Fold Path argument. > tadao Tadoa, I agree. For me, this is a "like, duh" sorta thing! How could we NOT be experincing sila these moments? And Jonothan, I hope you're not reply ony due to time constraints. I'm concerned the strength of my replies has made communicating difficult (kif so, I apologize profusely). If that is the case it is a cause for serious regret. Because I am definitely not looking to "win" ANY debate, but keep the discussion going until we both feel our collective understanding has been clarified--the entire point of Buddhist debate. That goes likewise for anyone, because the purpose of formal Buddhist debate (at least the Tibetan version) as I've been taught, is to help lead ALL the parcitipants (and spectators!) to understanding. In fact, DIRECT understanding (because Tibetan debate involves specifically debating emptiness and depencent origination--and there are some who have had had such strong moments of stipatthana arise in the courses of debate on emptiness they have realized the emptiness DURIGN the process of debate or shortly thereafter, as I recall reading happened to Lama Yeshe as he told Lama Zopa, both of whom whom Sarah has had the astonishing karma to have met). The entire point is to get to Right View. So there are no losers in this, nor can there be when the spirit of such debate is properly understood and practiced. Just wanted to add that for those who may not know about this incredible tradition of learning the Dharma, and one very relevant to forums such as these. It is my favorite form of Dharma interaction, due to accumulations. 7030 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 0:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Noble Eightfold Path - Jonothan Dear Erik, Thanks for your posts with excellent Theravada sutta citations.. --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Set aside the Visuddhimagga! Set aside the Abhidhammata-Sangaha! In > fact, take the entire Abhidhamma Pitaka, its commentaries and sub- > commentaries, and set the WHOLE THING aside, until the essential > points above are grasped in their entirety, You wouldn't be moving the goalposts now, would you, Erik???;-)) What's happened to that very well-worn book you even read on flights and were using in support of your arguments to me (on dsg) just a week ago..? > > Do you have direct experience if this type of concentration arising > from the method of practice you've been taught? Erik, at any moment of rt understanding of a reality, there is always rt concentration accompanying it . At these moments samma-samadhi focuses on the object of the citta in the appropriate or 'right' way. When the citta falls away, so do the rt understanding, rt concentration and other cetasikas accompanying it. When (read IF) lokuttara citta arises, the samma-samadhi accompanying it is then lokuttara and focuses on nibbana. At this moment, samma-samadhi and the other cetasikas being discussed are factors of the supramundane N8FP. Again, as the lokuttara citta falls away, so do the samma-samadhi and the rest. So, rt concentration always accompanies rt understanding from the very beginning (by conditions) and performs its function without any need to focus or 'attend' to special objects. Indeed, due to the anattaness of all these conditioned realities, there is no self that can determine the experiencing of any object or direct any citta. If it were so simple, we'd all have been arahats long ago! Glad to see you having such fun on and off-list! Sarah 7031 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 0:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Thanks for your response, Kom. The summary of my thinking about Nibbana being apprehended by an advanced consciousness is just that until the moment of entering Nibbana, Nibbana must remain as a concept. I don't see how it can be truly apprehended by a conditioned consciousness. That does not mean Nibbana is unattainable, just that in the moment of attaining Nibbana, one's condition would go beyond Nibbana being apprehended as a separate object of consciousness and Nibbana would simply become one's reality. I would love to hear any other responses to this, more learned than mine. Robert ------------------------------- --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > Thanks for taking the time reply. I will be augmenting what you said only > and won't be arguing because the scope of the topic is beyond my > knowledge. =============== 7032 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 0:47pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Thanks for your response, Kom. > > The summary of my thinking about Nibbana being apprehended by an advanced > consciousness is just that until the moment of entering Nibbana, Nibbana must > remain as a concept. I don't see how it can be truly apprehended by a conditioned > consciousness. That does not mean Nibbana is unattainable, just that in the > moment of attaining Nibbana, one's condition would go beyond Nibbana being > apprehended as a separate object of consciousness and Nibbana would simply become > one's reality. > > I would love to hear any other responses to this, more learned than mine. You just succinctly stated the position I have taken on all of this, far better that I ever have! Thank you! 7033 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 0:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Thanks for your response, Kom. > > > > The summary of my thinking about Nibbana being apprehended by an > advanced > > consciousness is just that until the moment of entering Nibbana, > Nibbana must > > remain as a concept. I don't see how it can be truly apprehended by > a conditioned > > consciousness. That does not mean Nibbana is unattainable, just > that in the > > moment of attaining Nibbana, one's condition would go beyond > Nibbana being > > apprehended as a separate object of consciousness and Nibbana would > simply become > > one's reality. > > > > I would love to hear any other responses to this, more learned than > mine. > > You just succinctly stated the position I have taken on all of this, > far better that I ever have! Thank you! I am glad to hear it, since I feel I am slightly shooting in the dark! Regards, Robert E. 7034 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 1:18pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Thanks for your response, Kom. > > The summary of my thinking about Nibbana being apprehended by an advanced > consciousness is just that until the moment of entering Nibbana, Nibbana must > remain as a concept. I don't see how it can be truly apprehended by a conditioned > consciousness. That does not mean Nibbana is unattainable, just that in the > moment of attaining Nibbana, one's condition would go beyond Nibbana being > apprehended as a separate object of consciousness and Nibbana would simply become > one's reality. > I think the statement that the actual characteristics of nibbana cannot be experienced until the englightenment would be agreed on by many (if not all?) members in this list. Nibbana as a concept can be experienced by anybody. On the other hand, as discussed earliers, there are hypothesis (for me, and perhaps actuality for others) that what experience nibbana are the lokuttara cittas and mental factors (including the N8FP factors) which are conditioned realities. This hypothesis is, of course, in contrary to the logics that you have already discussed, that the true characteristics of nibbana, as unconditioned realities, cannot be fully experienced by a conditioned consciousness. I have also mentioned that with this logics, it implies that none of the true characteristics (conditioned and unconditioned) can be fully experienced. kom 7035 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 1:42pm Subject: Erik's debating skills OK Erik, --- Erik wrote: > It is my favorite form of > Dharma interaction, due to accumulations. > > Let's see if i'm getting the idea..(feel free to correct;-)) 1. Overwhelm your 'friend' with volume and sheer intensity 2. Move the goalposts to suit the debate in hand 3. Never concede but instead use your friend's arguments to debate with other friends elsewhere (eg on other lists) 4. If you don't have a ready answer, smile ;-)) and say nothing 5. Come back instantly to ensure your friend has no time to check references or do any mundane work 6. Get as far away from Head office as possible so that one really can devote all day to debates without anyone looking over one's shoulder. Preferably, dismiss all household and other mundane chores too 7. Learn that the more objections and the more one's name is mentioned specifically, the better case one is presenting and the more fun your friend is having 8. Learn that this is really the way to your friend's heart;-)) How's that? Just know, Erik, that we always enjoy discussions with you and any lack of response or tardiness is only because we haven't quite mastered all the points and in particular, point 6!! Give a little lee-way to beginners.... Sarah 7036 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 2:41pm Subject: Re: Erik's debating skills --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > OK Erik, > > --- Erik wrote: > > > It is my favorite form of > > Dharma interaction, due to accumulations. > > > > > Let's see if i'm getting the idea..(feel free to correct;-)) > > 1. Overwhelm your 'friend' with volume and sheer intensity This is standard mode of "challenger" in Tibetan debate, actually. The point of this is deliberately to get the "defender" "off their game" and test direct understanding here & now. Khun Sujin and the rest of this tough group really nailed me on a few occasions there! This is as it should be. This happens very quickly in real-time in the monastic debating courtyards every Gleug-pa monastery has specifically for this purpose. What happens here on DSG is SLOW by comparison, and it was refreshing to have to try to reply in real- time to this group of VERY tough customers. Makes me realize I have to get this Theravada presentation down COLD. Incidentally, at some point, if there is any interest, I will post here my lama's foreward to Daniel Perdue's tome "Debate in Tibetan Buddhism" (page 9 for those interested). It was translated by my teacher Artemus Engle (my lama's senior student along with Geshe Michael Roach), who is considered by other Tibetan scholars like Robert Thurman and others to be THE expert in Abhidharma in the West, having translated the 'kosa from Sanskrit. In fact, it was Art who gave me enough of a basis in Abhidharma so that I could come here and not get totally creamed by this group. As one of my sangha back in NY asked me the other day, why did you come all the way to to Thailand when you have the BEST right here, and he's already your teacher? I told her that in the same way it was Art translating the 'kosa (plus three years of one-on-one instruction from my lama in Abhidharma) that is WHY he's considered the expert, that to study and do a comparative analysis of these two systems of the Tripitaka's Abhidhamma vs. the Abhidharmakosa (and working out a computerized model of the categories and relations) would be my way of relly learning this amazing system thoroughly. > 2. Move the goalposts to suit the debate in hand Not at all. One essential aspect of Buddhist debate in specific is using ONLY those texts or arguments both debaters agree on completely. In other words, if one takes a line of reasoning, even if CORRECT reasoning, that one's "opponent" doesn't accept, then that is considered to be an error. Why? Because the purpose is to come to DIRECT understanding, to lead out of wrong views into Right View, and if someone doesn't accept a specific thesis, then that purpose has been blown. Knowledge will not arise if one refuses to accept a basic premise, and as such is considered an "error" because it does not help sentient beings out of confusion and into wisdom. Consider the Yamaka Sutta for an example of how the Buddha skillfully used basic logic to lead Yamaka out of his annihilation view. To think the purpose of Buddhist debate means anything else is to have entirely missed the point, which is for ALL to gain Right Understanding. So returning to the Suttas, which Jon and I both accept as canonical, and accept as primary material, really is correct method according to this principle. I don't necessarily accept the commentaries as-is without analysis, and if I have any questions I'm much more interested in seeing first what the Buddha actually is reputed to have said, and then reading the commentaries in that light. In fact, if I have any doubt about at all, on any point (Tibetan, Zen, Theravadin), I always feel it imperative to go back to the most primary material availble, the Suttas reputed to have been heard as the direct words of the Buddha. For example, do you see me tossing "Mahayana" Sutras out here? Only in the rarest cases--ex. Nagarjuna, and then in light of what the Pali texts themselves say, as a way of clarifying that position. Why? Because I know not everyone HERE accepts them as canonical (though if I am debating Gelug-pas I can use ALL my training, inc. Nagarjuna, the Tibetan masters like Je Tonsgkhapa, etc.). This is why if there's any dout about an interpretation within a later text NOT reputed to have been spoken by Lord Buddha verbally and recorded as such, I cannot debate from that perspective here, because I don't accept it at that point. So this is not "moving the goalposts," but actually toeing the Buddhist-debate line perfectly. > 3. Never concede but instead use your friend's arguments to debate with other > friends elsewhere (eg on other lists) I have conceded many many times! For example, Robert forced me to concede on what I believe is a very imporatnt point, through his careful argumentation and pointing me at various references I came to accept as correct, namely, that it is possible that there are such things as sukkhavipassika practitioners. This is no mean feat! And I have mentioned this to Robert with extreme thankfulness on many occasions. Anyway, the point is not to "concede" or not, but again, to come to correct understanding of the INNER meaning and INTENT of the Buddha's teachings. Without undersatnding truth from fabrication, liberation is imopssible. > 4. If you don't have a ready answer, smile ;-)) and say nothing In real-life, there could be many reasons for that, not always beacuse I lack a ready "answer." If I don't know something, from your experience of me here and in person, am I the sort to say pretend to know something if I don't? I certainly hope not. In fact, I think I admit early and often that I have MUCH yet to learn, and hardly pretend to know everything, and furthermore, that I consider all beings as my teachers, and listen carefully to advice from any and all, because I have had, for some reason, the karma to hear that advice spoken, and as such it gives me something to ponder and reflect on carefully. That does not mean to say I always accept that advice as correct after careful condsideration. Nevertheless, there is not a being in the triple-realm I don't have something to learn something from. Ergo, everyone is in this regard my teacher. > 5. Come back instantly to ensure your friend has no time to check references or > do any mundane work Again, given the ruthless grilling I was given both Saturday and Sunday that should work both ways! :) I was given NO breathing room at all to consider any answers and got hammered consistently from ten sides simultaneously, all taking one position, and Erik the lonely defender of an entirely different system of teaching, having to hold up against such withering (and entirely relished) challenge! It was exhausting, frankly. But what a great mode of instruction for me! It made me feel like I'm starting all over again! It also erally inspired me to go to my "home" monastery Sera Mey and practice formal debate there with the monks at lenght. I expect to do so somethime this next year. > 6. Get as far away from Head office as possible so that one really can devote > all day to debates without anyone looking over one's shoulder. Preferably, > dismiss all household and other mundane chores too Sarah, dear, if you know just how much "mundane" work I've been doing since arriving here you'd have no cause to say that! I've been working harder here, now, than I EVER did back in NY. Trust me! > 7. Learn that the more objections and the more one's name is mentioned > specifically, the better case one is presenting and the more fun your friend is > having I sure hope so! :) > 8. Learn that this is really the way to your friend's heart;-)) And I sure hope that as well! > How's that? Just know, Erik, that we always enjoy discussions with you and any > lack of response or tardiness is only because we haven't quite mastered all the > points and in particular, point 6!! Give a little lee-way to beginners.... Phhhbbbbttt!!!! I love and deeply admire and respect you both, as you know. So let's keep it coming! :) :) And, I must say, Sarah, I'm impressed. You seem to have gotten that "challenger" thing going here pretty well yourself (although Sat. & Sun. was I ever in the "defender's" hotseat! Talking about making me WORK for my Dhamma! Phew!) I wound up sleeping nearly tweleve hours Sun. night from the sheer intensity of this past weekend and yours (and others) ruthless (in the very kindest sense of the word) grilling! I look forward to much much more of this! 7037 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 2:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Five-fold path (Howard and Jon) Erik (and Howard, Herman and others) Just coming in here to assure you my silence is due solely to time constraints and nothing else. My apologies for not getting back promptly, but other commitments sometimes make this difficult for a few days or so. (And I have never been one for instant replies anyway.) Jon --- Erik wrote: > And Jonothan, I hope you're not reply ony due to time constraints. > I'm concerned the strength of my replies has made communicating > difficult (kif so, I apologize profusely). > > If that is the case it is a cause for serious regret. Because I am > definitely not looking to "win" ANY debate, but keep the discussion > going until we both feel our collective understanding has been > clarified--the entire point of Buddhist debate. > > That goes likewise for anyone, because the purpose of formal Buddhist > debate (at least the Tibetan version) as I've been taught, is to help > lead ALL the parcitipants (and spectators!) to understanding. In > fact, DIRECT understanding (because Tibetan debate involves > specifically debating emptiness and depencent origination--and there > are some who have had had such strong moments of stipatthana arise in > the courses of debate on emptiness they have realized the emptiness > DURIGN the process of debate or shortly thereafter, as I recall > reading happened to Lama Yeshe as he told Lama Zopa, both of whom > whom Sarah has had the astonishing karma to have met). > > The entire point is to get to Right View. So there are no losers in > this, nor can there be when the spirit of such debate is properly > understood and practiced. Just wanted to add that for those who may > not know about this incredible tradition of learning the Dharma, and > one very relevant to forums such as these. It is my favorite form of > Dharma interaction, due to accumulations. 7038 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 4:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Tadao, It's really great to be in touch again and to share dhamma reminders....Some of your posts have been very helpful indeed. However, I just can't understand this one: --- ppp wrote: > 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 > What about now, Tadao, wherever we live? Aren't there opportunities for kusala cittas? Aren't there opportunities to consider others, to have metta, to refrain from ill speech and most of all to have sati at the level of satipatthana, having read and heard so much (in your case in Pali as well as Thai and English) about seeing, visible object and all the rest? I fail to see why there are fewer opportunities in Canada than Thailand even if our kilesa mean that there is in fact far less kusala in a day than we'd like. I'd also like to add that rt view is the most important aspect; so even if one has been away from dhamma books and discussions for a long time, if rt view has been accumulated, this is more valuable than having studied and practised for these years with wrong view. In other words, don't feel that all your time in Canada has been wasted or less useful than if you'd been elsewhere as this is just thinking with dosa and regrets, isn't it? I'm sure there have been many moments of kusala at different levels according to your accumulations each day. Best wishes, Sarah p.s glad to hear your health is getting better....I'm sure all the dhamma consideration will be helping. By the way, one of the links here (the www.metta link)is to some of the Tipitaka in Pali, but you've probably seen it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links 7039 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 5:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] the moment in between Dear Loke, --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > 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.. do feel free to 'chip' in and ask anyone for clarification (or else just ignore the posts that are too confusing and come in with your own thread as you've done here;-) > > 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.... To be quite frank, I don't get it actually (and I suspect this may be why others haven't replied either!) I wonder if by resultant kamma you mean vipaka, the result of kamma? So, for example, seeing now is vipaka, the result of kamma and so is hearing, smeeling, tasting, touching and there are many other vipaka cittas (moments of consciousness). We have no idea when the kamma (the cetana , intention) action was performed to bring about this result of seeing or hearing now. Some kamma will have been done in this life and some in previous lives, but it doesn't help to try and speculate about what and when, I think. There are no fixed time spans for when vipaka will arise. When there aren't moments of vipaka arising, then there are other kinds of citta (consciousness).There is never a moment (for us) when there is no consciousness arising. I've tried to put this simply, but actually the subject is complex. I think you have a few confusions and I highly recommend 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' by Nina Van Gorkom which is on some of the websites (on Amara's Dhamma Study website I know) at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links There's also a good paper on Kamma by Khun Sujin on this website. You may also find it useful to read some of the past posts on 'Useful Posts' under subject headings such as kamma, vipaka, rounds of existence at:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL%20POST%20LINKS If you have questions about any of these books or letters, please let us know. > May you all be well and happy... you too .... Sarah p.s.(dui m joh, ngoh yiga ho mong, soh yi m ji ching choh ne) 7040 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 5:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Animals - Nivarana/Jhananga Dear Christine, I understand your concern and wish to help animals around you to have a happier rebirth. --- Christine wrote: > Dear All, > 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? It's an interesting idea! Truly we have no idea what deeds from the past will bring what rebirth. As Erik pointed out with the apt turtle sutta, being born as a human with the chance to develop wholesomeness of any kind with wisdom of any level is a very precious gift. I don't think we can prevent another being (human, animal or other) from having hindrances or other unwholesome states of mind. All we can do is show kindness in anyway and as with a child, this can include training and discipline, which can give the animal an easier life perhaps. When there is attachment to another being, of course there is also attachment to a happy outcome or rebirth for that being. But, we're beginning to see that conditions are so very complex and so very out of 'our' control. An animal birth is considered an unhappy rebirth, it's akusala vipaka, partly because there is not the opportunity to develop wisdom of any kind (let alone highly developed jhanas or vipassana). Being born a human is kusala vipaka, however ghastly the circumstances may seem. Even if we, as humans, perform many, many good deeds in this life and develop some wisdom along the way, there's no way of knowing what the next rebirth will be and no self to help it. However, as we read in the example of the bats which Rob gave, we never know what conditions may have some beneficial effect. Some of the mental states you mention such as ekaggata, vitakka and vicara arise for all beings (kusala and akusala) and some like ekaggata at each moment......but not as jhananga. Christine, thanks for your comments which i don't think I've done justice to. Others may be able to help further;-) Wishing your pets well in the meantime! Sarah 7041 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 6:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Sarah Must endorse your post fully this time. Dear Tadao Aversion is very much evident in your remarks about living in a western country but if you cannot adapt why you indulged staying there for 20 years? Buddhism is a legacy of humanity not of so-called 'buddhist countries'. This is only prejudice out of your own discomfort. To practice you don't need to be in Thailand or Japan, it's a question of INNER GEOGRAPHY. Having 'a mind' is the only condition to thread the path. Metta Cybele > Dear Tadao, > >It's really great to be in touch again and to share dhamma >reminders....Some of >your posts have been very helpful indeed. > >However, I just can't understand this one: > >--- ppp wrote: > 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 > > > >What about now, Tadao, wherever we live? Aren't there opportunities for >kusala >cittas? Aren't there opportunities to consider others, to have metta, to >refrain from ill speech and most of all to have sati at the level of >satipatthana, having read and heard so much (in your case in Pali as well >as >Thai and English) about seeing, visible object and all the rest? I fail to >see >why there are fewer opportunities in Canada than Thailand even if our >kilesa >mean that there is in fact far less kusala in a day than we'd like. > >I'd also like to add that rt view is the most important aspect; so even if >one >has been away from dhamma books and discussions for a long time, if rt view >has >been accumulated, this is more valuable than having studied and practised >for >these years with wrong view. In other words, don't feel that all your time >in >Canada has been wasted or less useful than if you'd been elsewhere as this >is >just thinking with dosa and regrets, isn't it? I'm sure there have been >many >moments of kusala at different levels according to your accumulations each >day. > >Best wishes, >Sarah > >p.s glad to hear your health is getting better....I'm sure all the dhamma >consideration will be helping. By the way, one of the links here (the >www.metta >link)is to some of the Tipitaka in Pali, but you've probably seen it. > 7042 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 7:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders Thanks for your comments. > > 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. :-) Yes, I think I know what you mean. Here's a question for you, Anders. What in your view/experience is happening at such moments, when the fingers become 'visually interesting'. Is this because of what is happening in the eye-door process, or in the mind-door process, (assuming it's not changes in the finger!)? Is it kusala of some kind (understanding, perhaps) or is it akusala? > > 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... But not only that. We also take the seen and the heard for being 'self', in the sense that it has existence in a manner similar to ourself. In whatever terms we perceive ourself, we are likely to 'project' to other 'objects'. Jon 7043 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek Thanks for the interesting and, to me, new perspective on the suttas. I am not really in a position to comment for the most part since I have never looked into this aspect. However, I have snomething to say on your 4th point-- > (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. This seems to assume that the Noble Eightfold Path and the Mahasatipatthana Sutta are talking about the development of the path from the same point of view. As you may have noticed from another thread going on at the moment, this is something I would not agree with. The description of the N8FP makes it clear what factors are present at moments of path-consciousness, while DN 22 tells us how that path is to be developed. To my understanding, there is no inconsistency between the 2, so I would not wish to accept any conclusion based on an assumption that there was. Jon --- 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. 7044 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Teachings Then / Now Herman As usual, Herman, a challenging question. --- Herman wrote: > [Jon:] > > 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? Let me comment on what follows first. > 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. Different kinds of knowledge lead to different goals. The knowledge that leads to breakthroughs in the sciences, is not the same knowledge that. leads to escape from the kind of existence we have been born. The 'physical realities' that are represented by the scientific terms 'elements' or 'matter' are not the same physical realities that are represented by the term 'rupas'. There is absolutely no common ground between the 2 frames of reference/idioms, as far as I can see. I remember that in an earlier post you said you were interested in pursuing knowledge about reality (I hope I've got that right, Herman). I suppose it depends on how 'reality' is defined, but we need to have a working definition of 'reality' otherwise we may find ourselves pursuing the wrong goal. In explaining what are the realities to be studied and understood, the Buddha was pointing us in a certain direction. Even in his time there would have been an equivalent of 'modern technology', but he explained why that frame of reference would not lead to the goal that he had realised. On the other hand, the realities about which he spoke are exactly the same now as then. There are the same objects appearing through the same sense-doors, to be studied and known as and when they appear. The seeing and visible object appearing now are exactly the same in nature for you and for me and for people through all the ages. > The reality at this moment is that we are all using 21st century > technology to communicate at a very impersonal level with each other. That is 'reality' at a conventional level, of course. It is not 'absolute' in any sense. It could equally be described as a marvel that has made an entirely new form of communication available -- it all depends on the perspective of the speaker. Paramattha dhammas are not like that. They are realities that are the same for everyone. But without the explanation given by the Buddha they would not be apparent us as they really are. > Apparently it is very useful to be more discriminating than to have > just two types of reality, absolute and conventional. I'm not sure I understand this comment, but to answer your opening question, Herman, if the Buddha's teaching is what it claims to be, then it is as appropriate an 'idiom' today as it was in his time. > Regards > > > Herman Jon 7045 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 11:45pm Subject: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Before I proceed with this question, I just wanna make sure that we're in agreement on the presuppositions the question is based, mainly that the experience of Nibbana remains after Parinibbana (not necessarily in the subject/object way, or any *way* for that matter). Otherwise, how would it be possible to know it it's there? Just to underline this: ----------------------- This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: Monks, there are these two forms of the Nibbana property. Which two? The Nibbana property with fuel remaining, and the Nibbana property with no fuel remaining. And what is the Nibbana property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is a worthy one devoid of mental effluents, who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the bonds of becoming, and is released through right knowing. His five sense faculties still remain, and owing to their being intact, he is cognisant of the pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. That which is the passing away of passion, aversion, & delusion in him is termed the Nibbana property with fuel remaining. And what is the Nibbana property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is a worthy one...released through right knowing. All that is sensed by him, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Nibbana property with no fuel remaining. These two Nibbana properties proclaimed by the one with vision the one independent the one who is Such: one property, here in this life with fuel remaining from the ending of craving, the guide to becoming and that with no fuel remaining after this life in which all becoming completely stops. Those who know this state uncompounded their minds released through the ending of craving, the guide to becoming, they, attaining the Teaching's core, delighting in the ending of craving, have abandoned all becoming: they, the Such. Iti 44 -------------------------------------- What I am wondering is how can this possibly be discerned, since the arising of Nibbana (just to speak of 'arising' and 'dependent' in relation to Nibbana seems absurd to my mind) is dependent on the formation of consciousness (which ceases upon Parinibbana)? Basically, what I am reading from the 'experience of Nibbana is dependent on the formation of consciousness' doctrine is annihilation, because with the cessation of consciousness, there would be no way to know about the existence of Nibbana after Parinibbana, and so it would be ridiculous for the Buddha to speak of Nibbana after Parinibbana, since there would be no way to know or experience this with the cessation of consciousness. What this theory seems to propose to me is that cessation of all things, leaving nothingness behind (thus affirming the doctrine of annihilation). Anyone care to clarify this point for me? 7046 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:33am Subject: re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 7:18 AM Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) > 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?' And then we have someone like U.G. Krishnamurti, who commented on a situation when J. Krishnamurti asked a young couple "why don't you just hold hands?" U.G.'s response: "Bah, he probably said that because he used to have premature ejaculation himself and can't stand the thoughts of others having it." 7047 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:41am 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: > 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 :) When you do find the source, be sure to let me know. It would really mean a lot to me. 7048 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:18 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders > 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. Nah, from what he has told me, he uses Tom Bombadil simply because Tom Bombadil is his favourite character in the "Lord of the Rings" series. It's a small world though. But then again, DT is some of the closest you can come to a 'Usenet celebrity'. I'm not sure if I would say that me and DT are friends as such, because we've never conversed via email or anything like that, but we certainly have friendly discussions from time to time. 7049 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:57am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:32 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] 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? You know him too? Haha, what a small world! 7050 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:58am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 5:06 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Anders - > > > > In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > Anders: > > > > > > > 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. Yeah, I've talked with Richard P. Hayes from time to time myself too. A great guy. I always enjoyed his posts, although I think he has been offline (at least not frequenting Usenet) for quite some time now. 7051 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:00am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 8:05 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > --- <> 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. Well, 'identity' is not exactly a word I'd use, but that pretty much sums it up yes. 7052 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:04am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 12:04 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 > 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. Yup. More specifically, I think it was Dionysius the Areopagite who came up with that (although he also laid out a "via positivia" approach) in his "Mystical Theology". You can read the teaching on this on my website: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen-writings/mystical-theology.htm > 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. Yes, I think that's a very sharp observation which I agree with 100%. 7053 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:06am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Gayan Karunaratne Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 3:06 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 > Dear anders, > 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. That's a good point really. But as Derek and others have pointed out, 'dhamma' is one of the most generic terms in the entire Pali Canon. I'm still not sure how to properly interpret it in this context. 7054 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:09am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 3:52 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] 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, >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. Definitely. I agree with this very much. I kinda noticed the paradox myself a few days after. I write a long post about self and Nibbana only to conclude that my suggestion for the wisest approach would be to have no position on that matter at all. So what's the point? Duh. >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.) As I read, since it is the end of such things, it would seem closer to a 'non-state' (although this might imply nihilism). 7055 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! ----- Original Message ----- From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 9:09 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > The Dhamma will not be obscured, but people will do a fine job obscuring it. Nice one, although I did sense some contempt in your post as a whole. Or was that just me? As Nietszche said: "He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not become a monster himself." Be careful, that when speaking of other people obscuring the Dhamma, that you do not obscure the Dhamma yourself." Regards Anders 7056 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 11:22pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 2:55 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! > Difficult to grasp, I know. I dont' pretend to understand, but simply > quote this as the accepted orthodox teaching on this point. It's funny don't you think? I'm not pointing any fingers or anything, but try and imagine this sequence in an elementary school: Pupil: "I don't really understand this text." Teacher: "Doesn't matter. Now I'd like you to reformulate, expand comment and clarify the text. And when you're done with that, I want you to translate it into another language and make sure it's comprehensible there as well." I guess there aren't enough people around truly qualified to "reformulate, expand, comment and clarify." 7057 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 2, 2001 11:06pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:14 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > > When you stare at them long enough, your fingers are actually quite > > visually > > interesting. :-) > > Yes, I think I know what you mean. Here's a question for you, Anders. > What in your view/experience is happening at such moments, when the > fingers become 'visually interesting'. Is this because of what is > happening in the eye-door process, or in the mind-door process, (assuming > it's not changes in the finger!)? Is it kusala of some kind > (understanding, perhaps) or is it akusala? Hmmm, good question. I don't think it's related much to understanding really. I think it's a combination of eye and mind response. Generally, when your eyes loose focus or remain in focus on one object for an extended period of time, they tend to relax (at least for me) and I think this may result in visual sensations that are not normally experienced (since the eyes rarely relax in that way) and thus the mind responds to this *new* change, usually with fascination (the again, I can only speak for myself). I'd say that from a Samatha perspective, it's kusala (not much, but a little), but from the perspective of Vipassana, it's akusula. > > 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... > > But not only that. We also take the seen and the heard for being 'self', > in the sense that it has existence in a manner similar to ourself. In > whatever terms we perceive ourself, we are likely to 'project' to other > 'objects'. Yes, that's true. It's often not just *I am feeling* but *I am that feeling*. 7058 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:10am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 11:42 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! > 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? For me, it's simple causation. This arises because of that, and without this, that won't arise. Basically, what this theory tells me is that Nibbana 'is' dependent' on something, which of course is absurd (but perhaps it's my own lack of discernment that causes this conclusion). Or to speak in other words: Conditioned causes leads to conditioned effects, and not unconditioned effects. Otherwise, it would follow that Nibbana interacts (responds - starting a cause and effect) with Samsara, which is quite impossible since Nibbana is unconditioned. 7059 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:02am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 9:29 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! > 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. Tricky one. Anyway, assuming that Nibbana is self (and I do for the sake of relevance in this case), the Buddha refuted that view by saying: "This wrong view arises inappropriately.... It is exactly because of self that I perceive self." Perhaps it all has to do with the presupposition that if Nibbana is released consciousness, then there must automatically an object of it. In Mahayana, Nibbana is defined as "non-dwelling, unconditioned released consciousness." If it's not dwelling, how can there be an object (even Nibbana) to dwell on? This is something that defies normal comprehension, but my guess would be that there is no experiencing Nibbana: Nibbana just *is*. Just joy, permanence and all those other attributes that I can never remember correctly. No one experiencing that, because the "Nibbana-consciousness in itself *is* that joy and permanence etc. 7060 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:28am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: Emptiness is a mode of perception ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 4:40 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: Emptiness is a mode of perception > 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: > 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. I have read Bikkhu Bodhi's essay on nonduality before and I thought it was poorly made too. I think Nargajuna's list of negations pretty much puts it clear the Mahayana perspective on Oneness and all that: Not Many (Manyness) Not Two (duality) Not One (Oneness) This pretty much accords with Buddha's answers in the Cosmologist Sutta. As for the thing about nonduality, I'll just quote the Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra when it goes on to list various kinds of dualities that people erroneously fall into: "It is dualistic to speak of duality and non-duality." 7061 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:51am Subject: looking for good Pali translation I am thinking about buying the complete translations of the Samyutta Nikaya (because of its diversity of subjects) and the Digha Nikaya (because of its detail). Anyone here who can recommend a good (complete) translation, as well as where I can buy it? I'm looking for a translation that is *not* adapted for ease of readability and generally tries to stay as true to the original texts as possible. Derek, you seem pretty well-versed in all of that. Perhaps you can help (or anyone else for that matter)? Or would it be better for me to ask this question on that Pali Group that I have seen mentioned by some people here? Also, anyone who has some alternative suggestions besides the Digha and Samyutta Nikayas (I'll only be buying two Nikayas this time around), coupled with some good reasons as to why I should buy anything else? Regards Anders PS: I am sorry that I have been so late to reply to some of the posts directed at me, but I have been offline on vacation in Holland the past week, and have only returned online today. 7062 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:55am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Anders, I don't believe you have answered this question (I think Robert E has) fully, or what you said doesn't help me with what you are trying to explain. --- "Anders Honoré" > > 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? > > For me, it's simple causation. This arises because of that, and without > this, that won't arise. Basically, what this theory tells me is that Nibbana > 'is' dependent' on something, which of course is absurd (but perhaps it's my > own lack of discernment that causes this conclusion). If you look back at that post, there is nothing that suggested that nibbana is conditioned. I don't think it anyway suggested that nibbana rises or falls, and that its inherent characteristics are dependent on conditioned realities. > > Or to speak in other words: Conditioned causes leads to conditioned effects, > and not unconditioned effects. There are no conditioned cause that lead to unconditioned effects. Hence, this is true in all cases. > Otherwise, it would follow that Nibbana > interacts (responds - starting a cause and effect) with Samsara, which is > quite impossible since Nibbana is unconditioned. You are just repeating that nibbana cannot be cognized by conditioned realities, but have not explained (to me) why that is. kom 7063 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 2:28am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > What I am wondering is how can this possibly be discerned, since the > arising > of Nibbana (just to speak of 'arising' and 'dependent' in relation to > Nibbana seems absurd to my mind) is dependent on the formation of > consciousness (which ceases upon Parinibbana)? I read your question to be: if nibbana is cognized by conditioned realities, and since there are no more conditioned realities (the 5 kandhas) associated with the person after pari-nibbana, how can the person prove that nibbana existed after all the 5 kandhas (associated with the person) have no more conditions to rise? My speculation is that since nibanna is unconditioned realities, its characteristics are sufficiently different from the conditioned realities that it is obvious that it doesn't rise and it doesn't fall. So even when = the ariyan is not experiencing nibbana (and I hope you agree that they are not experiencing nibbana all the time when they are still alive!), they= know with direct knowledge (of having experienced nibbana) that its characteristic continue, without rising or falling, even if there are no condition at the time for them to experience it. > Basically, what I am reading from the 'experience of Nibbana is dependent on > the formation of consciousness' doctrine is annihilation, because with the > cessation of consciousness, I think we (you, Roberts, and I) have discussed the Sutta related to annihilation on-and-off. Since you didn't add other points to the topics (= I only remember that you said you disagreed, but didn't give explict reasons), our discussion here may not any more points to this topics. The sutta that you raised on this topics the last time concerns V. Sariputta's answers to the question what happend to the Tathagatha after his death. I think Roberts had explained sufficiently why the answer cannot be that there is no longer Tathagatha after his death. This is because there is never Tathagatha at the first place since the Buddha was a stream of conditioned realities that arise consequentially and continuously as long as there are conditions for the realities to arise. At the points of his death, there are no more conditions for the stream of conditioned realities to continue. > there would be no way to know about the > existence of Nibbana after Parinibbana, and so it would be ridiculous for > the Buddha to speak of Nibbana after Parinibbana, since there would be no > way to know or experience this with the cessation of consciousness. You can know by inference. > What > this theory seems to propose to me is that cessation of all things, leaving > nothingness behind (thus affirming the doctrine of annihilation). Anyone > care to clarify this point for me? I think you may want to clarify what your understanding of "annihilation" is. In SN, it is phrased as "is the one doing the deed different from the = one receiving the results?" The annihilationist view, as I understand the = scriptures to refer to, is that the consciousness rising a moment ago has nothing to do with the consciousness arising now---and hence, the doer of the deed is different from the receiver of the results. There is also view (I know some people today) who believe that their existence will cease at death---they don't know that the continuity of the 5-khandhas are assured as long as there are conditions for them to continue rising. I don't think the idea that when a condition for things to arise ceases to = exist, then its result cannot be is annihilationism in the view of the scriptures. This idea of eliminating the cause so that the effects cannot arise are repeated over and over in the explanation of dependent origination. kom 7064 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 4:57am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 8:28 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > What I am wondering is how can this possibly be discerned, since the > arising > of Nibbana (just to speak of 'arising' and 'dependent' in relation to > Nibbana seems absurd to my mind) is dependent on the formation of > consciousness (which ceases upon Parinibbana)? >I read your question to be: if nibbana is cognized by conditioned >realities, and since there are no more conditioned realities (the 5 >kandhas) associated with the person after pari-nibbana, how can the >person prove that nibbana existed after all the 5 kandhas (associated >with the person) have no more conditions to rise? Yup. >My speculation is that since nibanna is unconditioned realities, its >characteristics are sufficiently different from the conditioned realities >that it is obvious that it doesn't rise and it doesn't fall. So even when = >the ariyan is not experiencing nibbana (and I hope you agree that they >are not experiencing nibbana all the time when they are still alive!), they= > know with direct knowledge (of having experienced nibbana) that its >characteristic continue, without rising or falling, even if there are no >condition at the time for them to experience it. Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there even Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since Nibbana is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. >> Basically, what I am reading from the 'experience of Nibbana is >>dependent on >> the formation of consciousness' doctrine is annihilation, because with >>the >> cessation of consciousness, >I think we (you, Roberts, and I) have discussed the Sutta related to annihilation on-and-off. Since you didn't add other points to the topics (= I only remember that you said you disagreed, but didn't give explict reasons), our discussion here may not any more points to this topics. Don't think so either.... >The sutta that you raised on this topics the last time concerns V. Sariputta's answers to the question what happend to the Tathagatha after his death. I think Roberts had explained sufficiently why the answer cannot be that there is no longer Tathagatha after his death. Yup. I disagreed, but I don't think either view can be properly refuted, so I decided to leave it at that. >This is because there is never Tathagatha at the first place since the Buddha was a stream of conditioned realities that arise consequentially and continuously as long as there are conditions for the realities to arise. At the points of his death, there are no more conditions for the stream of conditioned realities to continue. Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to which he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could find the source if you want to)? >I think you may want to clarify what your understanding of "annihilation" is. Plain simply: As I see it, a non-annihilationist Buddhadhamma, is one where an "escape" from impermanent Samsara to permanent Nibbana is possible. A path where the actually is a real meaning to the practise other than to practise for the eventual non-existence of the kandhas. But that doesn't seem to be the case according to you. Hence, I see it as leaning towards nihilism/annihilation. 7065 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 4:58am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 7:55 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Anders, >I don't believe you have answered this question (I think Robert E has) fully, or what you said doesn't help me with what you are trying to explain. Well, if Robert has (who, I'll grant, as much more adept at explaining such things clearly than I), should I too? 7066 From: Brian Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:21am Subject: Hello Hello, Having just subscribed to dhammastudygroup, I thought I should introduce myself. My name is Brian, I'm a 34 year old American man, married to one of the world's most wonderful women. We're childless by choice and we have a cat named Sammy. My daily practice is focused on mindfulness of breathing as described in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118). In addition to this group, I also subscribe to the dhamma-list. It's likely that I'll be silently following the discussions in this group, but I wanted to surface at least once to say hello and wish everyone well. Metta, Brian 7067 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear anders, > That's a good point really. But as Derek and others have pointed out, > 'dhamma' is one of the most generic terms in the entire Pali Canon. I'm > still not sure how to properly interpret it in this context. > yes its so generic that nothing is more generic in pali. according to tipitaka, nibbana is a paramattha dhamma. rgds gayan 7068 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dear brian, welcome and wish you well for your dhamma journey . regards gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 6:21 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello > Hello, > > Having just subscribed to dhammastudygroup, I thought I should > introduce myself. > > My name is Brian, I'm a 34 year old American man, married to > one of the world's most wonderful women. We're childless by > choice and we have a cat named Sammy. > > My daily practice is focused on mindfulness of breathing as > described in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118). In addition to this > group, I also subscribe to the dhamma-list. > > It's likely that I'll be silently following the discussions in this > group, but I wanted to surface at least once to say hello and wish > everyone well. > > Metta, > Brian > > > 7069 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:36am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Gayan Karunaratne Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 1:26 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 > > dear anders, > > > That's a good point really. But as Derek and others have pointed out, > > 'dhamma' is one of the most generic terms in the entire Pali Canon. I'm > > still not sure how to properly interpret it in this context. > > > > yes its so generic that nothing is more generic in pali. > according to tipitaka, nibbana is a paramattha dhamma. But could there be another reason why he changes it to 'dhamma' in the third? 7070 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:37am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 12:21 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello > Hello, > > Having just subscribed to dhammastudygroup, I thought I should > introduce myself. > > My name is Brian, I'm a 34 year old American man, married to > one of the world's most wonderful women. We're childless by > choice and we have a cat named Sammy. > > My daily practice is focused on mindfulness of breathing as > described in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118). In addition to this > group, I also subscribe to the dhamma-list. > > It's likely that I'll be silently following the discussions in this > group, but I wanted to surface at least once to say hello and wish > everyone well. Welcome. I haven't been around long myself, but it's certainly an interesting group. I hope you'll enjoy yourself. 7071 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:36am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > >My speculation is that since nibanna is unconditioned realities, its > >characteristics are sufficiently different from the conditioned realitie= s > >that it is obvious that it doesn't rise and it doesn't fall. So even wh= en > = > >the ariyan is not experiencing nibbana (and I hope you agree that they > >are not experiencing nibbana all the time when they are still alive!), > they= > > know with direct knowledge (of having experienced nibbana) that its > >characteristic continue, without rising or falling, even if there are no= > >condition at the time for them to experience it. > > Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there even > Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from > Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since Nibbana > is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. If you remember the dependent origination's last 2 links, i.e, if there is = birth, there is suffering, aging, and death. Without birth, there is no more suffering, aging, and death. If you look at the "birth" link, some people interpret it to be the coming-about of the khandha (at every single moment, not just at the conventional birth and death). Hence, the cessation of birth (no more re-appearance of kandha) by definition eliminates all other sufferings. > >This is because there is never Tathagatha at the first place since the > Buddha was a stream of conditioned realities that arise consequentially > and continuously as long as there are conditions for the realities to > arise. At the points of his death, there are no more conditions for the > stream of conditioned realities to continue. > > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to which > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > find the source if you want to)? Of course, the Tathagata is not being in the kandhas. The "tathagata" in that sutta context denotes a being, a self, and there is no way that any disciples would acknoledge that there is Tathagata in the kandha: they would only say in the kandha, there is only the kandha, a conditioned reality that does not last. > >I think you may want to clarify what your understanding of "annihilation" > is. > > Plain simply: As I see it, a non-annihilationist Buddhadhamma, is one where > an "escape" from impermanent Samsara to permanent Nibbana is possible. A > path where the actually is a real meaning to the practise other than to > practise for the eventual non-existence of the kandhas. But that doesn't > seem to be the case according to you. Hence, I see it as leaning towards > nihilism/annihilation. Although I don't agree with your definition of annihilation (and that it agrees with the scripture) and the interpretation of the cessation of suffering, I will leave this view to be supported or refuted by other members... kom 7072 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:37am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 7:55 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full > Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! > > > Dear Anders, > > >I don't believe you have answered this question (I think Robert E has) > fully, or what you said doesn't help me with what you are trying to > explain. > > Well, if Robert has (who, I'll grant, as much more adept at explaining such > things clearly than I), should I too? If your understanding is different from Robert E's or if you have any meaningful points that can be added to his logics, then I think you should.= kom 7073 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:39am Subject: Re: Hello Dear Brian, Welcome to the list and thanks for introducing yourself. I am happy you made it here. I am located in San Jose, CA. Are you by any chance in the Western part of the US? kom --- Brian wrote: > Hello, > > Having just subscribed to dhammastudygroup, I thought I should > introduce myself. > 7074 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear anders, > > But could there be another reason why he changes it to 'dhamma' in the > third? > hmm,.... can't prolify about any other reason at the moment..... rgds gayan 7075 From: Brian Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 8:18am Subject: Re: Hello --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Brian, > > Welcome to the list and thanks for introducing yourself. I am happy you > made it here. I am located in San Jose, CA. Are you by any chance in > the Western part of the US? > > kom Dear Kom, I reside in upstate New York, out in the country. Unfortunately there are no Buddhist temples in my area, but the Insight Meditation Society in Barre, MA, is only about 3 hours away. I'm going to be attending my second vipassana retreat there starting next Friday. Metta, Brian 7076 From: ppp Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 2:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik's debating skills Hi, Sarah (and Erick): With respect to your list of points which Erick should pay attension to, I think some of these are bit too harsh. I am self very much enjoy his comments/auguments (despite the fact that I cannot respond to these immediately). Each person has a different accumuation (as Khun Sujin says time and again). If we were all very much the same, the world would indeed be a boring boring place. (Please remember how "peculiar" Khun Allen was. And as you know, we all (still) owe him a lot.) Three Cheers to Erick!!! tadao 7077 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 9:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation Anders Very nice to see your interest in the Tipitaka texts. Anumodana. --- Anders Honoré wrote: > I am thinking about buying the complete translations of the Samyutta > Nikaya > (because of its diversity of subjects) and the Digha Nikaya (because of > its > detail). > > Anyone here who can recommend a good (complete) translation, as well as > where I can buy it? I'm looking for a translation that is *not* adapted > for > ease of readability and generally tries to stay as true to the original > texts as possible. Derek, you seem pretty well-versed in all of that. > Perhaps you can help (or anyone else for that matter)? Or would it be > better > for me to ask this question on that Pali Group that I have seen > mentioned by > some people here? > > Also, anyone who has some alternative suggestions besides the Digha and > Samyutta Nikayas (I'll only be buying two Nikayas this time around), > coupled > with some good reasons as to why I should buy anything else? > > Regards > Anders There is a new and very useful translation of the Samyutta Nikaya by Bhikkhu Bodhi published by Wisdom Books under the title 'Connected Discourses of the Buddha'. It comes with extensive translation of passages from the Commentaries, comprehensive indices and glossaries and Bh Bodhi's own thoughts on a number of topics. Whil I find Ven. Bodhi's comments have a slant that I am not fully in agreemnt with, his scholarship of the texts is beyond question as far as I am able to judge. This particular publication is very user-friendly and browsable. It comes in 2 volumes and is well worth the price (almost USD 100, I believe). Available from Amazon.com or the Wisdom online store. From the same publisher and vendor there is also a trasnlation of the Digha Nikaya by Maurice Walsh ('Long Discourses of the Buddha'). While this translation is considerably earlier than the Samyutta's (and so not able to benefit from the much recent scholarship on the texts generally), it is published with the same useful supplemenetray materials. Recommended. As for other Nikaya-s, I would recommend a partial translation of the Anguttara Nikaya, also by Bhikkhu Bodhi (originally translations by Ven Nyanaponika), under the title 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha', published by AltaMera (I think) and available from Amazon.com. Well presented and with extensive notes from the Commentaries. Hope this helps, and happy reading! Jon 7078 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 9:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! Hi Anders, Namaste! There was no contempt in the post. Actually, I find the contempt coming from those who are challenged in their apathy, complacency, and use of the Dhamma to hide and escape from painful part of the tough world we live in and face. When something becomes overwhelming it is not unusual for people ho claim to be Dhamma practitioners to conveniently chalk it up to "anicca" --- how convenient. I wonder how people who are disenfranchised and "4th World" would accept such a reason? Thank you for the advice. Did I obscure the Dhamma? Metta, Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anders Honoré" Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:05 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 9:09 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > The Dhamma will not be obscured, but people will do a fine job obscuring > it. > > Nice one, although I did sense some contempt in your post as a whole. Or was > that just me? > > As Nietszche said: "He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, > he does not become a monster himself." > > Be careful, that when speaking of other people obscuring the Dhamma, that > you do not obscure the Dhamma yourself." > > Regards > Anders 7079 From: ppp Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 2:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation Hi, Anders and Jonothan: About books, as Jonothan infered Wisdom Books must be the biggest distributer of Buddhist books in North America. They used also to be a sole distributer of all the publications of the Pali Text Society. However, about a few months ago, another book seller [pariyatti.com] overtook the distribution of all the PTS books. So it is not bad idea to check their Web site, too. tadao 7080 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello Welcome Brian! We are chasing each other in these lists. Hope you enjoy the discussions and don't feel intimidated to participate. I will 'defend' you, don't be afraid. ;-) I am joking Brian, I know you are brave. Love Cybele >From: Brian >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello >Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 22:21:23 -0000 > >Hello, > >Having just subscribed to dhammastudygroup, I thought I should >introduce myself. > >My name is Brian, I'm a 34 year old American man, married to >one of the world's most wonderful women. We're childless by >choice and we have a cat named Sammy. > >My daily practice is focused on mindfulness of breathing as >described in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118). In addition to this >group, I also subscribe to the dhamma-list. > >It's likely that I'll be silently following the discussions in this >group, but I wanted to surface at least once to say hello and wish >everyone well. > >Metta, >Brian > 7081 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Brian > >I reside in upstate New York, out in the country. Unfortunately >there are no Buddhist temples in my area, but the Insight >Meditation Society in Barre, MA, is only about 3 hours away. I'm >going to be attending my second vipassana retreat there starting >next Friday. > >Metta, >Brian Another 'meditator' in this group!!!! ;-) The heretic club is increasing, wow!!! Again best wishes for your retreat and please don't lose your beginner's mind, you are so fresh Brian that I thought you were a lot younger. That's good, the freshness...take care to don't become a stale practitioner full of certainties and spiritual arrogance. Remember I 'demand' the detailed report. Let's check if they will instruct you as we were discussing in the list, using the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. Welcome again. LOve Cybele 7082 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:37am Subject: Neti, Neti it was : No-Self - Anders Part 2 Dear Derek Dear Anders >>> > > 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. > >Yes, I think that's a very sharp observation which I agree with 100%. > YES I endorse fully, not that my opinion here has any weight but I can't waste a chance to nosy in... And Anders you must explain what is 'neti, neti' here they are Pali addicted not Sanskrit addicted sweetheart. Neti, Neti: Skt., lit. "Not this, not this" These frequently cited words from the Brihadaranyayaka-Upanishad reject the appearances of the entire universe as mere superimpositions upon Brahman and stabilish that Brahman alone exists and nothing else. This application of the knowledge that the ultimate reality is 'not this, not this' to all manifestations represents in Advaita-Vedanta a process of negative discrimination that constitutes the intellectual path of the 'jnani' Love Cybele 7083 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:45am Subject: Nibbana talk it was Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 Dear Anders Dear Derek >Hi, Anders, > > >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. > >Definitely. I agree with this very much. I kinda noticed the paradox myself >a few days after. I write a long post about self and Nibbana only to >conclude that my suggestion for the wisest approach would be to have no >position on that matter at all. So what's the point? Duh. > WONDERFUL!!!!! So happy that after so much mumbo-jumbo both of you have agreed that discussing Nibbana is pointless. I always thought so. But if you conclude is a waste of time and energy PLEASE WHY DON'T YOU JUST STOP, I BEG YOU!!! :-))))) Be merciful, can't stand anymore this Nibbana talk and after people says I am obssessed with meditation. Two bright intelligent guys squandering their talents in this nihilist subject. Please give me a break, be compassionate.. ;-) By the way Derek, in the sharings about meditation I would most appreciate if you could forward some of your posts in d-l. Would you? Love Cybele 7084 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:50am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! hi Anders You and Nietszche are 'haunting me'. And if you 'don't take care', your preaching tone with Bhante will bear kammic results very soon. I can already smell the vipaka fruits in the air. :-)))) Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? Just to know, I am curious Anders... ;-) Love Cybele > > The Dhamma will not be obscured, but people will do a fine job obscuring >it. > >Nice one, although I did sense some contempt in your post as a whole. Or >was >that just me? > >As Nietszche said: "He who hunts monsters should see to that in the >process, >he does not become a monster himself." > >Be careful, that when speaking of other people obscuring the Dhamma, that >you do not obscure the Dhamma yourself." > >Regards >Anders > 7085 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:57am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 Dear Gayan > > Dear anders, > > 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. This is not fair, you are kammically advantadged with Pali being Sri Lankan; your language already has many pali related/derivated terms and you live in a Buddhist country. Let's do an exchange for a while? You come to cloudy LOndon and I move in to Serendipy Island. ;-) BTW have you already booked the place for our meeting; I am dying to send a daily report to the list. Love Cybele > >That's a good point really. But as Derek and others have pointed out, >'dhamma' is one of the most generic terms in the entire Pali Canon. I'm >still not sure how to properly interpret it in this context. > 7086 From: ppp Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 4:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Sarah: (i) Yes, Dhamma must be one of the best medicines for our health. (ii) Yes, I know, in reality there is no "Canada" no "Thailand", but just nama or rupa. (iii) But, as Erick and Mike mentioned, living in a Buddhist country, such as Thailand, is one of the 'mangalaani uttamaani' (highest happinesses) tadao 7087 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:08pm Subject: Re: Lumbini In Danger! --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > hi Anders > > You and Nietszche are 'haunting me'. > And if you 'don't take care', your preaching tone with Bhante will bear > kammic results very soon. I can already smell the vipaka fruits in the air. > :-)))) > Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? I assume Anders did! And I can see that very kusala vipaka coming Anders' way even now! 7088 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Tadao >Hi, Sarah: >(i) Yes, Dhamma must be one of the best medicines for our health. >(ii) Yes, I know, in reality there is no "Canada" no "Thailand", > but just nama or rupa. >(iii) But, as Erick and Mike mentioned, living in a Buddhist > country, such as Thailand, is one of the 'mangalaani uttamaani' > (highest happinesses) tadao You were born in a buddhist country though non theravada and you lived in a buddhist country such as Thailand. Why then if you believe is the 'highest happiness you persist in living in Canada? Legitimate question after your remarks... Metta Cybele 7089 From: Jon & Sarah Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:13pm Subject: Re: Lumbini In Danger! Anders (and others) I know you've been away from the list, so you may not have seen our earlier post declaring this thread off-topic. Please do not post any further replies on this thread. Thanks for your cooperation. (Any comments or queries, off-list, please) Jon & Sarah --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 9:09 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > The Dhamma will not be obscured, but people will do a fine job obscuring > it. > > Nice one, although I did sense some contempt in your post as a whole. Or was > that just me? > > As Nietszche said: "He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, > he does not become a monster himself." > > Be careful, that when speaking of other people obscuring the Dhamma, that > you do not obscure the Dhamma yourself." > > Regards > Anders 7090 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:17pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:31 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders > > > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > 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 :) > > When you do find the source, be sure to let me know. It would really mean a > lot to me. Okay, I WILL try, but it was a while ago I caught this. I'll make a strong mental note of this, because it is not a trivial issue [namely, my reply was that the Buddha did NOT dogmatically or categorically say that "NO OTHER PATHS CAN EVER LEAD TO CESSATION OF DUKKHA," and my reply had been recalling someplace in a Sutta where the Buddha had only stated that he was uncertain about other teachers or methods, but aagin, never went so far as to totally and categorically or dogmatically reject all other methods as definitely wrong]. 7091 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 0:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! Hi Erik >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > > hi Anders > > > > You and Nietszche are 'haunting me'. > > And if you 'don't take care', your preaching tone with Bhante will >bear > > kammic results very soon. I can already smell the vipaka fruits in >the air. > > :-)))) > > Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? > >I assume Anders did! And I can see that very kusala vipaka coming >Anders' way even now! > Naughty, naughty scandinavians!!!! All of you in the heretic club; by the way we count on organizing a meeting very soon. ;-) Nice to hear from you , drop a line when you manage.# LOve Cybele 7092 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik's debating skills Dear Tadao, I think you may have misunderstood for which I apologise - --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Sarah (and Erick): > With respect to your list of points which Erick should > pay attension to, I think some of these are bit too harsh. These weren't points for Erik to pay attention to at all - it was meant as a (humourous) list of what I'm learning from his debating style...certainly not meant as criticism of Erik or his style in the slightest..... > I am self very much enjoy his comments/auguments (despite the > fact that I cannot respond to these immediately). Erik knows how much I do too. Each person > has a different accumuation (as Khun Sujin says time and again). > If we were all very much the same, the world would indeed be a > boring boring place. I think I've made this point on several occasions too. Again, my apologies if (unknowingly) I caused offence to you or anyone else. Erik, thanks for the added comments and 'instruction' too - sorry, no chance to reply in full. Best, Sarah 7093 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 1:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello Dear Brian, Another welcome here and thanks so much for introducing yourself without more ado.....(a good example to any other lurkers out there!!) --- Brian wrote: > Hello, > > Having just subscribed to dhammastudygroup, I thought I should > introduce myself. > > My name is Brian, I'm a 34 year old American man, married to > one of the world's most wonderful women. We're childless by > choice and we have a cat named Sammy. > > My daily practice is focused on mindfulness of breathing as > described in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118). In addition to this > group, I also subscribe to the dhamma-list. > > It's likely that I'll be silently following the discussions in this > group, but I wanted to surface at least once to say hello and wish > everyone well. I see you're based in NY state - like Howard and Sotajanna (in lurk mode) and the famous or infamous Erik (now in Bangkok)...others I'm sure too. As Cybele so nicely encourages newcomers from d-l, pls chip in anytime - hopefully we don't bite! Best wishes, Sarah 7094 From: Herman Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:37pm Subject: The only way? Hi all, Recently there has been good discussion about the methods/paths to nibbana. One of the, so far unanswered, questions was whether there was a path presribed that was THE ONLY WAY. In my general browsing I chanced upon the following. Sorry for quoting the whole section, but it shows how in a particular instance multiple views were allowed without admonition or correction. Kalama Sutta: (The Four Solaces) 17. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate- free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom four solaces are found here and now. "'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him. "'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him. "'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him. "'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found." "So it is, Blessed One. So it is, Sublime one. The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, four solaces are found. "'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him. "'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him. "'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him. "'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate- free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found. With Metta Herman 7095 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:32pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello ----- Original Message ----- From: Sarah Procter Abbott Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 7:38 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello > Dear Brian, > > Another welcome here and thanks so much for introducing yourself without more > ado.....(a good example to any other lurkers out there!!) Was that a pun, Sarah? :o) 7096 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:39pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma There, changed the name of the thread, because I think it has developed into an on-topic now. ----- Original Message ----- From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 3:53 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > Hi Anders, Namaste! > > There was no contempt in the post. Actually, I find the contempt coming from > those who are challenged in their apathy, complacency, and use of the Dhamma > to hide and escape from painful part of the tough world we live in and face. > > When something becomes overwhelming it is not unusual for people ho claim to > be Dhamma practitioners to conveniently chalk it up to "anicca" --- how > convenient. I wonder how people who are disenfranchised and "4th World" > would accept such a reason? In that case I apologise for my lack of discernment. The written word cannot always convey feelings as accurately as might be wanted. > Thank you for the advice. Did I obscure the Dhamma? Certainly not, then! 7097 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana talk it was Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:45 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana talk it was Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 > > Dear Anders > Dear Derek > > >Hi, Anders, > > > > >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. > > > >Definitely. I agree with this very much. I kinda noticed the paradox myself > >a few days after. I write a long post about self and Nibbana only to > >conclude that my suggestion for the wisest approach would be to have no > >position on that matter at all. So what's the point? Duh. > > > > WONDERFUL!!!!! So happy that after so much mumbo-jumbo both of you have > agreed that discussing Nibbana is pointless. > I always thought so. > But if you conclude is a waste of time and energy PLEASE WHY DON'T YOU JUST > STOP, I BEG YOU!!! :-))))) > Be merciful, can't stand anymore this Nibbana talk and after people says I > am obssessed with meditation. > Two bright intelligent guys squandering their talents in this nihilist > subject. > Please give me a break, be compassionate.. ;-) > By the way Derek, in the sharings about meditation I would most appreciate > if you could forward some of your posts in d-l. Would you? And just because you said that, I'm gonna continue with it, Cybele! Actually, the reason I started that other thread about Nibbana and annihilation is not to dig deeper into "the true nature of Nibbana" or anything like that, but rather, people's motivation for the path. What are they ultimately practising for? That's all. 7098 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:48pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma Changed the name of the thread, to make it on-topic. ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:50 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > hi Anders > > You and Nietszche are 'haunting me'. We certainly are! Honestly, you must be able to see the wisdom in those words, Cybele. Don't you? > And if you 'don't take care', your preaching tone with Bhante will bear > kammic results very soon. I can already smell the vipaka fruits in the air. > :-)))) Hey, I'm just pointing! There was nothing wrong with the principle I laid out, so I can allow myself to be 'preaching' there, as you say. I was wrong about his underlying intent of the letter, and I certainly hope there was no preaching tone there from me. > Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? > Just to know, I am curious Anders... ;-) Yup. Actually, something dawned on me a few weeks ago. As many others, I used to perceive monks as being much more advanced than lay people because they devote their lives to the Dhamma and all. But then it occurred to me that monks aren't necessarily more advanced than lay people - They're just more desperate (or willing - insert any loaded word here. My intention was not to load the word, but I can't find one) to end suffering! Still, I intend to become a monk myself someday (have to finish school first and all). 7099 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:49pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 6:08 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > --- "cybele chiodi" > wrote: > > Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? > > I assume Anders did! And I can see that very kusala vipaka coming > Anders' way even now! Haha! 7100 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:50pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 6:17 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > >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 :) > > When you do find the source, be sure to let me know. It would really mean a > lot to me. >Okay, I WILL try, but it was a while ago I caught this. I'll make a strong mental note of this, because it is not a trivial issue >[namely, my reply was that the Buddha did NOT dogmatically or categorically say that "NO OTHER PATHS CAN EVER LEAD TO CESSATION OF DUKKHA," and my reply had been recalling someplace in a Sutta where the Buddha had only stated that he was uncertain about other teachers or methods, but aagin, never went so far as to totally and categorically or dogmatically reject all other methods as definitely wrong]. Thanks 7101 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:52pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 6:31 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > > Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? > > > >I assume Anders did! And I can see that very kusala vipaka coming > >Anders' way even now! > > Naughty, naughty scandinavians!!!! Haha, it's all part of the Grand Conspiracy, you know.... One day we are gonna rule the earth! And it all starts by conspiring against the latins in small groups on the internet! > All of you in the heretic club; by the way we count on organizing a meeting > very soon. ;-) > Nice to hear from you , drop a line when you manage.# I need to join that club sometime... 7102 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:54pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Neti, Neti it was : No-Self - Anders Part 2 ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:37 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Neti, Neti it was : No-Self - Anders Part 2 > > > 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. > > > >Yes, I think that's a very sharp observation which I agree with 100%. > > YES I endorse fully, not that my opinion here has any weight but I can't > waste a chance to nosy in... > > And Anders you must explain what is 'neti, neti' here they are Pali addicted > not Sanskrit addicted sweetheart. > > Neti, Neti: Skt., lit. "Not this, not this" > These frequently cited words from the Brihadaranyayaka-Upanishad reject the > appearances of the entire universe as mere superimpositions upon Brahman and > stabilish that Brahman alone exists and nothing else. > This application of the knowledge that the ultimate reality is 'not this, > not this' to all manifestations represents in Advaita-Vedanta a process of > negative discrimination that constitutes the intellectual path of the > 'jnani' Shouldn't I hand over this job to Nagarjuna? If anyone ever explained what's Neti Neti, he would have to be the one. 7103 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 6:52pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 3:44 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation > Hi, Anders and Jonothan: > About books, as Jonothan infered Wisdom Books must be > the biggest distributer of Buddhist books in North > America. They used also to be a sole distributer of all > the publications of the Pali Text Society. However, > about a few months ago, another book seller [pariyatti.com] > overtook the distribution of all the PTS books. So it is not > bad idea to check their Web site, too. tadao Thanks 7104 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:01pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 3:39 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation > Anders > > Very nice to see your interest in the Tipitaka texts. Anumodana. I've always had a great interest in the scriptures and I do find them beneficial to practise. I just got a VISA card the other day, so now I can actually start buying books via the internet. I figure I'll buy those two Nikayas and some stuff buy Nagarjuna as well. > There is a new and very useful translation of the Samyutta Nikaya by > Bhikkhu Bodhi published by Wisdom Books under the title 'Connected > Discourses of the Buddha'. It comes with extensive translation of > passages from the Commentaries, comprehensive indices and glossaries and > Bh Bodhi's own thoughts on a number of topics. Whil I find Ven. Bodhi's > comments have a slant that I am not fully in agreemnt with, his > scholarship of the texts is beyond question as far as I am able to judge. Well, personally I have my reservations about Bikkhu Bodhi's views and I don't think I would buy a book just for that, but his contributions to the western understanding of Theravada is immense, and for that he deserves much praise. But if his translations are good, then I'll certainly consider it. > This particular publication is very user-friendly and browsable. It comes > in 2 volumes and is well worth the price (almost USD 100, I believe). > Available from Amazon.com or the Wisdom online store. Phew. I think it is worth the price anyway too though. > From the same publisher and vendor there is also a trasnlation of the > Digha Nikaya by Maurice Walsh ('Long Discourses of the Buddha'). While > this translation is considerably earlier than the Samyutta's (and so not > able to benefit from the much recent scholarship on the texts generally), > it is published with the same useful supplemenetray materials. > Recommended. Sounds good. > As for other Nikaya-s, I would recommend a partial translation of the > Anguttara Nikaya, also by Bhikkhu Bodhi (originally translations by Ven > Nyanaponika), under the title 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha', > published by AltaMera (I think) and available from Amazon.com. Well > presented and with extensive notes from the Commentaries. > > Hope this helps, and happy reading! It does very much. Thank you! 7105 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:02pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 1:37 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! > Well, if Robert has (who, I'll grant, as much more adept at explaining such > things clearly than I), should I too? >If your understanding is different from Robert E's or if you have any meaningful points that can be added to his logics, then I think you should.= I think me and Robert are pretty much in agreement. And any points I might have to add would surely only confuse the matter even more! 7106 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:26pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 1:36 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "Anders Honoré" > Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there even > Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from > Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since Nibbana > is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. >If you remember the dependent origination's last 2 links, i.e, if there is = >birth, there is suffering, aging, and death. Without birth, there is no more suffering, aging, and death. If you look at the "birth" link, some people interpret it to be the coming-about of the khandha (at every single moment, not just at the conventional birth and death). Hence, the cessation of birth (no more re-appearance of kandha) by definition eliminates all other sufferings. Yeah, but you didn't answer my question? What's the point? Why are you practising? To end suffering through nothingness after Parinibbana? Personally, I'm practising for the eternal bliss and joy of Nibbana after Parinibbana, and that is what I'm trying to show that, as I read the Pali Canon, the Buddha pointed to the same thing. > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to which > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > find the source if you want to)? >Of course, the Tathagata is not being in the kandhas. The "tathagata" in that sutta context denotes a being, a self, and there is no way that any disciples would acknoledge that there is Tathagata in the kandha: they would only say in the kandha, there is only the kandha, a conditioned reality that does not last. The sutta also says "do you construe the Tathagata as being elsewhere than the five kandhas?" to which he truthfully answers no. It concludes: 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. ---------------- I must admit I still don't see how you are *not* saying that the Tathagata doesn't exist after death. Another one, makes it clear that there *is* an entity labeled Tathagata : "Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard-to-fathom, like the sea. "Reappears" doesn't apply. "Does not reappear" doesn't apply. "Both does & does not reappear" doesn't apply. "Neither reappears nor does not reappear" doesn't apply. 'Any feeling...Any perception...Any mental process... 'Any act of consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned....Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard-to-fathom, like the sea.' " M 72 Doesn't say that the Tathagata is merely a construct of the five kandhas, but rather indicates that there is a Tathagata, but that he has transcended the kandhas. Come to think of it, doesn't Robert K's (wouldn't be eaiser to just call him Kirk or something?) explanation about "the Buddha doesn't perish because there never was a Buddha to begin with. Just the kandhas which are not-self," doesn't it contradict that. and doesn't that explanation fall under the fallacious view "the Buddha neither exists nor does not exist adter death"? 7107 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek hi, It is totally wrong to say that satipatthanasuuta in DN22 is without samadhi jhana.We have anapanasati attainment to 4 jhana in this sutta.And also in the last subject of 4 noble truth ,we have 8 noble path completely, Note that com .said kaya and vedana are for samathayanika while the other two for vipassanayanika.Do not simply give comment until we have read enough texts. Teng Kee >From: Jonothan Abbott >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek >Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:42:45 +0800 (CST) > >Derek > >Thanks for the interesting and, to me, new perspective on the suttas. I >am not really in a position to comment for the most part since I have >never looked into this aspect. > >However, I have snomething to say on your 4th point-- > > > (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. > >This seems to assume that the Noble Eightfold Path and the >Mahasatipatthana Sutta are talking about the development of the path from >the same point of view. As you may have noticed from another thread going >on at the moment, this is something I would not agree with. The >description of the N8FP makes it clear what factors are present at moments >of path-consciousness, while DN 22 tells us how that path is to be >developed. > >To my understanding, there is no inconsistency between the 2, so I would >not wish to accept any conclusion based on an assumption that there was. > >Jon > > > --- 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. > 7108 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear cybele, > This is not fair, you are kammically advantadged with Pali being Sri Lankan; > your language already has many pali related/derivated terms and you live in > a Buddhist country. yeah, have both advantages and disadvantages. for example the pali term 'uddhacca' - the intended pali meaning is the restlessness(non-one-pointedness) of the mind (?hope I am correct) Theres a sinhala version of uddhacca which means 'unnecessarily proud'. And the word dukkha , the pali meaning is an array of characteristics - unsatisfactoriness,frustration,grief,sorrow But the sinhala word duka means (or implies) just 'suffering'. ( as in the case with initial english translations of 'dukkha') > Let's do an exchange for a while? why not, I do like changing places , never settling down, never home sick. > You come to cloudy LOndon and I move in to Serendipy Island. ;-) Like to go to london, have never been to england. But FYI , a terrorist attack just blew up serendib dhamma deepa's international air-port, 5 airbuses. Insurance premiums, air-fares hiking now. But SL ppl are now really war-adjusted, "today a bomb exploded-tomorrow we go for work" thats the tolerance spirit. > BTW have you already booked the place for our meeting; I am dying to send a > daily report to the list. Of course!, I am waiting until I go back to SL after finishing my project here in Boston. Daily report is a bad idea though :o) rgds gayan 7109 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear anders and derek, In the mulapariyaya sutta buddha explains how a person prolifies (mannana) about pathavi(earth-matter),.....,jhana,.........nibbana....etc. And it goes on to describe as how enlightened ones 'handle' above cases. a translation can be found at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn001.html rgds gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anders Honoré" Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:09 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Derek Cameron > > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 3:52 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] 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, > > >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. > > Definitely. I agree with this very much. I kinda noticed the paradox myself > a few days after. I write a long post about self and Nibbana only to > conclude that my suggestion for the wisest approach would be to have no > position on that matter at all. So what's the point? Duh. > > >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.) > > As I read, since it is the end of such things, it would seem closer to a > 'non-state' (although this might imply nihilism). > > > 7110 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 7:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Neti, Neti it was : No-Self - Anders Part 2 Hi, Cybele (and Anders) - In a message dated 8/3/01 7:54:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cybele chiodi writes: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: cybele chiodi > > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:37 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Neti, Neti it was : No-Self - Anders Part 2 > > > > 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. > > > > > >Yes, I think that's a very sharp observation which I agree with 100%. > > > > YES I endorse fully, not that my opinion here has any weight but I can't > > waste a chance to nosy in... > > > > And Anders you must explain what is 'neti, neti' here they are Pali > addicted > > not Sanskrit addicted sweetheart. > > > > Neti, Neti: Skt., lit. "Not this, not this" > > These frequently cited words from the Brihadaranyayaka-Upanishad reject > the > > appearances of the entire universe as mere superimpositions upon Brahman > and > > stabilish that Brahman alone exists and nothing else. > > This application of the knowledge that the ultimate reality is 'not this, > > not this' to all manifestations represents in Advaita-Vedanta a process of > > negative discrimination that constitutes the intellectual path of the > > 'jnani' > > Shouldn't I hand over this job to Nagarjuna? If anyone ever explained what's > Neti Neti, he would have to be the one. > > ============================= The "neti, neti", or "neither this nor that" of the upanishads and Shankara's advaita vedanta, describing Brahman, suggests, perhaps, that Brahman and Nibbana, are one and the same. I'd just like to point out that, while there are similarities, there are also essential differences. Brahman = Atman. It is considered to be a Self, with *essence*, indeed having sat (being) as a characteristic. Moreover, as you point out, Cybele, it is considered to be the one and only reality, with all conditioned dharmas being actually nothing at all, mere illusion superimposed (somehow!!) on the reality of Brahman - products of Maya. Nibbana, however, is anatta (not self). Nibbana is not "being", nor is it nothingness. It is middle-way empty, "existing" in mutual dependence with all conditioned dhammas, which also are neither essential existents nor complete nullities, but are middle-way empty. As I understand it, advaita vedanta, despite the term 'advaita' (nondual), is actually a complete monism, because Brahman is considered to be all there really is, all else being mere illusion. But the Buddhadhamma has a more sophisticated perspective. It adopts the middle-way between monism and pluralism, namely the perspective of emptiness/relativity. 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) 7111 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 11:31pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Anders Honoré How are you? If you like the idea of reading translations done by the collective group of intellectuals made up of experts in languages, and experts in Dhamma, there are such translations in Myanmar. Translations are the final results of consultations among different experts made up of both monks and laypeople before writing down a single word. They also come with explanations of words or sticky points as notes right after the paragraphs in which those words occur. Sound good? Where to get them? The Myanmar embassy in your city or nearest to your city could help you out. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > I am thinking about buying the complete translations of the Samyutta Nikaya > (because of its diversity of subjects) and the Digha Nikaya (because of its > detail). > > Anyone here who can recommend a good (complete) translation, as well as > where I can buy it? I'm looking for a translation that is *not* adapted for > ease of readability and generally tries to stay as true to the original > texts as possible. Derek, you seem pretty well-versed in all of that. > Perhaps you can help (or anyone else for that matter)? Or would it be better > for me to ask this question on that Pali Group that I have seen mentioned by > some people here? > > Also, anyone who has some alternative suggestions besides the Digha and > Samyutta Nikayas (I'll only be buying two Nikayas this time around), coupled > with some good reasons as to why I should buy anything else? > > Regards > Anders > > PS: I am sorry that I have been so late to reply to some of the posts > directed at me, but I have been offline on vacation in Holland the past > week, and have only returned online today. 7112 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 11:50pm Subject: Re: Erik's debating skills --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Tadao, > > I think you may have misunderstood for which I apologise - > > --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Sarah (and Erick): > > With respect to your list of points which Erick should > > pay attension to, I think some of these are bit too harsh. > > These weren't points for Erik to pay attention to at all - it was meant as a > (humourous) list of what I'm learning from his debating style...certainly not > meant as criticism of Erik or his style in the slightest..... That was entirely in the spirit they were taken, too Sarah--as I hope you garnered from my reply! I think this misinterpration is a living demonstration of how easy it is (particularly in this medium, where things like vocal inflection abnd gesture are entirely absent) to project our own accumulated tendencies onto the words of others. But this is true in every aspect of life. 7113 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: Nietszche and Dhamma Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > Yup. Actually, something dawned on me a few weeks ago. As many others, I > used to perceive monks as being much more advanced than lay people because > they devote their lives to the Dhamma and all. But then it occurred to me > that monks aren't necessarily more advanced than lay people - They're just > more desperate (or willing - insert any loaded word here. My intention was > not to load the word, but I can't find one) to end suffering! > Still, I intend to become a monk myself someday (have to finish school first > and all). I realize you are kidding, but just in case, here's are words that were oft= en used for the motivation of the monks mentioned in the scripture: "Household life is confinement, a path of dust, going forth is like the ope= n air. It is not easy for one living at home to lead the perfectly complete,= perfectly purified holy life, which is like polished conch." I wouldn't term this even close to desperate, willing, but appreciative of = the purity and the wholesome states. kom 7114 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: Hello --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Brian, > > My name is Brian, I'm a 34 year old American man, married to > > one of the world's most wonderful women. We're childless by > > choice and we have a cat named Sammy. Welcome Brian! I love your cat's name! My first cat's name, who my parents got me when I was five years old, I also named "Sam!" :) He was a yellow striped tabby. He was my first pet! I loved him dearly. > > My daily practice is focused on mindfulness of breathing as > > described in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118). How nice to have another on this list who has the accumulations for anapanasati, the topic of today's discussion with Khun Sujin! (though I think that intense Tibetan debating style got the better of these khandas today--though the intensity was solely in defense of this amazing practice as a condition leading directly to Satipatthana and terminating the fetters, which was taught specifically by Lord Buddha, in the Anapanasati Sutta. :) Have to grab a quote from it for the benefit of those here who have not been taught this practice the Buddha praised so highly, a practice he said he was totally "content at heart with": "Now on that occasion -- the Uposatha day of the fifteenth, the full- moon night of the Pavarana ceremony -- the Blessed One was seated in the open air surrounded by the community of monks. Surveying the silent community of monks, he addressed them: "Monks, I am content with this practice. I am content at heart with this practice. So arouse even more intense persistence for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet- unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized." [...] "Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination. The seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." If there are any practices leading to Right View endorsed more highly than anapanasati by Lord Buddha, I have yet to see them. The entire Sutta is expounded here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn118.html I have heard a few rumors floating around that anapanasati is "too difficult" and so on. I know this isn't true, but some may have doubt about its efficacy as a practice that leading to clear knowing and release, and those in doubt should take careful note of how not only the Buddha practiced it but praised it unequivocally as leading to Satipatthana (Four Frames of Reference) which, as we all here agree are vital, which, as the Buddha said DIRECTLY, when developed and pursued, lead to the culmination of the Seven Factors of Awakening which, when developed and pursued lead to clear knowing and release. In that very cause-and-effect, "this conditions that," order: So again, so very pleased you had the fortuitous opportunity to drop by just now, given the topic of today's dicussion with Khun Sujin: the proponents of anapanasati "vs." the proponents of the "paramattha dhamma/present moment" forrms of strategic pedagogy! :) :) :) 7115 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] kamma and vipaka Dear Loke, Sarah explained about vipaka and I can add a few more points. > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: >> >> 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...??? Sarah: > I wonder if by resultant kamma you mean vipaka, the result of kamma? > So, for example, seeing now is vipaka, the result of kamma and so is hearing, > smeeling, tasting, touching and there are many other vipaka cittas (moments of > consciousness). We have no idea when the kamma (the cetana , intention) action > was performed to bring about this result of seeing or hearing now. Some kamma > will have been done in this life and some in previous lives, but it doesn't > help to try and speculate about what and when, I think. > > There are no fixed time spans for when vipaka will arise. When there aren't > moments of vipaka arising, then there are other kinds of citta > (consciousness).There is never a moment (for us) when there is no > consciousness > arising. > >Sarah: I've tried to put this simply, but actually the subject is complex. I think > you > have a few confusions and I highly recommend 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' by > Nina > Van Gorkom which is on some of the websites (on Amara's Dhamma Study website I > know) at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > There's also a good paper on Kamma by Khun Sujin on this website. Nina:You could have a look at Abh in Daily Life, Ch 5 and 6. But it is a complex subject and it cannot be clear all at once. As Sarah explained, seeing and hearing now are the results of kamma, and they arise time and again, thus, you do not have to wait for the arising of a result of kamma. Seeing either sees a pleasant object or an unpleasant object depending on the kamma that produces it. However, we may not realize at all whether seeing or hearing is the result of kusala kamma or akusala kamma, whether a pleasant object or an unpleasant object is experienced. Seeing and hearing are extremely short moments, they arise and then fall away immediately. There are countless moments of them within a splitsecond. Afterwards we may think about this ugly thing or that beautiful thing we perceived, but that is thinking, accompanied by like or dislike. It is not result of kamma, but thinking occurs at the moment of javanacittas (impulsion) in the process of cittas experiencing an object through one of the six doors. Javanacittas are, in the case of non-arahats, either kusala cittas or akusala cittas. Some people believe that the result of kamma is experienced only when they receive a very pleasant object or when they have an accident and suffer pain. But also now while seeing, hearing, smelling and tasting, the result of kamma is experienced. Knowledge of which kamma produces which vipaka and when it produces vipaka is exclusively the domain of Buddhas, we cannot fathom this. In past lives we committed many kinds of kamma and one of these countless kammas produced our rebirth. We do not know which of the countless kammas, also of past lives, will produce the next rebirth. As Sarah explained, kamma is intention or volition, thus it is mental. Therefore it can be accumulated from moment to moment, from life to life, and produce the appropriate result when it is the right time. Kamma also produces rupas, such as the sense organs and the heartbase, throughout our life. The physical result is not called vipaka, this term designates only the mental result of kamma. Thus, at the moment of birth kamma produces the rebirth-consciousness, and also throughout life kamma produces result in the form of seeing and the other sense impressions. Moreover, the life-continuum, bhavangacitta, arising in between the processes of citta, is produced by kamma. As Robert K. wrote in his post from Bangkok, the difference between the moments of vipakacittas such as seeing or hearing, and thinking about them with attachment or aversion should be discerned. I quote: Nobody can prevent the next moment from arising, there are so many factors that can condition that moment. Who knows what kamma has in store for us, the next moment may be hard to bear. And then, how do we react to it? If patience has been accumulated, there may be conditions to face an unpleasant moment with patience, thus, with kusala citta. Intellectual understanding of the different realities is not the same as mindfulness of what appears now, these are different levels of understanding. Seeing is dukkha, that means, it arises and falls away. What is impermanent is not happiness, sukha. Some people may believe that the Truth of dukkha does not relate to our daily life now, but it occurs right now. Only, right understanding has to be developed so that first the difference between nama and rupa can be realized. When panna is further developed it can realize their arising and falling away and then there will be more understanding of the fact that seeing or hearing now is dukkha, that whatever arises and falls away is dukkha. Each moment of citta arises and falls away and then it conditions the next moment. So also the last moment of life falls away, but it is succeeded by the next moment, the rebirth-consciousness. Best wishes, Nina. 7116 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:35am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > >If you remember the dependent origination's last 2 links, i.e, if there = is > = > >birth, there is suffering, aging, and death. Without birth, there is no= > more suffering, aging, and death. If you look at the "birth" link, some > people interpret it to be the coming-about of the khandha (at every > single moment, not just at the conventional birth and death). Hence, > the cessation of birth (no more re-appearance of kandha) by definition > eliminates all other sufferings. > > Yeah, but you didn't answer my question? What's the point? Why are you > practising? I think the goal of Buddhism is the end of suffering. In our cases, we understand the meaning of the end differently. In your case, you think it = is some part of your consciousness (but no-self) that lives on endlessly and being conscious of definitely nibbana, and perhaps other kandhas (without the "established"/"grasping" consciousness) . In my case, it is the cessation of the conditioned realities, as their conditions have been permanently eradicated. We have already established the differences between our understadings of nibbana and annihilationism. Unless you have any more points, I think we can close off the discussion about annihilation as well. > To end suffering through nothingness after Parinibbana? > Personally, I'm practising for the eternal bliss and joy of Nibbana after= > Parinibbana, and that is what I'm trying to show that, as I read the Pali= > Canon, the Buddha pointed to the same thing. Eternal bliss is definitely not I have in mind when I think of the end of suffering! > > > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to > which > > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > > find the source if you want to)? > > >Of course, the Tathagata is not being in the kandhas. The "tathagata" in > that sutta context denotes a being, a self, and there is no way that any > disciples would acknoledge that there is Tathagata in the kandha: they > would only say in the kandha, there is only the kandha, a conditioned > reality that does not last. > > The sutta also says "do you construe the Tathagata as being elsewhere than > the five kandhas?" to which he truthfully answers no. > > It concludes: > 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. > ---------------- > I must admit I still don't see how you are *not* saying that the Tathagata > doesn't exist after death. > > Another one, makes it clear that there *is* an entity labeled Tathagata : > "Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata > would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, > like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not > destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, > the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard-to-fathom, like the sea. "Reappears" > doesn't apply. "Does not reappear" doesn't apply. "Both does & does not > reappear" doesn't apply. "Neither reappears nor does not reappear" doesn't > apply. > 'Any feeling...Any perception...Any mental process... > 'Any act of consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would > describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned....Freed from the > classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, > hard-to-fathom, like the sea.' " > M 72 > > Doesn't say that the Tathagata is merely a construct of the five kandhas, > but rather indicates that there is a Tathagata, but that he has transcended > the kandhas. > > Come to think of it, doesn't Robert K's (wouldn't be eaiser to just call = him > Kirk or something?) explanation about "the Buddha doesn't perish because > there never was a Buddha to begin with. Just the kandhas which are > not-self," doesn't it contradict that. and doesn't that explanation fall > under the fallacious view "the Buddha neither exists nor does not exist > adter death"? You are mixing up suttas which are explained to different set of people. You have to remember that we believe that the Buddha dispensed the dhamma to suit each person's accumulation. For those who believe in eternalism or annihilationism, he denied both extremes. For those who understand (not directly know) the conditioned realities and impermanence, he is more conventional in his usage of the language. I think I can sufficiently explain your view about what annihilationism is = and how it could be used to explain logically what you believe nibbana to be. I think it would be benefiical for both of us if you could explain wha= t my point of view (and perhaps Robert's, if they are similar) what our view of annihilationism is and why it makes sense in the sutta context that you mentioned? After all, we are not here to convince, only to explain why things are so and see why other people think differently... kom 7117 From: Brian Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 2:07am Subject: Re: Hello Hello again, everyone, Many thanks for the warm welcome. Cybele, thank you for the offer of protection. :-) The level of discourse in this group does seem formidable. Dear rikpa21 (I'm sorry I don't know your name -- how should I address you?) When I first began studying and practicing a few years ago, I was drawn to the Anapanasati Sutta for the very reasons you describe below. A method that was both practiced and praised by the Buddha would seem to be one worth developing and pursuing. You mentioned that some people may think that anapanasati is too difficult. I find this very surprising. Why might some people think this? Metta, Brian --- Erik wrote: > How nice to have another on this list who has the accumulations for > anapanasati, the topic of today's discussion with Khun Sujin! (though > I think that intense Tibetan debating style got the better of these > khandas today--though the intensity was solely in defense of this > amazing practice as a condition leading directly to Satipatthana and > terminating the fetters, which was taught specifically by Lord > Buddha, in the Anapanasati Sutta. :) > > Have to grab a quote from it for the benefit of those here who have > not been taught this practice the Buddha praised so highly, a > practice he said he was totally "content at heart with": > > "Now on that occasion -- the Uposatha day of the fifteenth, the full- > moon night of the Pavarana ceremony -- the Blessed One was seated in > the open air surrounded by the community of monks. Surveying the > silent community of monks, he addressed them: > > "Monks, I am content with this practice. I am content at heart with > this practice. So arouse even more intense persistence for the > attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet- > unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized." > > [...] > > "Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of > great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, > when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to > their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & > pursued, bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination. > The seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear > knowing & release to their culmination." > > If there are any practices leading to Right View endorsed more highly > than anapanasati by Lord Buddha, I have yet to see them. > > The entire Sutta is expounded here: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn118.html > > I have heard a few rumors floating around that anapanasati is "too > difficult" and so on. I know this isn't true, but some may have doubt > about its efficacy as a practice that leading to clear knowing and > release, and those in doubt should take careful note of how not only > the Buddha practiced it but praised it unequivocally as leading to > Satipatthana (Four Frames of Reference) which, as we all here agree > are vital, which, as the Buddha said DIRECTLY, when developed and > pursued, lead to the culmination of the Seven Factors of Awakening > which, when developed and pursued lead to clear knowing and release. > In that very cause-and-effect, "this conditions that," order: > > So again, so very pleased you had the fortuitous opportunity to drop > by just now, given the topic of today's dicussion with Khun Sujin: > the proponents of anapanasati "vs." the proponents of > the "paramattha dhamma/present moment" forrms of strategic > pedagogy! :) :) :) 7118 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 2:36am Subject: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath (was: Hello) --- Brian wrote: > Dear rikpa21 (I'm sorry I don't know your name -- how should I > address you?) How do mental fabrications like names help us recognize that there is only the arising and passing away of conditioned realities? (sorry, couldn't resist that one! :) > When I first began studying and practicing a few years ago, I was > drawn to the Anapanasati Sutta for the very reasons you describe > below. A method that was both practiced and praised by the > Buddha would seem to be one worth developing and pursuing. It would certainly seem that way, wouldn't it? > You mentioned that some people may think that anapanasati is > too difficult. I find this very surprising. Why might some people > think this? That question has interested me for some time as well! In fact, I would be VERY curious to see any passage from any sutta where the Buddha explicitly told his disciples that anapanasati was "too difficult" a practice. Perhaps someone here with greater knowledge of the suttas than you or I can help us out a little here, because I know there are many here with far more expertise in the suttas than I have (for example, though I know nothing about your degree of expertise in these holy words of the Buddha). And I do not believe that any commentaries will suffice on such an important issue, because as explained in the Anapanasati Sutta, it cuts directly to the chase, as it were. > Metta, > Brian Back atcha, my friend! :) Erik 7119 From: ppp Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Erik's debating skills Hi, Erick: Some psychologits belive that when we converse, over 60% of information is transmitted non-verbally (by such a medium as gesture). When such non-verbal information is not present, it is hard to understand the true intent of the converstion. NOW, ERICK. The above argument applies to all the discoureses documented in the Sutta-Pitake. We cannot see the Buddha's eyes, his hand movements, bodily movements. All the important informational aids have been lost in the words kept in the Sutta-Pitake, indicating it would be a dengerous endevour if we read/interpred the suttas LITERALLY. (Just as easily as I was misled by Sarah's words, you may be misled by the Buddha's words.) tadao 7120 From: Howard Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 5:38am Subject: Some Thoughts on the Role of the Jhanas on the Path Hi, all - I was thinking today about the jhanas. In several places in the suttas, it is the the jhanas, especially the first four (with the remaining four being modifications of the 4th jhana), that are described as Right Concentration. Clearly, since concentration is a condition for the arising of insight, this makes the jhanas important. But another thought occurred to me with regard to the importance of the jhanas which I would like to put forward for your consideration. It is the following: The jhanas, first through eighth, form an ascending chain of increasing relative emptiness. As the mind ascends from jhana to jhana, more and more is let go of. It occurs to me that gaining familiarity with, or mastery of, these states of relative emptiness can serve as a kind of preparation of the mind for the nibbanic experience of ultimate emptiness. Perhaps this is the reason that there were numerous cases in the suttas of people who had mastered the jhanas easily attaining enlightenment, for example by just hearing a sutta spoken by the Buddha, or after just a brief period of practice. Any thoughts? 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) 7121 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 9:42am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma Dear Anders >> > > > Did you realize you were 'preaching' a monk? > > > > > >I assume Anders did! And I can see that very kusala vipaka coming > > >Anders' way even now! > > > > Naughty, naughty scandinavians!!!! > >Haha, it's all part of the Grand Conspiracy, you know.... One day we are >gonna rule the earth! And it all starts by conspiring against the latins in >small groups on the internet! Oh please make me your slave. But I have a few conditions - I wish to be only a doll like object, no worries about earning a living, good food and entertainment and time to time vacations in the tropics naturally! > > > All of you in the heretic club; by the way we count on organizing a >meeting > > very soon. ;-) > > Nice to hear from you , drop a line when you manage.# > >I need to join that club sometime... Sweetheart you are invited and welcome in full right. Love Cybele 7122 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 9:44am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation Hi Anders I live just beside Wisdom Books in UK. If you need any help but you should reconsider your plan of conspiration against latins.... ;-) Cybele >> >----- Original Message ----- >From: ppp >>Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 3:44 AM >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation > > > > Hi, Anders and Jonothan: > > About books, as Jonothan infered Wisdom Books must be > > the biggest distributer of Buddhist books in North > > America. They used also to be a sole distributer of all > > the publications of the Pali Text Society. However, > > about a few months ago, another book seller [pariyatti.com] > > overtook the distribution of all the PTS books. So it is not > > bad idea to check their Web site, too. tadao > >Thanks 7123 From: Brian Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 10:54am Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath --- Erik wrote: > > You mentioned that some people may think that anapanasati is > > too difficult. I find this very surprising. Why might some people > > think this? > > That question has interested me for some time as well! In fact, I > would be VERY curious to see any passage from any sutta where the > Buddha explicitly told his disciples that anapanasati was "too > difficult" a practice. Dear Erik, One possible reason someone might consider anapanasati "too difficult" is that when the body and the breath become calm, the sensations of the breath can become so subtle that they seem almost to disappear. A remedy for this is to cup a handful of warm water and snuffle the water up into the nose and then blow it out. Doing this a few times for each nostril leaves the nasal linings very sensitive, and the breath sensations become much more vivid. Metta, Brian 7124 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Dear Friends, There are a fair number of discussion about Anapanasati and samatha bhavana (tranquil meditation) previously discussed in this group which may shed insights to why some members think Anapanasati is a difficult meditation practice. Follow the following link (you may have to cut-and-past if this is split into multiple lines): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL 20POST%20LINKS And look under: Anapanasati Samadhi Samatha and Vipassana bhavana. kom --- Brian wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > > > You mentioned that some people may think that anapanasati > is > > > too difficult. I find this very surprising. Why might some > people > > > think this? > > > > That question has interested me for some time as well! In fact, > I > > would be VERY curious to see any passage from any sutta > where the > > Buddha explicitly told his disciples that anapanasati was "too > > difficult" a practice. > > Dear Erik, > > One possible reason someone might consider anapanasati "too > difficult" is that when the body and the breath become calm, the > sensations of the breath can become so subtle that they seem > almost to disappear. > > A remedy for this is to cup a handful of warm water and snuffle > the water up into the nose and then blow it out. Doing this a few > times for each nostril leaves the nasal linings very sensitive, and > the breath sensations become much more vivid. > > Metta, > Brian 7125 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:38pm Subject: Understanding Realities at Many Levels --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Erick: > Some psychologits belive that when we converse, over 60% of > information is transmitted non-verbally (by such a medium as > gesture). When such non-verbal information is not present, it is > hard to understand the true intent of the converstion. NOW, ERICK. > The above argument applies to all the discoureses documented in the > Sutta-Pitake. We cannot see the Buddha's eyes, his hand movements, > bodily movements. All the important informational aids have been lost > in the words kept in the Sutta-Pitake, indicating it would be > a dengerous endevour if we read/interpred the suttas LITERALLY. > (Just as easily as I was misled by Sarah's words, > you may be misled by the Buddha's words.) Just a consideration. You are sounding, to these ears, just a tad too overcautious here, my friend. Sometimes you can accept things to mean say exactly what they say, particularly when the language is so direct. Say, for example, you're a "farang" (foreign) visitor arriving in Thailand for the first time. If I tell you "it's "considered a VERY bad idea in general to denigrate the Buddha-dharma in this country," does that require a whole lot of interpretation? In other words, sometimes things really ARE that simple. And in most cases the Suttas- -as one would expect of any totally masterful teaching arising from the omniscient mind of a Tathagata--can be understood AND APPLIED at so many levels. Often times, the very simplest understanding of what is has been so plainly-spoken by Lord Buddha will suffice for us RIGHT HERE AND NOW. In other words, there's no need for a Ph.D. to figure out the Suttas or find a USEFUL, SKILLFUL, HELPFUL interpretation of their meaning for us RIGHT HERE AND NOW, no matter our present level of development or accumulated wisdom. And yet I agree completely that a literal reading, if that's something one becomes hung up on is an example of clinging to views. One example would be getting hung up on the most literal interpretation of the precepts and their execution, which to these khandas represents a perfect example of silabattaparamasa, or "clinging to rites and rituals", one of the three fetters terminated at the moment of stream-entry. This "wrong practice" (arising from wrong understanding) is yet another extreme to be avoided. To give one controversial example, the idea that one could not EVER use "drugs"--even the most dangerous drug of all, alcohol--and that even a glass of, say, wine, MUST be INHERENTLY wrong in terms of keeping the precept to abstain from intoxicants. None of this represents in the slightest the intent of the Buddha's teachings on avoiding intoxicants (which is that some drugs like alcohol--especially alcohol--condition ahirika and anotappa and serve as excellent supporting conditions for breaking the other four panca-sila: killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct). That sort of wrong understanding would also ignore the intention, skillfulness, and understanding of the person taking them (as medicine, for example, which as Robert noted here before when asking Khun Sujin about someone taking morphine if they're in serious pain, if that is a form of violating the precept against intoxicants, to which Robert noted she replied that to believe would be an example of an extreme view). In fact, as I saw it, during yesterday's discussion, Khun Sujin entirely agreed that the notion of using even alcohol skillfully (as a medicine for example) would NOT be a violation of the precept to refrain from intoxicants, with my addition to that to think that to merely abstain in terms of "outward behavior" has nothing to do with the precept, and is in fact a form of silabbataparamasa itself! And Robert further noted that the leader of the Taliban abstains from alcohol (we assume, if he follows Islamic law), and yet, is that mere abstention the same as correctly understanding the Buddha's intent of the precept to refrain from intoxicants (knowing nothing of the man's cittas, I cannot make any assumptions, he may well be an "emanation" here simply to demonstrate for us the law of anicca, impermanence, by havcing the statues of the Buddas destroyed, solely to help us overcome our fixation and clinging to mere appearances--WHO REALLY KNOWS??? :) :) :) )? Furthermore, Khun Sujin noted that we can be aware of the present moment with Right Mindfulness AT ANY TIME, with or without "drugs" (such an incredibly broad category) in the system, for example. By the way, I mention this only because this had been a point of some contention here before, and I also wish to be clear I would NEVER endorse anything that would lead to ANY type of unskillful behavior, but am merely using this as an example of how we can come, through Right View, to see the deeper meaning and intent of the precepts, and how over time Right View may be developed--perhaps first by simple total abstention from acting through any of the five akusala-kamma- pathas leading to killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct, and taking intoxicants to the point of heedlessness, withouth any real "Right Uderstanding" of realities in the present. In fact, that was noted to be motivated through the coarses of the afflictions (kilesa), the vitikkakama (see Khun Sujin's explanation on these three types of kilesa here: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat8.html). The broader point is that we can read the Suttas and understand them at many levels, like any good metaphor and analogy, beginning perhaps with the more literal interpretation and then, as our undersatnding of realities deepens, their and deeper deeper meaning and then, when the characteristics of all things are penetrated directly, at the most correct level (which is why it is said that stream-entry entails the termination of silabattaparamasa, the fetter of clinging to wrong views regarding "rites, rituals, and precepts," for example). So again, we will all begin understanding at the level we're presently at, because there's simply no other way. It's where we are RIGHT NOW, and no amount of willing (following the law of anatta that is "non-controlling") it to be otherwies will ever change this very simple truth. And that should be nothing for undue worry or concern. It is a very basic reality, a statement of the barest fact. Lord Buddha taught us in such a way that even beginners, even those without the deeper knowledges of vipassana-nana for example, or even supramundane wisdom, can begin applying the Buddha's often very simple formualic remedies at the most basic level, beginning where we are, RIGHT HERE AND NOW. Because in the final analysis, there simply is no choice for us, no other way than to begin where we are. And that beginning, at the most basic level, of learning to discern what is wholesome and skillful from what is unwholesome and unskillful will, over time, allow us to grow in wisdom to the point where we come to know directly "what is to be put down, and what is to be taken up" in such a way it will lead us to the right teachers and teachings on Right View, the only teachings which will help us PERMANENTLY terminate the round of suffering we associate with samasara. Yours in the Dhamma, Erik 7126 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:42pm Subject: Re: Some Thoughts on the Role of the Jhanas on the Path --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > I was thinking today about the jhanas. In several places in the > suttas, it is the the jhanas, especially the first four (with the remaining > four being modifications of the 4th jhana), that are described as Right > Concentration. Clearly, since concentration is a condition for the arising of > insight, this makes the jhanas important. But another thought occurred to me > with regard to the importance of the jhanas which I would like to put forward > for your consideration. It is the following: > The jhanas, first through eighth, form an ascending chain of > increasing relative emptiness. As the mind ascends from jhana to jhana, more > and more is let go of. It occurs to me that gaining familiarity with, or > mastery of, these states of relative emptiness can serve as a kind of > preparation of the mind for the nibbanic experience of ultimate emptiness. > Perhaps this is the reason that there were numerous cases in the suttas of > people who had mastered the jhanas easily attaining enlightenment, for > example by just hearing a sutta spoken by the Buddha, or after just a brief > period of practice. What a wonderul way of putting thins, as per usual, Howard. > Any thoughts? I sure hope not! :) :) :) 7127 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:47pm Subject: Re: Nietszche and Dhamma --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Oh please make me your slave. > But I have a few conditions - I wish to be only a doll like object, Is this to this Sandinavian as well? (please? please?) no > worries about earning a living, good food and entertainment and time to time > vacations in the tropics naturally! Aaaah, vacations to the tropics! When you arrive here in Thailand aagin, we shall have to head South a bit and spend a little time hanging out on Ko Pha-Ngan for a bit! :) :) :) There is a sub-species of a certain type of mushroom that grows natively there in the soil of the Land of Lord Buddha I'm quite curious to sample! :) 7128 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:50pm Subject: Re: Nietszche and Dhamma --- Erik wrote: > --- "cybele chiodi" > wrote: BTW, I just want to say, apropos of this thread's title, that it was the combination of Neitzsche (specifically "Beyond Good and Evil") and LSD that enabled me to totally break the conditioning of my strict Mormon upbringing (not that I ever really believed it at any pojnt growing up, just that that sort of immersive social conditioning can take quite a bit of power to snap totally). 7129 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 1:59pm Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Friends, > > There are a fair number of discussion about Anapanasati and samatha > bhavana (tranquil meditation) previously discussed in this group which > may shed insights to why some members think Anapanasati is a difficult > meditation practice. > > Follow the following link (you may have to cut-and-past if this is split into > multiple lines): > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL > 20POST%20LINKS > > And look under: > Anapanasati > Samadhi > Samatha and Vipassana bhavana. Thank you Kom, for the various discussions amongst the group members here on their various views, suppositions, notions, and ideas regarding anapanasati and its so-called "difficulty". Anumodhana to your efforts, but that, again, was specifically NOT my request on this specific point. Again, I was hoping someone here might be able to provide us all with a CANONICAL reference we can ALL agree on as being the spoken words of the historical Siddhartha Gotama, and for the sake of this specific discussion I do no accept the canonicity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. In other words, I will ONLY accept what is reputed to have been DIRECTLY spoken and heard (as in the Evam me suttam) sense, as Lord Buddha's DIRECT instruction to his disciples on this point. 7130 From: Herman Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 7:25pm Subject: Re: Nietszche and Dhamma Hi all, I perceive monks to be people who have taken particular vows. Whether they keep them or not is between them and their not-selves :-) I know that in certain cultures being a monk can be about having a particular kind of social status, and being a means for lay people to think they are acquiring merit. The dana/merit thing is, in my opinion, a blight on Buddhist culture. Compare/contrast with this old catholic practise: The selling of indulgences by monks was a practise in the middle ages to fund the building of St Peters in the Vatican, and other 'worthwhile" projects. People were told, and believed, that by buying indulgences they would shorten their stay in purgatory, a waiting room between heaven and hell. Since the reformation, the Occident has moved on. Dana has become socially entrenched through taxation. You participate in the social welfare network whether you like it or not. Merit doesn't come in to it, but it is a result nonetheless. Noone dies of hunger. Everyone can spend more time than they are able to watching their breath, dwelling in the jhanas, cessation, whatever, to ensure they are not born again. All that is required is a 40 hour a week alms round. Obsequious behaviour to those who call themselves monks and teachers does not result in merit. It is simply a practise that consigns both giver and receiver to endless repetitions of the same dishonesty. If not everyone and everything is a teacher, than we might as well all go home. (I don't know where that is :-) Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Changed the name of the thread, to make it on-topic. > > Yup. Actually, something dawned on me a few weeks ago. As many others, I > used to perceive monks as being much more advanced than lay people because > they devote their lives to the Dhamma and all. But then it occurred to me > that monks aren't necessarily more advanced than lay people - They're just > more desperate (or willing - insert any loaded word here. My intention was > not to load the word, but I can't find one) to end suffering! > Still, I intend to become a monk myself someday (have to finish school first > and all). 7131 From: Herman Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 8:03pm Subject: Re: Some Thoughts on the Role of the Jhanas on the Path Hi Howard, Just to let you know I always get something from your posts. You always have a very precise, clear message. And then it is always topped off with the quote from the Diamond Sutra. Hard to beat, that one. I think the combination of your post on the jhanas and the bubble in the stream reminder is especially good. Awareness , too, is b(ull)s(hit) Herman --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > I was thinking today about the jhanas. In several places in the > suttas, it is the the jhanas, especially the first four (with the remaining > four being modifications of the 4th jhana), that are described as Right > Concentration. Clearly, since concentration is a condition for the arising of > insight, this makes the jhanas important. But another thought occurred to me > with regard to the importance of the jhanas which I would like to put forward > for your consideration. It is the following: > The jhanas, first through eighth, form an ascending chain of > increasing relative emptiness. As the mind ascends from jhana to jhana, more > and more is let go of. It occurs to me that gaining familiarity with, or > mastery of, these states of relative emptiness can serve as a kind of > preparation of the mind for the nibbanic experience of ultimate emptiness. > Perhaps this is the reason that there were numerous cases in the suttas of > people who had mastered the jhanas easily attaining enlightenment, for > example by just hearing a sutta spoken by the Buddha, or after just a brief > period of practice. Any thoughts? > > 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) > > > > > 7132 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 9:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Howard, Erik and others --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Erik) - > > I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about Right > > Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And what of > all > the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the > suttas? > These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma understanding, > then > it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are > further > apart than i had realized. Below are a few extracts I have collected from the Vibhanga (Book of Analysis, PTS), Visuddhimagga (Path of Purification, BPS) and Abhidhammattha-Sangaha (Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, BPS). I present these for what they are -- I realise they are not conclusive, but they do throw light on how the certain aspects of the teachings were understood by the ancient commentators. Any questions or comments are of course welcome. Jon EXTRACTS FROM THE ABHIDHAMMATTHA-SANGAHA TRANSLATION (CMA) VII, Guide to #38 [The Four Noble Truths] "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths. It should be noted that while in the section on the requisites of enlightenment, the eight path factors may be either mundane or supramundane, in the teaching of the Four Noble Truths they are exclusively supramundane." VII, Compendium of Requisites of Enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyasangaha) Guide to #30 (Eight Path Factors) "Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, right view is the cetasika of wisdom exercised in understanding the Four Noble Truths. Right intention is the cetasika of initial application (vitakka) directed towards renunciation, good will, and harmlessness. Path-factors (3)-(5) are identical with the three abstinences. Right effort is the same as the four supreme efforts. Right mindfulness is the same as the four foundations of mindfulness. Right concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta system (see D.22/ii,313)" Guide to #25 (Four Supreme Efforts) "Four supreme efforts (sammapphadhaanaa): Here one mental factor, energy, performs four separate functions. This fourfold effort is identical with right effort, the sixth factor of the Noble Eightfold Path." IX, Guide to #34 "The path consciousness (magga citta) simultaneously performs four functions, one with respect to each of the four truths. These four functions, mentioned here, are-- the full understanding (parinna) of suffering; the abandoning (pahana) of craving, its origin: the realization (sacchikiriya) of Nibbana, its cessation; and the development (bhavana) of the Noble Eightfold Path." EXTRACTS FROM THE VISUDDHIMAGGA XVI, 13-31 B. Description Of The Truths "19. Because the fourth truth goes (leads) to the cessation of suffering since it confronts that cessation as its object, and being the way to attain cessation of suffering, it is called dukkha- nirodha-gaaminii pa.tipadaa the way leading to the cessation of suffering. "23. … The truth of the path has the characteristic of an outlet. Its function is to abandon defilements. It is manifested as emergence." XVI, 75 - 83 'The Truth Of The Way' "75. In the description of the way leading to the cessation of suffering eight things are given. Though they have, of course, already been explained as to meaning in the Description of the Aggregates, still we shall deal with them here in order to remain aware of the difference between them when they occur in a single moment on the occasion of the path. "76. Briefly, when a meditator is progressing towards the penetration of the four truths, his eye of understanding with nibbana as its object eliminates the inherent tendency to ignorance, and that is right view. It has right seeing as its characteristic. Its function is to reveal elements. It is manifested as the abolition of the darkness of ignorance. [and so on through factors 2-6 of the Eightfold Path] "82. When he exerts himself thus, the non-forgetfulness in his mind, which is associated with that right view, shakes off wrong mindfulness, and that is called right mindfulness. It has the characteristic of establishing. Its function is not to forget. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong mindfulness. "83. When his mind is thus guarded by supreme mindfulness, the unification of mind, which is associated with that right view, abolishes wrong concentration, and that is called right concentration. It has the characteristic of non-distraction. Its function is to concentrate. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong concentration." … "102. In addition all the truths are of one kind because they are not unreal, or because they must be directly-known. They are of two kinds as (i and ii) mundane or (iii and iv) supramundane… "104. … And the last two are similar since they are hard to grasp because profound, since they are supramundane, and since they are free from cankers. … And the first and fourth as similar in being formed. They are dissimilar in being mundane and supramundane." SUMMARY FROM VIBHANGA Ch 4 Analysis Of Truth Summary from par. 206 Right view is wisdom, understanding right thought is mentation, thinking right speech, action and livelihood are avoiding etc the 4 verbal wrong actions, 3 wrong bodily actions and wrong livelihood respectively right effort is the arousing of mental energy right mindfulness is mindfulness right concentration is stability of consciousness, steadfastness Summary from par. 217-218 The truth of the path-- - has immeasurable object - has path as its cause - has external object - is mental concomitants - accompanies consciousness - tends to release 7133 From: Howard Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 6:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/4/01 9:19:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard, Erik and others > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Erik) - > > > > I'm sorry to say that I find this idea very odd. What about Right > > > > Livelihood and Right Speech? These are elements of cittas??? And what of > > all > > the very conventional formulations of the 8-fold noble path in the > > suttas? > > These are recent developments? If this is the Abhidhamma understanding, > > then > > it sure seems that the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka are > > further > > apart than i had realized. > > > Below are a few extracts I have collected from the Vibhanga (Book of > Analysis, PTS), Visuddhimagga (Path of Purification, BPS) and > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha (Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, BPS). > > I present these for what they are -- I realise they are not conclusive, > but they do throw light on how the certain aspects of the teachings were > understood by the ancient commentators. > > Any questions or comments are of course welcome. > > Jon > ============================== Thank you for the effort you had to exert to provide these extracts. I will spend some time on them! 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) 7134 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 11:37pm Subject: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Dhammastudy Friends The following message is my answers to Sakula's questions on Jhana on dhamma-list (message 22041). --------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sakula How are you? The answer is Yes to your question: " is it important to know that one is in the first or second (or whatever) Jhana and if so why?" Reason? A simple reason is that one thing leads to another. As you might have read this phenomenon in Visuddhimagga, when we become quite skillful in a practice, we kind of get bored! We want to try out something slightly different and difficult, don't we? Mental cultivation practices are very addictive (the only case of good addiction?) because they are our very minds in progress, literally. Once you are hooked, you want to go further and further. So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca samadhi), you won't stop at there. You would go for the First Jhana in due course. And you know what you don't like at the present level, and you would make every effort to get rid of it or them. As a result, you would end up at the next higher level of jhana. You also wrote: "Having asked that let me also add that I do not think (perhaps hope) that Jhana practice is not out of reach for anyone with diligent persistence and a very good teacher as guide. What do you think?" I agree with you. The most important keyword to remember to make jhana within our reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from sensuous preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, of course)! Hope this message answered your questions. Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7135 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 0:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nietszche and Dhamma Dear Erik Sweetheart >>--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > Oh please make me your slave. > > But I have a few conditions - I wish to be only a doll like object, > >Is this to this Scandinavian as well? (please? please?) YES, sure! Actually you are the most suitable 'master' for me. Anders I have to raise up first... ;-) > >no > > worries about earning a living, good food and entertainment and >time to time > > vacations in the tropics naturally! > >Aaaah, vacations to the tropics! When you arrive here in Thailand >aagin, we shall have to head South a bit and spend a little time >hanging out on Ko Pha-Ngan for a bit! :) :) :) Wow this is too much appealing, I know a wonderful place to stay in Ko Pha Ngan 'master' - I am a very efficient slave when it comes to travelling! :-)))) > >There is a sub-species of a certain type of mushroom that grows >natively there in the soil of the Land of Lord Buddha I'm quite >curious to sample! :) > And you have chosen this Brazilian mad slave to share the experience of Moksha? ;-) Love and respectful bows to the master Cybele 7136 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 2:46am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nietszche and Dhamma ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 6:14 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nietszche and Dhamma --- "Anders Honoré" > Yup. Actually, something dawned on me a few weeks ago. As many others, I > used to perceive monks as being much more advanced than lay people because > they devote their lives to the Dhamma and all. But then it occurred to me > that monks aren't necessarily more advanced than lay people - They're just > more desperate (or willing - insert any loaded word here. My intention was > not to load the word, but I can't find one) to end suffering! > Still, I intend to become a monk myself someday (have to finish school first > and all). >I realize you are kidding, About what? Me becoming a monk or the other? > but just in case, here's are words that were often used for the motivation of the monks mentioned in the scripture: "Household life is confinement, a path of dust, going forth is like the open air. It is not easy for one living at home to lead the perfectly complete,= perfectly purified holy life, which is like polished conch." I wouldn't term this even close to desperate, willing, but appreciative of = the purity and the wholesome states. .... 7137 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 2:47am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 3:42 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nietszche and Dhamma > Oh please make me your slave. Haha, you gotta love those words coming from a woman :-) > But I have a few conditions - I wish to be only a doll like object, no > worries about earning a living, good food and entertainment and time to time > vacations in the tropics naturally! Oh sure! > >I need to join that club sometime... > > Sweetheart you are invited and welcome in full right. Sounds great! Where do I sign? 7138 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 2:48am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 3:44 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] looking for good Pali translation > > Hi Anders > > I live just beside Wisdom Books in UK. Lucky you. Buddhist books are hard to find in Denmark (simply because there sin't much translated). > If you need any help but you should reconsider your plan of conspiration > against latins.... ;-) Oh well, that's out of the question then :-) 7139 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 2:50am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nietszche and Dhamma ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nietszche and Dhamma > YES, sure! > Actually you are the most suitable 'master' for me. > Anders I have to raise up first... ;-) Hey! 7140 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 3:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 7:35 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > Yeah, but you didn't answer my question? What's the point? Why are you > practising? >I think the goal of Buddhism is the end of suffering. In our cases, we understand the meaning of the end differently. In your case, you think it = >is some part of your consciousness (but no-self) that lives on endlessly and being conscious of definitely nibbana, and perhaps other kandhas (without the "established"/"grasping" consciousness) . In my case, it is the cessation of the conditioned realities, as their conditions have been permanently eradicated. No, you misunderstand me. I'm not driving at eternalism in that sense. But no matter. >We have already established the differences between our understadings >of nibbana and annihilationism. Unless you have any more points, I >think we can close off the discussion about annihilation as well. Yup. Eternal bliss is definitely not I have in mind when I think of the end of suffering! Well, isn't that what characterises Nibbana? >You are mixing up suttas which are explained to different set of people. >You have to remember that we believe that the Buddha dispensed the >dhamma to suit each person's accumulation. For those who believe in >eternalism or annihilationism, he denied both extremes. For those who >understand (not directly know) the conditioned realities and >impermanence, he is more conventional in his usage of the language. >I think I can sufficiently explain your view about what annihilationism is = >and how it could be used to explain logically what you believe nibbana to >be. I think it would be benefiical for both of us if you could explain wha= >t my point of view (and perhaps Robert's, if they are similar) what our >view of annihilationism is and why it makes sense in the sutta context >that you mentioned? After all, we are not here to convince, only to >explain why things are so and see why other people think differently... I'm not sure I understand your question..... 7141 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 3:07am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:31 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy >Dear Anders Honoré >How are you? Quite well, thank you. The same goes for you I hope? >If you like the idea of reading translations done by the >collective group of intellectuals made up of experts in >languages, and experts in Dhamma, there are such translations in >Myanmar. >Translations are the final results of consultations among different >experts made up of both monks and laypeople before writing down a >single word. They also come with explanations of words or sticky >points as notes right after the paragraphs in which those words occur. >Sound good? Where to get them? The Myanmar embassy in your city or >nearest to your city could help you out. It actually sounds very interesting. I'm not sure if there's a Myanmar embassy to be found in Denmark though..... Could there be an alternative way of getting them? 7142 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 3:36am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > >You are mixing up suttas which are explained to different set of people.= > >You have to remember that we believe that the Buddha dispensed the > >dhamma to suit each person's accumulation. For those who believe in > >eternalism or annihilationism, he denied both extremes. For those who > >understand (not directly know) the conditioned realities and > >impermanence, he is more conventional in his usage of the language. > >I think I can sufficiently explain your view about what annihilationism = is > = > >and how it could be used to explain logically what you believe nibbana to > >be. I think it would be benefiical for both of us if you could explain > wha= > >t my point of view (and perhaps Robert's, if they are similar) what our > >view of annihilationism is and why it makes sense in the sutta context > >that you mentioned? After all, we are not here to convince, only to > >explain why things are so and see why other people think differently... > > I'm not sure I understand your question..... I am requesting that you explain the Sutta (about the tathagatha not having ceased after the Buddha's death) using Robert's or my point of view to the best of your ability (we have discussed this quite a bit, I thi= nk you probably have learned a point or two) as if you are explaining to a third party why Robert and I have such views. kom 7143 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 6:16am Subject: Fwd: [d-l] Scholars and Meditators Hi group Thought of forwarding this very pertinent text. >From the book "Numerical Discourses of the Buddha – An Anthology of >Suttas from the Anguttara Nikaya" >translated by Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi: > >125. Scholars and Meditators > >. . . "friends, you should train yourselves thus: `Though we >ourselves are Dhamma-experts, we will praise also those monks who are >meditators.' And why? Such outstanding men are rare in the world who have >personal experience of the deathless element (Nibbana). > And the other monks, too, should train themselves thus: `Though we >ourselves are meditators, we will praise also those monks who are >Dhamma-experts.' And why? Such outstanding persons are rare in the >world who can by their wisdom clearly understand a difficult subject." > (VI, 46) Metta Cybele 7144 From: ppp Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 11:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Understanding Realities at Many Levels Hi, Erick: Basically we are not disagreeing each other. I totally agree with you that one can find verious (numerous) levels of the Dhamma in the Tipitaka, and everybody can benefit it from reading any of the suttas (to a certain extent). However, the point I would like to emphasize is that when one, for instance, reads the Maha-sati-patthana sutta LITERALLY and applies it to one's practice, one would end up with treading the totally wrong path. (And 99% of us in fact has done the so-called (two-week) Vipassana medition, where we had to slow down all our activies to catch seeming realities = TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE.) Unless one has a keen keen keen panna, one cannot penerate the true meaning of what sati is just by reading the sutta. You must agree with my point! tadao 7145 From: ppp Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 11:30pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Hi, Abhidammika: Do you not think it would be much easier for Anders to study Pali than to study Burmese (At least she would have more resources/helps). tadao P.S. Thank you very much for the information on the presence of such a translation in Burmese. (As my next language to learn, I have to think about Burmese (which belongs to the Tibeto-Burman language family, which, in turn, is a subgroup of the Sino-Tibetan language family.) 7146 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 6:41am Subject: Idiotic meditation it was Understanding Realities at Many Levels Dear Tadao >However, the point I would like to emphasize is that when one, for > >instance, reads the Maha-sati-patthana sutta LITERALLY and applies >it to one's practice, one would end up with treading the >totally wrong path. (And 99% of us in fact has done >the so-called (two-week) Vipassana medition, where we >had to slow down all our activies to catch seeming >realities = TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE.) I can really appreciate that the many years of monastic practice led you to a skilful level of right speech indeed: if in your view that obviously you don't EVEN consider that could be fruit of simple DELUSION you feel entitled to affirm that Vipassana meditation is a 'TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE' I would like to remind you that many of us in this group and in all the buddhist world value and practice MEDITATION and practically you are extending your remarks about the practice to the practitioners, assuming that we are IDIOTS. realities = TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE.) Very interesting viewpoint. I would most appreciate discussing it with you. You seem very assertive, you must know all about it. I would beg you to pour out your wisdom to rescue this 'idiot' here from her delusion. Thanks. MetTa regards Cybele 7147 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 6:44am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Tadao >P.S. Thank you very much for the information on >the presence of such a translation in Burmese. >(As my next language to learn, I have to think about >Burmese (which belongs to the Tibeto-Burman language family, >which, in turn, is a subgroup of the Sino-Tibetan language >family.) > I thought that would be extremely skilful and most beneficial if all of us could manage to learn the language of kindness to communicate with each other. Metta Cybele 7148 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 6:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath - Erik Dear Erik Dear group >Again, I was hoping someone here might be able to provide us all with >a CANONICAL reference we can ALL agree on as being the spoken words >of the historical Siddhartha Gotama, and for the sake of this >specific discussion I do no accept the canonicity of the Abhidhamma >Pitaka. In other words, I will ONLY accept what is reputed to have >been DIRECTLY spoken and heard (as in the Evam me suttam) sense, as >Lord Buddha's DIRECT instruction to his disciples on this point. "Originally, in the Agamas/Nikayas, the word Abhidhamma denoted not any particular type or style of composition but simply what pertained to, or was connnected with, the Buddha's Teaching. This usage is illustrated by a passage in the Mahagosinga-sutta of the Majjhima-Nikaya where the elder monks are said to have an Abhidhamma-katham, meaning a talk or discussion about the Dharma. Carried beyond a certain point, however, all discussion inevitably becomes technical. For this reason, unmistakeable as its initial spiritual emphasis might have been, every higher religious tradition sooner or later gives birth to a scholasticism..... By the time of King Asoka, in the middle of the 3rd century BCE, the Abhidhamma had reached practically its apogee (peak) of development and crystallized into a more or less self-contained and independent system of what we call the Abhidhamma-Pitaka." .... Sangharakshita Thought it might interest you. See your 'slave' is trying to be helpful! ;-) Love Cybele 7149 From: ppp Date: Sat Aug 4, 2001 11:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Erik's debating skills Hi, Erick: Could you please explain (in simple/basic terms) how the Abhidhammic systems you are familiar with differ from the Pali Abhidamma? (Are they very much the same or differ greatly?) Thank you in advance, tadao 7150 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 7:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Idiotic meditation it was Understanding Realities at Many Levels Dear Cybele, Take it a little easy.....they were strong words, but I'm quite sure there was no implication of you or anyone else being an idiot! Perhaps you could tell us what the purpose is in your practice of trying to slow down activities, whether you think this is a way to catch realities and how this fits into the Buddha's Teachings. Let's keep it pleasant with your smiles;-))) Sarah p.s Could you and your Scandinavian tropical island friends TRY not to send messages which JUST consist of non-dhamma chit-chat! Thanks and take care, Cybele - we all appreciate your insights here. >cybele chiodi wrote: > > I can really appreciate that the many years of monastic practice led you to > a skilful level of right speech indeed: > if in your view that obviously you don't EVEN consider that could be fruit > of simple DELUSION you feel entitled to affirm that Vipassana meditation is > a 'TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE' I would like to remind you that many of us in > this group and in all the buddhist world value and practice MEDITATION and > practically you are extending your remarks about the practice to the > practitioners, assuming that we are IDIOTS. > realities = TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE.) > Very interesting viewpoint. > I would most appreciate discussing it with you. > You seem very assertive, you must know all about it. > I would beg you to pour out your wisdom to rescue this 'idiot' here from her > delusion. > Thanks. > > MetTa regards > > Cybele 7151 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 7:25am Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Dear Erik, --- Erik wrote: > Thank you Kom, for the various discussions amongst the group members > here on their various views, suppositions, notions, and ideas > regarding anapanasati and its so-called "difficulty". Anumodhana to > your efforts, but that, again, was specifically NOT my request on > this specific point. > > Again, I was hoping someone here might be able to provide us all with > a CANONICAL reference we can ALL agree on as being the spoken words > of the historical Siddhartha Gotama, and for the sake of this > specific discussion I do no accept the canonicity of the Abhidhamma > Pitaka. In other words, I will ONLY accept what is reputed to have > been DIRECTLY spoken and heard (as in the Evam me suttam) sense, as > Lord Buddha's DIRECT instruction to his disciples on this point. You an in an enviable position. I think the best person (perhaps) to ask this question is TA Sujin. She has been studying the tipitakas over 50 years and also are associated with people who are pali scholars. If you decide to go this path, I would really appreciate it if you would report your findings (what she says and what you think). Or maybe if you can wait (to ask her) until October when I will be in BKK, then I will get to listen to this conversation myself. ;-) BTW, I have heard rumors that you are residing very close to where I will be in BKK; perhaps, we will get a chance to meet yet. It would be great if you can come to India with us too (so I get to listen to your conversation some more...)... kom 7152 From: ppp Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 0:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Hi, Erick (and Kom): Majority of the suttas start with "evam me suttam" (thus, by me, heard (an impersonal passive)). It is 'generally' possible to date which Nakaayas are older than the others or which groups of suttas may be older than other sets of suttas. But I do not think that in any future we have a scholar who can atually identify the suttas which are direct words of the Buddha and those which are not. It may wise for us to take the whole Tipitaka (and commentaries) as the precious aid for understanding the significance of: sabba papassa akaranam kusalassa upasampada sacitta pariyopanam etam Buddhana sasanam (ingnore mispellings, it's just out of my memory). tadao 7153 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 9:06am Subject: Non idiotic communication Dear Sarah I am the first who most appreciate the policy of 'don't worry, be happy' and 'take it easy'. It actually belongs to my character being relaxed and non apprehensive. But we cannot be always light-hearted when the situation requires an assertive response as 'assertive' and dismissive of others sensitivity it was the declaration. It's not the first time that Tadao implies severe judgements upon various issues. He is perfectly entitled to be 'rigid' on his positions but he cannot discredit people and practices that many of us, you included have dedicated not '2 weeks' of our lives but years, energy, devotion and sincere efforts. If we were deluded or not is certainly not his concern. Excuse moi but whatever merits Tadao has and I reckon he should have many - everything here is disputable as nobody is enlightemned but the choice of the adjective IDIOTIC written in this very fashion was quite unskilful. Now because he partake with Khun Sujin honorable clan, this doesn't exclude him or anybody else from mindful communication. He is the one who HAS TO TAKE IT EASY and I really wonder why the remark comes to me and not to both of us? In your viewpoint this should be equanimous from a moderator? I am not taking it personally, could not care less Sarah - I discuss in another list in front of 500 hundred 'non selves' and the thing that doen't worries me in least is 'losing face' or prestige. I am mercilessly sincere and honest with myself first thing. But I have a very keen sense of justice and I battle for what I believe as I am ready to disclaim it when I aware that is not valid or meaningful anymore. I am not merely attached to principles but don't ask me to cool down my fervour for Dhamma. I observed people here in unconcealed 'indignation' because I persisted on the subject of meditation and don't think I have been offensive with whom I was discussing it like Kom, Robert or Anders. If I were not GENUINELY interested in Abhidhamma study I would simple drop the question. Tadao has fully right to express his opinion but he must improve his communications means. Love Cybele P.S.: Can you again remind people to TRIM the messages as they continue with 'congratulations and I agree' keeping the full tails messages to refer unecessarily. Thanks. Our chit chat takes 1 k their messages takes 20 k. Perhaps a bit of lightheartedness would be preferable even if frivolous that being UNKIND with each other. > >Dear Cybele, > >Take it a little easy.....they were strong words, but I'm quite sure there >was >no implication of you or anyone else being an idiot! > >Perhaps you could tell us what the purpose is in your practice of trying to >slow down activities, whether you think this is a way to catch realities >and >how this fits into the Buddha's Teachings. > >Let's keep it pleasant with your smiles;-))) > >Sarah > >p.s Could you and your Scandinavian tropical island friends TRY not to send >messages which JUST consist of non-dhamma chit-chat! Thanks and take care, >Cybele - we all appreciate your insights here. > > > >cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > I can really appreciate that the many years of monastic practice led you >to > > a skilful level of right speech indeed: > > if in your view that obviously you don't EVEN consider that could be >fruit > > of simple DELUSION you feel entitled to affirm that Vipassana meditation >is > > a 'TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE' I would like to remind you that many of us >in > > this group and in all the buddhist world value and practice MEDITATION >and > > practically you are extending your remarks about the practice to the > > practitioners, assuming that we are IDIOTS. > > realities = TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE.) > > Very interesting viewpoint. > > I would most appreciate discussing it with you. > > You seem very assertive, you must know all about it. > > I would beg you to pour out your wisdom to rescue this 'idiot' here from >her > > delusion. > > Thanks. > > > > MetTa regards > > > > Cybele > > 7154 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 9:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath - kom Dear Kom > >Or maybe if you can wait (to ask her) until October when I will be in BKK, >then I will get to listen to this conversation myself. ;-) BTW, I have >heard >rumors that you are residing very close to where I will be in BKK; perhaps, >we will get a chance to meet yet. It would be great if you can come to >India with us too (so I get to listen to your conversation some more...)... > >kom What is this India business? How it comes I have not been informed you are going to my beloved India? :-( I am most indignant... ;-) What is this Indian meeting about or only the privileged ones are invited? LOve Cybele 7155 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 10:49am Subject: Samatha-Vipassana Buddhist Meditation by Francis Story (The Anagarika Sugatananda) The root-cause of rebirth and suffering is avijja conjoined with and reacting upon tanha. These two causes form a vicious circle; on the one hand, concepts, the result of ignorance, and on the other hand, desire arising from concepts. The world of phenomena has no meaning beyond the meaning given to it by our own interpretation. When that interpretation is conditioned by avijja, we are subject to the state known as vipallasa, or hallucination. Sañña-vipallasa, hallucination of perception; citta-vipallasa, hallucination of consciousness, and ditthi-vipallasa, hallucination of views, cause us to regard that which is impermanent (anicca) as permanent, that which is painful (dukkha) as a source of pleasure, and that which is unreal (anatta), or literally without any self existence, as being a real, self-existing entity. Consequently, we place a false interpretation on all the sensory experiences we gain through the six channels of cognition, that is, the eye, ear, nose, tongue, sense of touch and mind cakkhu, sota, ghana, jivha, kaya and mano (ayatana). Physics, by showing that the realm of phenomena we know through these channels of cognition does not really correspond to the physical world known to science, has confirmed this Buddhist truth. We are deluded by our own senses. Pursuing what we imagine to be desirable, an object of pleasure, we are in reality only following a shadow, trying to grasp a mirage. It is anicca, dukkha, anatta - impermanent, associated with suffering, an insubstantial. Being so, it can only be the cause of impermanence, suffering and insubstantiality, since like begets like; and we ourselves, who chase the illusion, are also impermanent, subject to suffering and without any persistent ego-principle. It is a case of a shadow pursuing a shadow. The purpose of Buddhist meditation, therefore, is to gain more than an intellectual understanding of this truth, to liberate ourselves from the delusion and thereby put an end to both ignorance and craving. If the meditation does not produce results tending to this consummation - results which are observable in the character and the whole attitude to life - it is clear that there is something wrong either with the system or with the method of employing it. It is not enough to see lights, to have visions or to experience ecstasy. These phenomena are too common to be impressive to the Buddhist who really understands the purpose of Buddhist meditation. There are actual dangers in them which are apparent to one who is also a student of psychopathology. In the Buddha's great discourse on the practice of mindfulness, the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, both the object and the means of attaining it are clearly set forth. Attentiveness to the movements of the body, to the ever-changing states of the mind, is to be cultivated in order that their real nature should be known. Instead of identifying these physical and mental phenomena with the false concept of "self," we are to see them as they really are: movements of a physical body, an aggregate of the four elements, (mahabhutas) subject to physical laws of causality on the one hand, and on the other, a flux of successive phases of consciousness arising and passing away in response to external stimuli. They are to be viewed objectively, as though they were processes not associated with ourselves but belonging to another order of phenomena. From what can selfishness and egotism proceed if not from the concept of "self" (sakkayaditthi)? If the practice of any form of meditation leaves selfishness or egotism unabated, it has not been successful. A tree is judged by its fruits and a man by his actions; there is no other criterion. Particularly is this true in Buddhist psychology, because the man is his actions. In the truest sense they, or the continuity of kamma and vipaka which they represent, are the only claim he can make to any persistent identity, not only through the different phases of this life but also from one life to another. Attentiveness with regard to body and mind serves to break down the illusion of self; and not only that, it also cuts off craving and attachment to external objects, so that ultimately there is neither the "self" that craves nor any object of craving. It is a long and arduous discipline, and one that can only be undertaken in retirement from the world and its cares. Yet even a temporary retirement, a temporary course of this discipline, can bear good results in that it establishes an attitude of mind which can be applied to some degree in the ordinary situations of life. Detachment, objectivity, is an invaluable aid to clear thinking; it enables a man to sum up a given situation without bias, personal or otherwise, and to act in that situation with courage and discretion. Another gift it bestows is that of concentration - the ability to focus the mind and keep it steadily fixed on a single point (ekaggata, or one-pointedness), and this is the great secret of success in any undertaking. The mind is hard to tame; it roams here and there restlessly as the wind, or like an untamed horse, but when it is fully under control, it is the most powerful instrument in the whole universe. He who has mastered his own mind is indeed master of the Three Worlds. In the first place he is without fear. Fear arises because we associate mind and body (nama-rupa) with "self"; consequently any harm to either is considered to be harm done to oneself. But he who has broken down this illusion by realizing that the five khandha process is merely the manifestation of cause and effect, does not fear death or misfortune. He remains equable alike in success and failure, unaffected by praise or blame. The only thing he fears is demeritorious action, because he knows that no thing or person in the world can harm him except himself, and as his detachment increases, he becomes less and less liable to demeritorious deeds. Unwholesome action comes of an unwholesome mind, and as the mind becomes purified, healed of its disorders, bad kamma ceases to accumulate. He comes to have a horror of wrong action and to take greater and greater delight in those deeds that are rooted in alobha, adosa, and amoha - generosity, benevolence and wisdom. Anapana Sati One of the most universally-applicable methods of cultivating mental concentration is anapanasati, attentiveness on the in-going and out-going breath. This, unlike the Yogic systems, does not call for any interference with the normal breathing, the breath being merely used as a point on which to fix the attention, at the tip of the nostrils. The attention must not wander, even to follow the breath, but must be kept rigidly on the selected spot. In the initial stages it is advisable to mark the respiration by counting, but as soon as it is possible to keep the mind fixed without this artificial aid, it should be discontinued and only used when it is necessary to recall the attention. As the state of mental quiescence (samatha) is approached, the breath appears to become fainter and fainter, until it is hardly discernible. It is at this stage that certain psychic phenomena appear, which may at first be disconcerting. A stage is reached when the actual bodily dukkha, the sensation of arising and passing away of the physical elements in the body, is felt. This is experienced as a disturbance, but it must be remembered that it is an agitation that is always present in the body but we are unaware of it until the mind becomes stabilized. It is the first direct experience of the dukkha (suffering) which is inherent in all phenomena - the realization within oneself of the first of the Four Noble Truths, Dukkha Ariya Sacca. When that is passed there follows the sensation of piti, rapturous joy associated with the physical body. The teacher of vipassana, however, is careful never to describe to his pupil beforehand what he is likely to experience, for if he does so, there is a strong possibility that the power of suggestion will produce a false reaction, particularly in those cases where the pupil is very suggestible and greatly under the influence of the teacher. Devices in Meditation In kammattana, it is permissible to use certain devices, such as the earth or colour kasina, as focal points for the attention. A candle flame, a hole in the wall, or some metal object can also be used, and the method of using them is found in the Pali texts and the Visuddhi-magga. In the texts themselves it is to be noted that the Buddha gave objects of meditation to disciples in accordance with their individual characteristics, and his unerring knowledge of the right technique for each came from his insight into their previous births. Similarly with recursive meditation, a subject would be given which was easily comprehensible to the pupil, or which served to counteract some strong, unwholesome tendency in his nature. Thus, to one attracted by sensual indulgence, the Buddha would recommend meditation on the impurity of the body, or the "cemetery meditation." Here the object is to counterbalance attraction by repulsion, but it is only a "skillful means" to reach the final state, in which attraction and repulsion both cease to exist. In the Arahant there is neither liking nor disliking: he regards all things with perfect equanimity, as did Thera Maha Moggallana when he accepted a handful of rice from a leper. Beads The use of the rosary in Buddhism is often misunderstood. If it is used for the mechanical repetition of a set formula, the repeating of so many phrases as an act of piety, as in other religions, its value is negligible. When it is used as means of holding the attention and purifying the mind, however, it can be a great help. One of the best ways of employing it, because it calls for undivided attention, is to repeat the Pali formula of the qualities of Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, beginning "Iti'pi so Bhagava - " with the first bead, starting again with the second and continuing to the next quality: "Iti'pi so Bhagava, Arahan - " and so on until with the last bead the entire formula is repeated from beginning to end. This cannot be carried out successfully unless the mind is entirely concentrated on what is being done. At the same time the recalling of the noble qualities of Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha lifts the mind to a lofty plane, since the words carry with them a meaning the impresses itself on the pattern of the thought-moments as they arise and pass away. The value of this in terms of Abhidhamma psychology lies in the wholesome nature of the cittakkhana, or "consciousness-moment" in its uppada (arising), thiti (static) and bhanga (disappearing) phases. Each of these wholesome cittakkhana contributes to the improvement of the sankhara; or aggregate of tendencies; in other words, it directs the subsequent thought-moments into a higher realm and tends to establish the character on that level. Samatha Bhavana Samatha bhavana, the development of mental tranquillity with concentration, is accompanied by three benefits; it gives happiness in the present life, a favorable rebirth, and the freedom from mental defilements which is a prerequisite for attainment of insight. In samatha the mind becomes like a still, clear pool completely free from disturbance and agitation, and ready to mirror on its surface the nature of things as they really are, the aspect of them which is hidden from ordinary knowledge by the restlessness of craving. It is the peace and fulfillment which is depicted on the features of the Buddha, investing his images with a significance that impresses even those who have no knowledge of what it means. Such an image of the Buddha can itself be a very suitable object of meditation, and is, in fact, the one that most Buddhists instinctively use. The very sight of the tranquil image can calm and pacify a mind distraught with worldly hopes and fears. It is the certain and visible assurance of Nibbana. Vipassana Bhavana Vipassana bhavana is realization of the three signs of being, anicca, dukkha, and anatta, by direct insight. These three characteristics, impermanence, suffering and non-self, can be grasped intellectually, as scientific and philosophical truth, but this is not in itself sufficient to rid the mind of egoism and craving. The final objective lies on a higher level of awareness, the direct "intuitional" plane, where it is actually experienced as psychological fact. Until this personal confirmation is obtained, the sphere of sense perception (ayatana) and sensory-responses remain stronger than the intellectual conviction; the two function side by side on different levels of consciousness, but it is usually the sphere dominated by avijja which continues to determine the course of life by volitional action. The philosopher who fails to live according to his philosophy is the most familiar example of this incompatibility between theory and practice. When the direct perception is obtained, however, what was at its highest intellectual level still merely a theory becomes actual knowledge, in precisely the same way that we "know" when we are hot or cold hungry or thirsty. The mind that has attained it is established in the Dhamma, and pañña, wisdom, has taken the place of delusion. Discursive meditation, such as that practiced in Christian devotion, is entirely on the mental level, and can be undertaken by anyone at any time. It calls for no special preparation or conditions. For the more advanced exercises of samatha and vipassana, however, the strictest observance of sila, the basic moral rules, becomes necessary. These techniques are best followed in seclusion, away from the impurities of worldly life and under the guidance of an accomplished master. Many people have done themselves psychic harm by embarking on them without due care in this respect. It is not advisable for anyone to experiment on his own; those who are unable to place themselves under a trustworthy teacher will do best to confine themselves to discursive meditation. It cannot take them to enlightenment but will benefit them morally and prepare them for the next stage. 7156 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 1:43pm Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: Cybele, I just wanted to say SADHU! SADHU! SADHU! for posting that EXCELLENT Dhamma-teaching! I am saving up a post in this very vein regarding a visit to Wat Mahatat Section 5 yesterday. I will be returning there again and again for further instruction in 100% dead-on Satipatthana meditation, is all I will say at this point! :) :) :) (p.s. Sarah, regarding your moderator's comments to the Scandinavian contingent here: are the expressions of a bit of levity, lightness, and humor and the Dhamma mutually exclusive? :) :) :). 7157 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 4:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Non idiotic communication Dear Cybele, If I've upset you further rather than helping, I'm sorry! I fully agree that we should all respect each others' practices and viewpoints, even those we disagree with. It wasn't a very skilful use of words and I wasn't defending them at all. Certainly those of us who've had the good fortune (in my opinion!) to study with K.Sujin should be as mindful if not more mindful in this regard (as I mentioned to another friend in Bkk last weekend). Cybele, they were meant to be friendly words from a friend as I considered you were a little upset. As I said, we look forward to more of your comments and references on meditation (a term which means many things to many people). Even if there are different opinions, i don't think there's been any suggestion that your comments have been offensive at any time. I think your reminders on kindness are also v.useful. Sarah P.S. Pls TRY to remember to TRIM posts.......thanks Cybele! 7158 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 5:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- Anders Honoré wrote: > Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there even > Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from > Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since Nibbana > is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. I've been following your discussion with Kom and I think this is a very valid question! I think the reason we understand so little about nibbana conceptually is because there is so little understanding now of namas (mental phenomena) and rupas (physical phenomena that don't experience an object). Cessation of phenomena is not appealing to us now because we see life and the namas and rupas as being satisfactory and there is no understanding of the impermanence of these realities, however much we say everything is anicca and conceptually understand that nothing lasts. At this moment of lobha (attachment) is there any knowledge of unsatisfactoriness at all? Not at that moment. If awareness begins to be aware of the characteristic of lobha, it begins to be aware of lobha as an unwholesome reality that doesn't belong to anyone for an instant only. Awareness and understanding have to grow gradually to know many, many realities as they are as just namas and rupas until the first stage of insight arises which very clearly (and with no doubt at all) knows the difference between namas and rupas as they appear (not in theory). The higher stages of understanding the conditioned nature, the impermanence (and thus unsatisfactoriness) and the fearfulness of these realities come later. If we're honest with ourselves, are we really interested in giving up attachment now? Very seldom (except in theory again!). This is why it's a long and gradual path and why now we would rather have an idea of nibbana as 'eternal bliss' than as cessation of kilesa and parinibbana as cessation of the khandhas (aggregates of existence). > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to which > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > find the source if you want to)? Thanks, you provided the source in another post. In reality it is only (and has ever only been) the khandhas that exist - no Tathagata, no Anders or any other being in them. I think Kom has explained this. This is why we need some understanding of abhidhamma or of different realities in order to read the suttas with right understanding of the meaning. > Anders, I'm sending this off in my usual hurry. I haven't got your other post with the sutta extracts in front of me, but am happy to discuss these in detail if Kom hasn't clarified the points to your satisfaction (not that I'm likely to do any better!) Best wishes and my usual appreciation for your study and sincere interest in the dhamma. Sarah p.s In addition to the translations Jon mentioned, we also enjoy using B.Bodhi's translation of Maj Nik (1 vol) w/comm. notes (also Wisdom). Personally, I much prefer these to the PTS ones and really appreciate the notes. 7159 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 5:26pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Understanding Realities at Many Levels ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:07 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Understanding Realities at Many Levels > Hi, Erick: > Basically we are not disagreeing each other. > I totally agree with you that one can find verious > (numerous) levels of the Dhamma in the Tipitaka, and > everybody can benefit it from reading any of > the suttas (to a certain extent). However, the point > I would like to emphasize is that when one, for instance, > reads the Maha-sati-patthana sutta LITERALLY and applies > it to one's practice, one would end up with treading the > totally wrong path. (And 99% of us in fact has done > the so-called (two-week) Vipassana medition, where we > had to slow down all our activies to catch seeming > realities = TOTALLY IDIOTIC PRACTICE.) > Unless one has a keen keen keen panna, one cannot > penerate the true meaning of what sati is just > by reading the sutta. You must agree with my point! > tadao Actually, the sutta also tells you to abandon the Five hindrances (and thus attain Jhana) before sitting (meaning it does have Samatha). That's probably why there ain't many who have attained non-return after seven days of it. They weren't sticking to the recipe. 7160 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 5:28pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:30 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy > Hi, Abhidammika: > Do you not think it would be much easier for Anders to > study Pali than to study Burmese Haven't thought of that, really. Thanks for pointing it out. >(At least she would > have more resources/helps). Haha, "she"? 7161 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 5:31pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 1:37 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath > Hi, Erick (and Kom): > Majority of the suttas start with "evam me suttam" (thus, by me, heard > (an impersonal passive)). It is 'generally' possible to date which Nakaayas > are older than the others or which groups of suttas may be older than > other sets of suttas. But I do not think that in any future we have a > scholar who can atually identify the suttas which are direct words of the > Buddha and those which are not. It may wise for us to take the whole Tipitaka > (and commentaries) as the precious aid for understanding the significance > of: sabba papassa akaranam Maybe I am being ignorant because I have never studied the Abhidhamma myself, but I would personally trust the sutta pitaka over the abhidhamma pitaka. 7162 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 5:41pm Subject: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana SATIPATTHANA THE FOURFOLD FOCUS OF MINDFULNESS By Ajahn Brahmavamso ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- More has been said about the practice of Satipatthana than about any other meditation practice by Buddhist teachers of today... except by this monk! So in this Dhamma article I will keep up with the trend by presenting some practical observations on this most misunderstood of Lord Buddha's Teachings. Those of you who have been "sitting around" Buddhist Centres for a while have probably heard some teachers claim that the fourfold "Focus of Mindfulness" (my translation of "Satipatthana") is the "one and only way" to the goal of full Enlightenment! Although this is an impressive sales pitch for the teaching, it is neither a true translation of the original text nor consistent with what the Lord Buddha said elsewhere. The very phrase ("Ekayana Magga") which is mistranslated as "one and only way" occurs again in the l2th Sutta (discourse) of the Majjhima collection where it unmistakably means a "path with only one possible destination". Many different paths can share a common destination. In fact, the "one and only path" is the Lord Buddha's description, not of Satipatthana, but of the Noble Eightfold Path: "Of all Ways, the Noble Eightfold Path is the best. This is the only way, there is none other for the purity of insight" Dhammapada verses 273 and 274 (abridged) Thus, the "only way" to Enlightenment, as all Buddhists should know anyway, is the Noble Eightfold Path. The fourfold Focus of Mindfulness constitutes only a part of this Path, the 7th factor. Jhanas are the 8th factor and there is also Right View, Right Intention, Right Effort and the three factors of Right Virtue. Each of these eight factors are necessary to achieve the goal of full Enlightenment. lf any were redundant, then the Lord Buddha would have taught a 7-fold path, or a 6-fold path etc. So, in your practice of Buddhism, please keep in mind that all eight factors of the noble Eightfold Path should be cultivated as the "one and only way". Now the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness method as taught by the Lord Buddha, is a very advanced practice. So advanced that the Lord Buddha said that if anyone should develop them in the way He described for only seven days, then they would achieve full Enlightenment or the state of non-returner. Many meditators reading this may have gone on such a retreat for nine days or even more and not yet fulfilled this most lofty of the Lord Buddha's promises. Why not? Because, I suggest, you were not following the Lord Buddha's instructions. If you want to practise the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness in the way that the Lord Buddha said leads so rapidly to Enlightenment, then certain things are required before you begin. The essential preparations are in short, full cultivation of the other seven factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. Or, as the Lord Budda said in the Anguttara collection ('Nines', Suttas 63 and 64), one should maintain the five Precepts (the longer the better), abandon the five Hindrances and then practise Satipatthana. These vital prerequisites are actually stated by the Lord Buddha in His two discourses on the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness, as "Vineyya Loke Abhijjha-Domanassam" (please forgive me quoting Pali. It is the only way I can make this important point). This phrase is usually translated as "having put away covetousness and grief for the world", or something similar. Such translations mean so little to meditators that they ignore this instruction altogether, and thereby miss the bus! In the time of the Lord Buddha, the monks, nuns and lay disciples would have understood the phrase to mean "after having abandoned the five Hindrances"! The authoritative commentaries to the two Satipatthana Suttas taught by the Lord Buddha both clearly state that "Abhijjha-Domanassam" (sorry for the Pali again!) refer precisely to the five Hindrances. Elsewhere in the recorded Teachings of the Lord Buddha, "Abhijjha" is a synonym for the first Hindrance, "Domanassam" is a synonym for the second Hindrance, and together they stand, in Pali idiom, as an abbreviation for all five. This then means that the five Hindrances must be abandoned first before beginning any of the Focus of Mindfulness practices. It is, in my not-so-humble opinion, precisely because meditators attempt to practise the Satipatthana method with some of the Hindrances still remaining that they achieve no great or lasting result. It is the function of Jhana practice, the ultimate factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, to abandon all of the five Hindrances long enough to gain BIG Insight. For example, in the 68th Sutta of the Majjhima collection ("Nalakapanna"), the Lord Buddha stated that for the meditator who does not attain to Jhana, the five Hindrances together with discontent and weariness invade the mind and remain. Only when one does attain to Jhana do the five Hindrances together with discontent and weariness not invade one's mind and remain the way the Lord Buddha said it is. Any meditator who has experienced the powerful Jhanas would know through that experience, and what happens after, what a mind without any Hindrances is truly like. The meditator who hasn't known Jhanas does not realise the many subtle forms Hindrances can take. They may think that the hindrances are abandoned but, the truth is, they just don't see them and so do not get great results in their meditation. This is why Samatha practice which cultivates Jhana is part of the Satipatthana teaching and why it is misinformation to call Satipatthana "pure Vipassana". Even my teacher, Ajahn Chah, said over and over again that Samatha and Vipassana, "calm and insight", go together and are inseparable as the two faces of a coin. Having patiently completed the necessary preparations, the meditator sustains their mindfulness on one of the four focuses: their own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind consciousness and, fourthly, the objects of mind. When the Hindrances are gone and one can sustain one's powerful and penetrating attention on these four objects, only then is it possible to realise that deep in our psyche, far deeper than the veil of intelligent thinking, we have been assuming a Self. We have been assuming that this body is "me" or "mine", that pleasure or pain has something to do with me, that the mind which looks on is our Soul or something close, and that the objects of mind such as thought or volition (the 'chooser') is a Self, me, or mine. In short, the purpose of the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness is to instruct one what to do when one has emerged from a Jhana, to uncover the deeply disguised delusion of a Soul and then see what the Lord Buddha saw, the Truth of Anatta. This is not an easy thing to do, but it can be done, and it can take only seven days. That is if one follows the Lord Buddha's instructions, follows them and takes no short cuts. Ajahn Brahm (From: Newsletter, July-October 1997, Buddhist Society of Western Australia, Perth, Australia) 7163 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 5:37pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:49 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > As the state of mental quiescence (samatha) is approached, the breath > appears to become fainter and fainter, until it is hardly discernible. It is > at this stage that certain psychic phenomena appear, which may at first be > disconcerting. That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my body calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath because of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes extremely faint after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and hence my attention wanders. Anyone got any advice? 7164 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 6:33pm Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: cybele chiodi > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:49 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > > As the state of mental quiescence (samatha) is approached, the breath > > appears to become fainter and fainter, until it is hardly discernible. It > is > > at this stage that certain psychic phenomena appear, which may at first be > > disconcerting. > > That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my body > calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath because > of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes extremely faint > after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and hence my > attention wanders. > > Anyone got any advice? After the instructions I received from the incredibly kind Ajarn at Wat Mahatat, Section 5 yesterday, yes. You may wish to carefully examine and test out in your own practice the other aspects of Meditation on the Body as found in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html): For starters, "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it." Of course it is even more beneficial to have a teacher who will be able explain this, to ensure the practice is properly tuned to one's accumulations. And those who have the incredible fortune to have enough Dhamma-theory AND reside nearby qualified teachers of applied meditation such as places like Wat Mahatat, Section 5, would be very wise, I would think, to go and ask for intruction in this excellent form of meditation taught by Lord Buddha directly in the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. 7165 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Sarah Procter Abbott Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 11:50 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there even > > Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from > > Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since Nibbana > > is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. > > I've been following your discussion with Kom and I think this is a very valid > question! Thank you for joining in on the discussion. I think Kom and I could use some fresh perspective. > If we're honest with ourselves, are we really interested in giving up > attachment now? Very seldom (except in theory again!). This is why it's a long > and gradual path and why now we would rather have an idea of nibbana as > 'eternal bliss' than as cessation of kilesa and parinibbana as cessation of the > khandhas (aggregates of existence). As I see it, Parinibbana is very much the cessation of the kandhas. But don't you think there's a reason that the death of an Arahant is called Parinibbana, if not to pass into Nibbana (or become Nibbana, whatever)? > > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to which > > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > > find the source if you want to)? > > Thanks, you provided the source in another post. In reality it is only (and has > ever only been) the khandhas that exist - no Tathagata, no Anders or any other > being in them. I think Kom has explained this. This is why we need some > understanding of abhidhamma or of different realities in order to read the > suttas with right understanding of the meaning. Hmm, as I've said before, I am biased in my reading of the Sutta Pitaka, in the sense that I also draw from Mahayana, but what I'm trying to say is not new in Theravada either. Basically, I'm just trying to say that there's a True Mind (to use a Mahayana term) as opposed to the conditioned Samasaric mind of the kandhas and that mind *is* Nibbana, that mind is unconditioned. You can call it self or not, but I would say that there is still something there. There's a sutta which says: "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming defilements. "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming defilements." That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, as it retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances (and this pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). I thought it was pretty much settled with this quote: "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) Which pretty much spells Nibbana, but Kom pointed out that the translation as this being consciousness was dubious, although I get the impression that this was primarily because Nibbana as consciousness like this is mentioned very few places in the Pali Canon (correct me if I'm wrong here, Kom). But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn Chah: "But really this mind of ours is already unmoving and peaceful... really peaceful! Just like a leaf which is still as long as no wind blows. If a wind comes up the leaf flutters. The fluttering is due to the wind -- the "fluttering" is due to those sense impressions; the mind follows them. If it doesn't follow them, it doesn't "flutter." If we know fully the true nature of sense impressions we will be unmoved. Our practice is simply to see the Original Mind. So we must train the mind to know those sense impressions, and not get lost in them. To make it peaceful. Just this is the aim of all this difficult practice we put ourselves through. " ........................... "This Nature is not born, it does not age nor sicken. This Nature does not die. This Nature is neither happy nor sad, neither big nor small, heavy nor light; neither short nor long, black nor white. There's nothing you can compare it to. No convention can reach it. This is why we say Nirvana has no colour. All colors are merely conventions. The state which is beyond the world is beyond the reach of worldly conventions." His own teacher Ajahn Mun makes an even clearer statement in his "Ballad of Liberation from the Kandhas": Once we see through inconstancy, the mind-source stops creating issues. All that remains is the primal mind, true & unchanging. Knowing the mind-source brings release from all worry & error. If you go out to the mind-ends, you're immediately wrong. A final passage: Freed, dissociated, & released from ten things, the Tathagata dwells with unrestricted awareness, Vahuna. Which ten? Freed, dissociated, & released from form... feeling... perception... processes... consciousness... birth... aging... death... stress*... defilement, he dwells with unrestricted awareness. Just as a red, blue, or white lotus born in the water and growing in the water, rises up above the water and stands with no water adhering to it, in the same way the Tathagata -- freed, dissociated, & released from these ten things -- dwells with unrestricted awareness. (A X.81) What he is saying here, is that when totally freed (unbound), even from consciousness, there is still this this "unrestricted awareness" left. > Anders, I'm sending this off in my usual hurry. I haven't got your other post > with the sutta extracts in front of me, but am happy to discuss these in detail > if Kom hasn't clarified the points to your satisfaction (not that I'm likely to > do any better!) Haha, go ahead and give it your best shot! > Best wishes and my usual appreciation for your study and sincere interest in > the dhamma. Thank you. > p.s In addition to the translations Jon mentioned, we also enjoy using > B.Bodhi's translation of Maj Nik (1 vol) w/comm. notes (also Wisdom). > Personally, I much prefer these to the PTS ones and really appreciate the notes. Yes, I wish I had them myself. But feel free to supplement with them. 7166 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 7:50pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 9:36 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation >I am requesting that you explain the Sutta (about the tathagatha not >having ceased after the Buddha's death) using Robert's or my point of >view to the best of your ability (we have discussed this quite a bit, I think >you probably have learned a point or two) as if you are explaining to a >third party why Robert and I have such views. Hmm, as I see it, aren't you saying that there reason that the views of the Tathatgata living on after death and not living on after death is because there never was a Tathagata in the first place, that it was all illusionary? 7167 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Dear Erik, Hope you're having more useful discussions/debates in Bkk and lot of sleep to recover!! it's really great to hear what you've been discussing....pls keep this up! Thanks for your notes back on the debate style....I now understand more about 'challenger' and 'defender' roles......How about 'counter-challenge'? --- Erik wrote: > > Again, I was hoping someone here might be able to provide us all with > a CANONICAL reference we can ALL agree on as being the spoken words > of the historical Siddhartha Gotama, and for the sake of this > specific discussion I do no accept the canonicity of the Abhidhamma > Pitaka. In other words, I will ONLY accept what is reputed to have > been DIRECTLY spoken and heard (as in the Evam me suttam) sense, as > Lord Buddha's DIRECT instruction to his disciples on this point. > Here, you were asking for a sutta reference in which the Buddha says anapanasati is too difficult for most, or something like that. First, may I ask you for a sutta reference in which the Buddha says it isn't too difficult for most? Also may I have a sutta reference in which the Buddha suggests any part of the path, or for that matter the development of any kind of kusala isn't difficult? Why isn't anapanasati encouraged for all? As I was browsing through MN, I was noticing in how few suttas there is any reference to it. Can you give me, btw, any sutta references where laypeople realise jhanas with anapanasati? Do you have any sutta references in which the Buddha says that those who haven't already realised this particular kind of jhana practice should do so in order to develop vipassana? Is there any sutta reference where the Buddha says it isn't essential to understand the difference between moments of kusala citta (wholesome consciousness) and akusala (unwholesome consciousness) from the very beginning of samatha development? Erik, for many of us here (Kom and myself included), without studying the commentaries and abhidhamma (whether from the book or from a teacher), it's really impossible to comprehend the true meaning of many suttas, so for our purposes here, I don't think we agree to ignore them for any discussion! I'd like to quote from a post of Mike's (Mike, hope you don't mind;-): ***************************************************** Mike: For nearly thirty years I've wandered around in various schools of Buddhism, the last ten or so in the Theravada. I was very glad when this meandering led me to the sutta-pitaka. I bought the PTS edition and read all of it, some more than once or even twice. Why I appreciate having had the great good fortune of discovering this group (and with it abhidhamma): MANY ideas I had developed individually, intellectually and intuitively and with the help of others, good monks among them, were simply mistaken. So much was clarified in such a short time! And all of it from the same suttas I'd read and contemplated and embraced. Maybe, if I'd had the time, I would've figured out the inconsistencies in my own understanding eventually, but I don't think so. The way this information has been carefully gleaned from the suttas and laid out, cross-referenced and so on, is incredibly helpful. So, from my point of view, why re-invent the eight-spoked wheel? I can always measure my own intuition and reasoning against the abhidhamma and the suttas and frankly, it's always the former, not the suttas or the abhidhamma (which always agree), that come up short. (end quote) ************************************************************ I'd also like to remind you of the excellent sutta which Rob posted on the subject of the complexity of the Teachings: ************************************************************ 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) ************************************************************* Best wishes as always, Erik. Sarah p.s Finally, one more counter-challenge!!;-)) You wrote: >(p.s. Sarah, .....are the expressions of a bit of levity, lightness, >and humor and the Dhamma mutually exclusive? :) :) :). Give me the Sutta reference first! 7168 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 8:09pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath ----- Original Message ----- From: Sarah Procter Abbott Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 1:58 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath > Finally, one more counter-challenge!!;-)) > > You wrote: > >(p.s. Sarah, .....are the expressions of a bit of levity, lightness, > >and humor and the Dhamma mutually exclusive? :) :) :). > > Give me the Sutta reference first! Hey, I wanna know too! I'm also Scandinavian, you know :-) :-) 7169 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 8:32pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Hmm, as I see it, aren't you saying that there reason that the views of the > Tathatgata living on after death and not living on after death is because= > there never was a Tathagata in the first place, that it was all illusiona= ry? Thank you for explaining the (not yours) view point. Why do we say the tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't exist? kom 7170 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 10:01pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: Tusinde tak igen! Jeg er nok særlig indtrykt! Hvor kommer du fra? (Min mor, mor-mor og mor-far er aller fra Odense... og tilgive min forfærdelig Dansk--jeg har glemmt næsten all, og behøver mere anvende! ;) I think in Pali that might go something like "SADHU! SADHU! SADHU!" 7171 From: Anders Honoré Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 11:52pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:01 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Tusinde tak igen! Jeg er nok særlig indtrykt! Hvor kommer du fra? Jeg er født og opvokset i Helsingør (rent faktisk Espergærde, en lille naboby som jeg ikke tror du kender). Jeg spekulerede på om du nu var dansk, da du nævnte at du var skandinavisk..... >(Min mor, mor-mor og mor-far er aller fra Odense... og tilgive min >forfærdelig Dansk--jeg har glemmt næsten all, og behøver >mere anvende! ;) Jeg har det efterhånden sådan at jeg foretrækker at tænke på engelsk fordi ordforrådet er meget bredere på det sprog, og tankesporene kommer mere naturligt. Pudsigt.... > I think in Pali that might go something like "SADHU! SADHU! SADHU!" Glad you liked my post :-) Am I the only one who thinks it strange that the Theravada (or at least as it is represented here) and Mahayana view of Nibbana could be so fundamentally different? PS. Vi må nok hellere holde os til det engelske fremover, af hensyn til de andre her i dsg.... 7172 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 11:58pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Tadao How are you? The translations in my message refer to those in English. So, Anders would not need to worry about learning Pali or Burmese. Having said that, the Chatthasangiti Tipitaka Burmese Translations do exist. And these translations are also the results of collective literary minds. They are as terse and clear-cut as the original Pali. With regards Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Abhidammika: > Do you not think it would be much easier for Anders to > study Pali than to study Burmese (At least she would > have more resources/helps). > tadao > P.S. Thank you very much for the information on > the presence of such a translation in Burmese. > (As my next language to learn, I have to think about > Burmese (which belongs to the Tibeto-Burman language family, > which, in turn, is a subgroup of the Sino-Tibetan language > family.) 7173 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Cybele How are you? Thank you for your generous description of Burmese language. With regards Suan --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Tadao > > >P.S. Thank you very much for the information on > >the presence of such a translation in Burmese. > >(As my next language to learn, I have to think about > >Burmese (which belongs to the Tibeto-Burman language family, > >which, in turn, is a subgroup of the Sino-Tibetan language > >family.) > > > > I thought that would be extremely skilful and most beneficial if all of us > could manage to learn the language of kindness to communicate with each > other. > > Metta > > Cybele > 7174 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 0:12am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Anders Honore How are you? If you do not have an easy access to a Myanmar Embassy, please try the following link: http://www.myanmarbook.com/ They might be able to get them for you. With regards Suan --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:31 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try > Myanmar Embassy > >Dear Anders Honoré > >How are you? > > Quite well, thank you. The same goes for you I hope? > > >If you like the idea of reading translations done by the > >collective group of intellectuals made up of experts in > >languages, and experts in Dhamma, there are such translations in > >Myanmar. > > >Translations are the final results of consultations among different > >experts made up of both monks and laypeople before writing down a > >single word. They also come with explanations of words or sticky > >points as notes right after the paragraphs in which those words occur. > > >Sound good? Where to get them? The Myanmar embassy in your city or > >nearest to your city could help you out. > > It actually sounds very interesting. I'm not sure if there's a Myanmar > embassy to be found in Denmark though..... Could there be an alternative way > of getting them? 7175 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 0:15am Subject: Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach: Correction of Citation Dear Dhamma friends I made a citation mistake in my message 7134. Could you please change the Pali "kamesu vivicceva" into "vivicceva kamehi". Sorry about this mistake. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > > Dear Dhammastudy Friends > > The following message is my answers to Sakula's questions on > Jhana on dhamma-list (message 22041). > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > Dear Sakula > > How are you? > > The answer is Yes to your question: > > " is it important to know that one is in the first or second (or > whatever) Jhana and if so why?" > > Reason? A simple reason is that one thing leads to another. As you > might have read this phenomenon in Visuddhimagga, when we become > quite skillful in a practice, we kind of get bored! We want to try > out something slightly different and difficult, don't we? > > Mental cultivation practices are very addictive (the only case of > good addiction?) because they are our very minds in progress, > literally. Once you are hooked, you want to go further and further. > So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca > samadhi), you won't stop at there. You would go for the First Jhana > in due course. And you know what you don't like at the present level, > and you would make every effort to get rid of it or them. As a > result, you would end up at the next higher level of jhana. > > You also wrote: > > "Having asked that let me also add that I do not think (perhaps hope) > that Jhana practice is not out of reach for anyone with diligent > persistence and a very good teacher as guide. What do you think?" > > I agree with you. The most important keyword to remember to make > jhana within our reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from > sensuous preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this > keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. > Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn > their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, > of course)! > > Hope this message answered your questions. > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7176 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 8:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Anders - In a message dated 8/5/01 5:53:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cybele chiodi writes: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: cybele chiodi > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:49 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > > As the state of mental quiescence (samatha) is approached, the breath > > appears to become fainter and fainter, until it is hardly discernible. It > is > > at this stage that certain psychic phenomena appear, which may at first be > > disconcerting. > > That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my body > calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath because > of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes extremely faint > after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and hence my > attention wanders. > > Anyone got any advice? > > ============================== The fact that the breath becomes faint and subtle *is* a problem, but also a great opportunity. As the breath sensation fades, there must be a corresponding strengthening of energy, mindfulness, and concentration (directed by will) in order to "stay in touch", and this will take the mind to a deeper and stronger levels. This becomes easier to carry out the longer and more consistently one practices. 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) 7177 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:07am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:33 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > Hi, Anders - > > That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my body > > calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath because > > of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes extremely faint > > after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and hence my > > attention wanders. > > > > Anyone got any advice? > ============================== > The fact that the breath becomes faint and subtle *is* a problem, but > also a great opportunity. As the breath sensation fades, there must be a > corresponding strengthening of energy, mindfulness, and concentration > (directed by will) in order to "stay in touch", and this will take the mind > to a deeper and stronger levels. This becomes easier to carry out the longer > and more consistently one practices. Wow, thanks a lot. Just that change of perspective is something I find quite illuminating. > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) That part is readily understandable, but how much do you make of the Sutra in its entirety? 7178 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:07am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:32 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation >Thank you for explaining the (not yours) view point. Why do we say the tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't exist? Nibbana? 7179 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:09am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:12 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy >Dear Anders Honore >If you do not have an easy access to a Myanmar Embassy, >please try the following link: > >http://www.myanmarbook.com/ > >They might be able to get them for you. Thank you. I am as yet undecided as to which version I'll go for.... 7180 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:10am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 5:58 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy > Dear Tadao > > How are you? > > The translations in my message refer to those in English. > So, Anders would not need to worry about learning Pali or Burmese. > > Having said that, the Chatthasangiti Tipitaka Burmese Translations > do exist. And these translations are also the results of collective > literary minds. They are as terse and clear-cut as the original Pali. Do you know how much time was spent translating from Pali to Burmese? 7181 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:13am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:33 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana > Anyone got any advice? >After the instructions I received from the incredibly kind Ajarn at >Wat Mahatat, Section 5 yesterday, yes. You may wish to carefully >examine and test out in your own practice the other aspects of >Meditation on the Body as found in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html): For starters, >"Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. >When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he >discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is >lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns >it." Yeah, I do that in my daily life. But it doesn't help my seated practise much in terms of one-pointedness (at least not directly - I'm sure it's working wonders indirectly) >Of course it is even more beneficial to have a teacher who will be >able explain this, to ensure the practice is properly tuned to one's >accumulations. And those who have the incredible fortune to have >enough Dhamma-theory AND reside nearby qualified teachers of applied >meditation such as places like Wat Mahatat, Section 5, would be very >wise, I would think, to go and ask for intruction in this excellent >form of meditation taught by Lord Buddha directly in the Four >Foundations of Mindfulness. Unfortunately, there are no monasteries anywhere near where I live. 7182 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Dear Erik I am filled up with mudita for your appreciation because that is basically my practice. And I used to frequent Wat Mahathat as well because they have the instructions in English; please go to their library Erik; they do translations from the texts and they have an excellent material to consult - if they lived up their own standards. I would recommend you to visist Wat Bornovives as well. There are two western monks living there, one English, one American and they will be pleased if you wish to talk about Dhamma with them. Really content of your appreciation: if you are really interested I have plenty of material on the 'idiotic practice of Vipassana' and I would send it off line to you. Anumodana in your efforts Love Cybele >> >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > >Cybele, I just wanted to say SADHU! SADHU! SADHU! for posting that >EXCELLENT Dhamma-teaching! > >I am saving up a post in this very vein regarding a visit to Wat >Mahatat Section 5 yesterday. I will be returning there again and >again for further instruction in 100% dead-on Satipatthana >meditation, is all I will say at this point! :) :) :) > >(p.s. Sarah, regarding your moderator's comments to the Scandinavian >contingent here: are the expressions of a bit of levity, lightness, >and humor and the Dhamma mutually exclusive? :) :) :). > > > 7183 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:34am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders Hi Anders > > > As the state of mental quiescence (samatha) is approached, the breath > > appears to become fainter and fainter, until it is hardly discernible. >It >is > > at this stage that certain psychic phenomena appear, which may at first >be > > disconcerting. > >That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my body >calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath >because >of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes extremely faint >after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and hence my >attention wanders. > >Anyone got any advice? I would advise you to shift from the nostrils or upperlip to the abdominal movement and be aware also of the sensation of body-contact with the cushion or the floor. This should give you enough support to focus your attention. However if you are experiencing any kind of visual phenomena (nimittas)it's normal slipping in a kind of trance, that's why I use the Four Foundations of Mindfulness rather than Anapanasati in my meditation. Widening the field of my attention promotes the sense of being present inside many realities without wandering, only shifting the attention on a different subject. Love Cybele 7184 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:45am Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Thanks for your notes back on the debate style....I now understand > more about 'challenger' and 'defender' roles......How about > 'counter-challenge'? As the boxing announcer Michael Buffer might intone... "Let's get ready to RUUUUMBUUUUUUULE!!!! TWEEELVE rounds (beginning with avijja, sankahara, etc...) in the SUPRA-MIDDLE-WAY DIVISION!!! "First, in the Theravada corner, wearing the saffron blouse, the challenger, Sarah; and in the Tibetan corner, wearing the burgundy shirt with the Wheel of Law and the Dorje, the defender, Erik..." > --- Erik wrote: > > > > Again, I was hoping someone here might be able to provide us all with > > a CANONICAL reference we can ALL agree on as being the spoken words > > of the historical Siddhartha Gotama, and for the sake of this > > specific discussion I do no accept the canonicity of the Abhidhamma > > Pitaka. In other words, I will ONLY accept what is reputed to have > > been DIRECTLY spoken and heard (as in the Evam me suttam) sense, as > > Lord Buddha's DIRECT instruction to his disciples on this point. > > > Here, you were asking for a sutta reference in which the Buddha says > anapanasati is too difficult for most, or something like that. > > First, may I ask you for a sutta reference in which the Buddha says it isn't > too difficult for most? Ma drup! (is not established!). Meaning, the question's invalid, given the original challenge was to provide the citation from the Suttas for the statement that "meditation on the breath is too difficult for all but the rarest of disciples," which I reject in this debate as NOT being established as what the Buddha actually said anyplace in the Suttas. In other words, if you make the claim, you have to back it with either air-tight reasoning OR cite the direct words of the Buddha (or accepted references ALL participants agree are correct Dharma, which by implication would all be "word of the Buddha" if there is such agreement). So Sarah, you can't turn the tables here. You have to defend THAT assertion first, since "you" (or whomever) made this positive assertion. Tibetan-style Buddhist logic, Prasanga, accepts the ONLY negation to establish valid reasoning, meaning you can use logic ONLY to deny logically falsifiable views, not to establish new views-- which just leads to another wilderness and thicket of conceptual elaborations--NOT the point, in other words! This is a VERY important point to keep firmly in mind about the purpose of this style of debate. Again, Prasanga as a technique arose SOLELY as a means to terminating wrong views and rejects, for example, the so-called "Svatantrika" approach of "autonomous syllogisms"--meaning, Prasanga rejects ANY positivistic reasoning used to establish a thesis, because such a thesis will ALWAYS be founded upon some sort of supposition or view (unless it is the direct word of the Buddha and all agree on the canonicity of the reference). The point of Prasanga is to terminate wrong views decisively by demonstrating how such views entail absurd consequences. It is explicitly NOT used to create yet more conceptual elaborations-- papanca--which would entirely defeat the point of it all! :) It is all about direct knowing. According to Master Dharmakirti, "Direct knowledge here means neither mental construction nor illusion." > Why isn't anapanasati encouraged for all? As I was browsing through MN, I was > noticing in how few suttas there is any reference to it. You mean, like the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta? I'm not saying it's absolutely necessary; what I did say was that no one has been able to show me ANY Suttas where the Buddha said it's "too difficult" a practice for "most" of his disciples. I mean, crikey, the Buddha BEGINS the teaching on mindfulness with mindfulness of the breath! Do you suppose he begins with mindfulness of the breath because it's the hardest practice of them all? That just doesn't seem all that sensible for a doctor interested in in helping people terminate their suffering in the quickest possible way. Why would he begin with something only the rarest of his disciples could work with in his Great Discourse on Mindfulness, which, as we all agree, is an essential factor for awakening? "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself? [1] "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. "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. Just as a skilled turner or his apprentice, when making a long turn, discerns that he is making a long turn, or when making a short turn discerns that he is making a short turn; in the same way the monk, when breathing in long, discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short... He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication." That seems pretty clear to me. Remove "monk" and insert "21st Century layperson living in NYC," for example (across from a noisy piano bar in the noisiest part of Greenwich Village), because it works equally well for those who have never donned any robes who live in the so- called "real world." Trust me. > Can you give me, btw, any sutta references where laypeople realise jhanas with > anapanasati? I can give you Erik. Does that suffice? It really isn't that big a deal to sit down cross-legged and cultivate concentration on the breath (which conveniently also happens to help with cultivating tranquility), once you've received appropriate instructions on it from a teacher who has been trained in and mastered this form of meditation. And such teachers certainly exist. > Do you have any sutta references in which the Buddha says that those who > haven't already realised this particular kind of jhana practice should do so in > order to develop vipassana? I think there have been numerous suttas detailing that detail how Right Concentration entails cultivating concentration to the point of the jhanas, that in Right Concentration includes the jhanas (Magga- Vibhanga Sutta again). Speaking from experience, I can say that for these accumulations that vipassana would have been nearly impossible without such directed effort and the tranquility provided by samatha meditation as a foundation. Do you have any experience that runs counter to this you would feel comfortable sharing? I would also be most interested in hearing what, specifically, is your present practice, and how it has led you to Right Mindfulness, and in particular, how your practice of Right Mindfulness has helped you establish Right Concentration to the degree you can sustain concentration on your favorite object of meditation for a period of longer than one second, ten seconds, twenty seconds, thirty seconds, one minute, etc. etc. Because in the final analysis there is either Right Mindfulness or there is wrong mindfulness. There is Right concentration or there is wrong concentration. Based on your present practice, can you honestly say that it has assisted you to establish either of these to the degree the conditions for insight have arisen at any of the levels of insight- knowledge? There is no need to reply; only to consider this VERY carefully. > Is there any sutta reference where the Buddha says it isn't essential to > understand the difference between moments of kusala citta (wholesome > consciousness) and akusala (unwholesome consciousness) from the very beginning > of samatha development? I am not familiar with any suttas where the Buddha talks about kusala citta and akusala citta. I am familiar with suttas where the Buddha praises skillful activity and criticizes unskillful activity, though. Rather than talk about abstract notions like cittas (and until you have had DIRECT experience of a citta, please don't come back to me with this "paramattha dhammas" business--cittas are WAY too abstract an concept before such direct experience of them; who but a Buddha or nearly a Buddha directly discern the billionth of a second of awareness each citta represents? I think perhaps it would help to simplify things a bit. Perhaps a LOT. For example, when I requested instruction yesterday at Wat mahatat, Section 5, my extremely kind (he simply radiated metta) and amazing Ajarn in Mindfulness of the Body using eating as an example, there was no mention of "cittas" or "cetasikas." There was mention of observing: "lifting lifting lifting" or "touching touching touching" or "tasting tasting tasting." He said that Right Mindfulness in this particular practice would mean eating a dinner should take two hours, according to HIS teacher. When I tried to diligently apply this last evening (how could I NOT apply these instructions with my VERY best efforts given these precious teachings I was given, which I had actively sought last time I was here and failed to connect with at the time?), difficult as it was, I came to see within 1 hour and forty-five minutes into my dinner (when I had to stop after getting only halfway through) that he was not bullshitting on this method of meditation. Not at all. It does indeed lead to Right Mindfulness when applied with diligent effort. And I honestly find this particular method more difficult for these accumulations than watching the breath, beacuse you're moving, not sitting still. Perhaps that's just because I'm a beginner at this form of meditation, concentrating while moving like this. Nevertheless, this teaching was MOST instructive, and bore fruits in the form of clearly and discernibly increased mindfulness in under a couple of hours (not terribly strong sati for this beginner, mind you, but strong enough to notice the difference)! How about your practice? Has it worked for you in a similar fashion? If so, I heartily encourage and applaud your diligence and efforts. If not, this may be something for serious consideration. > Erik, for many of us here (Kom and myself included), without studying the > commentaries and abhidhamma (whether from the book or from a teacher), it's > really impossible to comprehend the true meaning of many suttas, so for our > purposes here, I don't think we agree to ignore them for any discussion! It IS possible to comprehend the meaning of the Suttas if you're pointed in the right direction by those who have terminated their misunderstanding of the Suttas, however. That is, if you are willing to pay careful attention to their advice. If not, there's always samsara. 7185 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Erik I am really delighted! I have been practicing Vipassana since my first contact with Theravada Buddhism and for me it was a kind of revelation after years of Zen. I am really happy that a dear friend of mine, is so keen in exploring this insight meditation. Indeed when with Robert or Kom we were discussing meditation I would be surprised on their idea of the practice as it was radically different from my experience with Vipassana. But is something that you have to experience rather than conceptualize and I am fully gratified that a brain cruncher like you is enthusiastic of it. Great! Love Cybele > >After the instructions I received from the incredibly kind Ajarn at >Wat Mahatat, Section 5 yesterday, yes. You may wish to carefully >examine and test out in your own practice the other aspects of >Meditation on the Body as found in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta: > >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html): > >For starters, > >"Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. >When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he >discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is >lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns >it." > >Of course it is even more beneficial to have a teacher who will be >able explain this, to ensure the practice is properly tuned to one's >accumulations. And those who have the incredible fortune to have >enough Dhamma-theory AND reside nearby qualified teachers of applied >meditation such as places like Wat Mahatat, Section 5, would be very >wise, I would think, to go and ask for intruction in this excellent >form of meditation taught by Lord Buddha directly in the Four >Foundations of Mindfulness. > > 7186 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:49am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Glad you liked my post :-) Am I the only one who thinks it strange that the > Theravada (or at least as it is represented here) and Mahayana view of > Nibbana could be so fundamentally different? I see no difference whatsoever. I see only strategic pedagogy for differing accumulations. For some the "mind is luminous" and for others, there is only anatta. These are mere rafts; they can never convey direct knowledge of Nibbana, which is entirely beyond the scope of concepts like "mind" or "not mind" and of COURSE is NOT annihilation! 7187 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 1:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Good gracious My eyes are whirling with all this consonants clashing together. I bet that both of you can learn Pali after this stuff any language is 'a piece of cake'.... :-) Love Cybele >> >Tusinde tak igen! Jeg er nok særlig indtrykt! Hvor kommer du fra? >(Min mor, mor-mor og mor-far er aller fra Odense... og tilgive min >forfærdelig Dansk--jeg har glemmt næsten all, og behøver >mere >anvende! ;) > >I think in Pali that might go something like "SADHU! SADHU! SADHU!" > 7188 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 2:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Suan > >Dear Cybele > >How are you? > >Thank you for your generous description of Burmese language. Why, do you reckon that only Burmese language can be 'kind'? Loving kindness is a universal language and can fits any ethnology, grammar and phonetics - no discrimination. Actually I have been in Burma and for the sake of truth, they are gentle people, obviously I exclude the government from my remark. Regards Metta Cybele >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > > Dear Tadao > > > > >P.S. Thank you very much for the information on > > >the presence of such a translation in Burmese. > > >(As my next language to learn, I have to think about > > >Burmese (which belongs to the Tibeto-Burman language family, > > >which, in turn, is a subgroup of the Sino-Tibetan language > > >family.) > > > > > > > I thought that would be extremely skilful and most beneficial if >all of us > > could manage to learn the language of kindness to communicate with >each > > other. > > > > Metta > > > > Cybele 7189 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 2:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders Dear Anders >For starters, > > >"Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. > >When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he > >discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is > >lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns > >it." > >Yeah, I do that in my daily life. But it doesn't help my seated practise >much in terms of one-pointedness (at least not directly - I'm sure it's >working wonders indirectly) Anders, you have to describe realistically your practice and we could help you if you are indeed interested in commiting on the practice. I have done so many retreats in my life that I finished to assist the teachers, translating dhamma-talks and being present at all personal interviews. Then you have to rely on what the 'convents pass' so to speak. If you trust a Brazilian wild woman teaching you Vipassana here I am. Sure you have posture problems Anders that's why your attention is not focussed. If you remind breath and touching most surely with a good deal of training (therefore LAZYNESS is not contemplated) you can remain 'down to earth' and in the present moment. The position of your back must be upright to improve alertness. If your legs are not enough elastic for a balanced half lotus you must shift to 'easy posture', cross legged but not overimposing one leg. Use a cushion to sustain you back and incline you forward - your knees will touch the floor and give you a good equilibrium and stability. Meditation is a very refined art Anders and you cannot practice without a solid inner attitude. For example use the muscular and joints pain to keep you present to the moment. Your mind doesn't wanders if you are conscious of pain - observe it and I bet it will grab your attention. But do not cling to mortification or a kind of challenge with yourself. > >Of course it is even more beneficial to have a teacher who will be > >able explain this, to ensure the practice is properly tuned to one's > >accumulations. And those who have the incredible fortune to have > >enough Dhamma-theory AND reside nearby qualified teachers of applied > >meditation such as places like Wat Mahatat, Section 5, would be very > >wise, I would think, to go and ask for intruction in this excellent > >form of meditation taught by Lord Buddha directly in the Four > >Foundations of Mindfulness. > >Unfortunately, there are no monasteries anywhere near where I live. > But you do have us if you trust our help. This is subject I can feel quite confident about mister viking. ;-) Let's say for my services I would request a vacation in Scandinavia guest of your mum. Is she a good cooker? :-)))) love Cybele 7190 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 2:44am Subject: Mindfulness and Insight - Sati and Vipassana Dear group Thought you could apprecaite this simple text by Ven. Henepola Gunaratana extrated from 'Mindfulness in plain English'. It's very basic, essential, minimalist nonetheless insightful. >Mindfulness (Sati) and Insight (Vipassana) Meditation > >Mindfulness is the center of Vipassana Meditation and the key to the whole >process. it is both the goal of this meditation and the means to that end. >You reach Mindfulness by being ever more mindful. One other Pali word that >is translated into English as Mindfulness is Appamada, which means >non-negligence or an absence of madness. One who attends constantly to what >is really going on in one's mind achieves the state of ultimate sanity. > >The Pali term Sati also bears the connotation of remembering. It is not >memory in the sense of ideas and pictures from the past, but rather clear, >direct, wordless knowing of what is and what is not, of what is correct and >what is incorrect, of what we are doing and how we should go about it. >Mindfulness reminds the meditator to apply his attention to the proper >object at the proper time and to exert precisely the amount of energy >needed to do the job. When this energy is properly applied, the meditator >stays constantly in a state of calm and alertness. As long as this >condition is maintained, those mind-states call 'hindrances' or 'psychic >irritants' cannot arise - there is no greed, no hatred, no lust or >laziness. But we all are human and we do err. Most of us are very human and >we err repeatedly. Despite honest effort, the meditator lets his >Mindfulness slip now and then and he finds himself stuck in some >regrettable, but normal, human failure. It is Mindfulness that notices that >change. And it is Mindfulness that reminds him to apply the energy required >to pull himself out. These slips happen over and over, but their frequency >decreases with practice. Once Mindfulness has pushed these mental >defilements aside, more wholesome states of mind can take their place. >Hatred makes way for loving kindness, lust is replaced by detachment. It is >Mindfulness which notices this change, too, and which reminds the Vipassana >meditator to maintain that extra little mental sharpness needed to keep >these more desirable states of mind. mindfulness makes possible the growth >of wisdom and compassion. Without Mindfulness they cannot develop to full >maturity. > >Deeply buried in the mind, there lies a mental mechanism which accepts what >the mind perceives as beautiful and pleasant experiences and rejects those >experiences which are perceived as ugly and painful. This mechanism gives >rise to those states of mind which we are training ourselves to avoid - >things like greed, lust, hatred, aversion, and jealousy. We choose to avoid >these hindrances, not because they are evil in the normal sense of the >word, but because they are compulsive; because they take the mind over and >capture the attention completely; because they keep going round and round >in tight little circles of thought; and because they seal us off from >living reality. > >These hindrances cannot arise when Mindfulness is present. Mindfulness is >attention to present time reality, and therefore, directly antithetical to >the dazed state of mind which characterizes impediments. As meditators, it >is only when we let our Mindfulness slip that the deep mechanisms of our >mind take over - grasping, clinging and rejecting. Then resistance emerges >and obscures our awareness. We do not notice that the change is taking >place - we are too busy with a thought of revenge, or greed, whatever it >may be. While an untrained person will continue in this state indefinitely, >a trained meditator will soon realize what is happening. It is Mindfulness >that notices the change. It is Mindfulness that remembers the training >received and that focuses our attention so that the confusion fades away. >And it is Mindfulness that then attempts to maintain itself indefinitely so >that the resistance cannot arise again. Thus, Mindfulness is the specific >antidote for hindrances. It is both the cure and the preventive measure. > >Fully developed Mindfulness is a state of total non-attachment and utter >absence of clinging to anything in the world. If we can maintain this >state, no other means or device is needed to keep ourselves free of >obstructions, to achieve liberation from our human weaknesses. Mindfulness >is non-superficial awareness. It sees things deeply, down below the level >of concepts and opinions. This sort of deep observation leads to total >certainty, and complete absence of confusion. It manifests itself primarily >as a constant and unwavering attention which never flags and never turns >away. > >This pure and unstained investigative awareness not only holds mental >hindrances at bay, it lays bare their very mechanism and destroys them. >Mindfulness neutralizes defilements in the mind. The result is a mind which >remains unstained and invulnerable, completely unaffected by the ups and >downs of life. > > > >Metta >Cybele > 7191 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 3:22am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 8:29 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders > Anders, you have to describe realistically your practice and we could help > you if you are indeed interested in commiting on the practice. Daily practise or what? Non-dwelling, as taught in the Diamond Sutra. My preferred meditation subjects (when sitting that is) are Metta and non-dwelling. I shift between the two depending on my moods (plus, I've found that in the past few weeks my desire to sit has increased again. It really went down the around winter). > I have done so many retreats in my life that I finished to assist the > teachers, translating dhamma-talks and being present at all personal > interviews. You may have got a head start in years, but you know I'll beat you to the finish line ;-) > Then you have to rely on what the 'convents pass' so to speak. > If you trust a Brazilian wild woman teaching you Vipassana here I am. uhhhh........... > Sure you have posture problems Anders that's why your attention is not > focussed. I'm telling you, I really don't. I used to, of course. My bag wasn't properly upright, it hurt to have it upright, my legs were killing me, I'd break into a sweat and all, but in half-lotus, it's virtually perfect. I do a thorough check of my posture initially and just before moving to get up. Nothing to point fingers at there. My legs are perfectly assembled in half-lotus without pain. My back becomes naturally and effortlessly erect and I don't sway. I don't think about my posture either anymore, because it doesn't bother me. The only time I ever feel any pain is when I come out of the half-lotus (of course, in full lotus I can hardly walk afterwards). > If you remind breath and touching most surely with a good deal of training > (therefore LAZYNESS is not contemplated) you can remain 'down to earth' and > in the present moment. > The position of your back must be upright to improve alertness. Perfectly upright! > If your legs are not enough elastic for a balanced half lotus you must shift > to 'easy posture', cross legged but not overimposing one leg. I used to be able to sit in full lotus with only minor pains, but you really need to keep it up consistently to get that. But half-lotus is like a second nature to me. It feels so natural. It funny, but it seems like my body was built to sit in meditation, even though my mind isn't so inclined. In terms of physical endurance, I can easily sit for half an hour (sat an hour once, with two minor breaks). > Use a cushion to sustain you back and incline you forward - your knees will > touch the floor and give you a good equilibrium and stability. Yup, do that too! > Meditation is a very refined art Anders and you cannot practice without a > solid inner attitude. > For example use the muscular and joints pain to keep you present to the > moment. But I don't have any pain in half lotus. I always sit in full lotus when I do "pain meditation", and once you direct your awareness to the pain there, it can be excrusiating! > Your mind doesn't wanders if you are conscious of pain - observe it and I > bet it will grab your attention. Yup!!! > But do not cling to mortification or a kind of challenge with yourself. Nah, don't do that either. > But you do have us if you trust our help. uhhhh........ :-) :-) :-) Seriously, I'd love it! > This is subject I can feel quite confident about mister viking. ;-) Hang on, while I consume poisinous mushrooms and prepare to raid the British Isles! > Let's say for my services I would request a vacation in Scandinavia guest of > your mum. Is she a good cooker? :-)))) Not the best to tell you the truth (she's okay). My stepmom is a better cook really. Anyway, I thought the Dhamma was free!!!!! :-) 7192 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:01am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 7:49 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Glad you liked my post :-) Am I the only one who thinks it strange that the > Theravada (or at least as it is represented here) and Mahayana view of > Nibbana could be so fundamentally different? >I see no difference whatsoever. I see only strategic pedagogy for differing accumulations. For some the "mind is luminous" and for others, there is only anatta. These are mere rafts; they can never convey direct knowledge of Nibbana, which is entirely beyond the scope of concepts like "mind" or "not mind" and of COURSE is NOT annihilation! My point! 7193 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:03am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 7:34 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders > Hi Anders Hello there, Cybele :-) > >Anyone got any advice? > > I would advise you to shift from the nostrils or upperlip to the abdominal > movement and be aware also of the sensation of body-contact with the cushion > or the floor. Thanks. > This should give you enough support to focus your attention. > However if you are experiencing any kind of visual phenomena (nimittas)it's > normal slipping in a kind of trance, that's why I use the Four Foundations > of Mindfulness rather than Anapanasati in my meditation. Nope, none of that kind. > Widening the field of my attention promotes the sense of being present > inside many realities without wandering, only shifting the attention on a > different subject. You should try non-dwelling then..... 7194 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:00am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 7:59 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > > Good gracious > > My eyes are whirling with all this consonants clashing together. > I bet that both of you can learn Pali after this stuff any language is 'a > piece of cake'.... :-) Bah, you should try and learn Chzeck. There's a language that likes to use consonants. > >Tusinde tak igen! Jeg er nok særlig indtrykt! Hvor kommer du fra? > >(Min mor, mor-mor og mor-far er aller fra Odense... og tilgive min > >forfærdelig Dansk--jeg har glemmt næsten all, og behøver > >mere > >anvende! ;) > > > >I think in Pali that might go something like "SADHU! SADHU! SADHU!" 7195 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana > > Erik > > I am really delighted! > I have been practicing Vipassana since my first contact with Theravada > Buddhism and for me it was a kind of revelation after years of Zen. What Zen did you fancy? My Zen was primarily the Chinese one from the T'ang dynasty. I never fancied koans much. 7196 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders Dear Anders Cy: > > Widening the field of my attention promotes the > sense of being present > > inside many realities without wandering, only > shifting the attention on a > > different subject. Anders: > You should try non-dwelling then..... > Preacher, I will call you the preacher from now on! ;-) Anders all the practcice if the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is BASED on noticing upadana - clinging - in order to don't get attached or reject any of the objects of meditation. Smack,smack Cybele 7197 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:57am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Cybele Chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 10:29 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders > Dear Anders > Anders: > > You should try non-dwelling then..... > > > > Preacher, I will call you the preacher from now on! > ;-) Yes! I'll that to my impressive resumé which includes: Keeper of the Sceptre of Us (ask at alt.philosophy.taoism), Keeper of Snakes, BWZ [Bastardized Western Zen] Messiah (from alt.philosophy.zen) and more. Can I get something extra added to that title to make it more fancy? This preacher thing seems to be a big deal to you, Cybele. :-) > Anders all the practice if the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness is BASED on noticing upadana - clinging - > in order to don't get attached or reject any of the > objects of meditation. > > Smack,smack I'm talking about no object of meditation at all! Have you read the Diamond Sutra? "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odours, tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has an abode, then it would be the non-abode." 7198 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:02am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders Sweetheart > > Anders, you have to describe realistically your practice and we could >help > > you if you are indeed interested in commiting on the practice. > >Daily practise or what? Non-dwelling, as taught in the Diamond Sutra. My >preferred meditation subjects (when sitting that is) are Metta and >non-dwelling. I shift between the two depending on my moods (plus, I've >found that in the past few weeks my desire to sit has increased again. It >really went down the around winter). What a cocktail Anders, you are a free spirit or you are a bit dispersive? Anyway if you want my support on Vipassana meditation exclusively I can be helpful. BUT I practice the Four Foundations of Mindfulness and do not add much more burden to it. > > > I have done so many retreats in my life that I finished to assist the > > teachers, translating dhamma-talks and being present at all personal > > interviews. > >You may have got a head start in years, but you know I'll beat you to the >finish line ;-) Honey, I am not in a Nibbana contest. The spirit of competition I leave to the scandinavians. I am Brazilian, I take it easy. :-))))) > > Then you have to rely on what the 'convents pass' so to speak. > > If you trust a Brazilian wild woman teaching you Vipassana here I am. > >uhhhh........... Don't you dare viking, do any comment and the sword of justice will fall on your head!!!! :-) >>> > > If your legs are not enough elastic for a balanced half lotus you must >shift to 'easy posture', cross legged but not overimposing one leg. >I used to be able to sit in full lotus with only minor pains, but you >really >need to keep it up consistently to get that. But half-lotus is like a >second >nature to me. It feels so natural. It funny, but it seems like my body was >built to sit in meditation, even though my mind isn't so inclined. In terms >of physical endurance, I can easily sit for half an hour (sat an hour once, >with two minor breaks). Sweeetieeee! So tender... Anders a body build to sit in meditation has a lot more to endure. In a retreat of intensive practice you keep going alternating sitting and walking meditation from dawn till late evening. A minumum duration of a sitting session is one hour followed by one hour walking. In the strict ones like in Burma I arrived to sit in one time 3 hours and half. And my body is really not built to sit in meditation, I am very tall and well built, large bones and buxom. Therefore come down to earth, don't start with your manic high flights of sotopanna. :-) > > > Meditation is a very refined art Anders and you cannot practice without >a > > solid inner attitude. >> > > Your mind doesn't wanders if you are conscious of pain - observe it and >I > > bet it will grab your attention. > >Yup!!! > > > But do not cling to mortification or a kind of challenge with yourself. > >Nah, don't do that either. > > > But you do have us if you trust our help. > >uhhhh........ :-) :-) :-) > >Seriously, I'd love it! Ok the deal is done. Great I can boss you around!!!! ;-);-);-) > > > This is subject I can feel quite confident about mister viking. ;-) > >Hang on, while I consume poisinous mushrooms and prepare to raid the >British >Isles! What is this stuff of 'poisonous myshrooms'? > > > Let's say for my services I would request a vacation in Scandinavia >guest of your mum. Is she a good cooker? :-)))) > >Not the best to tell you the truth (she's okay). My stepmom is a better >cook >really. Anyway, I thought the Dhamma was free!!!!! :-) What this is capitalism sweetheart, let's face reality as it is! However if you really fancy it, contact me off line and I give you the clues. FREEEEEE don't worry! I must accumulate merits for all my 'sins'. ;-))))) Love Cybele 7199 From: ppp Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Hi, Suan: So are you saying that if one just drop into a Burmese embassy and pays a certain amount of fee, one can get an English translation of the whole Tipitaka (and that, if one wish, one can get a Burmese version, too)? (I know that the Pali Tipitaka in the Burmese script is the most authoritative/most beatifully edited Tipitaka.) tadao 7200 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:14am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders Hello >>This preacher thing seems to be a big deal to you, Cybele. :-) I don't get along well with 'peremptory or authoritative tones', is well known. Past accumulations sweetheart. Remember I was born on the continent of the revolutionary Che Guevara. I had red flags with his image all over the place when I was your age. 'No paseran!' > > > Anders all the practice if the Four Foundations of > > Mindfulness is BASED on noticing upadana - clinging - > > in order to don't get attached or reject any of the > > objects of meditation. > > > > Smack,smack > >I'm talking about no object of meditation at all! Have you read the Diamond >Sutra? Anders I have read the Diamomd Sutra but my practice is Theravada, Satipatthana Sutta based, Vipassana - Insight Meditation. But have you read the text I forwarded? I am not all over the place, I concentrate in one practice even being ecletic. Love Cybele > >"This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when >engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in >forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odours, >tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He >should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has >an abode, then it would be the non-abode." > > 7201 From: ppp Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 10:15pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Suan (and Anders): Thank you very much for more information on the Burmese Tipitaka, and the Web site on Burmese embassies. Historically, Burma and Burmese have contributed greately on the enrichment of the Pali literature (e.g., Saddhaniti, one of the greatest Pali grammarians, who lived in 12th century A.D.). (In my Bangkok era, there was only one temple in whole Thailand, where we (late Ven. Dhmmadara and I) could learn the Pali language in the traditional Panini method. And this temple was run by a well learned Burmese maha-thera.) tadao 7202 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:00am Subject: Fw: The Dana Thing The following links are excellent concerning "dana": http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/economy.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel367.html May they be helpful. Bhante D. 7203 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 6:19am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 11:14 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana - Anders > > Hello > > >>This preacher thing seems to be a big deal to you, Cybele. :-) > > I don't get along well with 'peremptory or authoritative tones', is well > known. Past accumulations sweetheart. > Remember I was born on the continent of the revolutionary Che Guevara. > I had red flags with his image all over the place when I was your age. > 'No paseran!' Destroy the capitalist plague! > >I'm talking about no object of meditation at all! Have you read the Diamond > >Sutra? > > Anders I have read the Diamomd Sutra but my practice is Theravada, > Satipatthana Sutta based, Vipassana - Insight Meditation. Aha! So you admit that you smacked me unjustly! And where does a slave get off with that anyway? > But have you read the text I forwarded? > I am not all over the place, I concentrate in one practice even being > ecletic. Well...... 7204 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 6:25am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 11:02 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders > What a cocktail Anders, you are a free spirit or you are a bit dispersive? What's wrong with that? > Anyway if you want my support on Vipassana meditation exclusively I can be > helpful. > BUT I practice the Four Foundations of Mindfulness and do not add much more > burden to it. Isn't Satipatthana a mixture of Samatha and Vipassana? > >You may have got a head start in years, but you know I'll beat you to the > >finish line ;-) > > Honey, I am not in a Nibbana contest. > The spirit of competition I leave to the scandinavians. > I am Brazilian, I take it easy. :-))))) Damn. You gotta set your standards higher, Cybele. > > > Then you have to rely on what the 'convents pass' so to speak. > > > If you trust a Brazilian wild woman teaching you Vipassana here I am. > > > >uhhhh........... > > Don't you dare viking, do any comment and the sword of justice will fall on > your head!!!! :-) Oh well... > Sweeetieeee! So tender... > Anders a body build to sit in meditation has a lot more to endure. And I thought my body was already done for! Phew! > In a retreat of intensive practice you keep going alternating sitting and > walking meditation from dawn till late evening. > A minumum duration of a sitting session is one hour followed by one hour > walking. Yikes! You have to remember I've never attended anything of that kind. > In the strict ones like in Burma I arrived to sit in one time 3 hours and > half. Wow, that's almost up to Japanese Zen standards. > And my body is really not built to sit in meditation, I am very tall and > well built, large bones and buxom. > Therefore come down to earth, don't start with your manic high flights of > sotopanna. :-) Ever heard about the Danish "jante-law", Cybele? > Ok the deal is done. > Great I can boss you around!!!! ;-);-);-) Hey, wait a minute! You are supposed to be *my* slave, not the other way around! > > > This is subject I can feel quite confident about mister viking. ;-) > > > >Hang on, while I consume poisinous mushrooms and prepare to raid the > >British > >Isles! > > What is this stuff of 'poisonous myshrooms'? If I knew, I'd be mixing it in my basement :-) > >Not the best to tell you the truth (she's okay). My stepmom is a better > >cook > >really. Anyway, I thought the Dhamma was free!!!!! :-) > > What this is capitalism sweetheart, let's face reality as it is! > However if you really fancy it, contact me off line and I give you the > clues. FREEEEEE don't worry! > I must accumulate merits for all my 'sins'. ;-))))) Offline? Like in person, or the phone? 7205 From: ppp Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 10:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidharma, Translation, Etc. Hi, Erick: The following is my responce to your earlier message on your project plan. So you have to learn Thai, Pali, Sanskrit, and Tibetan. As for Tibetan, all I know is that its sript must be the most beautiful one among all the scripts used in the langauges in the world. (One of courses I have been developing is "the writing systems of the world".) As for its grammar, besides the huge descripancy between the written form and spoken form (which is due to a historical reason), the affixation seems to be most difficult aspect of its grammar to master. Since you are in Thailand, you should not have any problem in picking up Thai. Thai is a so-called "isolating langaug"e (= no derviational/ inflectional morphemes involved), so it may be better for you to have a good teacher. Besides phonogical peculiarities (such as tone sandhi), Thai has "strange ways" of saying things due to the facts that it's a "pro-drop" language (where Subject, Object, etc. can easily be dropped) and that sentences often employ so-called "serial verb construction" (where, a series of verbs can, for insance, share the same object lisenced by these verbs). So, in Thai, for instance, the following sentence, which consists of a series of mere verbs, is perfectly grammatical: "go buy take come distribute give eat" (= to go and by (something) and bring (it) back and pass (it) out to eat). Again my suggestion is find a good teacher. Once you do so, you should start feeling comfortable with the language after two months or so. With respect to Sanskrit and Pali, I think, it's up to you to choose which language to be learned first. It's nice to have an instructor but you can easlity pick up these langauges without them. If you are going to study Pali, you may use A.K Warder's grammar book but, I suggest, you ignore all the excersises. Once you are able to read Pali texts of "your own choice" (in a-passage-from-here- and-another-from-there manner) slowly, and would like to learn more about the grammar, please visit the Mahamakkutt Bookstore, and ask for the "Pali Grammar (book) in the Higher Level (pali vanakoon chan suun). The book (consisting of several volumes) are excellent in the sense that it lists numerous peculiar grammatical forms whose explantions you cannot find any other grammar books. If you are interested in reading older Pali texts, such as Sutta-nipaata, then, pick up Giger's book: Pali Literature and Language. The point I would like to make is that Pali is not a difficult language to study. If you do not have any teacher and would like to pick up Sanskrit (as quickly and as painlessly as possible), please use the following text: Coulson Michael. (1992) Sanskrit: An Introduction to the Classical Langague. Illinois: NTC/Contemporary Publishing. I highly recommend this book because of its emphasis on developing the reader's reading skill and not on forcing him to mermorize various rules. (Another Sanskrit grammar book whose revised edition becomes avilable quite soon from the University of Hawaii Press has also a good reputation.) The point is that if you study Coulson's book very diligently, doing all the excercises on Sanskrit-English translation, you shoud be able to understand how the langauge works and how it differs from Pali in two or so months. These are my advice. Good luck, tadao 7206 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 10:03am Subject: Leaving Dear group >I just wish to communicate that I am leaving to Italy early morning and >during my stay, my participation will be very sporadic as internet cafes >are not so popular there and the few ones are a bit costly. >If I get the chance to check my mail in the house of some friend internet >equipped I will send greetings, otherwise everybody is going to enjoy >Cybele-vacations for a while. >Please avoid crying and sentimental scenes, a bit of composure please, >detachment, no clinging... ;-)) > >Actually I am going to miss all of you. >During my long recover participating in the lists helped me to feel >grounded and I developed a genuine friendship with some of you off list >that is most fulfilling and the only family I have. > >Well 'arrivederci' and best wishes for all of my dhamma friends. > >To make a prairie it takes >a clover and one bee, >One clover, and a bee, >And revery. >The revery alone will do, >If bees are few. > >Emily Dickinson > >Love > >Cybele > 7207 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 10:31am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders > > Honey, I am not in a Nibbana contest. > > The spirit of competition I leave to the scandinavians. > > I am Brazilian, I take it easy. :-))))) > >Damn. You gotta set your standards higher, Cybele. You impertinent brat! ;-) > > > >Not the best to tell you the truth (she's okay). My stepmom is a better > > >cook > > >really. Anyway, I thought the Dhamma was free!!!!! :-) > > > > What this is capitalism sweetheart, let's face reality as it is! > > However if you really fancy it, contact me off line and I give you the > > clues. FREEEEEE don't worry! > > I must accumulate merits for all my 'sins'. ;-))))) > >Offline? Like in person, or the phone? Oh, my! OFF LIST!!!!! Terrible Danish plague, you are my kammic punishment; I have to raise up this clever brat... :-)))) Cybele 7208 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 11:09am Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > What is this stuff of 'poisonous mushrooms? > > If I knew, I'd be mixing it in my basement :-) This so-called "poisonous mushroom" you are referring to is known by the clinical name "Amanita muscaria," or more commonly, the "fly agaric." It is the fairy-tale-like toadstool with a large red cap and white spots. This mushroom was consumed by Vikings before going on raids, because its active ingredients, muscarine and muscimol, condition tremorous excitement and agitation and fearlessness, which is the reason Vikings were called "Bezerkers"--due to the effects of these mushrooms. http://www.erowid.org/plants/amanitas/amanitas_muscaria_muscaria.shtml R. Gordon Wasson, a Wall St. investment banker and amateur mycologist, actually went so far as to claim that this very mushroom was the so-called "Soma" drug described in the Indian Somaveda (one of the four Vedas) that inspired the Indian sages to such heights of ecstasy. http://www.herbaria.harvard.edu/Libraries/wasson.html Given the effects of the drugs muscarine and muscimol, I found his HIGHLY doubtful, however, and I think he really stretched the idea to fit a questionable thesis. However, R. Gordon Wasson was the consummate explorer, and without his curiosity and tenacity, it is likely we would have had to wait quite some time longer before discovering the magical properties of the mushrooms of the Psilocybe family. For that matter, it is quite possible the sixties as we know them would have never occurred, and the Dharma as we know it may never have grown the way it has in the West (because let's call a spade a spade here: there are MANY who entered the Dharma gate in this lifetime through the use of psychedelic drugs; and to ignore this fact is to play the proverbial ostrich with his head buried in the ground). It was Gordon Wasson who first traveled to Mexico to meet the "curandera" Maria Sabina, a Mazateca shamaness who used Psilocybin mushrooms as part of her healing practice, as well as tools to aid in divination, etc. http://www.erowid.org/plants/mushrooms/mushrooms_spirit.shtml http://spiritplants.yack.org/articles/wasson.html So it was due to Wasson's explorations that the West came to know about the properties of psilocybin, with (if my recollection is right) the help of the renowned Harvard ethnobotanist, Richard Evans Schultes (also the consummate explorer and adventurer, without whom we may have had to wait quite some time to rediscover the properties of another naturally occurring neurochemical present in our own brains as well as a POWERFUL psychedelic, which is known by the name Dimethyltryptamine, or DMT, but I digress). It was Psilocybin, the active drug in the Psilocybe family of mushrooms, that was used in Harvard's "Good Friday" experiment, in which several Harvard divinity students were given the drug psilocybin at Marsh Chapel: http://www.erowid.org/plants/mushrooms/mushrooms_journal2.shtml It was this drug, psilocybin, that caught the attention of a Harvard psychologist at that time, a certain Timothy Leary, such that he felt some compulsion to give it a try. He had such an illuminating experience with psilocybin, that it led to, well, there are probably few here unfamiliar with the infamous (and wrongly maligned) Timothy Leary, which led him further to investigate a certain drug--a rye ergot derivative--which had been synthesized by a Swiss chemist by the name of Albert Hoffmann in 1943, which was known by the name of Lysergic acid diethylamide-25 (LSD). Following the chain of cause-and-effect, things, um, mushroomed from there, and there's no need to go forther to describe what everyone is quite familair with (leading Richard Milhouse Nixon to declare Timothy Leary the "most dangerous man in America"). Bring the setting to 1981, suburban Connecticut, and a sixteen-year- old Mormon boy, who before doing anything, had read nearly every book in his high-school's library on psychology and psychopharmacology, who was at that time experimenting with this marvelous and extremely hard-to-find chemical, LSD. In his mind's eye he saw what appeared to be a Buddhist monk meditating in what appeared to be a place that resembled someplace tropical, with stone carvings of Buddhas, etc. For some reason he sat spontaneously in lotus-posture and saw in his mind's eye the Buddha in meditative equipoise, and meditated on that, and furthermore, in this state gained a very strong (and familiar) taste of what he would later come to discover in his non-drug meditative experiences to be associated with "tathata," or "suchness." Further explorations with this same chemical seemed to provoke similar "familiar" tastes, sounds, sights, smells--things associated only with Indian or Asian culture, which he had never had any experience of at that point, which he found so intriguing he could not help but begin destroying all the beliefs he had been taught to accept as Gospel. Fast-forward to 1996, Entheobotany conference at San Francisco, where this now thirty-one-year-old attended several lectures, one by the Nobel Prize-winning chemist Kary Mullis, who described how it was in an LSD vision that he came to see the entire protease-chain-reaction process unfold, and how without LSD his Nobel Prize-winning discovery would have never occurred. The reason I mention this at all, for the record, is that without the discovery of the protease chain-reaction, my dear and only sister would be dead right now, and would have never had the incredible opportunity to hear the Holy Dharma as taught by the Dalai Lama in this lifetime a just few months ago. There, this conference attendee also had the incredible fortune of meeting the Bodhisattva and Berkeley pharmacologist known by the name of Alexander Shulgin (and even got an autographed copy of "PHIKAL"-- "Phenethylamines I Have Known and Loved" from him). Dr. Shulgin is known in some circles as the "Godfather" of MDMA, since it was his willingness to literally risk his life to explore the phenethylamine (and tryptamine) family of drugs using the incredible technique of "auto-assay"--which involved taking newly-synthesized compounds and trying them out on his own set of khandas (with the help of some friends, who were also intrepid explorers). http://www.abc.net.au/quantum/poison/ecstasy/alexander.htm Thee is much, much more to this story, but will stop here, as there are parts that are not appropriate to share publicly. Anyway, I can say with certainty that without these drugs, I would not be here, where I am, right now, doing what I'm doing--a student of the Buddhas' Dharma. And there are MANY I know who can say exactly the same (reading this very forum), who may not have the courage or willingness at present to speak up on this issue. 7209 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 11:15am Subject: Re: Abhidharma, Translation, Etc. --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Erick: Tadao, thank you for your most informative reply. Can you tell me, based on your knowledge, if learning Thai will help me out some with the Tibetan? I suspect from picking up a few words of Thai it will, since I find it's forcing these conditioned neurons into a different way of linguistic processing that feels more similar to the Tibetan structure. As far as I understand, they are the same family of languages. Or am I wrong on this? Anyway, your thoughts on would be most appreciated. 7210 From: ppp Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidharma, Translation, Etc. Hi, Erick: You asked me a wrong question. Now I have to explain language families in the South-East Asia and as you know, Sarah and Jonothan do not like us to discuss topics other than the Dhamma. However, I cannot resist, so here it is. In general, historical linguists post either four or five language families in the South-East Asian region. Probaly, (one of the) oldest family is called "Austronesian" whose original speakers lived in the southern China which now we call Fijian(?speeling?) around 5000 BC. They crossed the strate(?spelling?) and migrated to Taiwan and lived there for about 1000 years. From there most of them headed to Philipine islands, Boruneo, Indonesia, and some of them even went to Madagacaru near the east African coast. The other group headed east, skimming the norther shore of Papua New Ginia (whose residents moved to the island much much earlier (i.e. 60,000 years ago); they are closely related with Austoralian aborigional people) and spred into South Pacific region (including New Zealand, Eater islands, and Hawaii). The emigration of these people in the South Pacific region only took for the last 1500-1000 years. You can regard Indonesian as a proto typical language of this family: relatively simple sound system (most of Austronesian languages employ either four or five vowel system), with some complexity involving verb phrase construciton. The second oldest language family in the region is so-called "Mon-Khumer Languga Faimily" (which includes such major languages as Mon, Cambodian, and Vietnames). Khmer people occupied the current Cambodian region no later than the turn of the Christian era (as documented in a Chinese record). Meanwhile, Mon people used to live in the region which we call "Burma". Mon people were highly educated people and they practiced the Theravada Buddhism. They were eventually conqured by the Burmese people who decended from the Tibetan plateau roughly around A.D. 1000. These conqurers were in fact educated by the Mon people who lost their country ever since. Mon and Khmer languages used to be so-called register languages, which make use of differnt phonetion types (i.e. regular/modal voice and breathy voice distinction). (I do not want to get into details, but in Khmer, the disappearance of this voice distinction caused the doubling of the nubmer of the vowels. That is, they ued to have only 15 or so vowels, but now they have at least 30 vowels depending on diarectal differences. Khmer is noted for the extensive use of "infixing", which we do not have in English (other than such a rare case of "ALA @#$%-ing BAMA"). (Philippine languages, such as Tagalog, are also noted for extensive use of infixation). The next languag family is so-called "Thai-Kadai" (I will not explain the etymology of the term here) but Thai and many minor languages which can be found in the sourthen China region are closely related. The Thai people used to live southern China, having a very powerful nation called Nanchao. Their capital was well protected and also on commercail routes. Chinese tried to conqure this nation many many times, but they never succeeded. It was Gingis Hun's(?spelling?) armies which explled the Thai from Nanchao. Thai and Chinese sound very similar and also structually look similar. However, if some people say that Thai and Chinese are histroically related, it is not an accurate statement. Lastly, Burmese and Tibetan are histroically related, forming so-called "Tibeto-Burman Language Family". This family, in turn, has a much larger family which we call "Sino-Tibetan Languge Family". The current Tibetan and current so-called Chinese sound/look very differnt. However, proto-Tibetan and proto-Chinese are said to be closely related. As you know that Tibet used to be a huge empire, so the Tibetan lanauge reflect various dialectual differences. But as far the most prestigous Lhasa direct is concerned, the orginal tonality has become quite impoverished. From a syntactic view point, due possibly to the close contact with Indic languges, they developed case marking. And as I mentioned previously, affixation for the tense/aspectual system seems to be quite complex. Please understand that I've talked about the "history of the language families" in South East Asia regions, which somehow exclude a much much earlier history of the region. (Historical linguistics has its limit in tracing linguistic relations. Now, I will answer your question. I do not think that learning Thai will directly help you learning Tibetan. They belong to (totally) different language family. But, then, why are you afraid of learning Thai? Languge is not something to memorize but to analyze. You need not memorize all the words, but you have to understand how a given language works. It won't take more than two full months to undersand the structure of any language. Instead of trying to learn/aquire, just approach Thai in a logical/intelligent manner, and see how Thais say things. Gook luck, tadao (It's your responsibility to applogize Sarah and Jonothan, since you initiated me to talk about something which is not Dhamma.) 7211 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 2:21pm Subject: List Guidelines Dear All The list Guidelines have just undergone one of their periodic up-dates. Please check the exciting new features at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DhammaStudyGroup%20Guidelines.htm Anders and Cybele, please see our note to you off-list. Thanks. Our thanks to you all for your continued support for the list. Jon & Sarah 7212 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:36pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 4:31 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders > >Offline? Like in person, or the phone? > > Oh, my! OFF LIST!!!!! > Terrible Danish plague, you are my kammic punishment; I have to raise up > this clever brat... :-)))) Sure, catch you on the flip-side of your Italy trip. 7213 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 4:38pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 5:09 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana- Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > What is this stuff of 'poisonous mushrooms? > > If I knew, I'd be mixing it in my basement :-) >This so-called "poisonous mushroom" you are referring to is known by the clinical name "Amanita muscaria," or more commonly, the "fly agaric." It is the fairy-tale-like toadstool with a large red cap and white spots. Hey, those are actually quite common here. 7214 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Mike An interesting passage. Any idea what the reference to 'making a wish' might be referring to? I haven't quite figured this one out yet. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > 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 > 7215 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > 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 pañña are the > same thing, I think you're conflating the eight limbs to point where > it becomes a "Noble 1-fold Path." I'm not sure what I said that leads you to think this, Derek. There is of course no '1-fold path'. Panna is one of 5 (or 8) factors that arises at each mundane (or supramundane) path-moment > 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. I've not had a chance to look at the sutta yet. But I am aware that the factors are sometimes given in the manner you have described. This is done to show their interdependence, I believe. I did not mean to suggest that panna was a substitute for everything else. But when panna of the level of satipatthana arises (ie. mundane path moment), the other 4 path-factors arise together with that moment of consciousness. Jon 7216 From: Anders Honoré Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > Mike > > An interesting passage. Any idea what the reference to 'making a wish' > might be referring to? I haven't quite figured this one out yet. My guess would be that as long as you follow the path of practise, it is irrelevant if you have desire (or are wishing) for liberation and Nibbana. 7217 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Rob E Thanks for these thoughts and comments. It is a perplexing area. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > 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. Surprising, perhaps. But self-contradictory I don't see. The important question is not what the intrinsic nature of nibbana is, but whether it has an intrinsic nature capable of being experienced by citta. Don't forget that citta can experience objects that are not of the present life or plane of existence (jhana cittas, even bhavanga cittas which arise for all of us). The citta that experiences nibana is a supramundane citta, ie a citta of a plane other than this sensuous plane. > It would need an unconditioned, transcendent consciousness to grasp an > object or > state with a totally transcendent characteristic. This may be how it seems it should be, to our way of thinking. But what do we know about such matters? 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. I'm sure this won't have had that effect, but I hope it might provide some food for further thought. Jon 7218 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 5:48pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Rob E Sorry to take so long to get back to you on this. --- 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 Agreed. Neither is wholesome, and realising this can be a condition for us not to react that way sometimes. But the fact is, we do continue to react like that way, because we have the strongly accumulated tendency (anusaya) to do so. > 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 I see dealing with akusala and developing the path as 2 separate things. When I am thinking about dealing with my akusala, I am in strong 'self' and 'conventional world' mode. I would like to be without that akusala or at least some of it. My motives may be 'good' ones (consideration of others etc), but my thinking is basically self-centered. The development of the path, as I understand it, is the study of a reality appearing at the present moment, with awareness. If that reality is an unwholesome moment of consciousness, that would not preclude it being the object of study or awareness. All realities are to be known. This is made clear in the Satipatthana Sutta, where the 5 Hindrances are specifically mentioned as among the mind objects to be known. So to sumarise, working with my akusala (sexual or otherwise) does not as such come into the picture, in terms of the development of the path. I don't know if I have managed to explain this. Jon 7219 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 8:32pm Subject: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Jon, I haven't been able to determine it from your posts, so I'll ask straight out. Is any of your kusala sexual in nature? I don't necessarily restrict the question to you, but generally speaking. It is good to have you back after your absence. Herman --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > Sorry to take so long to get back to you on this. > > > So to sumarise, working with my akusala (sexual or otherwise) does not as > such come into the picture, in terms of the development of the path. I > don't know if I have managed to explain this. > > Jon > > 7220 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: List Guidelines Sarah, Either you have a wicked sense of humour, or the internet gods are playing havoc with the link you posted. Either way, I'm sure it will come good. And I have missed your ever skillful pointers to the here and now. Herman --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Dear All > > The list Guidelines have just undergone one of their > periodic up-dates. Please check the exciting new > features at: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DhammaStudyGroup 20Guidelines.htm > 7221 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 8:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: List Guidelines Dear Herman, The link in our message works fine for me in our original message, but not in yours. As an alternative, try this one which is shorter in 'files', and go to Guidelines. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Thanks for setting a good example, Herman. Sarah p.s. Kom, could you check this out? Maybe a shorter link? Thanks Kom and Rob for your help and advice. --- Herman wrote: > Sarah, > > Either you have a wicked sense of humour, or the internet gods are > playing havoc with the link you posted. Either way, I'm sure it will > come good. And I have missed your ever skillful pointers to the here > and now. > > Herman 7222 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 9:55pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:32 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > >Thank you for explaining the (not yours) view point. Why do we say the > tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't= > exist? > > Nibbana? So, you are saying that you think we understand that the only thing that exists in Nibbana, and not all the kandhas? kom 7223 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 11:50pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Anders Honore How are you? You asked: "Do you know how much time was spent translating from Pali to Burmese?" I haven't thought about it, so I have no idea. But, I guess that they must have been tanslated in the early sixties (when Chatthasangiti took place). Sorry about my guess work. With regards Suan --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 5:58 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try > Myanmar Embassy > > Dear Tadao > > > > How are you? > > > > The translations in my message refer to those in English. > > So, Anders would not need to worry about learning Pali or Burmese. > > > > Having said that, the Chatthasangiti Tipitaka Burmese Translations > > do exist. And these translations are also the results of collective > > literary minds. They are as terse and clear-cut as the original Pali. > > Do you know how much time was spent translating from Pali to Burmese? 7224 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 0:07am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Cybele How are you? You asked: "Why, do you reckon that only Burmese language can be 'kind'?" I have no idea. I have never reckoned it. I thought it was your reckoning. I thought you have been in the context provided by Tadao. Without realising your change of context, I must have misread your message in my drowsiness. Tonight is also no difference, either. It is now after 2 AM in Canberra. I am very sleepy. Apology if my response puzzeled you and gave the wrong impression. I will be careful in future. With regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > Dear Suan > > > > >Dear Cybele > > > >How are you? > > > >Thank you for your generous description of Burmese language. > > > Why, do you reckon that only Burmese language can be 'kind'? > Loving kindness is a universal language and can fits any ethnology, grammar > and phonetics - no discrimination. > > Actually I have been in Burma and for the sake of truth, they are gentle > people, obviously I exclude the government from my remark. > > Regards > Metta > > Cybele > 7225 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 0:26am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Tadao How are you? You wrote: "So are you saying that if one just drop into a Burmese embassy and pays a certain amount of fee, one can get an English translation of the whole Tipitaka..." Not so fast, Tadao! I don't know the form of help a Myanmar embassy could give you. But, they would certainly help you becase those translations are sponsored by the Myanmar government. You have to find out and see what happens. I am also not sure that English translation of the whole Tipitaka has been completed. You also wrote: "(and that, if one wish, one can get a Burmese version, too)?" Chatthasangiti Tipitaka Myanmar translation is now available both as books and on CD-ROMS. You also wrote: "(I know that the Pali Tipitaka in the Burmese script is the most authoritative/most beatifully edited Tipitaka.)" I couldn't agree more in this regard. As this Pali Tipitaka is Chatthasangiti edition, I like this version best as you would expect. With regards Suan --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Suan: > So are you saying that if one just drop into a Burmese embassy and > pays a certain amount of fee, one can get an English translation of > the whole Tipitaka (and that, if one wish, one can get a > Burmese version, too)? (I know that the Pali Tipitaka in the > Burmese script is the most authoritative/most beatifully edited > Tipitaka.) tadao 7226 From: ppp Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 10:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Hi, Suan: So do you have a whole set of the (hard, pale-yellow, cover) of the Pali Tipitaka in the Burmese script? Lucky you. tadao 7227 From: <> Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 6:46am Subject: Drugs I think drug use taught me a lot about Buddhism without me knowing itat the time. Through drug use I learned that any experience is onlythat - an experience - and only exists as a memory afterwards, and ifit was pleasant: something to long for. After awhile on psychadelicsI began to use 'numbing' drugs, which basically quenched out thedesire for the psychadelics (for a time). But, even this I began tosee as futile because eventually they would wear off. So, this led meto conclude that a true, lasting happiness (void of longing) is whatis to be sought after, and this is exactly what Buddha taught. While on the drugs I learned nothing, but after I reflected on what had happend, then I learned things. One time, I went outside and was sure I finally understood God. It was an amazing feeling, but after I 'came down', it was really quite laughable. This also taught me that an impermanent insight is no insight at all. Of course, I wouldn't recommend drugs. Better to have a real,Buddhist teacher. Because of my actions, I may be senile by age 40. In Dhamma 7228 From: ppp Date: Mon Aug 6, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drugs Hi, o0ss1234: You are a wise person, who can refrain from clinging to (any) unsual experiences. tadao 7229 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 10:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Erik I know you're busting for a full-scale debate on this, but there may be a problem. --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah > Ma drup! (is not established!). Meaning, the question's invalid, > given the original challenge was to provide the citation from the > Suttas for the statement that "meditation on the breath is too > difficult for all but the rarest of disciples," which I reject in > this debate as NOT being established as what the Buddha actually said > anyplace in the Suttas. > > In other words, if you make the claim, you have to back it with > either air-tight reasoning OR cite the direct words of the Buddha (or > accepted references ALL participants agree are correct Dharma, which > by implication would all be "word of the Buddha" if there is such > agreement). Before this debate gets too wound up, could we have the source of the statement that "meditation on the breath is too difficult for all but the rrest of disciples", please. I don't recall this being said on this list. I do recall some statements about breath as object of samatha development, but the context of your discussion is, I believe, vipassana (judging by the subject-heading). Let's get the alleged statement identified first. Jon 7230 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 10:27am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Anders Just a question here to clarify, please. --- Anders Honoré wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:33 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > > > > Hi, Anders - > > > That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my > body > > > calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath > because > > > of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes > extremely > faint > > > after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and > hence > my > > > attention wanders. > > > > > > Anyone got any advice? > > ============================== > > The fact that the breath becomes faint and subtle *is* a > problem, > but > > also a great opportunity. As the breath sensation fades, there must be > a > > corresponding strengthening of energy, mindfulness, and concentration > > (directed by will) in order to "stay in touch", and this will take the > mind > > to a deeper and stronger levels. This becomes easier to carry out the > longer > > and more consistently one practices. > > Wow, thanks a lot. Just that change of perspective is something I find > quite > illuminating. When you talk about meditation on breath, do you mean breath as object of the development of samatha or of vipassana? ('Meditation' is such a vague term, don't you find?) Jon 7231 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 0:13pm Subject: Drugs and the Dharma --- <> wrote: > I think drug use taught me a lot about Buddhism without me knowing itat the time. Through drug use I learned that any experience is onlythat - an experience Thank you for this important reminder! I have to say that was also one of the most incredible lessons I learned from them. Like you, I had many profound, mind-opening experiences. One in particular, with psilcocybin and harmaline (inspired by Terence McKenna's "Experiment at La Chorerra"), that was, well, the greatest bliss I'd ever imagined possible a human could stand to experience at that time (psilocybin has the ability to open the "nadis" in a very big way and provoke Kundalini). I recall days of joyous elation in the afterglow of this discovery, on par with what I believe many Kundalini yogis have written of in the past. The thought passed my mind at the time to burn all my books on spirituality I'd ever read up to that point (I didn't, but the thought nonetheless occurred), even my Zen books. ESPECIALLY my Zen books. The power of that experience made everything I'd read and studied in Buddhism seem so boring by comparison. But within just a week or two, KEEERAAASH!!! All that bliss, *poof*, gone! In fact, not just gone, but I was left with a deep aching depression and enormous bwilderment at how something so far beyond any previous conscious experience--something so powerful--could just evaporate, and not only that, leave me feeling even MORE depressed than I had been feeling before this illuminating experience! Nevertheless, I also learned that the Hindu tantric yogis of the past had not lied about what is possible with the human body, which lead me to seek out my Guru in Kundalini yoga at the time, Ravi Singh, a very kind gentleman I greatly admire, to teach me Kunadlini yoga--so I could learn to recreate these bliss states without the help of drugs. I wanted to be able to sustain that bliss permenently. In fact, the power of this experience led me to strongly question Buddhism, because up to then I'd practiced Zen, but nothing from my consideration and (admittedly very poor) practice had brought me anything like a result I was seeking, and by comparison the Buddha's Dharma all of a sudden seemed so barren to me compared to this exalting-feeling bliss. Within one day of learning Kundalini yoga there were immediate results! GREAT, I remember thinking! Of course I was still experimenting with psychedlics. At around this time, I recall wanting to try the most powerful psychedelic of all, ahayuasca--a magical potion (which consists of the drugs DMT and harmaline) Amazonian shamans have taken for some millennia to leave the body and see into the past and future. This experience with ayahuasca nearly killed me. Not because of the drugs themselves, which are physiologically rather benign (DMT--the most psychoactively potent psychedelic drug known to man--is, after all, a native neurotransmitter all humans possess in some quantitiy in the brain). This experience nearly killed me because within a few minutes of ingenstion I was knocked out of my body and straight into the hell- realms, which up to that point I had believed were mere fanciful tales used to scare us into being good. As I came to see, they are fabrications like all conditioned eralities, but like fabrications certainly "real enough" in the way our world experiened through the fiev sense-doors is "real enough"! I was in so much terror for so long (the drug effects last three to four human hours, but the boundaries of what we condsider time are destroyed in this state so a single human second can often pass as an aeon), and after what seemed like eternity after eternity of thinking I (there was no recollection of a "me" per se, only unspeakable suffering) would completely lose my mind, where all reality had been shattered so thoroughly, when I briefly became conscious there was still a sentient being lying on a couch, I thought that body was surely going to die from sheer, unabated, horrifying terror so heavy no descriptions can do it justice. It was only by taking refuge when I was able to regain the tiniest bit of awareness of my "self," those rare moments not being attacked and torn to shreds over and over again by ferocious demons, that I believe was what preserved this body so that it is alive today. The terror didn't end completely there after the ayahuasca wore off, and for months afterward there were moments of panic that would arise at the thought of my mind dissolving back into this state of uncontrolled terror even during regular waking consciousness, such that I lived in almost daily fear that if I might very well lose my mind. Talk about a lesson! This made me see the complete and utter futility of, as you noted, chasing after "experiences." This pair of experiences had the effect of bringing me STRAIGHT back to the Buddha's Dharma, beacuse the Buddha says very clearly that the lives of even the devas are not to be sought after, because like clockwork, they inevitable lead to further rounds on the wheel of rebirth. One can have the great bliss in one lifetime followed immediately by the sufferings and torments of the hell-realms for as long as one remains bound to the wheel of samsara. So again, it was this pair of experiences that led me to once again return squarely to the pursuit and development of the Buddha's Noble Eightfold Path, the ONLY way, I had come to believe--after all my studies and testing and experimenting--that would lead to the final cessation of this round of suffering--both so-called "pleasurable" (because even pleasure is suffering, ultimately) and painful. And yet, these experiences also indicated that what the tantric yogis taught about the physiology of the body are VERY real, that this fathom-long body has within it the hells and the heavens, and that its physiological structure as elaborated in tantric texts ARE correct. There seemed only one natural place for me to go at this point, given these expriences; a system combining both the understanding of this physiological reality of the human body AND the Buddha's message on permanently terminating the rounds of rebirth through seeing through the instubstatiality and mere appearances of things, which is, of course, the system labelled Buddhist tantra. Because the Buddhist tantrikas had figured out a way to take advantage of these physiological structural realities of the human body disovered by all tantrikas, in such a way one could skillfully harness the the understanding of these physiological realities to permanently terminate the wheel of suffering we know as samsara. The rest, as they say, is history, and this lead me, though a number of very auspicious and fortuitous curcumstances to my present (unbeleivably kind) teachers and teaching lineage--where we didn't begin studying all this esoteric tantric stuff, but rather, began at the beginning, with the simple stuff, the most basic stages of the path: 1) renunciation--giving up on this life by recognizing the preciousness of this human rebirth and the sufferings of cyclic existence; 2) Bodhicittia--cultivating lovingkindness toward all beings who have been our mothers; and 3) Right View--seeing things as they truly are: that the infallible law of karma NEVER fails; that all conditioned things are suffering; that all conditioned things are impermanent; that ALL realities are empty of intrisic self-nature; and that all things arise in dependence on conditions! CORE Buddha-dhamma, in other words! And this so thrilled me, made so plain what had been previously unclear, that I finally came to clearly understandand that THIS IS IT! I was hooked! After years of missteps, diversions, wrong paths, came to agree intellectually, at least, that the teachings of the Buddha were dead-on! And I could have never have come to this undersatnding without these "experiences." Just like you! Further study into these essential teachings of the Buddha began to reveal more and more of how reality both does and does not exist-- particularly due to the study of the last element of the threefold path I was trained in (Lam Rim), Right View. Such that by paying careful attention to my teachers, who I had come to have faith were teaching Right View; by careful analytical meditation and reflection on their teachings of how all things are empty of self-nature and depend on conditions for their arising; by asking question after question of them to help clarify and refine my understanding, never giving up on asking the tough questions, probing relentlessly (in keeping with my teachers' instructions on how to test the Dharma as if one tests gold to discern what is gold from what is fool's gold: burning, cutting, grinding, over and over again, refining and purifying, until only what is pure gold remains); and by diligently putting into practice their instructions on applied meditation, meaning: sitting consistently every day without fail-- following the breath in the way Lord Buddha taught in the Satipatthana Sutta--that knowledge arise, vision arose, insight arose, to the degree that what had once been unclear became perfectly clear; what had once been in doubt ceased to be a matter of doubt. That the correctness and essence of Lord Buddha's Holy Dharma became as clear and real as cool light of the full moon in a cloudless winter sky to these five khandas: that THERE IS CERTAIN DELIVERANCE from the rounds of suffering and rebirth! That the Law karma NEVER fails! That ALL things (even Nibbana) lack self-nature; that all composed things are impermanent; and that all composed things, being impermanent, are also suffering by their very nature; and that suffering can be brought to comlpete and total cessation by letting go of all views, suppositions, positions, and grasping. Amazing, amazing indeed! OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA!!! > Of course, I wouldn't recommend drugs. Better to have a real,Buddhist teacher. Because of my actions, I may be senile by age 40. Nonsense. These drugs will hardly cause "senility." :) :) :) Unless you consider this collection of khandas an expression of senility! Quite the opposite, in fact. Yours in the Dhamma! Erik 7232 From: Herman Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 0:21pm Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Jon, I don't have the time or the inclination to search through the list to prove a particular point, but I seem to recall that Erik's recollection of statements made re breath being an unsuitable object of meditation, because of difficulties associated with, is correct. Regards Herman --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Erik > > I know you're busting for a full-scale debate on this, but there may be a > problem. > > --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah > > > Ma drup! (is not established!). Meaning, the question's invalid, > > given the original challenge was to provide the citation from the > > Suttas for the statement that "meditation on the breath is too > > difficult for all but the rarest of disciples," which I reject in > > this debate as NOT being established as what the Buddha actually said > > anyplace in the Suttas. > > > > In other words, if you make the claim, you have to back it with > > either air-tight reasoning OR cite the direct words of the Buddha (or > > accepted references ALL participants agree are correct Dharma, which > > by implication would all be "word of the Buddha" if there is such > > agreement). > > Before this debate gets too wound up, could we have the source of the > statement that "meditation on the breath is too difficult for all but the > rrest of disciples", please. I don't recall this being said on this list. > I do recall some statements about breath as object of samatha > development, but the context of your discussion is, I believe, vipassana > (judging by the subject-heading). Let's get the alleged statement > identified first. > > Jon > 7233 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 0:52pm Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Erik > > I know you're busting for a full-scale debate on this, but there may be a > problem. Definitely am ready for a debate on this, beacuse it is a debate I believe is absolutely VITAL to cultivating Right Mindfulness, one of the essential limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path. > Before this debate gets too wound up, could we have the source of the > statement that "meditation on the breath is too difficult for all but the > rrest of disciples", please. I don't recall this being said on this list. > I do recall some statements about breath as object of samatha > development, but the context of your discussion is, I believe, vipassana > (judging by the subject-heading). Let's get the alleged statement > identified first. Okay, let's establish the basis for this. First of all, on many occasions here I have had the quote (I think Robert has given me this one on more than one occasion, as well as others here) from the Visuddhimagga VIII.211: "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, and Buddhas' sons are at home; it is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons." This is the basis for ALL the arguments I've so far seen here AGAINST parcticing minfulness on the breath. What I am challenging is the INTERPRETATION of this passage when it is used as a way to avoid actually attmepting to practice mindfulness of the breath (which again, is the VERY FIRST meditation given by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta in his instructions to his disciples on Right Mindfulness). In other words, what does this passage refer to when it says this, REALLY? Perhaps a Pali scholar can take us word-by-word through the original. Perhaps we can unpack what is referred to, specifically, by "Buddhas' sons" and "trivial people" here, because I beleive this may the point upon which the entire debate hangs. As was discovered earlier when the original Pali word for "only way" regarding Satipatthana was read correctly NOT to mean "ONLY WAY," but, rather on correct interpertation leading to "ONLY ONE DESTINATION," I suspect further interpretation here of this passage from the Visuddimagga may bear some fruit. And for that it would be most helpful to have the original Pali and a scholar here who would be kind enough to take the time to interpret this passage word-by- word so we can come to a clear understanding of the definitions as originally stated in the commentary--to WHOM do they really refer, in other words? In particular, the question, what is meant by "trivial persons"? Certainly this can't refer to ALL putthujanas (non-ariya) persons, because until full insight one is by definition a putthujana. And Right Mindfulness is not a mere practice for ariyans, but a necessary prerequisite to ariyan (superior) knowledge in the first place! In addition to a textual analysis of Budhagosa's Pali terms here, we need to find the citations from the original Suttas where the Buddha makes this explicit, from which these commantaries have drawn this statement. So I'd like to put to bed once and for all the meaning of this passage, because I think this is quite dangerous belief--an enormously defeatist belief and position, to believe that those who are fortunate enough to have contact with the Dharma to the extent EVERYONE ON THIS DSG LIST IS, makes, in my opinion, BY DEFINITION EVERYONE HERE NOT a "trivial person"! To me a "trivial person" does not refer to worlding, but to a fairly low class of worldlings. I do not consider a single person on this list a "trivial person" by any stretch of this imagination! :) (and don't go letting that inflate your egos now y'all and go with mana! :) :) :) In fact, I'd go further and say that for anyone here, reading DSG to believe they are a "mere trivial person" would be an extremely and pernicious form of mana (pride/conceit)! This error would be compounded by then using that conceit as a basis for NOT cultivating mindfulness of the breath as the Buddha EXPLICITLY taught FIRST in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta as the BEGINNING stage of the BEGINNING practice of Mindfulness of the Body. So, this is where things stand as I see it. Let's get to the bottom of this question, TOGETHER, because as I see it is is MOST LITERALLY a matter of life and death to get this right. 7234 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 1:30pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Nonsense. These drugs will hardly cause "senility." :) :) :) Unless > you consider this collection of khandas an expression of senility! > Quite the opposite, in fact. > > Yours in the Dhamma! > Erik I didn't want to fool with the drug dealers where I lived, so I basically went with 'legal' Dextramathorphan. This is in the same class as Ketamine & PCP, and can cause brain damage, according to an essay I read. But, only another reason to work harder, right? Thankyou for your reply. I'm glad to see even former druggies like me can realize the Dhamma. Ditto, Joshua 7235 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath --- Erik wrote: > Okay, let's establish the basis for this. First of all, on many > occasions here I have had the quote (I think Robert has given me this > one on more than one occasion, as well as others here) from the > Visuddhimagga VIII.211: > > "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to > develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, > and Buddhas' sons are at home; it is no trivial matter, nor can it be > cultivated by trivial persons." Erik, I believe this passage refers to the development of samatha with breath as object, which does indeed go by the name of anapanasati/mindfulness of breathing. I may be wrong, but I don't believe anyone on this list has associated this passage with the references to breathing in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta in particular or to satipatthana/vipassana in general. Jon > This is the basis for ALL the arguments I've so far seen here AGAINST > parcticing minfulness on the breath. > > What I am challenging is the INTERPRETATION of this passage when it > is used as a way to avoid actually attmepting to practice mindfulness > of the breath (which again, is the VERY FIRST meditation given by the > Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta in his instructions to his disciples > on Right Mindfulness). In other words, what does this passage refer > to when it says this, REALLY? > > Perhaps a Pali scholar can take us word-by-word through the original. > Perhaps we can unpack what is referred to, specifically, by "Buddhas' > sons" and "trivial people" here, because I beleive this may the point > upon which the entire debate hangs. > > As was discovered earlier when the original Pali word for "only way" > regarding Satipatthana was read correctly NOT to mean "ONLY WAY," > but, rather on correct interpertation leading to "ONLY ONE > DESTINATION," I suspect further interpretation here of this passage > from the Visuddimagga may bear some fruit. And for that it would be > most helpful to have the original Pali and a scholar here who would > be kind enough to take the time to interpret this passage word-by- > word so we can come to a clear understanding of the definitions as > originally stated in the commentary--to WHOM do they really refer, in > other words? > > In particular, the question, what is meant by "trivial persons"? > Certainly this can't refer to ALL putthujanas (non-ariya) persons, > because until full insight one is by definition a putthujana. And > Right Mindfulness is not a mere practice for ariyans, but a > necessary prerequisite to ariyan (superior) knowledge in the first > place! > > In addition to a textual analysis of Budhagosa's Pali terms here, we > need to find the citations from the original Suttas where the Buddha > makes this explicit, from which these commantaries have drawn this > statement. > > So I'd like to put to bed once and for all the meaning of this > passage, because I think this is quite dangerous belief--an > enormously defeatist belief and position, to believe that > those who are fortunate enough to have contact with the Dharma to the > extent EVERYONE ON THIS DSG LIST IS, makes, in my opinion, BY > DEFINITION EVERYONE HERE NOT a "trivial person"! To me a "trivial > person" does not refer to worlding, but to a fairly low class of > worldlings. I do not consider a single person on this list a "trivial > person" by any stretch of this imagination! :) > > (and don't go letting that inflate your egos now y'all and go with > mana! :) :) :) > > In fact, I'd go further and say that for anyone here, reading DSG to > believe they are a "mere trivial person" would be an extremely and > pernicious form of mana (pride/conceit)! > > This error would be compounded by then using that conceit as a basis > for NOT cultivating mindfulness of the breath as the Buddha > EXPLICITLY taught FIRST in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta as the > BEGINNING stage of the BEGINNING practice of Mindfulness of the Body. > > So, this is where things stand as I see it. Let's get to the bottom > of this question, TOGETHER, because as I see it is is MOST LITERALLY > a matter of life and death to get this right. 7236 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:34pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > > Nonsense. These drugs will hardly cause "senility." :) :) :) Unless > > you consider this collection of khandas an expression of senility! > > Quite the opposite, in fact. > > > > Yours in the Dhamma! > > Erik > > I didn't want to fool with the drug dealers where I lived, so I basically went with 'legal' Dextramathorphan. This is in the same class as Ketamine & PCP, and can cause brain damage, according to an essay I read. Ah, these drugs target and entirely different class of receptors from so-called "psychedlic" drugs, and are as a group (PCP & Ketamine and DXM/Dextromerthorpan, a common ingredient in many cough syrups like Robitussin DX) known as "dissociatives," which, like the various drugs found in plants like the Daturas (tropane alkaloids like atropine--by the way a nerve-gas-agent antitoxin!) can be extremely dangerous, and cause lasting damage if misused. These dissociative drugs all target specifically the NMDA (n-methyl-d- aspartate) class of receptors. These drugs are in a TOTALLY different class from tryptamine drugs like psilocybin (found in "magic musrooms") and DMT (and for that matter serotonin, which is also known as 5-hydroxy-tryptamine or 5-HT more conveniently), which primarily target the serotonergic system by binding to 5-HT receptor sites, similar to SSRI ("selective" serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which bind to the serotonin neruons' "autoreceptors") drugs like Prozac. Though keep in mind these ALL have cascading effects and also condition other systems in the brain like the dopaminergic system. There is truly no such thing as neuronal "specificity" as some wrongly state with regard to drugs like Prozac, Zoloft, etc., because the brain is an organic whole and you can't affect one part without affecting all the other parts at the same time, to a greater or lesser degree. Anyway, another class of drugs, the phenethylamines--like MDMA (aka "Ecstasy") and mescaline--exert a stronger influence on the dopaminergic system due to their different molecular structure, though these drugs also, again, interact and have cascading effects that affect the serotoneric (and other) systems as well, meaning that even these two classes of drugs with very different molecular structures and binding sites still all manage to fit into the category "psychedlic" or, as Gordon Wasson more appropriatly relabeled them, "entheogenic" (meaning "god inspiring" -- "en-theos"). It should be noted that the same applies to correct practice in the Buddhist sense, particularly as regards the Noble Eightfold path. This, too, is an organic whole, where each limb works in relation to every other limb, so, for example, Right View is a co-factor along with Right Mindfulness which is a co-factor with Right Concentration, etc. etc. > But, only another reason to work harder, right? Exactly! :) > Thankyou for your reply. I'm glad to see even former druggies like me can realize the Dhamma. You betcha! Just make sure you search carefully for teachers who you feel you can trust after CAREFUL investigation and testing of what they're telling you. When after CAREFUL consideration and testing you have come to gain confidence that what they're saying is accurate (after again, turning their teachings over and over again in your mind), when they give you instructions on what you need to do in terms of practice, to put those instructions into practice to the VERY BEST of your ability AS SOON AS POSSIBLE--with the very greatest diligence and effort and PERSERVERANCE against ALL OBSTACLES you can muster. And obstacles will ceratinly arise--Mara loves tossing us curve-balls to get us off our game, and the more serious we are, the tougher Mara tests us! This process will CERTAINLY lead to the Noble Fruits of the Path taught by Lord Buddha--which is the entire point of the Buddhist path! Good luck in your journey, my friend! I look forward to meeting you on the Other Side. :) 7237 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drugs Joshua Welcome to the list. I liked your post because I think it brings out the fact that it is how an experience is perceived or responded to by the experiencer that determines it's 'value', rather than anything to do with the intrinsic nature of the experience itself. People have enlightening experiences associated with, for example, near death incidents, loss of a loved one, indeed trauma of any kind. Other people can go through exactlu the same experience and be quite unmoved by it. In my view it would be wrong to see the event as the cause of the realisation, even if in conventional terms we could say that the realisation would not otherwise have happened. The whole of the dhamma is about cause and result. But it is not something we can verify for ourselves here and now by direct experience. It is safe to say that conventinal perceptions are no safe guide in this realm. Past 'enlightening' experiences are very difficult to let go of. However, clinging to such experiences as cause of understanding could lead one to wrong practice. Jon --- Joshua wrote: > I think drug use taught me a lot about Buddhism without me knowing itat > the time. Through drug use I learned that any experience is onlythat - > an experience - and only exists as a memory afterwards, and ifit was > pleasant: something to long for. After awhile on psychadelicsI began to > use 'numbing' drugs, which basically quenched out thedesire for the > psychadelics (for a time). But, even this I began tosee as futile > because eventually they would wear off. So, this led meto conclude that > a true, lasting happiness (void of longing) is whatis to be sought > after, and this is exactly what Buddha taught. > > While on the drugs I learned nothing, but after I reflected on what had > happend, then I learned things. > > One time, I went outside and was sure I finally understood God. It was > an amazing feeling, but after I 'came down', it was really quite > laughable. This also taught me that an impermanent insight is no insight > at all. > > Of course, I wouldn't recommend drugs. Better to have a real,Buddhist > teacher. Because of my actions, I may be senile by age 40. In Dhamma 7238 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:40pm Subject: Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > > Okay, let's establish the basis for this. First of all, on many > > occasions here I have had the quote (I think Robert has given me this > > one on more than one occasion, as well as others here) from the > > Visuddhimagga VIII.211: > > > > "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to > > develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, > > and Buddhas' sons are at home; it is no trivial matter, nor can it be > > cultivated by trivial persons." > > Erik, > > I believe this passage refers to the development of samatha with breath as > object, which does indeed go by the name of anapanasati/mindfulness of > breathing. I did not interpret the exact word "mindfulness" in the above passage to refer specifically to samatha, which in my understanding is more specifically spoken of as an indispensible practice for cultivating tranquility for pacifying the five hindrances, such that Right Concentration has a basis for arising. How did you arrive at the conclusion this is implying samatha? Just curious. 7239 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Erik The use of the same term (anapanasati) in the texts to refer sometimes to samatha and sometimes to vipassana can be a source of confusion. I believe the passage in question goes on to talk about the difficulty of acquiring and maintaining the 'nimitta' (sign), which is of course an aspect of samatha but not of satipatthana/vipassana. Let me check my Vis. at home this evening and get back on this later. Jon --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > > Okay, let's establish the basis for this. First of all, on many > > > occasions here I have had the quote (I think Robert has given me > this > > > one on more than one occasion, as well as others here) from the > > > Visuddhimagga VIII.211: > > > > > > "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to > > > develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, > Paccekabuddhas, > > > and Buddhas' sons are at home; it is no trivial matter, nor can > it be > > > cultivated by trivial persons." > > > > Erik, > > > > I believe this passage refers to the development of samatha with > breath as > > object, which does indeed go by the name of anapanasati/mindfulness > of > > breathing. > > I did not interpret the exact word "mindfulness" in the above passage > to refer specifically to samatha, which in my understanding is more > specifically spoken of as an indispensible practice for cultivating > tranquility for pacifying the five hindrances, such that Right > Concentration has a basis for arising. How did you arrive at the > conclusion this is implying samatha? Just curious. > 7240 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: On the other hand, as discussed earliers, there are hypothesis (for me, > and perhaps actuality for others) that what experience nibbana are the > lokuttara cittas and mental factors (including the N8FP factors) which are > conditioned realities. This hypothesis is, of course, in contrary to the > logics that you have already discussed, that the true characteristics of > nibbana, as unconditioned realities, cannot be fully experienced by a > conditioned consciousness. I have also mentioned that with this logics, it > implies that none of the true characteristics (conditioned and > unconditioned) can be fully experienced. > > kom yes, that would be correct, until realization that is, when they would be experienced directly, not as concepts, and not by conditioned consciousness. Robert E. 7241 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 3:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 8:28 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > > > Dear Anders, > > --- "Anders Honoré" > > What I am wondering is how can this possibly be discerned, since the > > arising > > of Nibbana (just to speak of 'arising' and 'dependent' in relation to > > Nibbana seems absurd to my mind) is dependent on the formation of > > consciousness (which ceases upon Parinibbana)? > > >I read your question to be: if nibbana is cognized by conditioned > >realities, and since there are no more conditioned realities (the 5 > >kandhas) associated with the person after pari-nibbana, how can the > >person prove that nibbana existed after all the 5 kandhas (associated > >with the person) have no more conditions to rise? > > Yup. > > >My speculation is that since nibanna is unconditioned realities, its > >characteristics are sufficiently different from the conditioned realities > >that it is obvious that it doesn't rise and it doesn't fall. So even when > = > >the ariyan is not experiencing nibbana (and I hope you agree that they > >are not experiencing nibbana all the time when they are still alive!), > they= > > know with direct knowledge (of having experienced nibbana) that its > >characteristic continue, without rising or falling, even if there are no > >condition at the time for them to experience it. > > Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there even > Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from > Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since Nibbana > is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. > > >> Basically, what I am reading from the 'experience of Nibbana is > >>dependent on > >> the formation of consciousness' doctrine is annihilation, because with > >>the > >> cessation of consciousness, > > >I think we (you, Roberts, and I) have discussed the Sutta related to > annihilation on-and-off. Since you didn't add other points to the topics (= > I only remember that you said you disagreed, but didn't give explict > reasons), our discussion here may not any more points to this topics. > > Don't think so either.... > > >The sutta that you raised on this topics the last time concerns V. > Sariputta's answers to the question what happend to the Tathagatha > after his death. I think Roberts had explained sufficiently why the > answer cannot be that there is no longer Tathagatha after his death. > > Yup. I disagreed, but I don't think either view can be properly refuted, so > I decided to leave it at that. > > >This is because there is never Tathagatha at the first place since the > Buddha was a stream of conditioned realities that arise consequentially > and continuously as long as there are conditions for the realities to > arise. At the points of his death, there are no more conditions for the > stream of conditioned realities to continue. > > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to which > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > find the source if you want to)? > > >I think you may want to clarify what your understanding of "annihilation" > is. > > Plain simply: As I see it, a non-annihilationist Buddhadhamma, is one where > an "escape" from impermanent Samsara to permanent Nibbana is possible. A > path where the actually is a real meaning to the practise other than to > practise for the eventual non-existence of the kandhas. But that doesn't > seem to be the case according to you. Hence, I see it as leaning towards > nihilism/annihilation. Yes, I think the problem here is that any assertion that the Enlightened exists 'as Nibbana' after death leads to the formation that there is an eternal soul. That falls into eternalism which the Buddha explicitly rejected. If you deny that Nibbana is experienced after death, as Anders points out, you fall into Nihilism. If you say the Enlightened merely dissolves back into the air as it were then he turns out to just be the product of conditioned causes, the exact opposite of what the Buddha says he is! If Beyond the Beyond merely meant cessation, as Anders pointed out, there would be no need for Nirvana. In fact, we could reach the same effect through suicide. But suicide does not end or cease existence, according to Buddha. As long as there are seeds of karma, the conditioned being will return to this life. Therefore, even though there is no 'soul', there is a consciousness that returns to this life to experience the continuance of karmas. When karmas cease in an Awakened one, what is left over? There must be something other than the kandhas. The Buddha is freed from conditioned causes, so his teaching and activity in the world cannot merely be the arising of conditioned causes and effects, or the Buddha would *not* be free of conditioned causes. So, while we do not want to assert a 'self' or 'soul' which is a separate object in the world, we also have to admit that there is a quality of being that exists outside of conditioned causes while the being, freed from karma, is still alive. that quality of being is not an 'entity'. It is the Nirvanic Awareness, if you like. The Nirvanic Awareness is not personal, as it is free of the idea of a separate entity, yet it must exist after death as well to avoid falling into annihilation. It is free, it is not a self, but it must not be dependent on kandhas or body if it is indeed not dependent on conditioned causes and effects. In other words, if one is to avoid annihilationism, there is an element of mystical duration beyond the body that I believe must be admitted of. What do you all feel the Buddha had to say about this, or did he merely avoid the question, not wanting to turn Nirvana into an object of the mind? And what do you think about my conclusion? Once again, it is just based on my own logical speculation, and not on a strong knowledge of many sutras. Regards, 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" 7242 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 4:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drugs and welcome Dear Joshua, You certainly don't sound very senile here! Welcome to dsg and thankyou for your insights below. Yes, the real test of any insight into life and the 'realities' which make up life has to be at this moment. As Tadao said, you're a wise man not to cling to past experiences. It's tempting to think that because of a certain experience, here we are now reflecting on the dhamma. From the Teachings however, we see that conditions are so very very complicated and it's impossible (except at a conventional level) to say we are reflecting now because of any one particular experience. Some like you, because of accumulated wisdom, are able to reflect wisely on the experiences, while others are not. Joshua, thank you for joining us on this topic and we look forward to more contributions from you. Where do you live and what is your background/interest in dhamma?(just if you wish to share this!) Sarah --- Joshua wrote: > I think drug use taught me a lot about Buddhism without me knowing itat the > time. Through drug use I learned that any experience is onlythat - an > experience - and only exists as a memory afterwards, and ifit was pleasant: > something to long for. After awhile on psychadelicsI began to use 'numbing' > drugs, which basically quenched out thedesire for the psychadelics (for a > time). But, even this I began tosee as futile because eventually they would > wear off. So, this led meto conclude that a true, lasting happiness (void of > longing) is whatis to be sought after, and this is exactly what Buddha > taught. > > While on the drugs I learned nothing, but after I reflected on what had > happend, then I learned things. > > One time, I went outside and was sure I finally understood God. It was an > amazing feeling, but after I 'came down', it was really quite laughable. This > also taught me that an impermanent insight is no insight at all. > > Of course, I wouldn't recommend drugs. Better to have a real,Buddhist > teacher. Because of my actions, I may be senile by age 40. In Dhamma 7243 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:34 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma > --- Erik wrote: Hi Dr. E., Hi Joshua, Namaste! Nice post. Glad to see some science here... sure wish we had more of the Buddha's lectures on science available in English. Your words are nice "mettacation". Sending you a large bolus, Bhante D. 7244 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drugs and the Dharma ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 12:13 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drugs and the Dharma > --- Erik wrote: > > I think drug use taught me a lot about Buddhism Check out "entheogen" in your search engines. For a bit of fun and some Dhamma perspectives (Alan Watts is interesting if one has never touched upon his writings...) : http://www.deoxy.org/ Metta, Bhante D. 7245 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drugs Recently, I was asked if there was any chance that entheogens could really be of benefit --- the discussion was with other scientists. Perhaps in psychiatry, one day these things will beneift people. The quick fix to Nibbana just ain't there. There is no free lunch in the universe. For now, the Blessed One I think would have taught that we do the work first... anapanasati, satipatthana... in other words, work with the techniques He used then see what this dukkha business was all about. I do not think He would be against doing the work first (Dhamma Practice) then making very careful inquiry about other things --- but after doing the work. An example of this work is when we bhikkhus seriously reflect on food offered as a support --- medicine. We know how certain foods can affect our meditation, for example, or for that matter how we will end up enduring a hot, humid Asian summer day. Food is medicine to sustain the body for practice --- some monks even mix up all the food offered to discourage craving and interruption of their practice. Some monks eat only out their bowl. But for some reason, doing the work does incredible things. One example was a lay woman in a meditaiton center who went there well enough to make what she thought would be her last retreat. She was in Burma and no treatment was available. After following the instructions for meditation, she returned home completely healed and in remission. That is one very intense example. But another incredible thing is that the practice shows us craving just as it is. When the work is done with Right Understanding and all the leads up to it, then practice is more important than messing with entheogens. It is like asking whether one wants mere releif or release from dukkha. And there is no imediate gratification --- though some people have rapture and many wonderful phenomena --- but that is anicca by its nature and not the goal --- just nice supports. In these times where mind-body health, or may I say holistic health is still in the frontier up against allopathic and corporate medicine (and the truth is they could compliment each other greatly), I would be more inclined to go with good Dhamma practice and follow the advice of a noble, well trained, honest, not in it for the money physician. Also, don't tell yourself you will be senile at 40, o0ss1234 --- fill your mind with wholesome thoughts and dedicate the merits of all your goodness to healing yourself and others who need your honesty and insights. May you do well in your pursuits and practice. and if you have not checked it out, take a look at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ for some good Dhamma (Dharma) reseources for yourself. There are nice selections from the Canon, articles, books, and a guide/search engine that will be a fine addition to your library. The Blessed One taught the Middle Path, not extremes. Fanatics could miss great insights. If an almost old timer got anything out of the 60's and 70's concerning entheogens and expanding consciousness, it would be to tell that the hard work of practice and discipline far out weigh in benefits, the risks of missing insights into the Dharma that can never be expressed in words. Like I tell some of my patients, it is not the medication you need as much as the "Mettacation". So friend, and other folks here, I recommend higher doses of Mettacation: IM (in mind), IV (in virtue), SC (sent conscioulsy), etc. The side-effects are radiant and the application well established. I guess the King of Physicians knew good medicine. May this find all our readers well. Anumodana to all your kusala efforts. Have you had your Mettacation today? ;-) Bhante D. 7246 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 6:58pm Subject: Re: Drugs and welcome --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Joshua, > > You certainly don't sound very senile here! Welcome to dsg and thankyou for > your insights below. > > Yes, the real test of any insight into life and the 'realities' which make up > life has to be at this moment. Not so, Sarah! :) The REAL test is if the afflictions have been permanently terminated or not. 7247 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: Drugs and welcome --- Sarah > As Tadao said, you're a wise man not to cling to past experiences. It's > tempting to think that because of a certain experience, here we are now > reflecting on the dhamma. From the Teachings however, we see that conditions > are so very very complicated and it's impossible (except at a conventional > level) to say we are reflecting now because of any one particular experience. These experiences were only a few in an immense chain of experiences spanning (at least) since I was born till now. I brought up the dope because rikpa did. > Joshua, thank you for joining us on this topic and we look forward to more > contributions from you. > Well, I really don't know very much. > Where do you live and what is your background/interest in dhamma?(just if you > wish to share this!) > I live in USA, and my background is really long & boring. Suffice to say a certain Danish fellow helped me out tremendously, and for the first time I think have some vague semblance of what 'balance' is, even if it is a relative balance. I have been keeping away from discussion for awhile, but recently I thought it best to test myself. For one thing, I need to truly practice right speech, and another, I need to avoid getting caught in endless scholarly speculation. I plan to attend a Meditaton/Chanting/Discussion group soon, and this is a bit of preparation. 7248 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 8:02pm Subject: Re: Drugs > ;-) > > Bhante D. Thankyou Bhante. But remember, the only good it did me was to beat me over the head till I finally realized it was futile. Even then I didn't comprehend what happened as much as I do now and I would never recomend it. 7249 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 8:06pm Subject: opportunities, support conditions, abhidhamma, slowing down, drugs and MAYBE Sex! Dear Tadao, Erik, Sukin, Cybele, Herman, A few reflections rather than any answers or debates ;-) ppp wrote: > Hi, Sarah: > (i) Yes, Dhamma must be one of the best medicines for our health. > (ii) Yes, I know, in reality there is no "Canada" no "Thailand", > but just nama or rupa. > (iii) But, as Erick and Mike mentioned, living in a Buddhist > country, such as Thailand, is one of the 'mangalaani uttamaani' > (highest happinesses) tadao > Tadao, I mentioned that there were opportunities for wholesome mental states or actions anywhere at any time. Sometimes we forget this and dream of another time or place which we think would be more favourable or cling to a past experience when it seemed there were more useful thoughts, deeds and even understanding. Cybele asked why you were in Canada if somewhere else seemed more suitable, but of course we are only ever where we are or doing what we're doing because of the combination of very complex conditions which mean we could not possibly be anywhere else at this given moment. It is true that many factors can act as decisive support condition (upanissaya paccaya) for how much or little kusala (wholesomeness) there is at this moment. These may include family, friends, place, temperature or drugs for example. When we were in Bangkok, Sukin ate too much for lunch and found it difficult to attend to the afternoon discussion. It doesn't mean there can't be awareness of the drowsy mental states and there may be many moments of listening carefully in between the drowsiness. Still, we can say that by upanissaya paccaya, the over-eating can be a condition for hearing less dhamma. In Nina VG's book on 'Conditions' (Zolag website),she gives the example of the Buddha's fasting before his enlightenment and became emaciated. Realising it was not the Middle Way, Sujata brought him the rice-gruel and the food was a natural decisive support condition for his enlightenment that night. Nina also gives examples from the Vinaya where the monks are instructed to keep their dwelling-places clean and the example of why the Buddha preached the Satipatthana Sutta in Kuru country: 'by reason of their country being blessed with a perfect climate and through their enjoyment of other comfortable conditions were always healthy in body and in mind. They, happy with healthy minds and bodies, and having the power of knowledge, were capable of receiving deep teachings....' Nina adds: 'the climate was not the only condition for them to receive the teachings, they also had accumulated panna. Oppressive weather and bad food can lead to dosa which may be so strong that one kills or performs other unwholesome deeds.' The point I was making before, however, was that if we cling to a time, place, experience or climate, it is the clinging and aversion that is being accumulated rather than the understanding of realities now or any other kind of skilful state. Many friends here have commented on good opportunities in Thailand. Last year, however, I remember one of our good friends living in Bangkok, Ivan, commented on how he there seemed to be many more opportunities for skilful thoughts and deeds and sati in India on a dhamma trip because in Thailand he's busy with family and work responsibilities and the traffic and pollution are bad and so on. Khun Sujin's comment at the time was that reflecting like this shows the 'strong attachment to the self'. We cling to a place and situation (and take them for being real so often) and to having more kusala. We'd like to have less attachment and aversion and more awareness and other skilful states...just clinging with no awareness of cittas (consciousness), cetasikas(mental factors) and rupas(pysical phenomena) now. Erik, you are very sincerely interested in studying abhidhamma and yet it seems that your idea of 'practice' is something different from this. For Tadao, myself and many others here, understanding the realities taught in the abhidhamma and practice of the Terachings are one and the same. The abhidhamma is not about terms in the book but about these same moments of seeing, hearing, clinging, aversion andother realities appearing now. You (Erik) said: >I am not familiar with any suttas where the Buddha talks about kusala citta and akusala citta. I am familiar with suttas where the Buddha praises skillful activity and criticizes unskillful activity, though. >Rather than talk about abstract notions like cittas (and until you have had DIRECT experience of a citta, please don't come back to me with this "paramattha dhammas" business--cittas are WAY too abstract an concept before such direct experience of them; who but a Buddha or nearly a Buddha directly discern the billionth of a second of awareness each citta represents? Erik, what the Buddha talks about in almost every sutta is about just these very paramattha dhammas, the 6 worlds appearing through eyes, ears, and the rest. He talks about different mental states- ignorance, clinging , wisdom and all the other states which accompany the moments of experience. These are not abstract concepts but what make up our lives now. The reason he talked about these dhammas is because it is possbile right now to be aware of seeing ( a citta) or visible object (a rupa). This is the aim of the teachings; not to 'sustain concentration on your favorite object....' Just now I had to really scold some of my teenage students who were annoying the security guard on their way out of my place. There were a few moments of patience and kindness, but many more of aversion and mana (pride) and seeing, hearing (different cittas) experiencing their objects in between. Beginning to study and know more about these realities is the practice as explained in the abhidhamma and suttanta. There shouldn't be any conflict and life should become easier, not harder. If one has the idea of slowing down one's eating or walking in order to be aware of them, it doesn't 'fit' with the abhidhamma at all. Awareness can only be aware of paramatha dhammas (absolute realities) as explained over and over again and eating and walking are concepts. Processes of cittas pass so very quickly (as you mentioned), so any idea of slowing them down shows a (wrong) idea of self that can do this. <> Thank you for sharing, so very candidly, your drug and other experiences. the more I learn from the abhidhamma (and let me assure you, this is very elementary both theoretically and practically speaking) the more I learn about how very complex paccaya (conditions) are. We think we've arrived here because of different experiences and encounters; I might say I was in that temple in Sri lanka as an earnest meditator and because of that I came across a manuscipt of Nina's book and so on, but really just to form up this moment of seeing or hearing, there are so many conditions including kamma and accumulations. Rather than trying to wrok it all out, I prefer to know a little more about conditions acting now, to show how very anatta this moment of seeing or hearing is. I don't think there has been any contention at all on dsg that there can be right mindfulness AT ANY TIME (yr caps) with or without drugs. The contention, as I recall, was with the idea of taking drugs in order to have awareness. OK Sex for those who've been! I'd just say that sex or going to movies or karaoke (an old favourite theme of Rob's) or even teenage students maybe upanissaya paccaya (and other conditions?) for unwholesome mental states. Does this mean we shouldn't partake (or teach)? I don't think so at all as laypeople. I think there shouldn't be any rules and in any case it will depend on those complex conditions again as to what we do. There are going to be unwholesome mental states regardless and rather than thinking about the story or 'situation' again, I think it's better to live naturally and develop more understanding of the realities again. There can be awareness at any of these times. I just admire those who manage to fit it all in, in addition to work, household chores, Tipitaka and list sudy and posting, breathing practices AND 2 hr meal sessions!! Certainly time to stop! Thanks for being patient. Sarah 7250 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 8:09pm Subject: Re: Drugs and welcome --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah > > As Tadao said, you're a wise man not to cling to past experiences. It's > > tempting to think that because of a certain experience, here we are now > > reflecting on the dhamma. From the Teachings however, we see that conditions > > are so very very complicated and it's impossible (except at a conventional > > level) to say we are reflecting now because of any one particular experience. > > These experiences were only a few in an immense chain of experiences spanning (at least) since I was born till now. Indeed, my friend, indeed. > Well, I really don't know very much. I bow to your wisdom. > I have been keeping away from discussion for awhile, but recently I thought it best to test myself. And seeking to have one's understanding tested is a sign of great wisdom indeed! > For one thing, I need to truly practice right speech, and another, I need to avoid getting caught in endless scholarly speculation. The degree of wisdom expressed in this little post of yours is really only inspires in me three words: SADHU! SADHU! SADHU! :) :) :) > and to attend a Meditaton/Chanting/Discussion group soon, and this is a bit of preparation. A solid theoretical foundation in the Buddha's Dhamma followed by a consistent, directed meditation practice is a pair of activities that has been demonstrated to bear great fruit! 7251 From: m. nease Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 8:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hello and welcome, Joshua, As a sort of former druggie myself, I came (a very long time ago) to pretty much the same conclusions as you did. As for brain damage, I've read some convincing material on lasting damage to neuroceptors resulting from mdma use, resulting in decreased ability to uptake seratonin, e.g. Then of course (as you hinted) there's the much more immediate danger posed by dealers to your neuroceptors and other bits (cranium etc.). There's been enough pro vs. con talk about drug use lately, I think (you can find it in the archives) and I don't mean to add more to either side with this post. Just wanted to echo your earlier comment, if you don't mind my paraphrasing, as to the unsatisfactoriness, impermanence and emptiness of getting high. In my opinion that's a worthwhile insight (even if only conceptual) and quite consistent with Dhammavinaya. mike --- Joshua wrote: > I didn't want to fool with the drug dealers where I > lived, so I basically went with 'legal' > Dextramathorphan. This is in the same class as > Ketamine & PCP, and can cause brain damage, > according to an essay I read. > > But, only another reason to work harder, right? > > Thankyou for your reply. I'm glad to see even former > druggies like me can realize the Dhamma. > > Ditto, > Joshua 7252 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Book for prison Does anyone know of some good online free distribution books that might be useful to prisoners? It has to have a "free to reprint for free distribution" on it. No "for personal use". Also, if an online book has no copyright information does that mean it is not under copyright? 7253 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 9:04pm Subject: precept question Is it sometimes necessary to lethally dispose of poisonous critters? Basically, I have a(nother) black widow living in my back yard, and it has 2 egg sacks. We can't live together. Is there a safe way (for both of us) to dispose of it and it's eggs? And even if there is, isn't it potentially endangering someone else? 7254 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 10:06pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Herman --- Herman wrote: > Jon, > > I haven't been able to determine it from your posts, so I'll ask > straight out. Is any of your kusala sexual in nature? I don't > necessarily restrict the question to you, but generally speaking. I hope I've understood you, Hereman. I think you are asking whether it is possible for wholesome moments to arise during sexual activity. I suppose we are agreed that certain kinds of activity necessarily involve a lot of attachment (it need not, of course, be strong attachment). These would include, for example, watching entertainment, chatting to friends, playing games, reading books (fiction). Sexual activity is another of these. But that doesn't mean there can't be wholesome moments in amongst the moments of attachment. Consideration to those around us, pleasantness of speech and manner, restraint, useful reflection on what has been read or heard, and studying the characteristic of a reality appearing at the present moment can all occur at one level or another. The more we understand at an intellectual level about the realities that make up our moment-to-moment lives, the more we see that the fact that we are in an 'unwholesome' situation is no bar to there being moments of kusala. For example, we will learn that every moment of seeing and hearing is neither kusala or akusala (it is vipaka), and that the attachment or aversion that characterises the unwholesome situation arises at moments other than those moments of sense-door experience. We are all locked into a life dominated by 'unwholesome' situations, but this should not be a cause for regret, since we are fortunate to have found the dhamma. With the dhamma we are able, despite our inherent akusala, to begin (again) to develop the understanding that leads on the other direction, away from the otherwise inevitable endless round of more lives dominated by unwholesomeness. The idea of a 'life full of unwholesome situations' will be seen for what it is -- a purely conventional perspective. > It is good to have you back after your absence. Thanks Herman. It's good to have you joining in lately, too. I hope I got your question right. If I didn't, please don't hesitate to say. Jon 7255 From: Asterix 7 Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 10:21pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma dear joshua, Welcome!, and thanx for the great insights given. For me also, it was the drugs that triggered the journey of the dhamma. The teachings really fall into places, arent they? For every 'outta-this-world' experience there comes the resultant unsatisfactoriness and depression. Everytime asking for more refined experience, it becomes really apparent that how 'we' get dependant on a whole set of alien oblects and substances. Brain-wave vibrations,neuro-electrics,internal chemical reactions....etc..name it, our 'happiness' depends on it. And when I knew the 'super-mundane' experience that drugs give I concluded that every other physical enjoyments cant come even close. Its always nice to meet "druggies" who's 'been-there-done-that' and all other things,who found the buddha's teaching meaningful and finally found someone to look up to! I made a vow to myself that I will stop all 'majjapamadatthana' (intoxicants) and meat eating for a while. So I spent two years of drug-abstinence and pure-vegetarianism (vegetarianism was just for the fun of it, trying to see that whether I can live without the meat eating I love so much - Obelix was my childhood hero), that 2 years expired on last week (27th july). So now, I again started breaking the precepts, impermanence of the 'happiness' is evident again, I confess that I was looking forward to the 'day' ( not during the whole 2 years :o) , only in the last week, ) fantasizing about all the beverages I can drink, all the substances that I can use to get stoned, ( all the dishes that I can eat). {ridiculous, I agree} And of course when the experience is finally realised , it lost its appeal, good old unsatisfactoriness came to me again. regards gayan --- Erik wrote: > > > Nonsense. These drugs will hardly cause "senility." :) :) :) Unless > > you consider this collection of khandas an expression of senility! > > Quite the opposite, in fact. > > > > Yours in the Dhamma! > > Erik > > I didn't want to fool with the drug dealers where I lived, so I basically went with 'legal' Dextramathorphan. This is in the same class as Ketamine & PCP, and can cause brain damage, according to an essay I read. > > But, only another reason to work harder, right? > > Thankyou for your reply. I'm glad to see even former druggies like me can realize the Dhamma. > > Ditto, > Joshua 7256 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 6:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Anders - In a message dated 8/5/01 1:23:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cybele chiodi writes: > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a > bubble > > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) > > That part is readily understandable, but how much do you make of the Sutra > in its entirety? > ======================= I'm on my way to work. I will get back to you on 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) 7257 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 10:51pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Tadao How are you? Unfortunately, I do not have a whole set of the (hard, pale-yellow, cover) of the Pali Tipitak in the Burmese script. From that set, I only have Atthasalini. But, I may try to lay my hands on the whole set in future. But, I have Chatthasangayana Pali Tipitaka CD-ROM version 3 produced by Vipassana Research Institute. I also have Chatthasangayana Myanmar Tipitaka CD-ROMs produced by the Myanmar Government through the Department of Sasana Propagation. You can also listen to the whole Tipitaka from these CD-ROMs as recited during the Chatthasangayana Proceedings. With regards Suan --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Suan: > So do you have a whole set of the (hard, pale-yellow, cover) > of the Pali Tipitaka in the Burmese script? Lucky you. tadao 7258 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > >. I have also mentioned that with this logics, it > > implies that none of the true characteristics (conditioned and > > unconditioned) can be fully experienced. > > > > kom > > yes, that would be correct, until realization that is, when they would be > experienced directly, not as concepts, and not by conditioned consciousness. > > Robert E. Is it also your understanding that none of the characteristics of the realities that are arising now (the 5 kandhas) can be truly experienced, since the consciousness that is experiecing them is conditioned? Is it also your understanding that until one's consciousness becomes "unconditioned", one cannot experience any realities as they are? kom 7259 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 0:03am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Yes, I think the problem here is that any assertion that the Enlightened exists > 'as Nibbana' after death leads to the formation that there is an eternal soul. > That falls into eternalism which the Buddha explicitly rejected. If you deny that > Nibbana is experienced after death, as Anders points out, you fall into Nihilism. As discussed with Anders earlier, I believe the text's mention fo annihilation is different from what Anders is proposing. My reading on the text about annihilationism is that there are some people who propose that 1) Those commit a kamma is not the same as the one receiving the result. 2) Those who believes that their "self" ends at death. When the kandhas come to an end, because their conditions are extinguished, this is not considered an annihilation in the scripture. > If you say the Enlightened merely dissolves back into the air as it were then he > turns out to just be the product of conditioned causes, the exact opposite of what > the Buddha says he is! Again, there is never a tagatha in the sense of identification or self. The conventional buddha was in reality just a stream of kandhas that end when there are no more conditions for the kandhas to arise. > If Beyond the Beyond merely meant cessation, as Anders > pointed out, there would be no need for Nirvana. In fact, we could reach the same > effect through suicide Beliving that commit suicide to end existence is obviously annihilation. As long as there are conditions to arise, then the kandhas will continue arising. If you commit suicide without having eliminated the conditions of rebirths (of the 5 kandhas), then the stream of kandhas continue in another plane of existence or as another person. >. But suicide does not end or cease existence, according to > Buddha. As long as there are seeds of karma, the conditioned being will return to > this life. Therefore, even though there is no 'soul', there is a consciousness > that returns to this life to experience the continuance of karmas. > > When karmas cease in an Awakened one, what is left over? There must be something > other than the kandhas. The Buddha is freed from conditioned causes, so his > teaching and activity in the world cannot merely be the arising of conditioned > causes and effects, or the Buddha would *not* be free of conditioned causes. The Buddha, after having become perfectly enlightened, continue as conditioned realities. He continued receiving the results of past kammas, obviously conditioned. He had to eat red rice meant for feeding horse for 3 months as a result of a verbal infraction toward a Buddha in a previous life. He suffered injury and physical pain on his toe (as commited by Devadatta) as a result of killing his brother in the previous life (wouldn't you call pain caused by an object "conditioned" by that object?) > So, > while we do not want to assert a 'self' or 'soul' which is a separate object in > the world, we also have to admit that there is a quality of being that exists > outside of conditioned causes while the being, freed from karma, is still alive. > that quality of being is not an 'entity'. There is no buddha inside the kandhas and outside the kandhas. Let me ask you Robert, what do you consider realities and what do you consider as non-realities? I think this is the gist of understanding of what Robert (K) and I are putting forward here. What exists? What doesn't exist? Does the kandhas exist? Does a person, a buddha, a tathagatha exist as an identification? What's the difference between what exists and what doesn't exist? > It is the Nirvanic Awareness, if you > like. The Nirvanic Awareness is not personal, as it is free of the idea of a > separate entity, yet it must exist after death as well to avoid falling into > annihilation. It is free, it is not a self, but it must not be dependent on > kandhas or body if it is indeed not dependent on conditioned causes and effects. This may be logically appealing, but let me tell you that I believe this is very different from the teaching of Theravadan tradition, and I believe different from what the Buddha had taught. > > In other words, if one is to avoid annihilationism, there is an element of > mystical duration beyond the body that I believe must be admitted of. Again, you need to look carefully at what annihilationism in the text is meant to be. kom 7261 From: Joshua Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 0:48am Subject: everythings ok! I put the spider in a plastic container and let it out by some plants. It's 'eggs' were apparently wrapped up bugs. 7262 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 5:45am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation Hi, Anders, I just bought the Wisdom Publications translations because they're the most recent and widely-available. I didn't do any comparisons with other translations. If you only want to buy one, I'd recommend getting the Majjhima Nikaya first. I find it the best source for the core teachings -- assuming that's what you want. I'm also getting fond of the Sutta Nipata, which is a short collection of verses that have quite a different flavor to them than the first four Nikayas. The Samyutta Nikaya has lots of miscellaneous teachings in it covering many, many minor points -- though curiously enough this is the only one with the Buddha's very first sermon it. And the Digha Nikaya, as you know, has the longer narratives. Derek. 7263 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 9:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Book for prison Most things like at Access to Insight have a copyright term that allows free distribution as a gift of the Dhamma. Hi Joshua, Namaste and Good Morning... Get in touch with IMS-Barre. They have a study center out there and could provide some books. All that I would recommend is pay it forward with some meritorious deeds or if possible dana for mailing or whatever is possible to defray expenses, as books do cost and the laws of physics tell us there are really no free lunches in the universe... was that Gary Snyder who said that? ;-) Many of our members here might be also able to offer some good advice in this area... also, if you do have problems, let me know, and I will be happy to give you some private benefactors off the public list you can contact for help. Sarah and Jon ? Robert, Amara? What do you think? Anumodana in your kind efforts, With Metta, Bhante D. ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:43 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Book for prison > Does anyone know of some good online free distribution books 7264 From: ppp Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 0:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Hi, Suan: Thank you very much for more information on the Tipitak, etc. Could you please tell me how one can obtain the Tipitak CD-ROM? Thank you in advance, tadao P.S. Have you been to Bruma? 7265 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 10:26am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Hi Robert and Kom et al, I hope you don't mind me joining in. Does the notion of direct, unconditioned, experience have support in the suttas, or is this an addition derived from the commentaries? If I follow, theoretically, the line of deconstruction of realities as it would unfold in the progressive jhanas, I end up with cessation of awareness, awareness of neither this nor that nor anything else. What awareness would it be that was unaware? Regards Herman --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > >. I have also mentioned that with this logics, it > > > implies that none of the true characteristics (conditioned and > > > unconditioned) can be fully experienced. > > > > > > kom > > > > yes, that would be correct, until realization that is, when they would be > > experienced directly, not as concepts, and not by conditioned > consciousness. > > > > Robert E. > > Is it also your understanding that none of the characteristics of the > realities that are arising now (the 5 kandhas) can be truly experienced, > since the consciousness that is experiecing them is conditioned? Is it also > your understanding that until one's consciousness > becomes "unconditioned", one cannot experience any realities as they are? > > kom 7266 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 10:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] everythings ok! Skilfully done, Joshua! --- Joshua wrote: > I put the spider in a plastic container and let it out by some plants. > It's 'eggs' were apparently wrapped up bugs. > > 7267 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 10:59am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Herman Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > Hi Robert and Kom et al, > Does the notion of direct, unconditioned, experience have support in > the suttas, or is this an addition derived from the commentaries? I do not remember having read any sutta that supports nor refutes this concept, but again, I am working through the suttas very slowly. I am pretty sure that the commentaries (both translated by V. Buddhaghosa and in the tika) that it is mentioned to be such. > If I follow, theoretically, the line of deconstruction of realities > as it would unfold in the progressive jhanas, I end up with cessation > of awareness, awareness of neither this nor that nor anything else. > What awareness would it be that was unaware? It is unclear (to me) which particular Jhana that you are discussing. For a non-ariyan person, the finest level of Jhana reachable is the 4th arupa jhana (nevasannanasannayatana-jhana), which has the characteristic of the citta of the 3rd arupa jhana as the object. For an ariyan person who develops Jhana that hasn't reached either 1) anagami attainment or 2) the 4th arupa jhana , then jhana having nibbana as the object is possible. For an anagami or an arahant who has reached the 4th arupa Jhana, then sanna-vetayidda-nirodha is possible, where the consciousness and its factor ceases during such session: there is no consciousness cognizing any object. For more details, please see: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat7.html kom 7268 From: Joshua Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 11:12am Subject: Re: everythings ok! --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Skilfully done, Joshua! > My father has informed me that a light blast of a fire extinguisher may make the poisonous critters immobile for a time being without killing them, thus safer for me to remove them from the area. Does anyone know if this is true? I think I was lucky this time, as the spider in question ran off into a plant (where I shook it out) and must have been sleeping or something, because it just latched on to a dead leaf that got caught in its web and didn't move (Though it was alive). But, had it been feisty I may not have been able to remove it. 7269 From: Joshua Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 1:43pm Subject: Re: Book for prison --- "Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" wrote: > Most things like at Access to Insight have a copyright term that allows free > distribution as a gift of the Dhamma. Yes. Thanissaro's scholarship coupled with Sutta translations and some works of Thai Ajaans (and an Upasika) seems to cover everything. > Hi Joshua, Namaste and Good Morning... > Hello Dhammapiyo. > Get in touch with IMS-Barre. They have a study center out there and could > provide some books. All that I would recommend is pay it forward with some > meritorious deeds or if possible dana for mailing or whatever is possible to > defray expenses, as books do cost and the laws of physics tell us there are > really no free lunches in the universe... I plan to print the books myself. It is actually quite easy to do so if one invests some money. All one has to do is buy a cheap copy machine (using Toner), a word processor & a long-reach stapler, and they are a veritable self-publisher. If you juggle the paper correctly, there is not a whole lot of difference between the booklets you make at home and any other low-budget booklets. A4 size paper makes for a perfect size booklet as well. Just don't buy an adjustable numerical stamp for the page numbers! But thanks! >was that Gary Snyder who said > that? ;-) He wrote the 'Smoky the Bear Sutra', so he certainly could have. > > Many of our members here might be also able to offer some good advice in > this area... also, if you do have problems, let me know, and I will be happy > to give you some private benefactors off the public list you can contact for > help. > So far everything's going smoothly. > Anumodana in your kind efforts, > > With Metta, > > Bhante D. : ) 7270 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 2:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Book for prison Dear Joshua, Enjoying yr contributions! --- Joshua wrote: > Does anyone know of some good online free distribution books that might be > useful to prisoners? It has to have a "free to reprint for free distribution" > on it. No "for personal use". Any of the books by Nina Van Gorkom or Sujin Biriharnwarnaket on the abhidhamma.com and other websites at this link can be downloaded for free distrib. w/no prob. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links As we're fortunate to have Nina with us here, if you or any of the prisoners have any questions arising from these books, he or other friends here will be happy to try and respond! > > Also, if an online book has no copyright information does that mean it is not > under copyright? I suppose so, but I don't know for other authors......better to keep to ones you're sure of or write to the authors/publishers I'd think... > I appreciate your efforts to share and help others with the dhamma! Sarah p.s Glad the spider found a nice new home! We use similar means and patience with the cockroaches in Hong Kong! 7271 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 10:43pm Subject: Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support conditions, Dear Sarah Fast message as I am in an internet cafe and in Italy they are costly! >Cybele asked why you were in Canada if somewhere else seemed more suitable, >but >of course we are only ever where we are or doing what we're doing because >of >the combination of very complex conditions which mean we could not >possibly be >anywhere else at this given moment. > I disagree radically Sarah! It's true that we have to work out kammic factors that conditions our life BUT there is choice otherwise what's the meaning of AWARENESS if we are 'doomed'? I could choose staying in London or returning to Asia and it was MY PRECISE CHOICE being there. As it was my choice moving from Brazil to Europe and from Europe to Asia. And it is MY CHOICE leading a nomadic life. Sure many factors contribute to 'push' me towards that direction but I decide to surrender or not to such conditions. What puzzles me is as Tadao is so desenchanted with Canada and he is resigning himself to leave there anyway, why don't see it clearly instead of regretting the past and 'dreamming Bangkok'... This is not 'present moment', this is clinging to memories and fantasies in my humble opinion. Love Cybele 7272 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 6:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Hi, Cybele amd Sarah - In a message dated 8/8/01 10:48:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cybele chiodi writes: > Dear Sarah > > Fast message as I am in an internet cafe and in Italy they are costly! > > >Cybele asked why you were in Canada if somewhere else seemed more > suitable, > >but > >of course we are only ever where we are or doing what we're doing because > >of > >the combination of very complex conditions which mean we could not > >possibly be > >anywhere else at this given moment. > > > > I disagree radically Sarah! > It's true that we have to work out kammic factors that conditions our life > BUT there is choice otherwise what's the meaning of AWARENESS if we are > 'doomed'? > I could choose staying in London or returning to Asia and it was MY PRECISE > CHOICE being there. > As it was my choice moving from Brazil to Europe and from Europe to Asia. > And it is MY CHOICE leading a nomadic life. > Sure many factors contribute to 'push' me towards that direction but I > decide to surrender or not to such conditions. > What puzzles me is as Tadao is so desenchanted with Canada and he is > resigning himself to leave there anyway, why don't see it clearly instead > of > regretting the past and 'dreamming Bangkok'... > This is not 'present moment', this is clinging to memories and fantasies in > my humble opinion. > > Love > Cybele > > ============================= This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" question of Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the result of causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would arise randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". However, volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, choices can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not arise randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it goes, on and on! ;-)) 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) 7273 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Dear Howard >============================= > This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" question of >Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the result of >causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would arise >randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". However, >volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, choices >can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not arise >randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it goes, on >and >on! ;-)) > >With metta, >Howard > Howard you are indeed a 'peacemaker', it's your 'DESTINY'! ;-)))))) LOve Cybele 7274 From: m. nease Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Hello, Howard, --- Howard wrote: > This is a difficult matter. It is that old > "free will" question of > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does > so as the result of > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else > events would arise > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the > "wrong views". However, > volition enters into the various chains of > conditionality, and, so, choices > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all > else, does not arise > randomly, but as the result of causes and > conditions! And so it goes, on and > on! ;-)) This is an interesting point. I hadn't thought of it in the context of the relation of kamma to volition, but your last sentence reminds me of the Acintita Sutta: "Conjecture about...the results of kamma...is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it." Anguttara Nikaya IV.77 Acintita Sutta Unconjecturable http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-077.html 7275 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 8, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Hi, all - Sorry for the typos! In the following: 'difficulat' = 'difficult' and 'vatious' = 'various'. With mettam Howard > > This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" question of > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the result of > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would arise > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". However, > volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, choices > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not arise > randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it goes, on > and > on! ;-)) > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7276 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 5:52am Subject: Tipitaka on CD-ROM Hi, Tadao, Try this: http://www.vri.dhamma.org/publications/tporder.html Derek. 7277 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 6:56am Subject: Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... --- Howard wrote: > > ============================= > This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" question of > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the result of > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would arise > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". However, > volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, choices > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not arise > randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it goes, on and > on! ;-)) > -------------------------- So it is Howard. Once we know that volition arises with both kusala and akusala we see that the only way is to develop understanding of any moment. To see that when 'we choose' or don't choose there are only conditioned moments arising. I think because the belief in self is so ingrained most can't see how effort comes about even with the absolute uncontrollability of dhammas. Yet the fact is the further insight into anattaness (conditionality) develops the more right effort arises simply because wrong view has been subliminated. All people whether buddhists , atheists, Talebans, criminals or saints make effort. But right effort at the level of satipatthana (the eightfold path)is associated with wisdom and detachment. Genuine right effort and other factors of the path become strong to the extent that the idea of self becomes weak. We have been born and died in one aeon so many times that the oceans would overflow with the blood just from the times we were killed. And the number of aeons is uncountable. During almost all of these lives we have deeply clung to the belief in self and control, so strongly has it been accumulated Now we - by conditions- are in the extraordinary position of hearing and considering Saddhamma. This is a rare opportunity that arises infrequently in samasara. Still, if accumulated wisdom is not sufficient then we misinterpret the Dhamma and try to find a self and control somewhere. If other parami such as patience have not been accumulated one will look for some fast way, a shortcut, rather than understanding the nature of whatever dhamma arises at this moment. Now is the time to see that there is truly no self. robert 7278 From: ppp Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 0:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tipitaka on CD-ROM Thank you, Derek! tadao 7279 From: Howard Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 4:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Hi, Mike - In a message dated 8/8/01 11:29:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, m nease writes: > > Hello, Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > > > This is a difficult matter. It is that old > > "free will" question of > > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does > > so as the result of > > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else > > events would arise > > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the > > "wrong views". However, > > volition enters into the various chains of > > conditionality, and, so, choices > > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all > > else, does not arise > > randomly, but as the result of causes and > > conditions! And so it goes, on and > > on! ;-)) > > This is an interesting point. I hadn't thought of it > in the context of the relation of kamma to volition, > but your last sentence reminds me of the Acintita > Sutta: > > "Conjecture about...the results of kamma...is an > unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, > that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who > conjectured about it." > > Anguttara Nikaya IV.77 > Acintita Sutta > Unconjecturable > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-077.html > > ============================ That sutta is one which I like, because it reminds me of something my wife jokingly says to me when I get bogged down in theorizing, namely "Don't bust your brain, Howard!!" ;-)) BTW, thank you for incorporating my typo corrections! 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) 7280 From: Howard Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 4:09am Subject: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, all - I've been reading over and mulling over material on Abhidhamma - with steadily increasing appreciation, BTW. There is one very fundamental principle of Abhidhamma which is kind of a "backbone" for it, namely that there is only one object of discernment, one arammana, at a time. I was curious whether anyone on the list knows the findings of cognitive science or neurophysiology with regard to this issue? 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) 7281 From: Howard Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 4:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/8/01 6:58:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > ============================= > > This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" > question of > > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the > result of > > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would > arise > > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". > However, > > volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, > choices > > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not > arise > > randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it > goes, on and > > on! ;-)) > > > -------------------------- > So it is Howard. > Once we know that volition arises with both kusala and akusala we see > that the only way is to develop understanding of any moment. To see > that when 'we choose' or don't choose there are only conditioned > moments arising. > I think because the belief in self is so ingrained most can't see how > effort comes about even with the absolute uncontrollability of > dhammas. Yet the fact is the further insight into anattaness > (conditionality) develops the more right effort arises simply because > wrong view has been subliminated. All people whether buddhists , > atheists, Talebans, criminals or saints make effort. But right effort > at the level of satipatthana (the eightfold path)is associated with > wisdom and detachment. Genuine right effort and other factors of the > path become strong to the extent that the idea of self becomes weak. > We have been born and died in one aeon so many times that the oceans > would overflow with the blood just from the times we were killed. And > the number of aeons is uncountable. During almost all of these lives > we have deeply clung to the belief in self and control, so strongly > has it been accumulated > Now we - by conditions- are in the extraordinary position of hearing > and considering Saddhamma. This is a rare opportunity that arises > infrequently in samasara. Still, if accumulated wisdom is not > sufficient then we misinterpret the Dhamma and try to find a self and > control somewhere. If other parami such as patience have not been > accumulated one will look for some fast way, a shortcut, rather than > understanding the nature of whatever dhamma arises at this moment. > Now is the time to see that there is truly no self. > robert > ============================== Thanks, Robert! I find this post of yours to be a most insightful one! I am reminded, BTW, of a Hebrew prayer, recited when a happy event occurs, which expresses gratefulness for "having reached this day". As you point out, we should all be grateful that conditions have brought us to this day in which we are exposed to the Buddha's wonderful Dhamma. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7282 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 10:24am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --- Dear Howard, Great to hear of your developing appreciation of Abhidhamma . I know I am biased but I feel this is going together with increasing wisdom. Science cannot investigate nama in the way they are able to investigate rupa. It is something each must see for himself. I like the definition in the International Dictionary of Psychology: "Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon; it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written about it." (cited in Crick 1994, vii). Perhaps the best scientist in cognitive science is Francisco Varela - but then he is a devout Buddhist and constantly refers to Buddhist texts. robert Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > I've been reading over and mulling over material on Abhidhamma - with > steadily increasing appreciation, BTW. There is one very fundamental > principle of Abhidhamma which is kind of a "backbone" for it, namely that > there is only one object of discernment, one arammana, at a time. I was > curious whether anyone on the list knows the findings of cognitive science or > neurophysiology with regard to this issue? > > 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) > > > > > 7283 From: <> Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 11:32am Subject: accents Q. Can I type alternate Latin characters, such as accents over vowels? A. To type an accent over a vowel, press Alt and E on your keyboard at the same time (nothing will appear on screen), then type the vowel. You can also type these other characters: ñ: Press Alt and N at the same time, then N by itself. ¿: Press Alt, Shift, and / at the same time. ü: Press Alt and U at the same time, and then U by itself. ç: Press Alt and C at the same time 7284 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 0:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anapanasati--Mindfulness of the Breath Erik --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan > > > Visuddhimagga VIII.211: > > > > > > "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to > > > develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, > Paccekabuddhas, > > > and Buddhas' sons are at home; it is no trivial matter, nor can > it be > > > cultivated by trivial persons." > > > > Erik, > > > > I believe this passage refers to the development of samatha with > breath as > > object, which does indeed go by the name of anapanasati/mindfulness > of > > breathing. > > I did not interpret the exact word "mindfulness" in the above passage > to refer specifically to samatha, which in my understanding is more > specifically spoken of as an indispensible practice for cultivating > tranquility for pacifying the five hindrances, such that Right > Concentration has a basis for arising. How did you arrive at the > conclusion this is implying samatha? Just curious. I have looked at this passage again. It seems clear to me that the reference to 'difficulty' is made in the context of the development of samatha with breathing as object. In the texts, the description of mindfulness of breathing as an aspect of satipatthana is intimately bound up with descriptions breathing as one of the objects of samatha. This does not mean that the two are necessarily dependent on each other (and perhaps you would not say that they are). Rather it reflects the widespread practice of samatha at the time of the Buddha and the prevalence of disciples with fully developed accumulations to practice samatha and attain jhana. The Buddha of course encouraged both forms of bhavana, and was able to show that attention to the development of the jhanas need not preclude the development of insight. This may sound a strange thing to say, but it is not so strange when you consider that the object of samatha is a concept, whereas the object of vipassana must be a reality, so at first sight the 2 may seem mutually exclusive. Another essential difference between the 2 kinds of bhavana is that in satipatthana/vipassana, unlike for samatha at advanced levels, there is no ‘choosing’ of an object. It is this aspect that gives rise to the 'difficulty' in the case of samatha and breathing, because as the text explains the chosen object gets fainter as progres is made. Satipatthana on the other hand is concerned with the reality that is appearing at the present moment, whatever that reality is. It matters not whether it is, for example, a mental state or an object that is external to us, because all realities are equally to be known as they are. At this very moment, there are realities arising (seeing, visible object, hardness etc) any of which can be known directly by awareness if there are conditions for it to arise. To ‘focus’ on an object that has been selected for the purpose is to fail to appreciate that opportunity. And is there not at such moment of ‘focusing’ some idea of a self who is directing, experiencing? The texts about mindfulness of breathing must be read with all this in mind, and of course with the understanding that ‘breath’ is a concept, not a paramattha dhamma, and cannot as such be the object of satipatthana. You asked in one of your posts about the reason for the inclusion of mindfulness of breathing in the Satipatthana Sutta and the prominence given to it. The answer is I think found in the following passage from the commentary to the Section on Breathing in that sutta (from the Way of Mindfulness at p.54) – “This is the portal to emancipation of the bhikkhu devoted to meditation on breathing.” A person whose daily life already includes time spent in samatha, and will do so increasingly as he/she progresses through the jhanas, needs to be taught how satipatthana can be developed also. As we are not in this category, any ‘focus’ on our part should surely be on understanding how satipatthana is to be developed in our lives are we are now leading them (the city slicker devoted to meditation on the sense-pleasures!). Nothing said here is intended to suggest that there cannot for use be mindfulness of breathing as mentioned in the Satipatthan Sutta ie. awareness of one of the realities we take for breathing. If that is the reality that appears, there is no reason why it cannot be studied or directly experinced. At such moments there is neither more nor less 'difficulty' than at any other moment. Jon 7286 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 1:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Sorry, accidentally sent this without comment. Actually, Mike, you posted this to the list. Are you saying that anyone in particular is a Theosophist? I am not. Kom points out below that one of the definitions of an Annihilationist [Nihilist] is one who believes his 'self' ends at death. I was questioning what then *does* persist after death, a valid question. As for Joseph Campbell, THE MASKS OF GOD is recognized as a classic in its field. I think to call it a popular piece of junk is not very objective, even if you disagree with what he says about Buddhism or other subjects. He is acknowledged as one of the most brilliant minds in his field, and his work is in mythology, so he is not commenting on the practice of any given tradition in the same way that members of this group might. I don't think it can be judged on the same basis, or has much to do with this thread. However, even though you meant to post off-list to those who 'agree' with you, you seem to have some aversion to work through about this, and your strong opinion against mythologists, theosophists and others do not seem to accord with the injunction for 'dropping all views' that the Buddha suggested. I hope that we can discuss the subjects of how Nibbana is experienced, by whom, and what kind of self does or does not exist in reality, openly and with respect. so as not to generate the consequences of negativity at a future date. Thanks, Robert E. ====================================================== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom, > > You continue to do a wonderful job on this thread. I > think the dificulty many have with accepting the > characterisitics of nibbana results from a very strong > attachment to a theosophistic concept of nibbana as > being essentially identical to the hindu union with > atman (right term?) or christian rebirth with > god--that is, some kind of (re) union with some > supreme and unlimited being. This is unfortunately > echoed also in some interpretations of Zen ('original > mind', etc.). > > This view is, I think, one of the worst problems > facing especially western Buddhists, largely because > of the place of theosophism in western Buddhist > history. A wildly popular piece of junk titled 'The > Masks of God', by Joseph Campbell, infused a whole new > generation with this horrible delusion several years > ago. I think any skilful effort to dispel it is of > priceless merit. > > I post this off-list to a few who I think might agree, > because I believe we have a number of passionate, > 'closet' theosophists in the group who would, I think, > take extreme offense. I certainly don't want to > alienate anyone who might eventually be convinced by > Kom's skill and patience (nothing personal, of course, > Kom--I know it isn't you, or yours). > > mike ===== 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" 7287 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 1:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Is it also your understanding that none of the characteristics of the > realities that are arising now (the 5 kandhas) can be truly experienced, > since the consciousness that is experiecing them is conditioned? Is it also > your understanding that until one's consciousness > becomes "unconditioned", one cannot experience any realities as they are? > > kom I don't think that the five sense organs experience what anything actually *is*. How could they? We don't get an experience of an outer object without a mental interpretation of impressions which are put together by the mind to form an image. Inner objects are generally also clouded by conditioned consciousness. We interpret, assume, anticipate, add, etc., rather than merely experience with clarity. However, it is possible to have moments of insight when we experience exactly what is arising with clarity, and those would be exceptional moments when there is a breakthrough in conditioned consciousness. I believe these breaks in conditioned consciousness to experience true insight are cumulative and gradually lift the level of clarity in the person. They would start as exceptional experiences and as the person moved towards an enlightened state, they would become more and more common. The person would gradually live in a much more perceptive, insightful state, unclouded by false concepts and presumptions. At the point that one had a continuous condition of seeing the exact truth of the kandhas as they were arising, wouldn't this person be enlightened? 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" 7288 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 1:49pm Subject: Reorganization of the Files associated with this group Dear Friends, Because egroups appears to have a message width limitation of 70 characters and because the files associated with this list were too long, the files were renamed recently. You may want to update your "bookmarks" or "scrapbooks." If you want to mention a link to the file, please be sure to start the link on a new line. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guidelines http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Delivery_Option http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Pali_Glossary http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL_POST_L INKS kom 7289 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 2:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... Dear Robert, Would I be right to say that my response to this mail is due in part to the thread itself, to my increase interest in buddhadhamma, to my wish to test my understanding, to my having seen your posting on this list after a long break, to my not feeling so tired, to the memory of Sarah, to the thought about Cybele, to the names Erik, Mike, Howard......, to as you say the aeons of deep clinging to self and control, the Acintita Sutta etc. One condition of which could have made a difference to whether or not this response would have been or 'how' it would have been made. Cetana cetasika has been with every single citta from the begining till this very moment doing its job 'knowing??' better than the 'thinking about' which itself is just Also being so identified with my past experiences it seems logical that I would think that *I* am in control of my destiny. Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > --- Howard wrote: > > > ============================= > > This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" > question of > > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the > result of > > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would > arise > > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". > However, > > volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, > choices > > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not > arise > > randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it > goes, on and > > on! ;-)) > > > -------------------------- > So it is Howard. > Once we know that volition arises with both kusala and akusala we see > that the only way is to develop understanding of any moment. To see > that when 'we choose' or don't choose there are only conditioned > moments arising. > I think because the belief in self is so ingrained most can't see how > effort comes about even with the absolute uncontrollability of > dhammas. Yet the fact is the further insight into anattaness > (conditionality) develops the more right effort arises simply because > wrong view has been subliminated. All people whether buddhists , > atheists, Talebans, criminals or saints make effort. But right effort > at the level of satipatthana (the eightfold path)is associated with > wisdom and detachment. Genuine right effort and other factors of the > path become strong to the extent that the idea of self becomes weak. > We have been born and died in one aeon so many times that the oceans > would overflow with the blood just from the times we were killed. And > the number of aeons is uncountable. During almost all of these lives > we have deeply clung to the belief in self and control, so strongly > has it been accumulated > Now we - by conditions- are in the extraordinary position of hearing > and considering Saddhamma. This is a rare opportunity that arises > infrequently in samasara. Still, if accumulated wisdom is not > sufficient then we misinterpret the Dhamma and try to find a self and > control somewhere. If other parami such as patience have not been > accumulated one will look for some fast way, a shortcut, rather than > understanding the nature of whatever dhamma arises at this moment. > Now is the time to see that there is truly no self. > robert > > > 7290 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 1:53pm Subject: Re: Reorganization of the Files associated with this group Sorry, it appears that the cap seems to count where the line gets cut off as well: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guidelines http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Delivery_Option http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Pali_Glossary http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts kom 7291 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 1:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Anders, > > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Kom Tukovinit > > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:32 PM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and > annihilation > > >Thank you for explaining the (not yours) view point. Why do we say > the > > tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't= > > > exist? > > > > Nibbana? > > So, you are saying that you think we understand that the only thing that > exists in Nibbana, and not all the kandhas? > > kom Kom, I would ask you what you mean by 'exists'. I would say the kandhas exist provisionally, in other words they are unstable and impermanent, constantly shifting based on conditioned causes and having no actual identity, while Nibbana alone is self-existent. Are you in accord with that idea, or would you say something different about it? Robert 7292 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 2:00pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > Sorry to take so long to get back to you on this. > > --- 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 > > Agreed. Neither is wholesome, and realising this can be a condition for > us not to react that way sometimes. But the fact is, we do continue to > react like that way, because we have the strongly accumulated tendency > (anusaya) to do so. > > > 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 > > I see dealing with akusala and developing the path as 2 separate things. > > When I am thinking about dealing with my akusala, I am in strong 'self' > and 'conventional world' mode. I would like to be without that akusala or > at least some of it. My motives may be 'good' ones (consideration of > others etc), but my thinking is basically self-centered. > > The development of the path, as I understand it, is the study of a reality > appearing at the present moment, with awareness. If that reality is an > unwholesome moment of consciousness, that would not preclude it being the > object of study or awareness. All realities are to be known. This is > made clear in the Satipatthana Sutta, where the 5 Hindrances are > specifically mentioned as among the mind objects to be known. > > So to sumarise, working with my akusala (sexual or otherwise) does not as > such come into the picture, in terms of the development of the path. I > don't know if I have managed to explain this. I think I understand what you are saying: that development of the path involves expansion of awareness and knowledge of what is really there in the moment, and that this is not a way of working out unwholesome tendencies, but a separate endeavor. But what I have not gotten from this response is how you deal with the akusula. You say that you would like to have less, as a person, of lust or greed, whatever the akusula may be. Is this something that you work out, and if so how? Since we agree that this is part of the foundation of the path, and that neither suppression nor satisfaction of desire lessens the pull of desire, which I would think we would agree would tend to pull us from the path, what is the proper way of dealing with akusula to lessen its presence and its pull? I think that mindfulness of the experience of the akusula lessens its pull. You are saying that these are and should be separate issues. So what is your answer to attachment and desire? 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" 7293 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 2:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Awareness and choices it was Re:opportunities, support... It seems that the last post got sent beyond my control, unwholesome cetana did its job. Just want to fill up the missing part in that post; "Cetana cetasika has been with every single citta from the begining till this very moment doing its job 'knowing??' better than the 'thinking about' which itself is just an element having arisen because of conditions." Too lazy to write more. Sukin. Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Robert, > Would I be right to say that my response to this mail is due in part to > the thread itself, to my increase interest in buddhadhamma, to my wish > to test my understanding, to my having seen your posting on this list > after a long break, to my not feeling so tired, to the memory of Sarah, > to the thought about Cybele, to the names Erik, Mike, Howard......, to as > you say the aeons of deep clinging to self and control, the Acintita Sutta > etc. One condition of which could have made a difference to whether or > not this response would have been or 'how' it would have been made. > Cetana cetasika has been with every single citta from the begining till > this very moment doing its job 'knowing??' better than the 'thinking > about' which itself is just > Also being so identified with my past experiences it seems logical that > I would think that *I* am in control of my destiny. > > Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > --- Howard wrote: > > > > ============================= > > > This is a difficulat matter. It is that old "free will" > > question of > > > Western philosophy. Certainly, whatever occurs does so as the > > result of > > > causes and conditions, as taught by the Buddha, else events would > > arise > > > randomly, which the Buddha taught to be one of the "wrong views". > > However, > > > volition enters into the vatious chains of conditionality, and, so, > > choices > > > can be made. On the other hand, volition, like all else, does not > > arise > > > randomly, but as the result of causes and conditions! And so it > > goes, on and > > > on! ;-)) > > > > > -------------------------- > > So it is Howard. > > Once we know that volition arises with both kusala and akusala we see > > that the only way is to develop understanding of any moment. To see > > that when 'we choose' or don't choose there are only conditioned > > moments arising. > > I think because the belief in self is so ingrained most can't see how > > effort comes about even with the absolute uncontrollability of > > dhammas. Yet the fact is the further insight into anattaness > > (conditionality) develops the more right effort arises simply because > > wrong view has been subliminated. All people whether buddhists , > > atheists, Talebans, criminals or saints make effort. But right effort > > at the level of satipatthana (the eightfold path)is associated with > > wisdom and detachment. Genuine right effort and other factors of the > > path become strong to the extent that the idea of self becomes weak. > > We have been born and died in one aeon so many times that the oceans > > would overflow with the blood just from the times we were killed. And > > the number of aeons is uncountable. During almost all of these lives > > we have deeply clung to the belief in self and control, so strongly > > has it been accumulated > > Now we - by conditions- are in the extraordinary position of hearing > > and considering Saddhamma. This is a rare opportunity that arises > > infrequently in samasara. Still, if accumulated wisdom is not > > sufficient then we misinterpret the Dhamma and try to find a self and > > control somewhere. If other parami such as patience have not been > > accumulated one will look for some fast way, a shortcut, rather than > > understanding the nature of whatever dhamma arises at this moment. > > Now is the time to see that there is truly no self. > > robert > > 7294 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 1:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] accents I tired and could not get it to go. For Pali and Sanskrit, this would be soooo helpful. Is this a font file needed or a command? Thanks! And Metta to you... ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 11:32 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] accents Q. Can I type alternate Latin characters, such as accents over vowels? A. To type an accent over a vowel, press Alt and E on your keyboard at the same time (nothing will appear on screen), then type the vowel. You can also type these other characters: ñ: Press Alt and N at the same time, then N by itself. ¿: Press Alt, Shift, and / at the same time. ü: Press Alt and U at the same time, and then U by itself. ç: Press Alt and C at the same time 7295 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 2:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > Thanks for these thoughts and comments. It is a perplexing area. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > 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. > > Surprising, perhaps. But self-contradictory I don't see. The conditioned perceiving the unconditioned? It seems contradictory by definition. Can a flea perceive a supermarket? It can perceive the crack between two bricks. The important > question is not what the intrinsic nature of nibbana is, but whether it > has an intrinsic nature capable of being experienced by citta. And that brings into question the nature of the citta, as you discuss below. > Don't forget that citta can experience objects that are not of the present > life or plane of existence (jhana cittas, even bhavanga cittas which arise > for all of us). > > The citta that experiences nibana is a supramundane citta, ie a citta of a > plane other than this sensuous plane. > > > It would need an unconditioned, transcendent consciousness to grasp an > > object or > > state with a totally transcendent characteristic. Dear Jon, When you say that the citta that experiences nibbana is 'supramundane', this means to me that it is a consciousness transcendent to worldy conditions. In other words, would supernatural be an equivalent term? If the consciousness is beyond earthly conditions, it would certainly get me closer to understanding how it could apprehend Nibbana. Best, Robert 7296 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 5:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, I've just been looking up some of the references you give here (some took a little searching for;-)) --- Anders Honoré wrote: > Thank you for joining in on the discussion. I think Kom and I could use some > fresh perspective. I think you and others who have joined in are doing fine... > > > Hmm, as I've said before, I am biased in my reading of the Sutta Pitaka, in > the sense that I also draw from Mahayana, but what I'm trying to say is not > new in Theravada either. Basically, I'm just trying to say that there's a > True Mind (to use a Mahayana term) as opposed to the conditioned Samasaric > mind of the kandhas and that mind *is* Nibbana, that mind is unconditioned. > You can call it self or not, but I would say that there is still something > there. While we cling to a 'self' we'cling to the idea of a true mind, a lurking nibbana or God as well....not to mention the idea of choice or free will. It's quite possible to read all the Tipitaka in Pali with the idea of a self. We can see from some translations (especially some of the earlier ones) that this is often done. > > There's a sutta which says: > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming defilements. > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming defilements." > > That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, as it > retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances Anders, whenever the mind is referred to, I understand that cittas ( conditioned moments of consciousness) are being referred to and indeed the Buddha made it clear there are only 5 khandhas, not 5 khandhas and a mind. Nina wrote about these lines and quotes from 'Survey of Paramatha Dhammas' which can be found on Rob's website. We can see that mind is translated from citta. I hope you don't mind if I repeat it here: (N-Nina Van Gorkom) ********************************************************** > pabhassaramida.m bhikkhave citta.m ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi > upakkili.t.tha.m. N: This consciousness, monks, is luminous, and it is indeed corrupted by oncoming defilements. >ta.m assutavaa puthujjano yathaabhuuta.m nappajaanaati. N:The ordinary person who has not learned (the Dhamma, not listened to it) does not understand it as it really is. > tasmaa assutavato puthujjanassa cittabhaavanaa natthiiti vadaamiiti. N:Therefore I say that for the ordinary person who has not listened there is no mental development (literally. free: the ordinary person who has not listened to the Dhamma has not developed the mind.) > 1. 6. 2. > pabhassaramida.m bhikkhave citta.m ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi > vippamutta.m. N: This consciousness, monks, is luminous, and it is indeed released from oncoming defilements. >ta.m sutavaa ariyasaavako yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati. N: The learned noble disciple understand it as it really is. >tasma sutavato ariyasaavakassa cittabhaavanaa atthiiti vadaamiiti. N: Therefore I say that the learned, noble disciple has developed the mind. N.The upakilesas, defilements arising with the citta (different from the anusayas, latent tendencies who do not arise with the akusala citta but can condition akusala), are like visitors from outside. It seems disturbing, but we have to note: the ariyan knows the citta as it really is: yathaabutta. One has to know also akusala citta as it is, otherwise one cannot become an ariyan, this is stressed in this short sutta. N. The Atthasalini speaks about the bhavangacitta as being pure, using the word pa.n.dara (I, Book I, Part IV, Ch II, 140) : "Mind also is said to be clear in the sense of exceedingly pure with reference to the Bhavanga-citta." Now I like to quote from Acharn's Survey of Paramattha dhammas where she explains about the bhavanga-citta which is different from the cittas experiencing objects impinging on the six doors. She explains that when one is fast asleep one does not know who one is or where one is, one does not experience the world. When one wakes up the world appears, one experiences all the objects impinging on the six doors and then these objects give rise to defilements. The bhavanga-citta, life-continuum, that has the function of keeping continuity in the life of an individual, arises when fast asleep and also in between the processes of cittas. Thus our life, consisting of an uninterrupted series of cittas, goes on. The bhavanga-citta experiences the same object as the rebirth-consciousness, and this object is like an echo of the object experienced shortly before the dying-consciousness of the previous life. This citta is pure, but it does not mean that there are no latent tendencies of defilements, anusayas, which lie dormant in the citta. It is called pure or luminous, because at that moment no defilements arise. I quote: < The citta is pure only at the moment it does not experience an object through the doors of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind. Everybody who is fast asleep looks innocent, pure, he does not experience like or dislike, he is not jealous, stingy, conceited, he has no lovingkindness nor compassion; thus, unwholesome or wholesome qualities do not arise because he does not see, hear, experience tangible object or think. However, it should be known that whenever the citta which arises experiences an object through one of the six doors, citta is not pure. The reason is that many different defilements have been accumulated in the citta and these condition the arising of pleasure and attachment when one sees something pleasant, and the arising of displeasure and annoyance when one sees something unpleasant.> The person who is enlightened, the ariyasaavako, has eradicated anusayas by the development of pa~n~naa of the eightfold Path. It is pa~n~naa which knows realities as they are, yathaabhuuta, no other way. Anusayas are eradicated at the different stages of enlightenment, and only the arahat is freed from all defilements, he has no more latent tendencies of defilements, no conditions for their arising. Nina. ************************************************************* back to Anders and Sarah! >(and this > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. I thought it was > pretty much settled with this quote: > > "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) > > Which pretty much spells Nibbana, but Kom pointed out that the translation > as this being consciousness was dubious, although I get the impression that > this was primarily because Nibbana as consciousness like this is mentioned > very few places in the Pali Canon (correct me if I'm wrong here, Kom). B.Bodhi translates the passage as: 'the consciousness that makes no showing, And in becoming about to disbecome, Not claiming being with respect to all: that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc I think your comments are correct according to BB's notes. He adds, "MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the sense that "it can be cognized" '. Anders, I don't know any of the pali here (which probably wouldn't help anyway), but I fail to see why this description of nibbana has anything to do with the idea of Nivana being present in us..... > > But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn > Chah: I think I'll leave comments on his writings as I may misunderstand him. > A final passage: > > Freed, dissociated, & released from ten things, the Tathagata dwells with > unrestricted awareness, Vahuna. Which ten? Freed, dissociated, & released > from form... feeling... perception... processes... consciousness... birth... > aging... death... stress*... defilement, he dwells with unrestricted > awareness. Just as a red, blue, or white lotus born in the water and growing > in the water, rises up above the water and stands with no water adhering to > it, in the same way the Tathagata -- freed, dissociated, & released from > these ten things -- dwells with unrestricted awareness. (A X.81) > > What he is saying here, is that when totally freed (unbound), even from > consciousness, there is still this this "unrestricted awareness" left. > Now i know why i've been slow to reply to you! OK just tracked it down. I just have the PTS translation of this with no footnotes or Pali. I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading above. Here it says (with my notes after S.): 'The Wayfarer dwells free, detached and released from physical body, feeling,perception, mental factors and consciousness ....from rebirth, decay and death ....from the passions, Bahuna, the Wayfarer is free, detached and released, and dwells with a mind whose barriers are broken down' I hope I have at least given an indication of why some of us say that reading the suttas is not quite as simple as it seems and how a little understanding of abhidhamma comes into play here. Anders, I really appreciate your keen interest and Tipitaka citations. I look forward to more. Sarah 7297 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 8:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear all, I had meant to give fuller references before posting, so let me add them now: --- > > There's a sutta which says: > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming defilements. AN I.51-52 > I like to quote from Acharn's Survey of Paramattha dhammas http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > > > > "Consciousness without feature, without end, luminous all around, Maj NIk, 49, The Invitation of a Brahma,24-26 > I think your comments are correct according to BB's notes. He adds, "MA note 513 > > > A final passage: > > > > Freed, dissociated, & released from ten things, the Tathagata dwells with > > unrestricted awareness, Vahuna. Which ten? > > these ten things -- dwells with unrestricted awareness. (A X.81) Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, Text V, 151-2) 7298 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Well, as I have say a short "hellow" I say "hellow to all of you!" and just want to say that I "also" have been lucky just like all of "you" to get a "human life in this very short period of a Buddha sasana" in this "infinite" sansara - specially, because using "this life" any person can limit his infinite sansara to a maxium of future seven lives only. But keeping in mind that you have to "let" the mango rippen... ~ may we all get wisdom, to "understand" nirvana Ranil >From: dhammastudygroup Moderator >Subject: Welcome to dhammastudygroup >Date: 9 Aug 2001 08:51:58 -0000 > > >Dear Dhamma Friend, > >Welcome to the group. > >We hope you will take part in and benefit from the exchange of views here. > >All new members are invited to consider posting a short ‘Hello’. Other >members would be interested to know something about you, your interest in >Buddhism and how you found your way here! > >Wishing you progress in the dhamma > >Sarah and Jonothan Abbott >(Moderators) > > >Please read the following guidelines and save a copy of this message for >future reference. > >POSTS > >1. We welcome any questions, answers, or comments relating to the Buddha’s >teachings (no matter how lighthearted). > >2. Please use an appropriate subject heading for messages and replies. >This makes it easier to follow different threads, or to browse the archives >later. > >3. For replies, delete any part of the original message that is not >directly relevant to your reply. This saves the reader from having to >scroll through large chunks of text, and saves archive space which may be >limited in future. > >4. Because of potential limits on storage space, please use hyperlinks >when referring to on-line texts, except for short passages. > >5. Please respect and be tolerant of views which may be different from >your own. Absolutely no flame messages or harsh language. > >6. The following are off-topic for our purposes (no matter how interesting >or useful they may seem): chain letters, virus alerts, ‘everybody in my >address book’ messages, circulars, petitions, urban legends, or any other >similar messages. Just questions, answers, or comments relating to the >Buddha’s teachings, please! > >7. Sorry, but attachments are not accepted on this list. > >8. Please respect copyright laws. > >9. Posts to the list are generally not moderated, but we reserve the right >to moderate posts of members who send inappropriate messages. > > >Contact us- >The moderators can be contacted off-list at Jon & Sarah172 > >For your information: >The Yahoo! Groups website on which this list is hosted allows you to select >the form in which you receive or read messages posted to the list. You can >choose from the following settings- > >1) Individual Emails – This is the default setting. Each message posted to >the list will be sent to your email inbox. > >2) Daily Digest – With this setting, you will receive a number of posts to >the list in a single email message to your inbox. Useful if you want to >reduce the number of incoming messages, or wish to scroll quickly through >the incoming messages. > >3) No Mail, Web Only – With this setting none of the messages posted to the >list will be sent to your inbox. You can browse messages by going to the >list’s home page at http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup > 7299 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup well ranil dont you think that u can get away that easily, according to the laws of this DSG mini-universe you will have to give more detailed introduction of urself. :o) welcome and regards gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: "ranil gunawardena" Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:44 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > Well, as I have say a short "hellow" I say "hellow to all of you!" and just > want to say that I "also" have been lucky just like all of "you" to get a > "human life in this very short period of a Buddha sasana" in this "infinite" > sansara - specially, because using "this life" any person can limit his > infinite sansara to a maxium of future seven lives only. But keeping in mind > that you have to "let" the mango rippen... > > ~ may we all get wisdom, to "understand" nirvana > Ranil > > 7300 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 10:11pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > Is it also your understanding that none of the characteristics of the > > realities that are arising now (the 5 kandhas) can be truly experienced, > > since the consciousness that is experiecing them is conditioned? Is it also > > your understanding that until one's consciousness > > becomes "unconditioned", one cannot experience any realities as they are? > > > > kom > > I don't think that the five sense organs experience what anything actually *is*. > How could they? As far as I know, you would be in accordance with the teaching to say the five sense organs cannot experience anything. The 5 sense organs do not experience, only the consciousness and mental factors can experience. > We don't get an experience of an outer object without a mental > interpretation of impressions which are put together by the mind to form an image. When one of the 5 sense objects impinges on the sense organ, and there is a process of consciousness (the sense-door process) (A) rising to cognize the object, the process of consciousness is said to be experiencing the actual characteristics (sabhava) of the object. The mind-door process of consciousness that rises immediately afterward (B), interrupted only by some "life-continuity" consciousness, also experience the sabhava of the object. It is only some processes later (extremely short) (C) that the consciousness starts to make an interpretation of the sense object, such as "shapes", "persons", "Robert", etc. The abhidhamma teaching indicates that the consciousness and the mental factors (in your terminology, the mind) at (A) and (B) are cognizing the actual characteristics (sabhava) of the reality (perhaps without thorough penetration), and the consciousness at (C) is cognizing concept (pannatti) of that reality. (A) and (B) cognize the characteristics (sabhava) of actual realities, where as (C) cognizes the concept which has no sabhava. For us who may not have accumulated enough wisdom, it may appear that (A), (B), and (C) are cognizing the same thing, where as they are actually not. This is the brief explanation of how the mind can cognize both what is real (with sabhava) and what is unreal (without sabhava) and appear to the person that the dhamma with and without sabhava are ones and the same (while they are not). > However, it is possible to have moments of insight when we experience > exactly what is arising with clarity, and those would be exceptional moments when > there is a breakthrough in conditioned consciousness. What you said here would also be in accordance with the teaching. There are some moments of consciousness that experience the sabhava of the object, if rising with wisdom, that would penetrate the true characteristics of the object that it is experiencing. Hence, it is *possible* that a conditioned reality, in this case a consciousness conditioned by wisdom, to penetrate the true characteristic of the object it is cognizing. This is how the Buddha encouraged us to "know feeling in feeling", i.e., to penetrate the true characteristic of feeling. The same argument goes with how the supramundane (the conditioned consciousness that rises at the point of enlightenment) consciousness can penetrate the true characteristics (sabhava) of unconditioned reality (nibanna). > I believe these breaks in > conditioned consciousness to experience true insight are cumulative and gradually > lift the level of clarity in the person. This is also in accordance with the teaching. Wisdom is accumulative, just like how greed, anger, and delusion are also accumulative. This is why it is rare to have wisdom as we have accumulated greed, anger, and delusion constantly for aeons. When there is enough wisdom accumulated, then it is possible to have moments of supramundane consciousness that penetrates the sabhava of the unconditioned. > They would start as exceptional > experiences and as the person moved towards an enlightened state, they would > become more and more common. The person would gradually live in a much more > perceptive, insightful state, unclouded by false concepts and presumptions. Agreed... kom 7301 From: m. nease Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 10:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Hi, Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Are you saying that anyone in particular is a > Theosophist? Sorry for my carelessness in posting this to the list. No, I was not. > I am not. Kom points > out below that one of the definitions of an > Annihilationist [Nihilist] is one who > believes his 'self' ends at death. > > I was questioning what then *does* persist after > death, a valid question. Of course. > As for Joseph Campbell, THE MASKS OF GOD is > recognized as a classic in its field. > I think to call it a popular piece of junk is not > very objective, even if you > disagree with what he says about Buddhism or other > subjects. This certainly was harsh speech, for which I again apologize. > He is acknowledged > as one of the most brilliant minds in his field, and > his work is in mythology, so > he is not commenting on the practice of any given > tradition in the same way that > members of this group might. > > I don't think it can be judged on the same basis, or > has much to do with this > thread. > > However, even though you meant to post off-list to > those who 'agree' with you, you > seem to have some aversion to work through about > this, and your strong opinion > against mythologists, theosophists and others do not > seem to accord with the > injunction for 'dropping all views' that the Buddha > suggested. Yes, aversion is never a good thing. > I hope that we can discuss the subjects of how > Nibbana is experienced, by whom, > and what kind of self does or does not exist in > reality, openly and with respect. > so as not to generate the consequences of negativity > at a future date. No disrespect intended, Robert. Apologies again, all around. mike 7302 From: m. nease Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 10:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation p.s. I meant also to say thanks for your very thoughtful, measured and courteous response. I'll remeber it as an example of 'right speech' in the future. mike 7304 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 10:48pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't= > > > > > exist? > > > > > > Nibbana? > Kom, > I would ask you what you mean by 'exists'. I would say the kandhas exist > provisionally, in other words they are unstable and impermanent, constantly > shifting based on conditioned causes and having no actual identity, while Nibbana > alone is self-existent. > > Are you in accord with that idea, or would you say something different about it? > Robert, I think you are saying that each of the 5 kandhas exists conditionally, i.e., it exists because of conditions infinitesmally briefly and then falls away immediately, and nibbbana exists unconditionally. There can be no identity in the kandhas because as soon as you identify with one of the kandhas, it has fallen away (if self is identified in the kandhas, then self cannot sustain). To this idea, I am in agreement! Now, let me ask you more, does a person exist? For example, does Kom exist? When you think of Kom, what is the consciousness experiencing? Is it experiencing any of the 5 kandhas? Is it experiencing something that exists? kom 7305 From: m. nease Date: Thu Aug 9, 2001 11:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Kom, Thanks for taking a tremendous amount of very complex abhidhamma and expressing it in terms that even I can grasp. Any one of (especially) your steps A,B and C below could have taken pages of detailed explanation--I know because I've read those pages, often without much over-arching comprehension. By paraphrasing all the details, lists and terminology involved and expressing the main features in conventional terms, you have (in my opinion) created a very nice primer of abhidhamma in a single post. Saadhu! Thanks also, Robert E., for the insightful questions and comments prompting this response. mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > When one of the 5 sense objects impinges on the > sense organ, and there > is a process of consciousness (the sense-door > process) (A) rising to > cognize the object, the process of consciousness is > said to be experiencing > the actual characteristics (sabhava) of the object. > The mind-door process > of consciousness that rises immediately afterward > (B), interrupted only by > some "life-continuity" consciousness, also > experience the sabhava of the > object. It is only some processes later (extremely > short) (C) that the > consciousness starts to make an interpretation of > the sense object, such > as "shapes", "persons", "Robert", etc. > > The abhidhamma teaching indicates that the > consciousness and the > mental factors (in your terminology, the mind) at > (A) and (B) are > cognizing the actual characteristics (sabhava) of > the reality (perhaps > without thorough penetration), and the consciousness > at (C) is cognizing > concept (pannatti) of that reality. (A) and (B) > cognize the characteristics > (sabhava) of actual realities, where as (C) cognizes > the concept which has > no sabhava. For us who may not have accumulated > enough wisdom, it > may appear that (A), (B), and (C) are cognizing the > same thing, where as > they are actually not. > > This is the brief explanation of how the mind can > cognize both what is real > (with sabhava) and what is unreal (without sabhava) > and appear to the > person that the dhamma with and without sabhava are > ones and the same > (while they are not). > > > However, it is possible to have moments of insight > when we experience > > exactly what is arising with clarity, and those > would be exceptional > moments when > > there is a breakthrough in conditioned > consciousness. > > What you said here would also be in accordance with > the teaching. There > are some moments of consciousness that experience > the sabhava of the > object, if rising with wisdom, that would penetrate > the true characteristics > of the object that it is experiencing. Hence, it is > *possible* that a > conditioned reality, in this case a consciousness > conditioned by wisdom, to > penetrate the true characteristic of the object it > is cognizing. This is how > the Buddha encouraged us to "know feeling in > feeling", i.e., to penetrate > the true characteristic of feeling. > > The same argument goes with how the supramundane > (the conditioned > consciousness that rises at the point of > enlightenment) consciousness can > penetrate the true characteristics (sabhava) of > unconditioned reality > (nibanna). > > > I believe these breaks in > > conditioned consciousness to experience true > insight are cumulative and > gradually > > lift the level of clarity in the person. > > This is also in accordance with the teaching. > Wisdom is accumulative, just > like how greed, anger, and delusion are also > accumulative. This is why it > is rare to have wisdom as we have accumulated greed, > anger, and > delusion constantly for aeons. When there is > enough wisdom > accumulated, then it is possible to have moments of > supramundane > consciousness that penetrates the sabhava of the > unconditioned. > > > They would start as exceptional > > experiences and as the person moved towards an > enlightened state, > they would > > become more and more common. The person would > gradually live in a > much more > > perceptive, insightful state, unclouded by false > concepts and > presumptions. > > Agreed... > > kom 7306 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 0:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/8/01 10:25:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Dear Howard, > Great to hear of your developing appreciation of Abhidhamma . I know > I am biased but I feel this is going together with increasing wisdom. > Science cannot investigate nama in the way they are able to > investigate rupa. It is something each must see for himself. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't completely agree with this. Science can *indirectly* investigate mind in various ways, using technical equpiment and observation "from the outside", as it were. Certainly that is only an indirect and at-a-distance approach, but the results are likely to give either some sort of confirmation or the opposite of the Abhidhammic theory. It seems likely to me that at a time that a "subject" reports having a subjective experience (such as seeing a red patch), the read-out of equipment hooked up to him/her would show a sequence of changing states, some of which could be correlated with various internal mental states, including the discernment via one or more sensory gateways, and, in this way,it could be observed whether or not more than one object can be discerned at the same time. ----------------------------------------------------------- > I like the definition in the International Dictionary of > Psychology: "Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon; > it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it > evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written about it." (cited in > Crick 1994, vii). > Perhaps the best scientist in cognitive science is Francisco Varela - > but then he is a devout Buddhist and constantly refers to Buddhist > texts. > robert > > > Howard wrote: > > Hi, all - > > > > I've been reading over and mulling over material on > Abhidhamma - with > > steadily increasing appreciation, BTW. There is one very > fundamental > > principle of Abhidhamma which is kind of a "backbone" for it, > namely that > > there is only one object of discernment, one arammana, at a time. I > was > > curious whether anyone on the list knows the findings of cognitive > science or > > neurophysiology with regard to this issue? > > > > 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) > > > > > > > > > > > > =============================== 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) 7307 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:21am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --Dear Howard, There have been experiments that demonstrate , for example, that even before a subject gained a conceptual idea about some stimulus that they already reacted in subtle ways(they reacted even before they 'knew' the stimulus existed). This certainly supports the Abhidhamma. We know that physics has gained some idea of the extraordinary rapidity of change in matter. But still (as far as I can tell)not as fast as the actaul happenings. According to the Abhidhamma mind states are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa. So whatever results they are seeing cannot equate with the actual moments . Whatever results they do get (if accurate) can only accord with fairly major effects of mindstates. A far inferior tool to panna(developed wisdom) robert S- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 8/8/01 10:25:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Robert writes: > > > > Dear Howard, > > Great to hear of your developing appreciation of Abhidhamma . I know > > I am biased but I feel this is going together with increasing wisdom. > > Science cannot investigate nama in the way they are able to > > investigate rupa. It is something each must see for himself. > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't completely agree with this. Science can *indirectly* > investigate mind in various ways, using technical equpiment and observation > "from the outside", as it were. Certainly that is only an indirect and > at-a-distance approach, but the results are likely to give either some sort > of confirmation or the opposite of the Abhidhammic theory. It seems likely to > me that at a time that a "subject" reports having a subjective experience > (such as seeing a red patch), the read-out of equipment hooked up to him/her > would show a sequence of changing states, some of which could be correlated > with various internal mental states, including the discernment via one or > more sensory gateways, and, in this way,it could be observed whether or not > more than one object can be discerned at the same time. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > I like the definition in the International Dictionary of > > Psychology: "Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon; > > it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it > > evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written about it." (cited in > > Crick 1994, vii). > > Perhaps the best scientist in cognitive science is Francisco Varela - > > but then he is a devout Buddhist and constantly refers to Buddhist > > texts. > > robert > > > > > 7308 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 7:36am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --- <> wrote: > --Dear howard, just wanted to add on this thread that I think it is well worth discussing any issues to do with science and Buddhism. I think scientism is the dominant ideology in the world, and so many/most people are influenced by it to a degree. Joe cummings has written a little about it and we also have Suan on this list who is interested in science and Buddhism. My research professionally is related to science and worldview. best wishes robert 7309 From: Larry Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 8:19am Subject: Re: accents Sorry about that. This is a web tv thing I sent to myself for storage. I have no idea how it got here. Larry 7310 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 5:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/9/01 6:25:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > --Dear Howard, > There have been experiments that demonstrate , for example, that even > before a subject gained a conceptual idea about some stimulus that > they already reacted in subtle ways(they reacted even before > they 'knew' the stimulus existed). This certainly supports the > Abhidhamma. > We know that physics has gained some idea of the extraordinary > rapidity of change in matter. But still (as far as I can tell)not as > fast as the actaul happenings. > According to the Abhidhamma mind states are arising and falling away > 17 times faster than rupa. So whatever results they are seeing cannot > equate with the actual moments . Whatever results they do get (if > accurate) can only accord with fairly major effects of mindstates. A > far inferior tool to panna(developed wisdom) > robert > ============================== You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind states are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is something that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What I find perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at a greater rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather how it is possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I understand Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the flow of cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual citta. In what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared with the flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a problem here. Can you help my understanding with 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) 7311 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 5:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/9/01 7:38:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > > --Dear howard, > just wanted to add on this thread that I think it is well worth > discussing any issues to do with science and Buddhism. I think > scientism is the dominant ideology in the world, and so many/most > people are influenced by it to a degree. Joe cummings has written a > little about it and we also have Suan on this list who is interested > in science and Buddhism. My research professionally is related to > science and worldview. > ========================== I agree that such issues are worthy of discussion, though I don't consider myself particularly competent in such an area, my knowledge of physics, biology, and chemistry being quite limited. 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) 7312 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:51am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --- Howard wrote: > > > > ============================== > You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind states > are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is something > that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What I find > perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at a greater > rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather how it is > possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I understand > Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the flow of > cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual citta. In > what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared with the > flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a problem here. > Can you help my understanding with this? > > With metta, > Howard ____________ Dear Howard, I think we have an idea of what panna knows and how it knows. Like the recent discussion about the fact that panna knows the immediately preceeding mind processes: This worries us if we assume that citta can only know itself at the exact moment it arises. In fact as we discussed a moment of citta with lobha cannot understand itself- but following processes with panna can understand the lobha. It is all happening fantastically fast and thus it is still correct to talk about knowing the present moment. Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after these. The moments of javanna citta with panna arise in a series of seven cittas that are conditioned by each other. There is an accumualation of understanding during this time (see the Patthana) and also there are further conditions by upanissaya paccaya for more insight in future processes. If we think of panna as a sort of mind atom that knows only some cittas (say) then we limit the nature and function of panna. Panna has the function of understanding and is a dhamma that has no limits. It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now when we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight into the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) and so its characteristic may be hard to discern. I don't know if this helps. best wishes robert 7313 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 0:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What > doesn't= > > > > > > > exist? > > > > > > > > Nibbana? > > > Kom, > > I would ask you what you mean by 'exists'. I would say the kandhas > exist > > provisionally, in other words they are unstable and impermanent, > constantly > > shifting based on conditioned causes and having no actual identity, > while Nibbana > > alone is self-existent. > > > > Are you in accord with that idea, or would you say something different > about it? > > > > Robert, I think you are saying that each of the 5 kandhas exists > conditionally, i.e., it exists because of conditions infinitesmally briefly and > then falls away immediately, and nibbbana exists unconditionally. There > can be no identity in the kandhas because as soon as you identify with one > of the kandhas, it has fallen away (if self is identified in the kandhas, then > self cannot sustain). To this idea, I am in agreement! > > Now, let me ask you more, does a person exist? For example, does Kom > exist? When you think of Kom, what is the consciousness experiencing? > Is it experiencing any of the 5 kandhas? Is it experiencing something that > exists? > > kom I would say that what we think of as Kom or Robert E. does not exist as an actual 'thing'. Instead it is an accumulated impression of various characteristics, actions, etc. You exist for me as certain impressions that I have of you. Put together, they form a mind-image which I call "Kom". The fact that I experience you through the internet or by having coffee with you every day for 20 years is probably inconsequential to the result. Except in the case of knowing you for a long time, I would have an even stronger presumption that I knew who and what *you* were. The way I exist for myself is also as a kind of impression, but I think it's a little more complex, because the familiar feeling I associate with my idea of self constantly accompanies all of my thoughts, feelings, etc. It is like a thought-feeling addition of intimate existence that I attach to every momentary experience. So I would say that "Robert E." exists as a familiar feeling and presumption in the mind and emotions. Do I really exist? When I've tried to look into the 'non-existence of self' personally, in the past I was just confused. But lately when I've tried to investigate this, there has been more of a conviction that there is no "I" as a kind of internal entity, but that "Robert E." is a habitual convention of thought, feeling and belief. If I accept the fact that Robert E. does not really exist as such, there is a feeling of loneliness that arises. It is as if this system, this bodymind, is very sad without the thought of an ego inhabiting it. When it cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series of arisings with no inhabitant to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, almost of despair. Well, these feelings of loneliness and despair at not 'being anybody' are enough to drive most people back to enduring the sufferings of karmas, the result of all the things they do in the service of this familiar sense of self, to protect and promote it, and attach and avert in relation to the things it likes or dislikes. It takes some tolerance of these feelings to be able to stay with the idea of 'emptiness of self or entity' and simply observe what really takes place. And I have never found an actual "Robert E." living anywhere in this pyscho-biological system. But of course that familiar sense of being somebody constantly rearises as soon as I relax my vigilance. Best Regards, Robert E., or.....whomever........ 7314 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 0:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi, Robert, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Are you saying that anyone in particular is a > > Theosophist? > > Sorry for my carelessness in posting this to the list. > No, I was not. > > > I am not. Kom points > > out below that one of the definitions of an > > Annihilationist [Nihilist] is one who > > believes his 'self' ends at death. > > > > I was questioning what then *does* persist after > > death, a valid question. > > Of course. > > > As for Joseph Campbell, THE MASKS OF GOD is > > recognized as a classic in its field. > > I think to call it a popular piece of junk is not > > very objective, even if you > > disagree with what he says about Buddhism or other > > subjects. > > This certainly was harsh speech, for which I again > apologize. > > > He is acknowledged > > as one of the most brilliant minds in his field, and > > his work is in mythology, so > > he is not commenting on the practice of any given > > tradition in the same way that > > members of this group might. > > > > I don't think it can be judged on the same basis, or > > has much to do with this > > thread. > > > > However, even though you meant to post off-list to > > those who 'agree' with you, you > > seem to have some aversion to work through about > > this, and your strong opinion > > against mythologists, theosophists and others do not > > seem to accord with the > > injunction for 'dropping all views' that the Buddha > > suggested. > > Yes, aversion is never a good thing. > > > I hope that we can discuss the subjects of how > > Nibbana is experienced, by whom, > > and what kind of self does or does not exist in > > reality, openly and with respect. > > so as not to generate the consequences of negativity > > at a future date. > > No disrespect intended, Robert. Apologies again, all > around. > > mike Thanks for your response, Mike. I feel like I sometimes step off a limb on this list, because I am admittedly using my own logic and my knowledge of Buddhism, which has been consistent, but not thorough in the Pali Canon. I am a little more familiar with works and concepts of Ch'an Buddhism, but my interest in Theravada is sincere. I know that at times people will have to tell me that at least as far as the Pali Canon and the Tripitaka are concerned, that I am way off, or not understanding the Buddha's intent. And I am prepared for that. It's part of my learning process. At the same time, I can sometimes have a valid view and contribute something. I have been reading Thich Nath Hanh's translation of the SUTRA ON COMPLETE AWARENESS OF THE BREATH, and I am amazed at its simplicity and completeness. It spells out the Buddha's path in a way that anyone with an open mind can understand. The Theravadan Canon has this kind of clarity and structure to offer, and someone like myself, who has struggled with Ch'an and Zen methodology for a long time, can really appreciate the kind of grounding and surety of path that this can give me. We are all working with our tendencies and accumulations, in whatever form, and the fact that you accidentally sent your note to this group instead of as a private message should not be a cause for alarm or embarrassment. It was obviously meant to be here, and it opened up issues and topics that might not have been looked at otherwise. I consider every event in a group like this to be a good one, and I'm happy to rise to the occasion, and chew on what you have contributed. 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" 7315 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 0:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Robert E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > > > Is it also your understanding that none of the characteristics of the > > > realities that are arising now (the 5 kandhas) can be truly > experienced, > > > since the consciousness that is experiecing them is conditioned? Is it > also > > > your understanding that until one's consciousness > > > becomes "unconditioned", one cannot experience any realities as they > are? > > > > > > kom > > > > I don't think that the five sense organs experience what anything > actually *is*. > > How could they? > > As far as I know, you would be in accordance with the teaching to say the > five sense organs cannot experience anything. The 5 sense organs do not > experience, only the consciousness and mental factors can experience. > > > We don't get an experience of an outer object without a mental > > interpretation of impressions which are put together by the mind to form > an image. > > When one of the 5 sense objects impinges on the sense organ, and there > is a process of consciousness (the sense-door process) (A) rising to > cognize the object, the process of consciousness is said to be experiencing > the actual characteristics (sabhava) of the object. The mind-door process > of consciousness that rises immediately afterward (B), interrupted only by > some "life-continuity" consciousness, also experience the sabhava of the > object. It is only some processes later (extremely short) (C) that the > consciousness starts to make an interpretation of the sense object, such > as "shapes", "persons", "Robert", etc. > > The abhidhamma teaching indicates that the consciousness and the > mental factors (in your terminology, the mind) at (A) and (B) are > cognizing the actual characteristics (sabhava) of the reality (perhaps > without thorough penetration), and the consciousness at (C) is cognizing > concept (pannatti) of that reality. (A) and (B) cognize the characteristics > (sabhava) of actual realities, where as (C) cognizes the concept which has > no sabhava. For us who may not have accumulated enough wisdom, it > may appear that (A), (B), and (C) are cognizing the same thing, where as > they are actually not. > > This is the brief explanation of how the mind can cognize both what is real > (with sabhava) and what is unreal (without sabhava) and appear to the > person that the dhamma with and without sabhava are ones and the same > (while they are not). Wonderful explanation. Very helpful. Thanks for your profoundly simple way of speaking. The idea that the consciousness and mental factors can cognize the true characteristics of the object, yet *not necessarily penetrate deeply* as you put it, is particularly interesting. This helps me to understand how the advanced cittas could cognize the true characteristics of Nibbana, but *not penetrate them deeply* as one would *in* Nibbana, if I am hearing you correctly. I think that what we are struggling with here [or maybe it's just me who's struggling!] is my finickiness about the ideaof 'apprehension' or really experiencing something as it is. I am taking this rather literally, as I expect the categories and levels laid out in the Suttas are meant to be precise. I can accept the idea that the higher consciousness could 'understand' the true characteristics of Nibbana, to the extent one understands them without having realized Nibbana. I think you would agree that there must be some measure of understanding that is reserved for the experience of Nibbana itself, and that cannot be accessible to any prior state, however highly developed. So the question is in what way and to what extent Nibbana is apprehended prior to being realized. The danger is that someone [probably a lot more developed than me!] will think they 'know' Nibbana prior to realizing it. Another danger is in turning Nibbana into an object of mind, thus blocking its realization. Are either of these dangers mentioned in the Suttas? Not having gone through the scriptures myself, I would love to know if there is also a passage or passages that speaks about the *way* in which Nibbana is apprehended in the various higher states of development prior to realization. This is just to have clarity of the path, but I know that to really answer these questions I need to go to the trouble of getting there myself! Then I can really worry about what is and isn't apprehended in a 'higher state'. Thanks again, Robert E. P.S. I have deleted the comments following this in which we are pretty much in accord, but I enjoyed and appreciate them. ----------------------------- ===== 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" 7316 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 1:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders [and all listening], The only difference I can discern between Parinibbana and mere cessation of being, according to those taking the 'other side' of the argument from you, is that mere cessation does not end karmas or prevent rebirth into a realm of suffering. Parinibbana ends suffering and the cycle of birth and death. It does not necessitate the prior existence of the Tathagata as an actual personage beyond the kandhas. It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and ceases to be with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the Tathagata never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas dissolve having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise again? I take your side in the argument, thinking that there is an existent reality to awareness or Nibbana that is not associated with the kandhas. But I also realize that this may be falling into mysticism and that it may be falling into objectifying consciousness or awareness into an entity, just not a physical one. Whichever way you assert that Awareness or Nibbana exists after death, or that Awareness or Nibbana does not exist after death, you fall into error. Idealistic mysticism or Nihilism seem to be the only available choices in conceptual thinking about this matter. It shows the amazing wisdom of the Buddha in refusing to assert or deny these alternatives. So how is the problem solved? Is it necessary to assert the existence of a self, Nibbana or consciousness? Is it necessasry to deny the existence of a self, Nibbana or consciousness? What's the alternative to these alternatives? What is Right View in this situation? Robert ================================= --- Anders Honoré wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sarah Procter Abbott > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 11:50 AM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > > > Can you tell me what the point of the whole deal is then? Why is there > even > > > Nibbana? The Buddha said that because there is Nibbana, an escape from > > > Samsara can be discerned, but obviosuly that is not the case since > Nibbana > > > is not even experienced after Parinibbana. There's just cessation. > > > > I've been following your discussion with Kom and I think this is a very > valid > > question! > > Thank you for joining in on the discussion. I think Kom and I could use some > fresh perspective. > > > If we're honest with ourselves, are we really interested in giving up > > attachment now? Very seldom (except in theory again!). This is why it's a > long > > and gradual path and why now we would rather have an idea of nibbana as > > 'eternal bliss' than as cessation of kilesa and parinibbana as cessation > of the > > khandhas (aggregates of existence). > > As I see it, Parinibbana is very much the cessation of the kandhas. But > don't you think there's a reason that the death of an Arahant is called > Parinibbana, if not to pass into Nibbana (or become Nibbana, whatever)? > > > > Actually, come to think of it, there's a sutta where Sariputta ask a > > > student: "Do you construe the Tathagata as being in the kandhas?", to > which > > > he truthfully answers 'no'. How does that accord with this theory (could > > > find the source if you want to)? > > > > Thanks, you provided the source in another post. In reality it is only > (and has > > ever only been) the khandhas that exist - no Tathagata, no Anders or any > other > > being in them. I think Kom has explained this. This is why we need some > > understanding of abhidhamma or of different realities in order to read the > > suttas with right understanding of the meaning. > > Hmm, as I've said before, I am biased in my reading of the Sutta Pitaka, in > the sense that I also draw from Mahayana, but what I'm trying to say is not > new in Theravada either. Basically, I'm just trying to say that there's a > True Mind (to use a Mahayana term) as opposed to the conditioned Samasaric > mind of the kandhas and that mind *is* Nibbana, that mind is unconditioned. > You can call it self or not, but I would say that there is still something > there. > > There's a sutta which says: > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming defilements. > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming defilements." > > That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, as it > retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances (and this > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). I thought it was > pretty much settled with this quote: > > "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) > > Which pretty much spells Nibbana, but Kom pointed out that the translation > as this being consciousness was dubious, although I get the impression that > this was primarily because Nibbana as consciousness like this is mentioned > very few places in the Pali Canon (correct me if I'm wrong here, Kom). > > But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn > Chah: > > "But really this mind of ours is already unmoving and peaceful... really > peaceful! Just like a leaf which is still as long as no wind blows. If a > wind comes up the leaf flutters. The fluttering is due to the wind -- the > "fluttering" is due to those sense impressions; the mind follows them. If it > doesn't follow them, it doesn't "flutter." If we know fully the true nature > of sense impressions we will be unmoved. > > Our practice is simply to see the Original Mind. So we must train the mind > to know those sense impressions, and not get lost in them. To make it > peaceful. Just this is the aim of all this difficult practice we put > ourselves through. " > ........................... > "This Nature is not born, it does not age nor sicken. This Nature does not > die. This Nature is neither happy nor sad, neither big nor small, heavy nor > light; neither short nor long, black nor white. There's nothing you can > compare it to. No convention can reach it. This is why we say Nirvana has no > colour. All colors are merely conventions. The state which is beyond the > world is beyond the reach of worldly conventions." > > His own teacher Ajahn Mun makes an even clearer statement in his "Ballad of > Liberation from the Kandhas": > > Once we see through inconstancy, > the mind-source stops creating issues. > All that remains is the primal mind, > true & unchanging. > Knowing the mind-source > brings release from all worry & error. > If you go out to the mind-ends, > you're immediately wrong. > > A final passage: > > Freed, dissociated, & released from ten things, the Tathagata dwells with > unrestricted awareness, Vahuna. Which ten? Freed, dissociated, & released > from form... feeling... perception... processes... consciousness... birth... > aging... death... stress*... defilement, he dwells with unrestricted > awareness. Just as a red, blue, or white lotus born in the water and growing > in the water, rises up above the water and stands with no water adhering to > it, in the same way the Tathagata -- freed, dissociated, & released from > these ten things -- dwells with unrestricted awareness. (A X.81) > > What he is saying here, is that when totally freed (unbound), even from > consciousness, there is still this this "unrestricted awareness" left. > > > Anders, I'm sending this off in my usual hurry. I haven't got your other > post > > with the sutta extracts in front of me, but am happy to discuss these in > detail > > if Kom hasn't clarified the points to your satisfaction (not that I'm > likely to > > do any better!) > > Haha, go ahead and give it your best shot! > > > Best wishes and my usual appreciation for your study and sincere interest > in > > the dhamma. > > Thank you. > > > p.s In addition to the translations Jon mentioned, we also enjoy using > > B.Bodhi's translation of Maj Nik (1 vol) w/comm. notes (also Wisdom). > > Personally, I much prefer these to the PTS ones and really appreciate the > notes. > > Yes, I wish I had them myself. But feel free to supplement with them. > > ===== 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" 7317 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 1:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Forgive my ignorance, but what sutras would one specifically read to get the instructions outlined in this talk. What is the basic collection necessary for this. Or is it the whole Canon.................... Best, Robert E. --- Anders Honoré wrote: > SATIPATTHANA > THE FOURFOLD FOCUS OF MINDFULNESS > By Ajahn Brahmavamso > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > More has been said about the practice of Satipatthana than about any other > meditation practice by Buddhist teachers of today... except by this monk! So > in this Dhamma article I will keep up with the trend by presenting some > practical observations on this most misunderstood of Lord Buddha's > Teachings. > > Those of you who have been "sitting around" Buddhist Centres for a while > have probably heard some teachers claim that the fourfold "Focus of > Mindfulness" (my translation of "Satipatthana") is the "one and only way" to > the goal of full Enlightenment! Although this is an impressive sales pitch > for the teaching, it is neither a true translation of the original text nor > consistent with what the Lord Buddha said elsewhere. The very phrase > ("Ekayana Magga") which is mistranslated as "one and only way" occurs again > in the l2th Sutta (discourse) of the Majjhima collection where it > unmistakably means a "path with only one possible destination". Many > different paths can share a common destination. In fact, the "one and only > path" is the Lord Buddha's description, not of Satipatthana, but of the > Noble Eightfold Path: > > "Of all Ways, the Noble Eightfold Path is the best. > This is the only way, there is none other for the purity of insight" > Dhammapada verses 273 and 274 (abridged) > > Thus, the "only way" to Enlightenment, as all Buddhists should know anyway, > is the Noble Eightfold Path. The fourfold Focus of Mindfulness constitutes > only a part of this Path, the 7th factor. Jhanas are the 8th factor and > there is also Right View, Right Intention, Right Effort and the three > factors of Right Virtue. Each of these eight factors are necessary to > achieve the goal of full Enlightenment. lf any were redundant, then the Lord > Buddha would have taught a 7-fold path, or a 6-fold path etc. So, in your > practice of Buddhism, please keep in mind that all eight factors of the > noble Eightfold Path should be cultivated as the "one and only way". > Now the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness method as taught by the Lord Buddha, > is a very advanced practice. So advanced that the Lord Buddha said that if > anyone should develop them in the way He described for only seven days, then > they would achieve full Enlightenment or the state of non-returner. Many > meditators reading this may have gone on such a retreat for nine days or > even more and not yet fulfilled this most lofty of the Lord Buddha's > promises. Why not? Because, I suggest, you were not following the Lord > Buddha's instructions. > > If you want to practise the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness in the way that > the Lord Buddha said leads so rapidly to Enlightenment, then certain things > are required before you begin. The essential preparations are in short, full > cultivation of the other seven factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. Or, as > the Lord Budda said in the Anguttara collection ('Nines', Suttas 63 and 64), > one should maintain the five Precepts (the longer the better), abandon the > five Hindrances and then practise Satipatthana. > > These vital prerequisites are actually stated by the Lord Buddha in His two > discourses on the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness, as "Vineyya Loke > Abhijjha-Domanassam" (please forgive me quoting Pali. It is the only way I > can make this important point). This phrase is usually translated as "having > put away covetousness and grief for the world", or something similar. Such > translations mean so little to meditators that they ignore this instruction > altogether, and thereby miss the bus! In the time of the Lord Buddha, the > monks, nuns and lay disciples would have understood the phrase to mean > "after having abandoned the five Hindrances"! The authoritative commentaries > to the two Satipatthana Suttas taught by the Lord Buddha both clearly state > that "Abhijjha-Domanassam" (sorry for the Pali again!) refer precisely to > the five Hindrances. Elsewhere in the recorded Teachings of the Lord Buddha, > "Abhijjha" is a synonym for the first Hindrance, "Domanassam" is a synonym > for the second Hindrance, and together they stand, in Pali idiom, as an > abbreviation for all five. This then means that the five Hindrances must be > abandoned first before beginning any of the Focus of Mindfulness practices. > It is, in my not-so-humble opinion, precisely because meditators attempt to > practise the Satipatthana method with some of the Hindrances still remaining > that they achieve no great or lasting result. > > It is the function of Jhana practice, the ultimate factor of the Noble > Eightfold Path, to abandon all of the five Hindrances long enough to gain > BIG Insight. For example, in the 68th Sutta of the Majjhima collection > ("Nalakapanna"), the Lord Buddha stated that for the meditator who does not > attain to Jhana, the five Hindrances together with discontent and weariness > invade the mind and remain. Only when one does attain to Jhana do the five > Hindrances together with discontent and weariness not invade one's mind and > remain the way the Lord Buddha said it is. > > Any meditator who has experienced the powerful Jhanas would know through > that experience, and what happens after, what a mind without any Hindrances > is truly like. The meditator who hasn't known Jhanas does not realise the > many subtle forms Hindrances can take. They may think that the hindrances > are abandoned but, the truth is, they just don't see them and so do not get > great results in their meditation. This is why Samatha practice which > cultivates Jhana is part of the Satipatthana teaching and why it is > misinformation to call Satipatthana "pure Vipassana". Even my teacher, Ajahn > Chah, said over and over again that Samatha and Vipassana, "calm and > insight", go together and are inseparable as the two faces of a coin. > > Having patiently completed the necessary preparations, the meditator > sustains their mindfulness on one of the four focuses: their own body, the > pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind consciousness and, > fourthly, the objects of mind. When the Hindrances are gone and one can > sustain one's powerful and penetrating attention on these four objects, only > then is it possible to realise that deep in our psyche, far deeper than the > veil of intelligent thinking, we have been assuming a Self. We have been > assuming that this body is "me" or "mine", that pleasure or pain has > something to do with me, that the mind which looks on is our Soul or > something close, and that the objects of mind such as thought or volition > (the 'chooser') is a Self, me, or mine. In short, the purpose of the > fourfold Focus of Mindfulness is to instruct one what to do when one has > emerged from a Jhana, to uncover the deeply disguised delusion of a Soul and > then see what the Lord Buddha saw, the Truth of Anatta. > > This is not an easy thing to do, but it can be done, and it can take only > seven days. That is if one follows the Lord Buddha's instructions, follows > them and takes no short cuts. > > Ajahn Brahm > (From: Newsletter, July-October 1997, > Buddhist Society of Western Australia, Perth, Australia) > > 7318 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 1:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Epstein" Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 1:11 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > Dear Anders [and all listening], > Right View in this situation? > > Robert Practice. Practice and investigate the Turning of the Wheel x 12 and the 40 trainings the Buddha left. Aristotelian logic cannot be applied here. If there is such a thing as a "glimpse" or "taste", then it is experiential and words render only crude approximations. The map, the address is not the place. Conventional. Absolute Dhamma truth is not found in a conundrum or words, tautologies, or paradigm testing. I think the question is less about the problem of "Tathagatology". ;-) I am not an expert but the insight here is without much left to express in words... there is the Path but no walker on it. (Vis. Mag.) Metta, Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo 7319 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 2:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Howard Just a quick comment on your main thread here. Is there any more reason why we should take comfort from an apparent 'confirmation' of the teachings in the findings of cognitive science, than we should be discouraged by an apparent contradiction arising from those findings? Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really give any indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind > states > are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is > something > that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What I > find > perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at a > greater > rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather how it > is > possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I > understand > Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the flow > of > cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual citta. > In > what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared with > the > flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a problem > here. > Can you help my understanding with this? I suppose a number of moments of cittas that each "know" another citta would then allow something to be known about the flow of those other cittas. (Isn't that in fact how we observe movement anyway?) Jon 7320 From: Joshua Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 2:59pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Forgive my ignorance, but what sutras would one specifically read to get the > instructions outlined in this talk. > > What is the basic collection necessary for this. > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > > > Best, > Robert E. > Ok, aside from the suttas dealing only with Satipatthana, I would say (roughly) Anguttara II.29 Anguttara IX.63-64 (he mentions) Majjhima 68 (he mentions) Majjhima 107 The last one outlines step by step exactly how a monk should train himself in a sequential manner. Hope that helps. 7321 From: Joshua Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 3:17pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Anders [and all listening], > The only difference I can discern between Parinibbana and mere cessation of being, > according to those taking the 'other side' of the argument from you, is that mere > cessation does not end karmas or prevent rebirth into a realm of suffering. > Parinibbana ends suffering and the cycle of birth and death. It does not > necessitate the prior existence of the Tathagata as an actual personage beyond the > kandhas. > > It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and ceases to be > with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the Tathagata > never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas dissolve > having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise again? > > I take your side in the argument, thinking that there is an existent reality to > awareness or Nibbana that is not associated with the kandhas. But I also realize > that this may be falling into mysticism and that it may be falling into > objectifying consciousness or awareness into an entity, just not a physical one. > > Whichever way you assert that Awareness or Nibbana exists after death, or that > Awareness or Nibbana does not exist after death, you fall into error. Idealistic > mysticism or Nihilism seem to be the only available choices in conceptual thinking > about this matter. It shows the amazing wisdom of the Buddha in refusing to > assert or deny these alternatives. > > So how is the problem solved? Is it necessary to assert the existence of a self, > Nibbana or consciousness? Is it necessasry to deny the existence of a self, > Nibbana or consciousness? What's the alternative to these alternatives? What is > Right View in this situation? > 2 Suttas I know of may touch upon this: Bahiya Suta, (Udana): Train yourself thus: In the seen, let there be only the seen. In the heard, let there be only the heard. In the sensed let there be only the sensed. In the cognized, let there be only the cognized. When for you there is only the seen... only the heard.... only the sensed.... only the conized, there is no 'you' in terms of that. When there it no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder, and this, just this, is the end of suffering. Sabbasava Sutta (Majjhima): When he attends unwisely in this way, one of the six views arises in him.... "I have a self"... "I have no self"..... "I perceive self with self".... "I perceie not-self with self".... "I perceive self with not self".... "It is this self ofmine that speaks and feels and xperiences here and there the result of good and bad actions; but this self of mine ispermanent, everlasting, eternal, not subjct to change, and it will endure as long as eternity." 7322 From: Joshua Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 3:18pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Anders [and all listening], > The only difference I can discern between Parinibbana and mere cessation of being, > according to those taking the 'other side' of the argument from you, is that mere > cessation does not end karmas or prevent rebirth into a realm of suffering. > Parinibbana ends suffering and the cycle of birth and death. It does not > necessitate the prior existence of the Tathagata as an actual personage beyond the > kandhas. > > It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and ceases to be > with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the Tathagata > never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas dissolve > having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise again? > > I take your side in the argument, thinking that there is an existent reality to > awareness or Nibbana that is not associated with the kandhas. But I also realize > that this may be falling into mysticism and that it may be falling into > objectifying consciousness or awareness into an entity, just not a physical one. > > Whichever way you assert that Awareness or Nibbana exists after death, or that > Awareness or Nibbana does not exist after death, you fall into error. Idealistic > mysticism or Nihilism seem to be the only available choices in conceptual thinking > about this matter. It shows the amazing wisdom of the Buddha in refusing to > assert or deny these alternatives. > > So how is the problem solved? Is it necessary to assert the existence of a self, > Nibbana or consciousness? Is it necessasry to deny the existence of a self, > Nibbana or consciousness? What's the alternative to these alternatives? What is > Right View in this situation? > 2 Suttas I know of may touch upon this: Bahiya Suta, (Udana): Train yourself thus: In the seen, let there be only the seen. In the heard, let there be only the heard. In the sensed let there be only the sensed. In the cognized, let there be only the cognized. When for you there is only the seen... only the heard.... only the sensed.... only the conized, there is no 'you' in terms of that. When there it no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder, and this, just this, is the end of suffering. Sabbasava Sutta (Majjhima): When he attends unwisely in this way, one of the six views arises in him.... "I have a self"... "I have no self"..... "I perceive self with self".... "I perceie not-self with self".... "I perceive self with not self".... "It is this self ofmine that speaks and feels and xperiences here and there the result of good and bad actions; but this self of mine ispermanent, everlasting, eternal, not subjct to change, and it will endure as long as eternity." 7323 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 3:55pm Subject: Gandhabba As Re-linking Consciousness: Three Events Coincide Dear Dhamma Study Friends The following message (dhamma-list message 22247) is my reply to John R Overman's message (dhamma-list message 22241). The subject is a serious one. I thought you might find it useful, so I post it here. Hope you enjoy it. Suan ------------------------------------------------------ Dear John R Overman How are you? The Buddha's explanation is already complete and transparant. But, I think you would like further comment on the translator's explanation "gandhabba is not some disembodied spirit". By the way, this wasn't actual wording in the MN commentary Pali. The commentary is merely commenting on the expression "paccupatthito hoti" found in section 408 of Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya original. The expression "Paccupatthito hoti" can mean "is standing in front" literally. But, this meaning does not apply to the re-linking consciousness (patisandhi cittam)of the dead one. So the commentator was forced to say the following. " Paccupatthito hotiti na matapitunam sannipatam olokayamano sammipethito paccupatthito nama hoti." "Is standing in front" wasn't like "standing close-by (sammipethito) while watching father and mother copulating". Now, the above Pali comment became "gandhabba is not some disembodied spirit" in the hands of the translator, I think. In Pali Buddhism, the re-linking consciousness follows immediately after the dying consciousness (cuti cittam). So when father and mother are copulating while mother is ovulating, someone dies and his re-linking consciounsess has a chance to conceive. All three events coincide. That is all there is to it. The right timing is made possible by the past actions of the father, mother and the embryo (gandhabba now with body). Re-linking consciousness is called "gandhabbo" in ordinary language. I hope my message makes sense to you and all other dhamma friends. With regards Suan Lu zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- John R Overman wrote: > In MN38, Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, the last sentence of paragraph 26, 7324 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 3:57pm Subject: Testing - Erik --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter Abbott > wrote: > > > > Yes, the real test of any insight into life and the 'realities' > which make up > > life has to be at this moment. > > Not so, Sarah! :) > > The REAL test is if the afflictions have been permanently terminated > or not. > Erik, what other time than this moment is there???> > > > 7325 From: Joshua Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 4:10pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > Bahiya Suta, (Udana): Train yourself thus: In the seen, let there be only the seen. In the heard, let there be only the heard. In the sensed let there be only the sensed. In the cognized, let there be only the cognized. When for you there is only the seen... only the heard.... only the sensed.... only the conized, there is no 'you' in terms of that. When there it no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder, and this, just this, is the end of suffering. > It goes: "You are neither here, nor yonder, nor in between" sorry 7326 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 4:25pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation: Try Myanmar Embassy Dear Tadao How are you? Sorry about my late reply. I was busy the last two days, and I could not check messages here. You asked: "Could you please tell me how one can obtain the Tipitak CD-ROM?" Well, I requested the Myanmar Embassy in Canberra to get one for me, and that is how I got Chatthasangayana Myanmar Tipitaka CD-ROMs. As for Chatthasangayana Pali Tipitaka CD-ROMs, I got them through a branch of Vippasana Research Institute in Sydney. You also asked: "Have you been to Bruma?" Well, I come from Bruma ,and live in Canberra, Australia. Hope this message would help. Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Suan: > Thank you very much for more information on the Tipitak, etc. > Could you please tell me how one can obtain the Tipitak CD-ROM? > Thank you in advance, tadao > P.S. Have you been to Bruma? 7327 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 5:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Joshua wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Anders [and all listening], > > The only difference I can discern between Parinibbana and mere cessation of > being, > > according to those taking the 'other side' of the argument from you, is that > mere > > cessation does not end karmas or prevent rebirth into a realm of suffering. > > Parinibbana ends suffering and the cycle of birth and death. It does not > > necessitate the prior existence of the Tathagata as an actual personage beyond > the > > kandhas. > > > > It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and ceases to > be > > with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the Tathagata > > never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas > dissolve > > having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise > again? > > > > I take your side in the argument, thinking that there is an existent reality > to > > awareness or Nibbana that is not associated with the kandhas. But I also > realize > > that this may be falling into mysticism and that it may be falling into > > objectifying consciousness or awareness into an entity, just not a physical > one. > > > > Whichever way you assert that Awareness or Nibbana exists after death, or that > > Awareness or Nibbana does not exist after death, you fall into error. > Idealistic > > mysticism or Nihilism seem to be the only available choices in conceptual > thinking > > about this matter. It shows the amazing wisdom of the Buddha in refusing to > > assert or deny these alternatives. > > > > So how is the problem solved? Is it necessary to assert the existence of a > self, > > Nibbana or consciousness? Is it necessasry to deny the existence of a self, > > Nibbana or consciousness? What's the alternative to these alternatives? What > is > > Right View in this situation? > > > > 2 Suttas I know of may touch upon this: > > Bahiya Suta, (Udana): Train yourself thus: In the seen, let there be only the > seen. In the heard, let there be only the heard. In the sensed let there be only > the sensed. In the cognized, let there be only the cognized. When for you there > is only the seen... only the heard.... only the sensed.... only the conized, > there is no 'you' in terms of that. When there it no you in terms of that, there > is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder, > and this, just this, is the end of suffering. > > Sabbasava Sutta (Majjhima): When he attends unwisely in this way, one of the six > views arises in him.... "I have a self"... "I have no self"..... "I perceive > self with self".... "I perceie not-self with self".... "I perceive self with not > self".... "It is this self ofmine that speaks and feels and xperiences here and > there the result of good and bad actions; but this self of mine ispermanent, > everlasting, eternal, not subjct to change, and it will endure as long as > eternity." Thanks. Those quotes are very clear and helpful. Robert E. 7328 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 5:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- Joshua wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Forgive my ignorance, but what sutras would one specifically read to get the > > instructions outlined in this talk. > > > > What is the basic collection necessary for this. > > > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > > > > > > Best, > > Robert E. > > > > Ok, aside from the suttas dealing only with Satipatthana, I would say (roughly) > > Anguttara II.29 > Anguttara IX.63-64 (he mentions) > Majjhima 68 (he mentions) > Majjhima 107 > > The last one outlines step by step exactly how a monk should train himself in a > sequential manner. > > Hope that helps. Thank you. I will try to look at those when I am able. Robert E. 7329 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 5:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Epstein" > > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 1:11 AM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > > > > Dear Anders [and all listening], > > > Right View in this situation? > > > > Robert > > Practice. Practice and investigate the Turning of the Wheel x 12 and the 40 > trainings the Buddha left. > > Aristotelian logic cannot be applied here. > > If there is such a thing as a "glimpse" or "taste", then it is experiential > and words render only crude approximations. > > The map, the address is not the place. Conventional. > > Absolute Dhamma truth is not found in a conundrum or words, tautologies, or > paradigm testing. > > I think the question is less about the problem of "Tathagatology". ;-) > > I am not an expert but the insight here is without much left to express in > words... there is the Path but no walker on it. (Vis. Mag.) > > Metta, > > Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Thanks. I knew I was avoiding something: more practice. Robert E. 7330 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 5:22pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science: Robert With Journalistic Ease Dear Robert Kirkpatrick How are you? You have just discussed such a complex issue with a journalistic ease and skill. I have been busy with organiational matters, so I won't be able to enter the fray now. But I will be following Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science started by Howard and You. With regards Suan http://www.bodhiolgy.org/ --- <> wrote: > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > > > ============================== > > You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind > states > > are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is > something > > that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What > I find > > perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at > a greater > > rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather > how it is > > possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I > understand > > Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the > flow of > > cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual > citta. In > > what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared > with the > > flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a > problem here. > > Can you help my understanding with this? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > ____________ > Dear Howard, > I think we have an idea of what panna knows and how it knows. > > Like the recent discussion about the fact that panna knows the > immediately preceeding mind processes: > > This worries us if we assume that citta can only know itself at the > exact moment it arises. In fact as we discussed a moment of citta > with lobha cannot understand itself- but following processes with > panna can understand the lobha. It is all happening fantastically > fast and thus it is still correct to talk about knowing the present > moment. Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after these. > > The moments of javanna citta with panna arise in a series of seven > cittas that are conditioned by each other. There is an accumualation > of understanding during this time (see the Patthana) and also there > are further conditions by upanissaya paccaya for more insight in > future processes. > If we think of panna as a sort of mind atom that knows only some > cittas (say) then we limit the nature and function of panna. Panna > has the function of understanding and is a dhamma that has no limits. > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now when > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight into > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) and > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > I don't know if this helps. > best wishes > robert 7331 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Ranil, Many thanks for joining us here and for posting these words of wisdom! Are you Sri Lankan AND living in Sri Lanka?(unlike Gayan as we just found out;-))- Now I'm dreaming about ripe mangoes! Look forward to hearing plenty more from you. I've also been appreciating the posts which have reminded me of the wonderful opportunity we have now , not only as humans, but also to study and understand the dhamma. Best wishes, Sarah -- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Well, as I have say a short "hellow" I say "hellow to all of you!" and just > want to say that I "also" have been lucky just like all of "you" to get a > "human life in this very short period of a Buddha sasana" in this "infinite" > sansara - specially, because using "this life" any person can limit his > infinite sansara to a maxium of future seven lives only. But keeping in mind > that you have to "let" the mango rippen... > > ~ may we all get wisdom, to "understand" nirvana > Ranil 7332 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 7:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Testing - Erik Dear Sarah Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is in a retreat in Angkor. You know we 'meditators' enjoy 'refuging' in monasteries... ;-))))) Metta Cybele 7333 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Howard Some time ago now you posted the message below in our discussion on the path factor of Right Effort. Thank you for the sutta reference on the 4 aspects of right effort, and my apologies for taking so long to get back to you. The 4 aspects of right effort as a path factor are also known as the 4 samma-padhanas (right endeavours). Indeed, the Visuddhimagga in its description of the content of the 4th noble truth (the truth of the path) (XVI, 86) explains that -- "The term right effort [samma-vayama] includes the fourfold right endeavour [samma-padhana], the energy faculty [viriyindriya], energy power [viriya-bala], and energy enlightenment factor [viriyasambojjhanga]." These different terms are in effect all synonyms. As you know, the Buddha often explained the same realities in different ways with different emphases. Later, in the section dealing with the 4 right endeavours (XXII, 33), the Vism explains that what is being referred to is viriya cetasika ('energy'). It says -- "… Or alternatively: by its means people endeavour rightly, thus it is right endeavour. … It is a name for energy. It accomplishes the functions of abandoning arisen unprofitable things, preventing the arising of those not yet arisen, arousing unarisen unprofitable things, and maintaining those already arisen; thus it is fourfold. That is why 'four right endeavours' is said." In this passage, "energy" is the Vism translation for viriya cetasika. It is by means of this cetasika when it is 'right', ie. when it arises with a path moment, that a person is said to endeavour rightly. It is not a case of the person 'endeavouring' in a way that causes right endeavour to arise. Nor is it a case of a person having to endeavour in each of 4 different ways. As the passage explains, it is called 'the four' because it performs its function in 4 slightly different aspects. The text goes on (XXII, 39, 40) to explain that at mundane path moments [ie. a moment of satipatthana], viriya cetasika endeavours rightly in one or other of the 4 ways, depending on the circumstances in which the moment of consciousness occurs. At supramundane path-moments, however, [ie. when nibbana is the object] viriya cetasika endeavours rightly in all 4 ways at the one moment. The Vism says that at such moments -- "the one kind of energy is called 'four right endeavours' because it accomplishes the four functions beginning with preventing the arising of the unarisen unprofitable." Howard, I hope these references give some food for thought. Jon --- Howard wrote: > Hi, 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 > > > Right Effort > > samma vayamo > > > Right Effort is the sixth of the eight path factors in HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/sacca4.html">the Noble > Eightfold > Path, and belongs to the HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/sacca4.html#3fold">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." > > >> -- HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-008.html">SN > XLV.8 > > 7334 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Rob. E In answer to your question-- --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Forgive my ignorance, but what sutras would one specifically read to get > the > instructions outlined in this talk. > > What is the basic collection necessary for this. > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... I would say yes, the whole Canon, including the commentaries. I say this because it is easy to read individual suttas, or event the whole Canon for that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. In the case of the article below, there are several passages which contain statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the ancient commentators, so one might want to consider things carefully. Only by one's own study and investigation over a long period of time can one learn to discriminate. Jon > Best, > Robert E. > > > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > SATIPATTHANA > > THE FOURFOLD FOCUS OF MINDFULNESS > > By Ajahn Brahmavamso > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---- > > > > More has been said about the practice of Satipatthana than about any > other > > meditation practice by Buddhist teachers of today... except by this > monk! So > > in this Dhamma article I will keep up with the trend by presenting > some > > practical observations on this most misunderstood of Lord Buddha's > > Teachings. > > > > Those of you who have been "sitting around" Buddhist Centres for a > while > > have probably heard some teachers claim that the fourfold "Focus of > > Mindfulness" (my translation of "Satipatthana") is the "one and only > way" to > > the goal of full Enlightenment! Although this is an impressive sales > pitch > > for the teaching, it is neither a true translation of the original > text nor > > consistent with what the Lord Buddha said elsewhere. The very phrase > > ("Ekayana Magga") which is mistranslated as "one and only way" occurs > again > > in the l2th Sutta (discourse) of the Majjhima collection where it > > unmistakably means a "path with only one possible destination". Many > > different paths can share a common destination. In fact, the "one and > only > > path" is the Lord Buddha's description, not of Satipatthana, but of > the > > Noble Eightfold Path: > > > > "Of all Ways, the Noble Eightfold Path is the best. > > This is the only way, there is none other for the purity of insight" > > Dhammapada verses 273 and 274 (abridged) > > > > Thus, the "only way" to Enlightenment, as all Buddhists should know > anyway, > > is the Noble Eightfold Path. The fourfold Focus of Mindfulness > constitutes > > only a part of this Path, the 7th factor. Jhanas are the 8th factor > and > > there is also Right View, Right Intention, Right Effort and the three > > factors of Right Virtue. Each of these eight factors are necessary to > > achieve the goal of full Enlightenment. lf any were redundant, then > the Lord > > Buddha would have taught a 7-fold path, or a 6-fold path etc. So, in > your > > practice of Buddhism, please keep in mind that all eight factors of > the > > noble Eightfold Path should be cultivated as the "one and only way". > > Now the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness method as taught by the Lord > Buddha, > > is a very advanced practice. So advanced that the Lord Buddha said > that if > > anyone should develop them in the way He described for only seven > days, then > > they would achieve full Enlightenment or the state of non-returner. > Many > > meditators reading this may have gone on such a retreat for nine days > or > > even more and not yet fulfilled this most lofty of the Lord Buddha's > > promises. Why not? Because, I suggest, you were not following the Lord > > Buddha's instructions. > > > > If you want to practise the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness in the way > that > > the Lord Buddha said leads so rapidly to Enlightenment, then certain > things > > are required before you begin. The essential preparations are in > short, full > > cultivation of the other seven factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. > Or, as > > the Lord Budda said in the Anguttara collection ('Nines', Suttas 63 > and 64), > > one should maintain the five Precepts (the longer the better), abandon > the > > five Hindrances and then practise Satipatthana. > > > > These vital prerequisites are actually stated by the Lord Buddha in > His two > > discourses on the fourfold Focus of Mindfulness, as "Vineyya Loke > > Abhijjha-Domanassam" (please forgive me quoting Pali. It is the only > way I > > can make this important point). This phrase is usually translated as > "having > > put away covetousness and grief for the world", or something similar. > Such > > translations mean so little to meditators that they ignore this > instruction > > altogether, and thereby miss the bus! In the time of the Lord Buddha, > the > > monks, nuns and lay disciples would have understood the phrase to mean > > "after having abandoned the five Hindrances"! The authoritative > commentaries > > to the two Satipatthana Suttas taught by the Lord Buddha both clearly > state > > that "Abhijjha-Domanassam" (sorry for the Pali again!) refer precisely > to > > the five Hindrances. Elsewhere in the recorded Teachings of the Lord > Buddha, > > "Abhijjha" is a synonym for the first Hindrance, "Domanassam" is a > synonym > > for the second Hindrance, and together they stand, in Pali idiom, as > an > > abbreviation for all five. This then means that the five Hindrances > must be > > abandoned first before beginning any of the Focus of Mindfulness > practices. > > It is, in my not-so-humble opinion, precisely because meditators > attempt to > > practise the Satipatthana method with some of the Hindrances still > remaining > > that they achieve no great or lasting result. > > > > It is the function of Jhana practice, the ultimate factor of the Noble > > Eightfold Path, to abandon all of the five Hindrances long enough to > gain > > BIG Insight. For example, in the 68th Sutta of the Majjhima collection > > ("Nalakapanna"), the Lord Buddha stated that for the meditator who > does not > > attain to Jhana, the five Hindrances together with discontent and > weariness > > invade the mind and remain. Only when one does attain to Jhana do the > five > > Hindrances together with discontent and weariness not invade one's > mind and > > remain the way the Lord Buddha said it is. > > > > Any meditator who has experienced the powerful Jhanas would know > through > > that experience, and what happens after, what a mind without any > Hindrances > > is truly like. The meditator who hasn't known Jhanas does not realise > the > > many subtle forms Hindrances can take. They may think that the > hindrances > > are abandoned but, the truth is, they just don't see them and so do > not get > > great results in their meditation. This is why Samatha practice which > > cultivates Jhana is part of the Satipatthana teaching and why it is > > misinformation to call Satipatthana "pure Vipassana". Even my teacher, > Ajahn > > Chah, said over and over again that Samatha and Vipassana, "calm and > > insight", go together and are inseparable as the two faces of a coin. > > > > Having patiently completed the necessary preparations, the meditator > > sustains their mindfulness on one of the four focuses: their own body, > the > > pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind consciousness > and, > > fourthly, the objects of mind. When the Hindrances are gone and one > can > > sustain one's powerful and penetrating attention on these four > objects, only > > then is it possible to realise that deep in our psyche, far deeper > than the > > veil of intelligent thinking, we have been assuming a Self. We have > been > > assuming that this body is "me" or "mine", that pleasure or pain has > > something to do with me, that the mind which looks on is our Soul or > > something close, and that the objects of mind such as thought or > volition > > (the 'chooser') is a Self, me, or mine. In short, the purpose of the > > fourfold Focus of Mindfulness is to instruct one what to do when one > has > > emerged from a Jhana, to uncover the deeply disguised delusion of a > Soul and > > then see what the Lord Buddha saw, the Truth of Anatta. > > > > This is not an easy thing to do, but it can be done, and it can take > only > > seven days. That is if one follows the Lord Buddha's instructions, > follows > > them and takes no short cuts. > > > > Ajahn Brahm > > (From: Newsletter, July-October 1997, > > Buddhist Society of Western Australia, Perth, Australia) 7335 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear bhante Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu!!! Bhante I was missing you; glad to know you returned in full shape! ;-))) Love Cybele > > > Dear Anders [and all listening], > > > Right View in this situation? > > > > Robert > >Practice. Practice and investigate the Turning of the Wheel x 12 and the 40 >trainings the Buddha left. > >Aristotelian logic cannot be applied here. > >If there is such a thing as a "glimpse" or "taste", then it is experiential >and words render only crude approximations. > >The map, the address is not the place. Conventional. > >Absolute Dhamma truth is not found in a conundrum or words, tautologies, or >paradigm testing. > >I think the question is less about the problem of "Tathagatology". ;-) > >I am not an expert but the insight here is without much left to express in >words... there is the Path but no walker on it. (Vis. Mag.) > >Metta, > >Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > 7336 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Hi Robert E. As I am the one the one who posted Ajahn Bramavamso, I would suggest you to read more of his texts as well. Love Cybele 7337 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Robert E. No my my sadhu x 3 goes to you. Great!!! Much appreciation. mudita Cybele > >Thanks. I knew I was avoiding something: more practice. > >Robert E. > > > 7338 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 10:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Dear Jon Dear Robert E. > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > >that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. > >In the case of the article below, there are several passages which contain >statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the >ancient commentators, so one might want to consider things carefully. >Only by one's own study and investigation over a long period of time can >one learn to discriminate. > >Jon Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind carefully and therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different approaches and interpretations. Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle fundamentalism and narrowmindness. Metta Cybele 7339 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 7:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/9/01 10:52:19 PM EDT, you quote me (Howard): > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > > > ============================== > > You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind > states > > are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is > something > > that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What > I find > > perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at > a greater > > rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather > how it is > > possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I > understand > > Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the > flow of > > cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual > citta. In > > what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared > with the > > flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a > problem here. > > Can you help my understanding with this? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > ____________ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay, Robert. You then offer a reply which is important to me and which I would like to pursue with further questions, if that's okay. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ear Howard, > I think we have an idea of what panna knows and how it knows. > > Like the recent discussion about the fact that panna knows the > immediately preceeding mind processes: > > This worries us if we assume that citta can only know itself at the > exact moment it arises. In fact as we discussed a moment of citta > with lobha cannot understand itself- but following processes with > panna can understand the lobha. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Directly, by some sort of retrospective knowing? Or indirectly, as a memory? ------------------------------------------------------------ It is all happening fantastically > fast and thus it is still correct to talk about knowing the present > moment. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, the relative speed is part what the original issue was. But what seems most important here is the question of whether the wisdom of a current citta is able to *directly* know what goes beyond that citta. ---------------------------------------------------------- Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after these. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Again, does that understanding directly apprehend what no longer exists? (If yes, this is reminiscent of the Sarvastivadin view of dhammas existing at all times.) ------------------------------------------------------------ > > The moments of javanna citta with panna arise in a series of seven > cittas that are conditioned by each other. There is an accumualation > of understanding during this time (see the Patthana) and also there > are further conditions by upanissaya paccaya for more insight in > future processes. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. This is starting to sound good to me. But again, I wonder whether the accumulated understanding is an understanding of a *memory* of a series of events. ---------------------------------------------------------- > If we think of panna as a sort of mind atom that knows only some > cittas (say) then we limit the nature and function of panna. Panna > has the function of understanding and is a dhamma that has no limits. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Am I correct in understanding the Abhidhamma view of panna to be that of a function accompanying a given mind-moment/citta, and being an aspect of it? If yes, does it go beyond that citta by some means other than memory? ----------------------------------------------------------- > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's fine. My question is: "By what means?". (It is, after all, not nibbana, not the supermundane reality which transcends the triple world, but, rather, a feature of a citta.) *How* does it grow beyond all limits? ----------------------------------------------------------- > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now when > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight into > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) and > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > I don't know if this helps. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It helps a lot, Robert, but, in the process, leads to ever more questions! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------------- > best wishes > robert > =========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7340 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 8:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/10/01 3:00:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > Just a quick comment on your main thread here. > > Is there any more reason why we should take comfort from an apparent > 'confirmation' of the teachings in the findings of cognitive science, than > we should be discouraged by an apparent contradiction arising from those > findings? > > Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really give any > indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? > > ========================== Yes, I think, so for the following reasons: (1) I have enormous, virtually unshakeable, confidence in the Buddha and his Dhamma, but not so in others and their claims, even including the eminent Buddhaghosa. (2) There is a legitimate question as to whether the source of the Abhidhamma pitaka was the Buddha, himself, inasmuch as much evidence suggests the development of the Abhidhamma over a period of centuries following the Buddha's parinibbana. It may very well be the case that the Buddha *was* the source, with the original exposition being in a heaven world, and then repeated to Sariputta, with the eventual passing along of it, and the recording of it, taking many centuries. But for me to believe that, which I certainly would find pleasing, a bit of supporting evidence wouldn't hurt! (3) The "world", both nama and rupa, both internal and external, seems to hang together in a coherent, holistic fashion, and one would expect a truth about the world to be supported both internally and externally. If scientific experiments were to point to only one object of discernment at a time, that would be most interesting and corroborative. On the other hand, a clear demonstration of parallel processing wherein, for example, multi-sense objects could co-occur would also have an impact! 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) 7341 From: m. nease Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 0:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > I feel like I sometimes step off a limb on this > list, because I am admittedly > using my own logic and my knowledge of Buddhism, > which has been consistent, but > not thorough in the Pali Canon. I am a little more > familiar with works and > concepts of Ch'an Buddhism, but my interest in > Theravada is sincere. Your posts continue to impress me (for what that's worth) by their sincerity and insightfulness. I was a Zen student myself for ten years or so and had lost interest in it altogether until reading Tadao's remarkable post at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6125 I also admire your logic. I think students of Dhammavinaya are meant to use logic in combination, of course, with investigation of dhammas and study of the teachings. > I know that at times people will have to tell me > that at least as far as the Pali > Canon and the Tripitaka are concerned, that I am way > off, or not understanding the > Buddha's intent. And I am prepared for that. It's > part of my learning process. Same here. > At the same time, I can sometimes have a valid view > and contribute something. Certainly. > I have been reading Thich Nath Hanh's translation of > the SUTRA ON COMPLETE > AWARENESS OF THE BREATH, and I am amazed at its > simplicity and completeness. It > spells out the Buddha's path in a way that anyone > with an open mind can > understand. The Theravadan Canon has this kind of > clarity and structure to offer, > and someone like myself, who has struggled with > Ch'an and Zen methodology for a > long time, can really appreciate the kind of > grounding and surety of path that > this can give me. I haven't read this translation but have been impressed by his writing in the past. The clarity and structure you mention in the Pali canon was a great relief to me, too, after years of Ch'an/Zen practice. > We are all working with our tendencies and > accumulations, in whatever form, and > the fact that you accidentally sent your note to > this group instead of as a > private message should not be a cause for alarm or > embarrassment. It was > obviously meant to be here, and it opened up issues > and topics that might not have > been looked at otherwise. I consider every event in > a group like this to be a > good one, and I'm happy to rise to the occasion, and > chew on what you have > contributed. Tendencies and accumulations (what I think of as sankharakhanda) are fertile ground for mindfulness (dhammanusati(sp?)). Unfortunately they are the continuous results of incomprehensibly vast numbers of unimaginably complex condtions from the past--since we can't change the past, we also can't change the present manifestations of its conditions. Fortunately, on the other hand, tendencies and accumulations CAN be understood as not-self--at that moment, 'personality' can be seen for the insignificant thing that it is. Having a rather rotten personality myself, I find this reflection quite liberating. (This isn't to say that kusala can't or shouldn't be cultivated despite personality--it can and should). In other words, I don't think personality-change is the object of Dhammavinaya patipatti--just a beneficial (and VERY gradual, usually) side-effect. I'm rambling--thanks again for the good words. mike 7342 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 10, 2001 8:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/10/01 10:16:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > Some time ago now you posted the message below in our discussion on the > path factor of Right Effort. Thank you for the sutta reference on the 4 > aspects of right effort, and my apologies for taking so long to get back > to you. > > The 4 aspects of right effort as a path factor are also known as the 4 > samma-padhanas (right endeavours). Indeed, the Visuddhimagga in its > description of the content of the 4th noble truth (the truth of the path) > (XVI, 86) explains that -- > > "The term right effort [samma-vayama] includes the fourfold right > endeavour [samma-padhana], the energy faculty [viriyindriya], energy power > [viriya-bala], and energy enlightenment factor [viriyasambojjhanga]." > > These different terms are in effect all synonyms. As you know, the Buddha > often explained the same realities in different ways with different > emphases. > > Later, in the section dealing with the 4 right endeavours (XXII, 33), the > Vism explains that what is being referred to is viriya cetasika > ('energy'). It says -- > > "… Or alternatively: by its means people endeavour rightly, thus it is > right endeavour. … It is a name for energy. It accomplishes the functions > of abandoning arisen unprofitable things, preventing the arising of those > not yet arisen, arousing unarisen unprofitable things, and maintaining > those already arisen; thus it is fourfold. That is why 'four right > endeavours' is said." > > In this passage, "energy" is the Vism translation for viriya cetasika. It > is by means of this cetasika when it is 'right', ie. when it arises with a > path moment, that a person is said to endeavour rightly. It is not a case > of the person 'endeavouring' in a way that causes right endeavour to > arise. Nor is it a case of a person having to endeavour in each of 4 > different ways. As the passage explains, it is called 'the four' because > it performs its function in 4 slightly different aspects. > > The text goes on (XXII, 39, 40) to explain that at mundane path moments > [ie. a moment of satipatthana], viriya cetasika endeavours rightly in one > or other of the 4 ways, depending on the circumstances in which the moment > of consciousness occurs. At supramundane path-moments, however, [ie. when > nibbana is the object] viriya cetasika endeavours rightly in all 4 ways at > the one moment. The Vism says that at such moments -- > > "the one kind of energy is called 'four right endeavours' because it > accomplishes the four functions beginning with preventing the arising of > the unarisen unprofitable." > > Howard, I hope these references give some food for thought. > > Jon > ============================== Thank you for this. I do understand it, seeing it as a "higher-order", Abhidhammic explanation of Right Effort, without disputing the conventional Right Effort emphasized in the Sutta Pitaka. I would be interested in sutta references which also suggest such an interpretation. Would you or anyone know of such? 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) 7343 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 2:57am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? / Buddhaghosa Dear Howards, It should be obvious this message is strictly my view/understandings without implying that Abhidhamma or Buddhaghosa had said this. Such as yourself and many others (I am sure), I have very strong confidence about the Buddha, his teachings, and the Sangha. However, I believe that the Buddha's teaching is detailed and subtle, and it is important to learn the meanings of his teachings carefully. It is obviously difficult to have an understanding encompassing the entire tipitikas (for you the Vinnanaya and the Suttantra, and for some of us, also the Abhidhamma) that would improve my confidence that I understand what the Buddha really meant. Hence, I look for some other aids to help us understanding the basics of his teachings. For me, and probably for some members of this group, Buddhaghosa, an evident expert in the Pali language and the teachings in the three tipitiakas, and a person with access to matterials which are reputed to be works of ancient acariya, is the most well-known of all acariyas. And hence, I count V. Buddhaghosa as a teacher. Even this is overwhelming, and therefore, I further count others (TA Sujin, Nina, Roberts, etc.) as teachers, on the premise that these people keep true to sticking the meanings as the Buddha has taught. I anumoddhana your efforts in making sure what you heard from others as being Buddha's teachings are actually Buddha's teachings. Now, something that may be related to your original post... ;-) --- Howard wrote: > Thank you for this. I do understand it, seeing it as a "higher- order", > Abhidhammic explanation of Right Effort, without disputing the conventional > Right Effort emphasized in the Sutta Pitaka. I would be interested in sutta > references which also suggest such an interpretation. Would you or anyone > know of such? > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html The above sutta appears (to me) to imply the separation of the "conventional" practices that are kusala (but results in rebirth), and the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering. When I read the teachings about the "path factor without taints", it appears to match the teachings about the path factors as being supramundane factors at the moment of enlightenment. The implication may also extend to cover the teaching of the 5-fold path, ie., satipatthana which is mundane. kom 7344 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 5:44am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science ---Dear Howard, These are difficult questions. I am just going out and won't be near a computer for a couple of days. Very briefly: -------- > Howard: > Okay, Robert. You then offer a reply which is important to me and > which I would like to pursue with further questions, if that's okay. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- > > ear Howard, > > I think we have an idea of what panna knows and how it knows. > > > > Like the recent discussion about the fact that panna knows the > > immediately preceeding mind processes: > > > > This worries us if we assume that citta can only know itself at the > > exact moment it arises. In fact as we discussed a moment of citta > > with lobha cannot understand itself- but following processes with > > panna can understand the lobha. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Directly, by some sort of retrospective knowing? Or indirectly, as a > memory? > ------------------------------------------------------------ rOBERT:It is all happening fantastically > > fast and thus it is still correct to talk about knowing the present > > moment. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, the relative speed is part what the original issue was. But what > seems most important here is the question of whether the wisdom of a current > citta is able to *directly* know what goes beyond that citta. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Robert: It is known directly . I do remember reading a tika years ago that went into a degree of detail about this but look as i may have not been able to find it. > Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after these. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Again, does that understanding directly apprehend what no longer > exists? (If yes, this is reminiscent of the Sarvastivadin view of dhammas > existing at all times.) > ------------------------------------------------------------ Robert: Can you accept that at a moment when greed takes an object there can be no understanding but that the greed can be seen (immediately after it falls away) by panna? If we see that this is just the way it is (in practice)these doubts will fade. ________ > > The moments of javanna citta with panna arise in a series of seven > > cittas that are conditioned by each other. There is an accumualation > > of understanding during this time (see the Patthana) and also there > > are further conditions by upanissaya paccaya for more insight in > > future processes. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay. This is starting to sound good to me. But again, I wonder > whether the accumulated understanding is an understanding of a *memory* of a > series of events. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Robert > > If we think of panna as a sort of mind atom that knows only some > > cittas (say) then we limit the nature and function of panna. Panna > > has the function of understanding and is a dhamma that has no limits. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Am I correct in understanding the Abhidhamma view of panna to be that > of a function accompanying a given mind-moment/citta, and being an aspect of > it? If yes, does it go beyond that citta by some means other than memory? > ----------------------------------------------------------- Robert: Panna is a cetasika and is ENTIRELY different from citta. However, it arises always in association with citta. Sanna (perception, memory) is likewise different from citta and panna. Because these three very different realities have some characteristics that are similar - they all know an object - they are often confused. For example, very often people experience some subtle sensations in the body after they begin meditation. They assume that this is wisdom(panna) that is knowing it while such things can all be known by citta and sanna not associated with panna. > > > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's fine. My question is: "By what means?". (It is, after all, not > nibbana, not the supermundane reality which transcends the triple world, but, > rather, a feature of a citta.) *How* does it grow beyond all limits? > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Robert: Nibbana can know nothing. Panna is nama thus it is not bound in the way rupa (matter) is. Wisdom grows if the conditions are right. The conditions for the growth of wisdom are elaboarted in the texts. ___________ > > > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now when > > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight into > > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) and > > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > > I don't know if this helps. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It helps a lot, Robert, but, in the process, leads to ever more > questions! ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------------------- > best wishes robert 7345 From: Howard Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 3:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? / Bud... Hi, Kom - In a message dated 8/10/01 3:00:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Kom Tukovinit writes: > > Dear Howards, > > It should be obvious this message is strictly my view/understandings > without implying that Abhidhamma or Buddhaghosa had said this. > > Such as yourself and many others (I am sure), I have very strong > confidence about the Buddha, his teachings, and the Sangha. However, > I believe that the Buddha's teaching is detailed and subtle, and it is > important to learn the meanings of his teachings carefully. It is > obviously difficult to have an understanding encompassing the entire > tipitikas (for you the Vinnanaya and the Suttantra, and for some of us, > also the Abhidhamma) that would improve my confidence that I > understand what the Buddha really meant. > > Hence, I look for some other aids to help us understanding the basics of > his teachings. For me, and probably for some members of this group, > Buddhaghosa, an evident expert in the Pali language and the teachings > in the three tipitiakas, and a person with access to matterials which are > reputed to be works of ancient acariya, is the most well-known of all > acariyas. And hence, I count V. Buddhaghosa as a teacher. Even this is > overwhelming, and therefore, I further count others (TA Sujin, Nina, > Roberts, etc.) as teachers, on the premise that these people keep true > to sticking the meanings as the Buddha has taught. > > I anumoddhana your efforts in making sure what you heard from others > as being Buddha's teachings are actually Buddha's teachings. > > Now, something that may be related to your original post... ;-) > > --- Howard wrote: > > Thank you for this. I do understand it, seeing it as a "higher- > order", > > Abhidhammic explanation of Right Effort, without disputing the > conventional > > Right Effort emphasized in the Sutta Pitaka. I would be interested in > sutta > > references which also suggest such an interpretation. Would you or > anyone > > know of such? > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html > > The above sutta appears (to me) to imply the separation of > the "conventional" practices that are kusala (but results in rebirth), and > the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering. When I read the > teachings about the "path factor without taints", it appears to match the > teachings about the path factors as being supramundane factors at the > moment of enlightenment. The implication may also extend to cover the > teaching of the 5-fold path, ie., satipatthana which is mundane. > > kom > =============================== Thank you for this. It is an interesting sutta! What it does for the most part is, for each of the factors of the eightfold path, give a description of that factor "with fermentations", and also "without fermentations". An example is the following: "And what is right action? Right action, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right action with fermentations, siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right action, without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path. "And what is the right action that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? Abstaining from killing, from taking what is not given, & from illicit sex. This is the right action that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions. "And what is the right action that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path? The abstaining, desisting, abstinence, avoidance of the three forms of bodily misconduct in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without fermentations, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right action that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path." Thus, what seems to be said is that each of the 8 factors of the path becomes "without fermentations" when it is carried out by "... one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without fermentations, who is fully possessed of the noble path." The difference seems to be the state of the mind involved rather than the factor, itself. I'm not sure what is the significance 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) 7346 From: Howard Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 4:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - I shall attempt some snipping of the following in order to zero-in on the gist of the current conversation. In a message dated 8/10/01 5:45:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > . But what > > seems most important here is the question of whether the wisdom of > a current > > citta is able to *directly* know what goes beyond that citta. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Robert: It is known directly . I do remember reading a tika years ago > that went into a degree of detail about this but look as i may have > not been able to find it. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay, thanks. This strikes me as implying that wisdom can *directly* observe a past event. Surprising, but, hey - maybe! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------- > > Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > > > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after > these. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Again, does that understanding directly apprehend what no > longer > > exists? (If yes, this is reminiscent of the Sarvastivadin view of > dhammas > > existing at all times.) > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Robert: Can you accept that at a moment when greed takes an object > there can be no understanding but that the greed can be seen > (immediately after it falls away) by panna? If we see that this is > just the way it is (in practice)these doubts will fade. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I can accept that. But my expectation would be that the "seeing" of the greed which is no longer there is really the seeing of a *fresh memory* of the greed, the knowing that the greed *was* just there, rather than a direct knowing of the no-longer-existing greed, itself. (Of course, you did imply before that wisdom can somehow *directly* observe a past event, and maybe that is so.) -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > Am I correct in understanding the Abhidhamma view of panna > to be that > > of a function accompanying a given mind-moment/citta, and being an > aspect of > > it? If yes, does it go beyond that citta by some means other than > memory? > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Robert: Panna is a cetasika and is ENTIRELY different from citta. > However, it arises always in association with citta. Sanna > (perception, memory) is likewise different from citta and panna. > Because these three very different realities have some > characteristics that are similar - they all know an object - they are > often confused. For example, very often people experience some subtle > sensations in the body after they begin meditation. They assume that > this is wisdom(panna) that is knowing it while such things can all be > known by citta and sanna not associated with panna. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Thank you very much for emphasizing this! I fear I was falling into a substantialist way of thinking, viewing a citta as a "thing" existing for a period of time, with the accompanying cetasikas as features of that thing!! Instead, of course, a citta is merely an act of discernment, a function/operation, and the accompanying cetasikas are different functions associated with the same object as that discernment. Your making this point is very helpful to me! ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > > > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > That's fine. My question is: "By what means?". (It is, after > all, not > > nibbana, not the supermundane reality which transcends the triple > world, but, > > rather, a feature of a citta.) *How* does it grow beyond all limits? > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert: Nibbana can know nothing. > Panna is nama thus it is not bound in the way rupa (matter) is. > Wisdom grows if the conditions are right. The conditions for the > growth of wisdom are elaboarted in the texts. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This is all fine. My only hesitance here is with regard to wisdom *directly* knowing what no longer exists, as opposed to a memory of it. ------------------------------------------------------------ > ___________ > > > > > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > > > > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > > > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now > when > > > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > > > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight > into > > > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) > and > > > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > > > I don't know if this helps. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > It helps a lot, Robert, but, in the process, leads to ever > more > > questions! ;-)) > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > best wishes > robert > > ============================== With metta and appreciation, 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) 7347 From: m. nease Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 8:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? / Bud... Dear Kom, Howard an Jon, This is extremely interesting. Kom, 'fermentations' or 'taints' here is from 'aasavas', one definition of which is 'ideas which intoxicate the mind'. Jon has often stated that the 8-(or5-)fold path refers exclusively to moments on the brink of awakening (my apologies, Jon, if I've mis-paraphrased you). It's obvious from reading the discourses (and the discipline) that the Buddha sometimes spoke of thought, speech and action leading to happy rebirths (e.g. the divine abodes) and other times of thought, (sometimes with and sometimes without) speech and action leading to unbinding--I say obvious because he stated so explicitly. (By the way, there's one discourse in which the Buddha chides Ananda (I think) for having taught the divine abodes to a dying person who could have attained enlightenment before death had he taught the path instead--anyone remember where this is?) Anyway, the Great Forty seems to me to support Jon's position on this to some extent--not quite to the extent that the path-factors refer only to near-enlightenment, but certainly to the extent that there's a real and important difference between the factors with and without aasavas. The question remaining to me is, if the Buddha taught 'only dukkha and the way out of dukkha', then why did he teach kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana? Off-hand I'm inclined to think that, kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana mayabe leads to kusala that DOES lead to nibbana. Maybe. Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right through the discourses and the discipline, the (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various skilful reflections. Do you think there is a link between this sort of reflection and the path-factors-with-aasavas? mike --- Howard wrote: > In a message dated 8/10/01 3:00:17 PM Eastern > Daylight Time, Kom Tukovinit writes: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html > > > > The above sutta appears (to me) to imply the > separation of > > the "conventional" practices that are kusala (but > results in rebirth), and > > the practice that leads to the cessation of > suffering. When I read the > > teachings about the "path factor without taints", > it appears to match the > > teachings about the path factors as being > supramundane factors at the > > moment of enlightenment. The implication may also > extend to cover the > > teaching of the 5-fold path, ie., satipatthana > which is mundane. > > > > kom > > > =============================== > Thank you for this. It is an interesting > sutta! What it does for the > most part is, for each of the factors of the > eightfold path, give a > description of that factor "with fermentations", and > also "without > fermentations". An example is the following: > "And what is right action? Right action, I > tell you, is of two sorts: > There is right action with fermentations, siding > with merit, resulting in the > acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right > action, without > fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path. > "And what is the right > action that has fermentations, sides with merit, & > results in acquisitions? > Abstaining from killing, from taking what is not > given, & from illicit sex. > This is the right action that has fermentations, > sides with merit, & results > in acquisitions. "And what is the right action that > is without fermentations, > transcendent, a factor of the path? The abstaining, > desisting, abstinence, > avoidance of the three forms of bodily misconduct in > one developing the noble > path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without > fermentations, who is fully > possessed of the noble path. This is the right > action that is without > fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path." > Thus, what seems to be said is that each of > the 8 factors of the path > becomes "without fermentations" when it is carried > out by "... one developing > the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is > without fermentations, who > is fully possessed of the noble path." The > difference seems to be the state > of the mind involved rather than the factor, itself. > I'm not sure what is the > significance of this. 7348 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 10:38am Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > I would say yes, the whole Canon, including the commentaries. I say this > because it is easy to read individual suttas, or event the whole Canon for > that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. > In the Canon itself there are stories & examples of very simple instructions given to people and, when carried out, lead to Arahantship. I doubt each and every disciple sat for hours on end listening to thousands upon thousands of discourses. He might croak before it was all finished! > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which contain > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > ancient commentators, Could you give some examples? 7349 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 4:16pm Subject: Fwd: Re: Necessity of jhana --- <> wrote: On the question of the neccesity for jhana. There are mundane jhanas and there are supramundane jhanas. While mundane jhana can be a basis for insight in the samatttha yanika the mundane and supramundane are not the same. I use The expositor PTS (translator, pe maung tin). P58. Triplets in the Matika "'leading to accumulation' are those states which go about severally arranging births and deaths in a round of of destiny like a bricklayer who arranges bricks, layer by layer in a wall." "..leading to accumulation are those causes which by being accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that round of rebirth"ENDQUOTE It then defines these causes as "moral or immoral states". i.e akusala AND kusalaThere is then several chapters (total of 140 pages) that gives much details about the various types of kusala (wholesome consciousness). The last two chapters in this section explain all the different types of mundane Jhanas. The start of the next chapter is interesting: this is where it discusses the eight-fold path. This is different from other types of kusala as it leads to dispersion , to tearing down the fence. The Discourse on lokuttara (trancendental). "He cultivates the Jhana means that he evolves, produces the ecstatic jhana of one momenatry flash of consciousness. because it goes forth from the world, from the round of rebirths, this is jhana called going out...This is not like that which is known as 'leading to accumulation' which heaps up and increases rebirths by the moral(kusala) consciousness of the three planes. ENDQUOTE. The moral consciouseness of the three planes includes many types of kusala including all the eight mundane jhanas. . It is true that even for the dry insight worker (sukkha vipassaka) that jhana is attained at the moment of commprehending nibbana but this is only for a flash. It is different from mundane jhana. robert --- End forwarded message --- 7350 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 4:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Sarah, Gayan invited me to join this group. Well, it is very interesting isn't it to talk of this beautiful dhamma - the real fruits with value. Yes, I am from Sri Lanka too. I stay in Moratuwa and working in the areas of ASP/Java/Site Server..etc. (Any other thing you want to know Gayan ;-)) ). Thank all for the welcome and specially Gayan for inviting me. ~metha Ranil >From: Sarah Procter Abbott >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup >Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:16:01 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Ranil, > >Many thanks for joining us here and for posting these words of wisdom! > 7351 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 4:34pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science -- Dear Howard, I got to an internet cafe, couldn't stay away. - Howard wrote: > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay, thanks. This strikes me as implying that wisdom can *directly* > observe a past event. Surprising, but, hey - maybe! ;-) > ------------------------------------------------------- Robert: I think we can understand its directness because in moments of direct insight there doesn't have to be any conceptualising or thinking. There is understanding before words ______ > > > Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > > > > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after > > these. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > Again, does that understanding directly apprehend what no > > longer > > > exists? (If yes, this is reminiscent of the Sarvastivadin view of > > dhammas > > > existing at all times.) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Robert: Can you accept that at a moment when greed takes an object > > there can be no understanding but that the greed can be seen > > (immediately after it falls away) by panna? If we see that this is > > just the way it is (in practice)these doubts will fade. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, I can accept that. But my expectation would be that the "seeing" > of the greed which is no longer there is really the seeing of a *fresh > memory* of the greed, the knowing that the greed *was* just there, rather > than a direct knowing of the no-longer-existing greed, itself. (Of course, > you did imply before that wisdom can somehow *directly* observe a past event, > and maybe that is so.) > -------------------------------------------------------------- Robert: That is pretty much it, I think. If you speak with Acharn sujin about this she would be able to explain that wisdom is so weak before the first stage of vipassana (when nama and rupa are truly percieved) that one just tries to comprehend in words what has to be properly seen for oneself. At those moments the doorways are seen as they are - separate,. And then no doubt. > > > > > Howard: > > > Am I correct in understanding the Abhidhamma view of panna > > to be that > > > of a function accompanying a given mind-moment/citta, and being an > > aspect of > > > it? If yes, does it go beyond that citta by some means other than > > memory? > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert: Panna is a cetasika and is ENTIRELY different from citta. > > However, it arises always in association with citta. Sanna > > (perception, memory) is likewise different from citta and panna. > > Because these three very different realities have some > > characteristics that are similar - they all know an object - they are > > often confused. For example, very often people experience some subtle > > sensations in the body after they begin meditation. They assume that > > this is wisdom(panna) that is knowing it while such things can all be > > known by citta and sanna not associated with panna. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Thank you very much for emphasizing this! I fear I was falling into a > substantialist way of thinking, viewing a citta as a "thing" existing for a > period of time, with the accompanying cetasikas as features of that thing!! > Instead, of course, a citta is merely an act of discernment, a > function/operation, and the accompanying cetasikas are different functions > associated with the same object as that discernment. Your making this point > is very helpful to me! > ----------------------------------------------------------- And thank you Howard. These questions are most difficult. As I've indicated we reach a point where to go further takes the development of direct insight. But if we don't discuss to this point then we might make assumptions that hinder the direct insight. The advantage of knowing the details of the Abhidhamma is that it removes many of the coarse views. I have a feeling you will come back to this matter again (sooner or later) and that is good. We learn to look at the same problem in different ways, we see the neccesity of considering the Dhamma and also the limitations. It should encourage the testing and study of these matters directly - it is all here now to be insighted best wishes robert 7352 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sat Aug 11, 2001 11:44pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Dear Howard And Robert How are you? At first, I thought I would just follow your discussion. But, now, I decided to enter the fray. Howard wrote: "But what seems most important here is the question of whether the wisdom of a current citta is able to *directly* know what goes beyond that citta." " Okay, thanks. This strikes me as implying that wisdom can *directly* observe a past event. Surprising, but, hey - maybe!;-)" Howard also wrote: " This is all fine. My only hesitance here is with regard to wisdom *directly* knowing what no longer exists, as opposed to a memory of it." Here is my bit of discussion. When wisdom reaches the stage of awakening (bodhi, magga nyana, phala nyana), it directly knows, penetrates, realizes and sees nibbana. If you can accept this capability of wisdom, you are ready to drop yor resistance to accepting wisdom's direct knowledge of a past event. As you might know very well, nibbana is timeless, and outside the three timeframes of past, present and future. Well, as wisdom directly knows nibbana, it directly knows timelessness. In other words, wisdom can directly knows any timeframe. Wisdom isn't bound by the time constraints. Howard also asked: "Am I correct in understanding the Abhidhamma view of panna to be that of a function accompanying a given mind-moment/citta, and being an aspect of it? If yes, does it go beyond that citta by some means other than memory?" Suan answers: Yes, wisdom goes beyond the accompanying citta by means of its capability of directly knowing the phenomena regardless of their timeframes. Hope this message helps you drop your hesitance with regard to wisdom's power to know directly a past event. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > I shall attempt some snipping of the following in order to zero-in on > the gist of the current conversation. > > <> writes: > > > > . But what > > > seems most important here is the question of whether the wisdom of > > a current > > > citta is able to *directly* know what goes beyond that citta. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert: It is known directly . I do remember reading a tika years ago > > that went into a degree of detail about this but look as i may have > > not been able to find it. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay, thanks. This strikes me as implying that wisdom can *directly* > observe a past event. Surprising, but, hey - maybe! ;-) > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > > > > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after > > these. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > Again, does that understanding directly apprehend what no > > longer > > > exists? (If yes, this is reminiscent of the Sarvastivadin view of > > dhammas > > > existing at all times.) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Robert: Can you accept that at a moment when greed takes an object > > there can be no understanding but that the greed can be seen > > (immediately after it falls away) by panna? If we see that this is > > just the way it is (in practice)these doubts will fade. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, I can accept that. But my expectation would be that the "seeing" > of the greed which is no longer there is really the seeing of a *fresh > memory* of the greed, the knowing that the greed *was* just there, rather > than a direct knowing of the no-longer-existing greed, itself. (Of course, > you did imply before that wisdom can somehow *directly* observe a past event, > and maybe that is so.) > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Howard: > > > Am I correct in understanding the Abhidhamma view of panna > > to be that > > > of a function accompanying a given mind-moment/citta, and being an > > aspect of > > > it? If yes, does it go beyond that citta by some means other than > > memory? > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert: Panna is a cetasika and is ENTIRELY different from citta. > > However, it arises always in association with citta. Sanna > > (perception, memory) is likewise different from citta and panna. > > Because these three very different realities have some > > characteristics that are similar - they all know an object - they are > > often confused. For example, very often people experience some subtle > > sensations in the body after they begin meditation. They assume that > > this is wisdom(panna) that is knowing it while such things can all be > > known by citta and sanna not associated with panna. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Thank you very much for emphasizing this! I fear I was falling into a > substantialist way of thinking, viewing a citta as a "thing" existing for a > period of time, with the accompanying cetasikas as features of that thing!! > Instead, of course, a citta is merely an act of discernment, a > function/operation, and the accompanying cetasikas are different functions > associated with the same object as that discernment. Your making this point > is very helpful to me! > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > > > > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > That's fine. My question is: "By what means?". (It is, after > > all, not > > > nibbana, not the supermundane reality which transcends the triple > > world, but, > > > rather, a feature of a citta.) *How* does it grow beyond all limits? > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > Robert: Nibbana can know nothing. > > Panna is nama thus it is not bound in the way rupa (matter) is. > > Wisdom grows if the conditions are right. The conditions for the > > growth of wisdom are elaboarted in the texts. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is all fine. My only hesitance here is with regard to wisdom > *directly* knowing what no longer exists, as opposed to a memory of it. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ___________ > > > > > > > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > > > > > > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > > > > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now > > when > > > > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > > > > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight > > into > > > > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) > > and > > > > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > > > > I don't know if this helps. > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > It helps a lot, Robert, but, in the process, leads to ever > > more > > > questions! ;-)) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > best wishes > > robert > > > > > ============================== > With metta and appreciation, > 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) > > 7353 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 3:21am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... > 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. Dear All, Determinism is not a Buddhist doctrine. Determinism was the key tenet of another school, the Ajivikas, founded by Goshala, who died in 488 B.C. (A. K. Warder, Indian Buddhism, p. 40). Derek. 7354 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:31am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --- <> wrote: > -- > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Robert: Can you accept that at a moment when greed takes an > object > > > there can be no understanding but that the greed can be seen > > > (immediately after it falls away) by panna? If we see that this is > > > just the way it is (in practice)these doubts will fade. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes, I can accept that. But my expectation would be that > the "seeing" > > of the greed which is no longer there is really the seeing of a *fresh > > memory* of the greed, the knowing that the greed *was* just there, > rather > > than a direct knowing of the no-longer-existing greed, itself. (Of > course, > > you did imply before that wisdom can somehow *directly* observe a > past event, > > and maybe that is so.) > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Robert: That is pretty much it, I think. If you speak with Acharn sujin > about this she would be able to explain that wisdom is so weak before > the first stage of vipassana (when nama and rupa are truly percieved) > that one just tries to comprehend in words what has to be properly seen > for oneself. At those moments the doorways are seen as they are - > separate,. And then no doubt. > > > ______ Dear Howard, I pondered a little more. I remember several years back A. Sujin told me a little about the moments of vipassana nana. I can only remember a little. She said that now (without vipassana nana) the sense door process such as seeing and the mind door process aren't sen as they really are, they are mixed up , confused. At vipassana nana the mindoor process is known as it is and so the difference between nama and rupa is clear. During a sense door process the rupa that is object lasts for 17 moments of citta (the time it takes for a complet process) and thus at advanced levesl of vipassana the next process can know directly the falling away of the prior one. It is happening so fast and there could be know choosing of which object the panna knows. It is not anyone knowing it but simply developed panna arising that performs its function during these moments. In the arupa Brahma planes there can be no vipassana development because there is no rupa so that the difference between nama and rupa cannot be seen. (if someone is already a sotapanna and was born there this may be different) 7355 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 8:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Derek You see my friend I try hard to behave myself but what else can I say after a message like this: I do love you, you are my hero! If you become a monk promise I will bow to you three times, special privilege because even to Bhikkhu Boddhi I bowed only one time and naturally he said me to don't be silly and stop it right away. Thank you, sadhu, sadhu, sadhu!!!!! Love Cybele >From: "Derek Cameron" >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is >controllable? (was kusa... >Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 19:21:05 -0000 > > > 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. > >Dear All, > >Determinism is not a Buddhist doctrine. Determinism was the key tenet >of another school, the Ajivikas, founded by Goshala, who died in 488 >B.C. (A. K. Warder, Indian Buddhism, p. 40). > >Derek. > > > > 7356 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 9:18am Subject: Re: Right View leads to Right Practice (was: Regarding Parinibbana and ...) Dear Friends, > Thanks. I knew I was avoiding something: more practice. I am not directing this message at anyone: I am only hoping for this as a reminder. In: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html (my most favorite sutta recently!), the Buddha stressed that "right view is the forerunner". Without the right view and depending on our accumulation, we may be doing many kinds of wrong practices that would lead us only to more sufferings, and if they are wrong enough, would even lead us to the bad destinations. Knowing what is wholesome (kusala, and/or leading to the path) and what is unwholesome (akusala) can be very subtle. Take gift (dana) for example. Do we think any kind of gifts for any reasons are actions based on kusala? Do we know that gifts that are not useful are not gifts? For example, pornorgraphy and sexual favors cannot be considered gifts. If we do not study in details about what the Buddha has taught, then we may mistake what is not to be what is. If dana is hard to differentiate, I think higher kusala, such as Tranquil (samatha) meditation, is even harder. The Buddha teaches that wrong concentration (micha-samathi) is possible. Do we know what wrong concentration is? Is concentration associated with reading (a concentration I am sure everybody has, especially if they have gotten this far!) kusala or akusala? How about focusing on an object? Without knowing the basic differences between the characteristics of kusala conciousness and akusala conciousness, then it will be impossible to develop tranquil meditation. If our concentration on a single object turns out to be based on attachment (lobha which is unwholesome) instead of on kusala, then we would be adding to the latent tendencies for lobha and all its associated akusala factors instead of developing kusala--- this definitely wouldn't lead to the happy abode in this life or happy destination in next life, and it wouldn't help our goal of the path. All kusala consciousness has lobha consciousness as it near enemy: they share many similar characteristics and factors including concentration (samathi), indifferent feeling (upekkha) or happy feeling (somanassa), rapture (piti), and a few others. It is easy to mistake what is akusala as kusala. Right view leads to the right practice, but wrong practice will not lead to the right view. We are fortunate indeed to be born in a world where the right views are still taught. I hope everybody is "taking advantage" of the teachings. kom 7357 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Derek - > > 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. > > Dear All, > > Determinism is not a Buddhist doctrine. Determinism was the key tenet > of another school, the Ajivikas, founded by Goshala, who died in 488 > B.C. (A. K. Warder, Indian Buddhism, p. 40). > > Derek. > ============================ And what is your point? Nibbana is the only unconditioned dhamma. All others arise as the result causes and conditions. Are you claiming that free will consists in doing something based on absolutely nothing, without cause or condition, an instance of pure randomness? 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) 7358 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/11/01 7:32:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Dear Howard, > I pondered a little more. I remember several years back A. Sujin told > me a little about the moments of vipassana nana. > I can only remember a little. She said that now (without vipassana > nana) the sense door process such as seeing and the mind door process > aren't sen as they really are, they are mixed up , confused. At vipassana > nana the mindoor process is known as it is and so the difference > between nama and rupa is clear. During a sense door process the rupa > that is object lasts for 17 moments of citta (the time it takes for a > complet process) and thus at advanced levesl of vipassana the next > process can know directly the falling away of the prior one. It is > happening so fast and there could be know choosing of which object the > panna knows. It is not anyone knowing it but simply developed panna > arising that performs its function during these moments. > In the arupa Brahma planes there can be no vipassana development > because there is no rupa so that the difference between nama and rupa > cannot be seen. (if someone is already a sotapanna and was born there > this may be different) > > =============================== Thanks for this, Robert. I'm having a little trouble grasping what you are saying here. The crux of it, and where most of my "trouble" lies is with: "During a sense door process the rupa that is object lasts for 17 moments of citta (the time it takes for a complet process) and thus at advanced levesl of vipassana the next process can know directly the falling away of the prior one." Could you please say some more here, clarifying it and expanding on it a bit. I'm afraid I'm being a bit dense here, and that's a shame, because it seems to me that this could be important. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7359 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi again, Derek - In a message dated 8/11/01 11:05:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard writes: > Hi, Derek - > > > > > > 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. > > > > Dear All, > > > > Determinism is not a Buddhist doctrine. Determinism was the key tenet > > of another school, the Ajivikas, founded by Goshala, who died in 488 > > B.C. (A. K. Warder, Indian Buddhism, p. 40). > > > > Derek. > > > ============================ > And what is your point? > Nibbana is the only unconditioned dhamma. All others arise as the > result causes and conditions. Are you claiming that free will consists in > doing something based on absolutely nothing, without cause or condition, an > instance of pure randomness? > =============================== I'm afraid I was a a little flip with my answer here. Let me explain further. Suppose I were to say to someone: "I'm going to have a bite to eat now", expressing an intention. And suppose the other person were to ask me "Why are you going to eat now?" I might then answer: "Well, I'm hungry, and I have some free time now, and there is nothing more urgent for me to do, and being hungry is unpleasant, and eating removes the hunger, and so on and so forth, ... and so, I'll grab a bite to eat now." The point is: Yes, I'm exercising volition, but for a variety of reasons. My volition is not uncaused. Yet it *is* a matter of volition. Is this determinism or fatalism? I don't think so. Neither is it an absence of conditionality. As usual, it is "in the middle". 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) 7360 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > =============================== > Thanks for this, Robert. I'm having a little trouble grasping what you > are saying here. The crux of it, and where most of my "trouble" lies is with: > "During a sense door process the rupa that is object lasts for 17 moments of > citta (the time it takes for a complet process) and thus at advanced levesl > of vipassana the next process can know directly the falling away of the prior > one." Could you please say some more here, clarifying it and expanding on it > a bit. I'm afraid I'm being a bit dense here, and that's a shame, because it > seems to me that this could be important. > > With metta, > Howard __________ Howard, The denseness is all mine! It is because I forget some of what Sujin told me. I did record it (we were on a trip to Hua Huin about 7 years ago, I remember the situation well)and I know it was exceedingly profound but I think the tape is up in japan. leave it with me though and I am sure some thoughts will occur sooner or later.Nina would also understand this matter far better than me. The crux of the biscuit, as Herman would say, is that it becomes vividly clear at vipassana nana. The factors of the eighfold (fivefold)path are becoming strong at this time. Samadhi is present to 'fix', momentarily on the objects so that panna can insight. I sometimes feel that talking about these advanced stages of insight is not beneficial in that we might try to fit our 'experience' into what we have heard. But since you have doubts on these points, and doubts can hinder progress(especially if you turned away from Abhidhamma), it is worth discussing. kind regards robert > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7361 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/11/01 11:32:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Howard, > The denseness is all mine! It is because I forget some of what Sujin > told me. I did record it (we were on a trip to Hua Huin about 7 years > ago, I remember the situation well)and I know it was exceedingly > profound but I think the tape is up in japan. leave it with me though > and I am sure some thoughts will occur sooner or later.Nina would > also understand this matter far better than me. > > The crux of the biscuit, as Herman would say, is that it becomes > vividly clear at vipassana nana. The factors of the eighfold > (fivefold)path are becoming strong at this time. Samadhi is present > to 'fix', momentarily on the objects so that panna can insight. > I sometimes feel that talking about these advanced stages of insight > is not beneficial in that we might try to fit our 'experience' into > what we have heard. But since you have doubts on these points, and > doubts can hinder progress(especially if you turned away from > Abhidhamma), it is worth discussing. > kind regards > robert > =========================== Again thank you. Whatever you can retrieve on this subject, by memory or tapes, or whatever, now or in the future, I would much appreciate hearing. This strikes me as crucially important material. (Oh, and BTW, the denseness is primarily with me, to be sure! ;-) 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) 7362 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 4:56pm Subject: Re: Testing - Erik --- Cybele Chiodi wrote: > > Dear Sarah > > Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is > in a retreat in Angkor. And what a retreat it was! I thought the week before was seriously reality-bending, but this past few days takes the cake. Had anyone told me just a week ago I'd return to BKK with a new fiancee (not in tow, however), I'd have laughed them out of the room. > You know we 'meditators' enjoy 'refuging' in > monasteries... ;-))))) > > > > Yes, the real test of any insight into life and > > the 'realities' > > > which make up > > > > life has to be at this moment. > > > > > > Not so, Sarah! :) > > > > > > The REAL test is if the afflictions have been > > permanently terminated > > > or not. > > > > > > > Erik, what other time than this moment is there???> Back to the point: what other test is there than if the afflictions have been permanently terminated or not? I don't recall the Buddha EVER talking about "this moment" being the test! The point of the path is supramundane insight, because only with supramundane insight can the fetters be terminated once and for all. So the point then is parcticing techniques that create the conditions for this to arise. And what are those techniquies? None other than the Noble Eightfold Path: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-008.html Any teaching that ignores ANY of these essentials limbs cannot be a teahing that leads to the end of dukkha, which is the entire point of the Buddhist path. I see little correspondence between "recognizing realities this moment" and what the Buddha actually taught in the Suttas as a pathway out of dukkha. For example, the Sammaditthi Sutta (the most detailed Sutta I've come across on the variations on Right View) doesn't anywhere mention Right View comes about by recognizing realities right this moment: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html Perhaps you or others here have some suttas I've missed on this point. I am happy to stand corrected on such a vital, life & death issue if I am wrong. On the other hand, if you find no references to such a teaching, getting this right still remains a matter of life & death. 7363 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 6:48pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... > If you become a monk promise I will bow to you three times Better watch out, Cybele! I might create an international scandal by bowing down to YOU! :-) Derek. 7364 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:37pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Howard, > > Nibbana is the only unconditioned dhamma. Well, as I've already said, I don't view nibbaana as a "thing." But that's another subject. > As usual, it is > "in the middle". Correct. Free-will is one extreme. Determininism is another. As to how it all works, I believe in the Acinteyya Sutta that Mike has already mentioned -- some things cannot be understood merely by thinking about them. They are acinteyya ("things not to be thought about"). Derek. 7365 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 8:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Dear Erik, --- Erik wrote: > --- Cybele Chiodi > > Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is > > in a retreat in Angkor. We wondered when we read this...... > > And what a retreat it was! I thought the week before was seriously > reality-bending, but this past few days takes the cake. Had anyone > told me just a week ago I'd return to BKK with a new fiancee (not in > tow, however), I'd have laughed them out of the room. our wondering was confirmed!!.....no surprise to us at all, Erik!!! There are retreats and retreats! (catch you off-list). > > > You know we 'meditators' enjoy 'refuging' in > > monasteries... ;-))))) and not just in monasteries:-) > > > Erik, what other time than this moment is there???> > > I see little correspondence between "recognizing realities this > moment" and what the Buddha actually taught in the Suttas as a > pathway out of dukkha. > > For example, the Sammaditthi Sutta (the most detailed Sutta > I've come across on the variations on Right View) doesn't anywhere > mention Right View comes about by recognizing realities right this > moment: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html > An excellent sutta. Erik, in this sutta, the Buddha talks about all kinds of realities to be understood directly. He makes the point that this is the way to end suffering/realize nibbana and it's understood that these realities can only be known when they appear. For example, intention to kill or reraining from unwholesome speech can only be known at those moments. If they don't appear now, they can't be known directly now. The realities are classified in different ways such as kusala (wholesome) and akusala (unwholesome) consciousness and mental factors. they are classified as the 5 khandhas, as nama and rupa, as the 6fold base etc. However they are classified, they point to the very same mental and physical phenomena that should be known as they are, as not-self. By understanding them thus over and over and over again, the unsatisfactoriness (suffering) of all conditioned realities eventually becomes apparent and the end of suffering is realized. These are not different strategies or techniques, but the description of the objects to be known by right understanding at this very moment. In other words the very 'practice' of the Teachings. Erik, this is a rushed post as I'm rather busy, but I'm glad to see you back;-)) You'll find one or two others waiting for you;-)) Sarah 7366 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Testing - Erik Sarah, > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html > An excellent sutta. Erik, in this sutta, the Buddha talks No, it's Saariputta who does the talking. > about all kinds of > realities to be understood directly. The terminology of "all kinds of realities to be understood directly" is entirely foreign to the sutta. You're reading things into the text that aren't actually there. Derek. 7367 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 9:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Derek, --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Sarah, > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html > > > An excellent sutta. Erik, in this sutta, the Buddha talks > > No, it's Saariputta who does the talking. Thanks for this correction. > > > about all kinds of > > realities to be understood directly. > > The terminology of "all kinds of realities to be understood directly" > is entirely foreign to the sutta. You're reading things into the text > that aren't actually there. Look forward to more discussion. Perhaps you'd elaborate. Sarah 7368 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 9:57pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > When you stare at them long enough, your fingers are actually quite > > > visually > > > interesting. :-) > > > > Yes, I think I know what you mean. Here's a question for you, Anders. > > What in your view/experience is happening at such moments, when the > > fingers become 'visually interesting'. Is this because of what is > > happening in the eye-door process, or in the mind-door process, > (assuming > > it's not changes in the finger!)? Is it kusala of some kind > > (understanding, perhaps) or is it akusala? > > Hmmm, good question. I don't think it's related much to understanding > really. That's for sure, although there's no reason why there could not be a level of understanding at such moments. Realities are appearing then, as at any time. > I think it's a combination of eye and mind response. Generally, > when your eyes loose focus or remain in focus on one object for an > extended > period of time, they tend to relax (at least for me) and I think this > may > result in visual sensations that are not normally experienced (since the > eyes rarely relax in that way) and thus the mind responds to this *new* > change, usually with fascination (the again, I can only speak for > myself). My biology is very weak but from a conventional perspective you are right here, as far as I know. > I'd say that from a Samatha perspective, it's kusala (not much, but a > little), but from the perspective of Vipassana, it's akusula. Perhaps you refer to the concentration aspect, when you say kusala from a samatha perspective? Concentration can be either kusala or akusala -- it is not intrinsically one or the other. Unless one knows by direct experience the characteristics of kusala and akusala, it would not be possible to say for sure in any particular case. However, we do know that only certain objects of concentration are conducive to calm (samatha). These include the body, in its repulsive aspect(!). Happy finger-watching! Jon 7369 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 10:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The only way? Herman --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Recently there has been good discussion about the methods/paths to > nibbana. One of the, so far unanswered, questions was whether there > was a path presribed that was THE ONLY WAY. > > In my general browsing I chanced upon the following. Sorry for > quoting the whole section, but it shows how in a particular instance > multiple views were allowed without admonition or correction. Thanks for bringing up this sutta. But I'm not sure that the Buddha here is speaking approvingly of other views. I read him as saying that whatever view a person holds (be it right or wrong), it makes sense to develop kusala. But it is certainly unusual in that he does not speak disapprovingly of the wrong views mentioned. Jon > Kalama Sutta: > > (The Four Solaces) > 17. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate- > free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such > a purified mind, is one by whom four solaces are found here and now. > > "'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds > done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the > body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is > possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by > him. > > "'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of > deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from > hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' > This is the second solace found by him. > > "'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of > doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no > evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him. > > "'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see > myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him. > > "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free > mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a > purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are > found." > > "So it is, Blessed One. So it is, Sublime one. The disciple of the > Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate-free mind, such a > malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, > is one by whom, here and now, four solaces are found. > > "'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds > done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the > body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is > possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by > him. > > "'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of > deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from > hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' > This is the second solace found by him. > > "'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of > doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no > evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him. > > "'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see > myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him. > > "The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate- > free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such > a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are > found. > > > With Metta > > > Herman > > 7370 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 10:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? Anders --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > An interesting passage. Any idea what the reference to 'making a > wish' > > might be referring to? I haven't quite figured this one out yet. > > My guess would be that as long as you follow the path of practise, it is > irrelevant if you have desire (or are wishing) for liberation and > Nibbana. That would make sense, but for the fact that the passage (which I don't have handy for this reply) begins with the words: 'If a monk endowed with [the eightfold path factors] follows the holy life ... [with or wothout having made a wish etc] ... he is capable of obtaining results." It ends by saying "Because it is an appropriate way of obtaining results". If a monk is endowed with the eightfold path factors, there is no question of him *not* following the holy life; he has already obtained results, I would have thought. Any other thoughts, anyone? Jon 7371 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 10:36pm Subject: rapidity of the processes Dear friends, just a few thoughts on the rapidity of the processes. Seeing and remembrance of concepts of what we see, it all goes so fast. Khun Sujin explained that when we are reading, we translate colours into letters, sentences, meaning. It goes on by conditions. The late Alan Driver once wrote to me: Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of visible object whioch appears, until one knows clearly that what appears through eyes is only colour. Khun Sujin said that if it is not in this way one cannot detach from the inclination to take realities for self, being, person. Khun Sujin said: <...The moment you translate is different from the moment you begin to study and understand that there is a reality which appears through the eyes... Knowing that what was seen is this or that thing, this or that person, it is a type of nama... There must be a reality that knows the meaning of sound which appeared through the ears, there are different namas experiencing objects through different doorways... When we know it is nama it means it is not self. When we know it is rupa, it means it is not self. > Seeing passes away so rapidly, but it can be studied with awareness. It arises again and again, very soon after it has disappeared and then there are opportunities to study it again and again, and in this way understanding of it is accumulated, but, very, very gradually. Nina. 7372 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 10:36pm Subject: the object of citta Dear Eric, Howard and all, Eric wrote: >Rather than talk about abstract notions like cittas (and until you have had DIRECT experience of a citta, please don't come back to me with this "paramattha dhammas" business--cittas are WAY too abstract an concept before such direct experience of them; who but a Buddha or nearly a Buddha directly discern the billionth of a second of awareness each citta represents? Nina: I can very well understand that for several people it is difficult to understand what citta is. Since it falls away extremely rapidly, it seems impossible to grasp it. It seems an abstract notion, like all the other categories described in the Abhidhamma. However, would the Buddha speak about paramattha dhammas, not only described in the Abhidhamma, but also in the Vinaya and Suttanta, if their characteristics could not be experienced, even now while we are beginning to develop understanding? As Sarah wrote : end quote. Nina: We can find out that seeing is an experience, citta, experiencing what appears through the eyes, and that hearing is another experience, citta experiencing what appears through the ears. They are dependent on different sense-bases and experience different objects. We read in the ³Middle Length Sayings²(I, 38, Greater Discourse on the Destruction of Craving) that the Buddha explained to Såti, a fisherman¹s son, who thought that there was one lasting consciousness: ³It is good, monks, it is good that you understand thus Dhamma taught by me to you, monks. For in many a figure has consciousness generated by conditions been spoken of by me to you, monks, saying: ŒApart from conditon there is no origination of consciousness.² ... It is because, monks, an appropriate condiiton arises that consciousness is known by this or that name: if consciousness arises because of eye and visible object, it is known as seeing-consciousness; if consciousness arises because of ear and sounds it is known as hearing-consciousness... The same has been explained on account of the other sense-doors and the mind-door. Here we see that there is Abhidhamma in the sutta, and there are many such examples all over the Suttanta. When I had in the beginning doubts about the Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin said, find out what is in it. We have to find out ourselves by beginning to consider the realities in daily life, that is the only way. Different fields of science, study of the history of the texts, or neuro-psychological science about consciousness that experiences one object could not eliminate doubts about the teachings. I do not deny the benefit of science, but through science the defilements of wrong view and doubt about the truth could never be eradicated. Only understanding, paññå, that begins to verify characteristics of realities as they appear through the six doors can eventually eradicate doubt and wrong view. I used to find it difficult to prove that citta can know only one object at a time. Khun Sujin asked me, can you think of two things at a time? We have to verify this ourselves. As Robert K. explained, paññå can know an object such as greed that has just fallen away. I can understand that people find it difficult to grasp how what has fallen away can be an object of paññå in vipassanå. As Kom explained, there are sense-door processes and mind-door processes arising one after the other very rapidly. When sati arises it can be mindful of a characteristic of reality that appears. What does this mean, a characteristic that appears? What is characteristic, and what does appearing mean? Seeing has one characteristic, hearing has another characteristic, hardness has another characteristic. A characteristic manifests itself, we do not have to think about it, it can be experienced. We do not have to do anything special, we do not have to think, is this a fresh memory of what appeared? Thus, we can know that there are different objects each with their own distinct nature or characteristic. Kom, in his explanation of processes of cittas, uses the word sabhava, sa means: with, and bhava means nature. Even when we begin to develop understanding of realities, thus, even when a stage of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa, has not arisen yet, the characteristics of greed or hardness appear. We do not have to calculate how many cittas have fallen away, but we should consider: do these different characteristics manifest themselves or not? As Robert K. explained, greed or seeing have just fallen away, but their characteristics appear. They have only just fallen away, cittas arise and fall away with tremendous speed. An example: sound is experienced through the ear-door and after that through the mind-door, but the mind-door process of cittas, after bhavanga-cittas, arises so rapidly after that, that we still seem to ³hear². Now I quote a passgae from Khun Sujin¹s Cambodian lectures: End quote. Nina. 7373 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 6:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Anders - In a message dated 8/7/01 10:51:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard writes: > Hi, Anders - > > In a message dated 8/5/01 1:23:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > cybele chiodi writes: > > > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a > > bubble > > > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, > a > > > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) > > > > That part is readily understandable, but how much do you make of the Sutra > > in its entirety? > > > ======================= > I'm on my way to work. I will get back to you on this. > > With metta, > Howard > > ================================ If you would like to post parts of that sutra so that we and others might discuss it from various vantage points, especially that of Theravada, I would be very happy to participate. (David Kalupahana, an academic who is a Theravadin is much appreciative of this sutra and others from the Perfcion of Wisdom writings.) Mainly, I see this sutra as expressing the emptiness/lack of separate identity/lack of esential existence in all dhammas, and most glaringly in those only apprehendable via concept, saying in each case that an X is really no X, and that is why it is *called* an X. For example, there is the following snippet I just took from one translation I picked off the net: "Subhuti, the so-called Buddhas and Dharmas are not real Buddhas and Dharmas. 'Subhuti, what do you think? Can one who has entered the stream (srota-apanna) have this thought (in his mind): I have obtained the fruit of entering the stream?' Subhuti replied: 'No, World Honoured One. Why? Because srota-apanna means 'entering the stream', but actually there is no entry into either form, sound, smell, taste, touch or dharma. Therefore, he is called srota-apanna.' 'Subhuti, what do you think? Can a Sakrdagamin have this thought (in his mind): I have obtained the fruit of a Sakrdagamin?' Subhuti replied: 'No, World Honoured One. Why? Because Sakrdagamin means „once more to come", but actually there is neither coming nor going. Therefore, he is called a Sakrdagamin.' 'Subhuti, what do you think? Can an Anagamin have this thought (in his mind): I have obtained the fruit of an Anagamin?' Subhuti replied: 'No, World Honoured One. Why? Because Anagamin means "no-coming" but actually there is no such a thing as no-coming. Therefore, he is called an Anagamin.' 'Subhuti, what do you think? Can an Arhat have this thought (in his mind): I have obtained the enlightenment of an Arhat?' Subhuti replied: 'No, World Honoured One. Why? Because there is no Dharma which is called Arhatship. World Honoured One, if an Arhat thinks "I have obtained the enlightenment of an Arhat", he will still grasp and hold on to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life." 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) 7374 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 11:04pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > I think I understand what you are saying: that development of the path > involves > expansion of awareness and knowledge of what is really there in the > moment, and > that this is not a way of working out unwholesome tendencies, but a > separate > endeavor. Yes, if I understand you correctly. One is the development of the path. 'Working out' unwholesome tendencies is not the development of the path; it is usually driven by an idea of 'self'. > But what I have not gotten from this response is how you deal with the > akusula. > You say that you would like to have less, as a person, of lust or greed, > whatever > the akusula may be. Is this something that you work out, and if so how? Like you said, we deal with akusala with more akusala. Unless there's any kusala (don't reckon there is, though, in my case, except occasionally some useful reflection later). > Since we > agree that this is part of the foundation of the path, and that neither > suppression nor satisfaction of desire lessens the pull of desire, which > I would > think we would agree would tend to pull us from the path, what is the > proper way > of dealing with akusula to lessen its presence and its pull? Here we differ, perhaps. It is my understanding of the teachings that there is no need to deal with one's akusala in order to begin the development of the path. > I think that mindfulness of the experience of the akusula lessens its > pull. You > are saying that these are and should be separate issues. So what is > your answer > to attachment and desire? I can't do better that re-post here something that Mike wrote recently. He said -- "Tendencies and accumulations (what I think of as sankharakhanda) are fertile ground for mindfulness (dhammanusati(sp?)). Unfortunately they are the continuous results of incomprehensibly vast numbers of unimaginably complex conditions from the past--since we can't change the past, we also can't change the present manifestations of its conditions. "Fortunately, on the other hand, tendencies and accumulations CAN be understood as not-self--at that moment, 'personality' can be seen for the insignificant thing that it is. Having a rather rotten personality myself, I find this reflection quite liberating. (This isn't to say that kusala can't or shouldn't be cultivated despite personality--it can and should)." The accumulated akusala are so strong and entrenched that nothing we can 'do' can have any real effect. The only fix in the long run is the development of panna which can gradually attenuate and eventually eradicate completely and finally all traces of akusala. As Mike also pointed out in a lsubsequent post, when kusala has been developed to a certain level (power?), it can have the effect of subduing akusala -- "Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right through the discourses and the discipline, the (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various skilful reflections. This again is only a temporary fix. But we should not think that it is simply a matter of 'thinking kusala'. As I understand it, this refers to a high level of development of kusala. I hope this clarifies what I have been trying to say. Jon 7375 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Erik - In a message dated 8/12/01 4:57:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Cybele Chiodi > wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah > > > > Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is > > in a retreat in Angkor. > > And what a retreat it was! I thought the week before was seriously > reality-bending, but this past few days takes the cake. Had anyone > told me just a week ago I'd return to BKK with a new fiancee (not in > tow, however), I'd have laughed them out of the room. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: REALLY!! If you are serious - that is, not metaphorical in some way - then you have my heartiest congratulations!! ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > You know we 'meditators' enjoy 'refuging' in > > monasteries... ;-))))) > > > > > > Yes, the real test of any insight into life and > > > the 'realities' > > > > which make up > > > > > life has to be at this moment. > > > > > > > > Not so, Sarah! :) > > > > > > > > The REAL test is if the afflictions have been > > > permanently terminated > > > > or not. > > > > > > > > > > Erik, what other time than this moment is there???> > > Back to the point: what other test is there than if the afflictions > have been permanently terminated or not? I don't recall the Buddha > EVER talking about "this moment" being the test! The point of the > path is supramundane insight, because only with supramundane insight > can the fetters be terminated once and for all. So the point then is > parcticing techniques that create the conditions for this to arise. > And what are those techniquies? None other than the Noble Eightfold > Path: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-008.html > > Any teaching that ignores ANY of these essentials limbs cannot be a > teahing that leads to the end of dukkha, which is the entire point of > the Buddhist path. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I am among the first to agree that the entire path, including Right Concentration, which the Buddha defined as the jhanas, is needed. However, I would also like to point out that nothing that happens in time happens at any time other than the present, for, as the Buddha pointed out, neither the past nor the future is existent. (Of course, the present doesn't remain for even an instant, and so there is an essential magical quality to time, a kind of unreality.) ------------------------------------------------------------ > > I see little correspondence between "recognizing realities this > moment" and what the Buddha actually taught in the Suttas as a > pathway out of dukkha. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't get your point here, Erik. No cultivation of the mind can occur at any time other than "now", no apprehending of the nature of anything can be done except "now". When else? What is gone is gone, though the effects remain. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > For example, the Sammaditthi Sutta (the most detailed Sutta > I've come across on the variations on Right View) doesn't anywhere > mention Right View comes about by recognizing realities right this > moment: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sometimes certain things are not repeated in all contexts. Very few books on nutrition, for example, mention that in order for nutition to be effective, there is the requirement that the eater be alive at the time! ;-)) (Sorry to be flip! ;-)) ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Perhaps you or others here have some suttas I've missed on this > point. I am happy to stand corrected on such a vital, life & death > issue if I am wrong. On the other hand, if you find no references to > such a teaching, getting this right still remains a matter of life & > death. > =================================== Erik, I seem to be missing your point here. What is the positive assertion that you are making? 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) 7376 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 11:22pm Subject: Re: Gandhabba As Re-linking Consciousness: Three Events Coincide Dear Dhamma Study Friends How are you? I made an embarrassing typing error in my message 7323. The word with a typing error is "sammipethito". Please kindly change it to "samipethito". Apology for any inconvenience and misunderstanding. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > Dear Dhamma Study Friends > > The following message (dhamma-list message 22247) is my reply > to John R Overman's message (dhamma-list message 22241). The subject > is a serious one. I thought you might find it useful, so I post it > here. > > Hope you enjoy it. > > Suan > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > Dear John R Overman > > How are you? > > The Buddha's explanation is already complete and transparant. But, I > think you would like further comment on the translator's explanation > "gandhabba is not some disembodied spirit". By the way, this wasn't > actual wording in the MN commentary Pali. The commentary is merely > commenting on the expression "paccupatthito hoti" found in section > 408 of Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya original. > > The expression "Paccupatthito hoti" can mean "is standing in front" > literally. But, this meaning does not apply to the re-linking > consciousness (patisandhi cittam)of the dead one. So the commentator > was forced to say the following. > > " Paccupatthito hotiti na matapitunam sannipatam olokayamano > sammipethito paccupatthito nama hoti." > > "Is standing in front" wasn't like "standing close-by (sammipethito) > while watching father and mother copulating". > > Now, the above Pali comment became "gandhabba is not some disembodied > spirit" in the hands of the translator, I think. > > In Pali Buddhism, the re-linking consciousness follows immediately > after the dying consciousness (cuti cittam). So when father and > mother are copulating while mother is ovulating, someone dies and his > re-linking consciounsess has a chance to conceive. All three events > coincide. That is all there is to it. The right timing is made > possible by the past actions of the father, mother and the embryo > (gandhabba now with body). > > Re-linking consciousness is called "gandhabbo" in ordinary language. > > I hope my message makes sense to you and all other dhamma friends. > > > With regards > > Suan Lu zaw > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > In MN38, Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, the last sentence of > paragraph 26, 7377 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Derek = > Hi, Howard, > > > > Nibbana is the only unconditioned dhamma. > > Well, as I've already said, I don't view nibbaana as a "thing." But > that's another subject. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, the Buddha did refer to nibbana as a "dhamma". A dhamma, is, from my perspective, any possible element of experience, and that would include nibbana. I agree that nibbana is no "thing". But, for that matter, I don't believe in *any* separate, self-existent, independent "things". ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > As usual, it is > > "in the middle". > > Correct. Free-will is one extreme. Determininism is another. As to > how it all works, I believe in the Acinteyya Sutta that Mike has > already mentioned -- some things cannot be understood merely by > thinking about them. They are acinteyya ("things not to be thought > about"). > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, at least not too much! And certainly not to the point of obsession. ------------------------------------------------------ > > Derek. > ============================ 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) 7378 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 7:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Derek - > Sarah, > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn009.html > > > An excellent sutta. Erik, in this sutta, the Buddha talks > > No, it's Saariputta who does the talking. > > > about all kinds of > > realities to be understood directly. > > The terminology of "all kinds of realities to be understood directly" > is entirely foreign to the sutta. You're reading things into the text > that aren't actually there. > > Derek. > ================================ It is certainly so that this sutta doesn't speak in terms of "all kinds of realities to be understood directly". However, it does discuss Right View of such things as clinging, craving, feeling, contact, namarupa, discernment, formations, ignorance, taints etc., and throughout the suttas it is taught that wisdom with regard to these things is to be obtained by direct knowing, by vijja, and not by mere intellectualization. So what is bothersome in this terminolgy? Is it that it has the taste of Abhidhamma? ;-)) I must admit that I prefer the sutta approach, myself, and am a bit turned off by the hyper-formalism I see in Abhidhamma. But when something is factually correct, such as the need to see *directly*, the terminolgy needn't loom so large, don't you think? 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) 7379 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 0:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Derek Actually I acknowledge that your action could be kusala certainly not because you would nourish my ego but to give a proper and fair outstanding public recognition to a a female buddhist practitioner and challenge solid, petrified 'official prejudices' justified by the so-called tradition that 'must' remain untouched. And so on the old, anachronistic mentality of 2500 years ago is still crushing down sincere aspirations in the women's buddhist world. How is it possible and sensible that the values of a mysoginist, archaic, patriarcal ancient Indian society and culture can still nowadays regulate the discipline code of modern women? I suppose we will continue being the evil creatures misleading the pure, honest, incorruptible males and good enough only for the kitchen and the bedroom. Food and procreation, shut up and behave yourself... It makes me feel sick...tedium vitae my friend, I am bored of the very same prejudices in different, subtle disguises. I make a vow to reach enlightenment as a female, forever reincarnating in this form till I attain deliverance. I feel really grateful that you are not between the oppressors. Love Cybele > > > If you become a monk promise I will bow to you three times > >Better watch out, Cybele! I might create an international scandal by >bowing down to YOU! :-) > >Derek. > 7380 From: m. nease Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] rapidity of the processes Dear Nina, Thanks for your generous posts (and for your excellent books, again). I'm afraid I'm not always able to understand them very clearly but maybe in time... --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of visible object which appears, until one knows clearly that what appears through eyes is only colour. -------------------- Where you write, 'until one knows clearly' what is the nature of this knowledge (since there's obviously no one knowing)? Is it conceptual understanding 'assembling' itself out of the memories of many recent instants of sati, or is it yet another instantaneous and conventionally unknowable moment? In other words, when 'sati studies with awareness the characteristic of visible object which appears', what accumulates as a result? Conceptual understanding (vitakka, I guess), or paññaa which can only be 'known' by other incomprehensively brief dhammas--or both, or neither? Sorry if this is too elementary or calls for repetition--and thanks in advance. mike 7381 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 1:47am Subject: Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Howard, > But when something is factually > correct, such as the need to see *directly*, the terminolgy > needn't loom so > large, don't you think? Well ... Ajahn Chah once told someone she was like a farmer who collected the chicken-droppings rather than the eggs. I think the difference is pretty large! ;-) Derek. 7382 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 4:56am Subject: Testing-Erik Erik wrote: > > > > > >SARAH: Yes, the real test of any insight into life and > > > the 'realities' > > > > which make up > > > > > life has to be at this moment. > > > > ______________________ ERIK: Not so, Sarah!....... ..... > > >I see little correspondence between "recognizing realities this > moment" and what the Buddha actually taught in the Suttas as a > pathway out of dukkha. . ________________ from Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of MN 131, in the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): A Single Excellent Night Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes;.... ...Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, .. Today the effort must be made; Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? No bargain with Mortality Can keep him and his hordes away, but one who dwells thus ardently, Relentlessly, by day, by night - It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, Who has had a single excellent night.ENDQUOTE robert 7383 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 8:22am Subject: Re: rapidity of the processes Nina, Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but to my limited understanding a person who dwelt in a realm of colours, hardnesses and softnesses, sounds, smells, tastes, coldness and warmness etc only, and makes no further associations and connections between these separate events, would be a completely dysfunctional person. The diagnosis would be along the lines of disassociative state. Is it incorrect to say that the process of combining information from separate events and so forming concepts, is the actual basis for insight and wisdom, and that the reverse process of deconstructing concepts into separate and non-related events would remove all foundations for wisdom and insight? Regards Herman --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, just a few thoughts on the rapidity of the processes. Seeing > and remembrance of concepts of what we see, it all goes so fast. Khun Sujin > explained that when we are reading, we translate colours into letters, > sentences, meaning. It goes on by conditions. The late Alan Driver once > wrote to me: > as the elements we translate into words and meanings are just sound, so, > through the eye-door, it is just colour, not the world of people and things. > We immediately translate colour into people and things and relate to them so > eagerly with all our defilements; what fears and promise our translated > world seems to hold for us. Yet, the original language is just rupa arising > and falling away by conditions, void of either threat or promise.> > > Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of visible object whioch > appears, until one knows clearly that what appears through eyes is only > colour. Khun Sujin said that if it is not in this way one cannot detach from > the inclination to take realities for self, being, person. Khun Sujin said: > <...The moment you translate is different from the moment you begin to study > and understand that there is a reality which appears through the eyes... > Knowing that what was seen is this or that thing, this or that person, it is > a type of nama... There must be a reality that knows the meaning of sound > which appeared through the ears, there are different namas experiencing > objects through different doorways... When we know it is nama it means it is > not self. When we know it is rupa, it means it is not self. > > Seeing passes away so rapidly, but it can be studied with awareness. It > arises again and again, very soon after it has disappeared and then there > are opportunities to study it again and again, and in this way understanding > of it is accumulated, but, very, very gradually. > Nina. 7384 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:14am Subject: Re: Testing - Erik --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Erik - > Howard: > I am among the first to agree that the entire path, including Right > Concentration, which the Buddha defined as the jhanas, is needed. However, I > would also like to point out that nothing that happens in time happens at any > time other than the present, for, as the Buddha pointed out, neither the past > nor the future is existent. (Of course, the present doesn't remain for even > an instant, and so there is an essential magical quality to time, a kind of > unreality.) On this point we do not at all disagree, just to be perfectly clear. There IS no other moment than the present moment. HOWEVER, this is not what I was driving at. I don't recall seeing the Buddha teaching in those terms. This is not an issue of whether or not awareness--or for that matter, awakening--occur in the present moment. They MUST! Past & future are mere mental elaborations, constructs. So nowhere will you see me disagree with the notion that nothing, NOTHING, happens outside of the "present moment"! What I am specifically questioning is any METHODOLOGY that appears to get hung up on the "present moment" to the point of excluding the more convenmtional view of past, present, and future, of kusala and akusala, and more important, of directed PRACTICE. All of my objections are about pedagogy--strategic pedagogy. Any objections I raise here are not denying there is only this present moment because, let's face it, that's all there really is. But when there is no mention of anything BUT recognizing the present moment as a pathway out of dukkha, BIG objection. The Buddha didn't teach that way. The Buddha spoke of past, present, and future. The Buddha spoke of conventional realities arising and passing away. The Buddha taught practices like Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration ande all the other limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path. If I were to really get cooking and go all Prajnaparamita on everyone here, there are many who would no doubt accuse me of nihilism. In the Perfection of Wisdom there ulitmately isn't even past, or present, not to mention eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; no Buddha, not Path, no Path leading to cessation! There aren't even any suffering sentient beings at all! But who really understands that directly? We have to begin where we are, coming back to my earlier point. And where we are is a place where we are enmeshed in our confusion, stuck in our stories about the past and our expectations for the future. And we have to work with those as well. No amount of wishing to understand realty in the present moment can change this fact. Therefore, we need to work SKILLFULLY with our delusions of past and future, and to work SKILLFULLY with practices designed to finally snap the grip of our delusion abuot how things exist (and don't exist). What I question is just how skillful the strategy of "recognizing realities this moment" is as a means of doing that. That is, and alwyas has been the question I've had about this. It's pretty simple, I think. So again, no denial there is only now. But HOW to recognize that--REALLY recognize that? How do we get from point A (sufering sentient being) to point B (Buddha?). That is the MOST important question, in terms of putting the horse before the cart. Can we realize this by just talking about present moment? By just talking about paramattha dhammas? Or must there be, in addition to this, skillfully working with the conventional realities of sentient beings that perceive non-existent things like the past or future? The Buddha taught in just this way, if you read all his suttas. The Buddha spoke of past lives, and of future lives. The Buddha spoke of practices that exist at the purely conventional level, like cultivating Right Effort and Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration. The Buddha, to the best of my knowledge, did NOT speak about ONLY recognizing realities in the present moment as a way out of dukkha, but taught a wide variety of skill-in-means approaches to bringing that understanding about directly. To recognize there is only reality in the present moment would be a FRUIT of these more boring, mundane practices. But then one wuold also recognize at the same time there are not now, nor have there ever been nor will there ever be sentient beings, the triple-realm, no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, not even a path leading to the cessation of suffering! > Erik, I seem to be missing your point here. What is the positive > assertion that you are making? I hope the above clarifies my intent & meaning some more. Cheers, Erik 7385 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:19am Subject: Re: Testing - Erik --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Erik - > > In a message dated 8/12/01 4:57:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Erik writes: > > > > --- Cybele Chiodi > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Sarah > > > > > > Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is > > > in a retreat in Angkor. > > > > And what a retreat it was! I thought the week before was seriously > > reality-bending, but this past few days takes the cake. Had anyone > > told me just a week ago I'd return to BKK with a new fiancee (not in > > tow, however), I'd have laughed them out of the room. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > REALLY!! If you are serious - that is, not metaphorical in some way - > then you have my heartiest congratulations!! > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, that was SERIOUS, as in NOT metaphorical! :) (though don't think for an instant that the metaphotrical dimension of this entire situation isn't far greater than the conventional reality of this, either :) :) :) 7386 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:21am Subject: Re: Testing-Erik --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > from Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of MN 131, in > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > A Single Excellent Night > > Let not a person revive the past > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > ...Instead with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; > Let him know that and be sure of it, > .. > Today the effort must be made; > Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? > No bargain with Mortality > Can keep him and his hordes away, > but one who dwells thus ardently, > Relentlessly, by day, by night - > It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, > Who has had a single excellent night.ENDQUOTE Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, precisely? 7387 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:52am Subject: Re: rapidity of the processes --- Herman wrote: > Nina, > > Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but to my limited understanding a > person who dwelt in a realm of colours, hardnesses and softnesses, > sounds, smells, tastes, coldness and warmness etc only, and makes no > further associations and connections between these separate events, > would be a completely dysfunctional person. The diagnosis would be > along the lines of disassociative state. I agree, Herman. This would indeed be a rather severe form of cognitive dysfunction (though dissociative may have other meanings). For example, anyone should have very legitimate concerns for the well- being of their five khandas if they were, say, riding in a car with one where these were the only forms of cognition happening at the moment! :) At most, the parctice of recognizing the Four Great Elements are mere strategies for helping us to understand the true nature of things, which serve as aids to increasing mindfulness and recognizing (even at the level of mundane insight) there is no intrinsic "self" behind things--to be practiced to the point where supramundane wisdom arises to terminate the fetters in a single flash. For example, by mindfully performing walking meditation and recognizing there is only hardness, cohesion, motility, etc.--we have a very time-tested way of breaking down notions there is an "I, me, mine", and, as such, this is a form of wisdom which leads eventually to release. At some point this directed mindfulness and concentration practice of deconstructing realities into their most elemental constituents is one way to bring about awakening to the reality there is no self behind things--which leads to the termination of the fundamental delusion of "I, me, mine." But to think even one who knows this directly (that there is no self) could possibly operate in this world free from conceptual categories would be a huge mistake. This would be a crazy assumptiopn even if one were speaking about a Buddha! How much more so about less developed beings! Can you imagine that the Buddha, for example, ONLY perceiving hardness, etc., and not also conventional notions of sentient beings, could have ever helped lead non-truly-existent sentient beings out of their delusions using something as mundane as conceptual categories such as "self"? 7388 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Derek - > Hi, Howard, > > > But when something is factually > > correct, such as the need to see *directly*, the terminolgy > > needn't loom so > > large, don't you think? > > Well ... Ajahn Chah once told someone she was like a farmer who > collected the chicken-droppings rather than the eggs. I think the > difference is pretty large! ;-) > > Derek. > =========================== I'm a bit confused, Derek. Are you saying that someone on this list is, in your estimation, like the person characterized by Ajahn Chah? 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) 7389 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:57am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I make a vow to reach enlightenment as a female, forever reincarnating in > this form till I attain deliverance. Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! This is the very wish made by the revered Tibetan protectress, Drol-ma (Tara). She vowed to take birth as a woman as many times as it would take until reaching supreme enlightenment (Buddhahood) for the sake of all sentient beings! 7390 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... dear Erik > > Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! This is the very wish made by > the revered > Tibetan protectress, Drol-ma (Tara). She vowed to > take birth as a > woman as many times as it would take until reaching > supreme > enlightenment (Buddhahood) for the sake of all > sentient beings! > What else a Shakti is supposed to do, I am just accomplishing my kamma vipaka! :-) Thank you for the encouragement. Love Cybele 7391 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 11:59am Subject: Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Howard, > I'm a bit confused, Derek. Are you saying that someone on this list > is, in your estimation, like the person characterized by Ajahn Chah? He was talking about people who don't actually practice. But I think we already had the study vs practice discussion. Derek. 7392 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 3:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Dear Derek, I may be the dense one this time! Howard wrote (very eloquently I thought): ******************************* It is certainly so that this sutta doesn't speak in terms of "all kinds of realities to be understood directly". However, it does discuss Right View of such things as clinging, craving, feeling, contact, namarupa, discernment, formations, ignorance, taints etc., and throughout the suttas it is taught that wisdom with regard to these things is to be obtained by direct knowing, by vijja, and not by mere intellectualization. So what is bothersome in this terminolgy? Is it that it has the taste of Abhidhamma? ;-)) I must admit that I prefer the sutta approach, myself, and am a bit turned off by the hyper-formalism I see in Abhidhamma. But when something is factually correct, such as the need to see *directly*, the terminolgy needn't loom so large, don't you think? ************************************** further you both wrote, --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Howard, > > > I'm a bit confused, Derek. Are you saying that someone on > this list > > is, in your estimation, like the person characterized by Ajahn > Chah? > > He was talking about people who don't actually practice. But I think > we already had the study vs practice discussion. > My questions iare these: In what way is the explanation/summary I gave of the sutta (as explained by Howard above) indicative of a lack of practice (of the Buddha's Teachings)? What would be your understanding of the sutta which would be indicative of practice? When you refer to those who practice and those who don't, what is the Sutta term or the Pali for this kind of practice you refer to? Derek, I'm not meaning to be deliberately dense, but I really don't understand how your comments relate to the sutta raised by Erik or to my response. I am very glad you've raised them and hope you 'hang in' with us all here. Btw, I think we all find the Abhidhamma and its language difficult at times, but I really doubt that it's possible to translate Pali without some good understanding of it. You or Jim or Tadao may have comments about this too. Sarah 7393 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 3:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Cybele Thanks for your comments. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Jon > Dear Robert E. > > > > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > > > >that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. > > > >In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > contain > >statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > >ancient commentators, so one might want to consider things carefully. > >Only by one's own study and investigation over a long period of time > can > >one learn to discriminate. > > > >Jon > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind carefully > and > therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the > ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different > approaches and interpretations. I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as the teachings? > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make the most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the actual teachings. Jon 7394 From: kelvin liew peng chuan Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 4:06pm Subject: pls advice Dear friends in Dhamma, May u all b well & happy! long time since i've written to this group. i'm currently conducting a Dhamma get together for the Buddhist students in my university, learning Dhamma weekly and just started with an introductory session to Metta Bhavana.(this get together is actually an underground thing as we're not allowed to form any religious society in here). the advise i'm asking is what can i include in the weekly discussions(the Buddhist must knows)?does anyone have a sample Dhamma class outline? pls suggest some activities we can do.thanks. with metta : sampuna 7395 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 4:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Joshua --- Joshua wrote: > > > I would say yes, the whole Canon, including the commentaries. I say > this > > because it is easy to read individual suttas, or event the whole Canon > for > > that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. > > > > In the Canon itself there are stories & examples of very simple > instructions given to people and, when carried out, lead to Arahantship. > I doubt each and every disciple sat for hours on end listening to > thousands upon thousands of discourses. He might croak before it was all > finished! Quite right. There were many, many listeners in those days who were ready for enlightenment in that very lifetime. It is not surprising, I think, that the a high incidence of such persons should coincide with the appearance of a Buddha in the world. On the other hand, think of all the unmentioned listeners at the time who didn't 'get it' then or later in that lifetime and who croaked it without reaching the goal. > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > contain > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > ancient commentators, > > Could you give some examples? OK. I'm doing something in a separate post. Jon 7396 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 4:37pm Subject: Re: pls advice --- For the course I teach at my uni. I use Buddhism in Daily life by Nina van gorkom. You can download most of this off the web in the beginner section of www.dhammastudy.com or order it from wisdom as a print book. It is easy to read but gives the basic principles of Dhamma. My students- completely new to Dhamma- love it and a group are now translating it into Japanese (for publication). It is also the type of book you could read sections from easily in a study group. robert "kelvin liew peng chuan" wrote: > Dear friends in Dhamma, > > May u all b well & happy! long time since i've written to this group. > > i'm currently conducting a Dhamma get together for the Buddhist students in > my university, learning Dhamma weekly and just started with an introductory > session to Metta Bhavana.(this get together is actually an underground thing > as we're not allowed to form any religious society in here). > > the advise i'm asking is what can i include in the weekly discussions(the > Buddhist must knows)?does anyone have a sample Dhamma class outline? > > pls suggest some activities we can do.thanks. > > with metta : sampuna > 7397 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 5:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Howard > > Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really give any > > indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? > > > > > ========================== > > Yes, I think, so for the following reasons: > > (1) I have enormous, virtually unshakeable, confidence in the > Buddha > and his Dhamma, but not so in others and their claims, even including > the > eminent Buddhaghosa. I appreciate your confidence in the teachings. > (2) There is a legitimate question as to whether the source of > the > Abhidhamma pitaka was the Buddha, himself, inasmuch as much evidence > suggests > the development of the Abhidhamma over a period of centuries following > the > Buddha's parinibbana. It may very well be the case that the Buddha *was* > the > source, with the original exposition being in a heaven world, and then > repeated to Sariputta, with the eventual passing along of it, and the > recording of it, taking many centuries. But for me to believe that, > which I > certainly would find pleasing, a bit of supporting evidence wouldn't > hurt! > (3) The "world", both nama and rupa, both internal and external, > seems > to hang together in a coherent, holistic fashion, and one would expect a > > truth about the world to be supported both internally and externally. If > > scientific experiments were to point to only one object of discernment > at a > time, that would be most interesting and corroborative. On the other > hand, a > clear demonstration of parallel processing wherein, for example, > multi-sense > objects could co-occur would also have an impact! > > With metta, > Howard My point was simply this. Unless cognitive science can measure something to a degree that is beyond the possibility of error, the result is of no use, since it only *tends to* show one thing or the other. In any event, I think you'll find that what science investigates does not coincide with the paramattha dhammas and other matters discussed by the Buddha. Jon 7398 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:26pm Subject: Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Sarah, I appreciate your post, but I'm getting bored with this study vs practice discussion and all its ramifications, and I would prefer to drop it and move on to something else. Derek. 7399 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:37pm Subject: Re: pls advice Dear Kelvin, I'm sorry to hear you have to keep quiet about your interests at the university. When I first started in Buddhism I used to go to a weekly beginners' class every Sunday afternoon, and the format was: 45 minutes of joint study from a book (I think it was "What the Buddha Taught," by Walpola Rahula, but it's so long ago, I can hardly remember!) 15 minutes break 30 minutes sitting meditation Derek. 7400 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi Derek, No problem at all! What I appreciate about this kind of forum is that anyone can discuss anything they like and one only need respond to what one is interested in or inclined to comment on at the time. I know you must also being getting busy preparing for your trip to Thailand. Please keep us posted on that and any topics you're interested to comment on;-)) Sarah --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Sarah, > > I appreciate your post, but I'm getting bored with this study vs > practice discussion and all its ramifications, and I would prefer to > drop it and move on to something else. > > Derek. > 7401 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:51pm Subject: Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup --- "Seylan Bank - DBD (Sumane Rathnasuriya)" wrote: > Dear Moderators, > > Thank you for the Welcome Msg. > > As desired I wish to detail my interests etc. as > hereunder. > > I received info about the Group thro' e-mail > forwarded by my collegue on > Subject: [BuddhistWellnessGroup] Digest Number 101 > of Friday, August 10, > 2001 10:24 AM > > I was interested in the concept "Finding the > Moment". > > I do not wish to intensely debate on intricate > deeprooted concepts/beliefs > but would use basics in abhidhamma occasionally to > sort out matters. I > prefer understanding situations on a "chain > analysis" not making analysis > complicated. > > I wish to understand rather than believe, that is in > respect of Dhamma. > > Sumane Rathnasuriya 7402 From: m. nease Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Sumane, wrote: > I > prefer understanding situations on a "chain > analysis" not making analysis > complicated. > I wish to understand rather than believe, that is > in > respect of Dhamma. Well said. Your comments reminded me of this: 'This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who delights in non-complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.' Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30 Anuruddha Sutta To Anuruddha 7403 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 8:39pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Dear Jon, > > Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really give any > > indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? > > My readings in cognitive science, and most other sciences for that matter, certainly confirm that the notion of a controlling self is without foundation. We are a mass of fermenting chemical processes, each one ultimately knowable and predicatable in its outcome, conforming as they all are to knowable laws. I take this not so much as a confirmation of the teachings, but as the honest finding of open minded enquiry. For the object of true scientific investigation is to know, not to confirm Planck, Newton or the Buddha. And how does modern science know it knows? When it is able to accurately predict and recreate. What is the basis for confidence in a Theradavin worldview? You can start with rebirth if you like. Is not all of Buddhism predicated on the notion of rebirth? Is there anything in rebirth that is knowable? Personally, I see more heuristic value in the the anatta, anicca and duhka of modern genetics. Regards Herman 7404 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 9:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Sumane, Welcome to dsg. You make some interesting comments here and I look forward to hearing how you find the discussions we're all having. I'm sure you will have plenty to contribute and I hope to get to know you more. Perhaps you would tell us how you use 'basics of abhidhamma occasionally to sort out matters'..... I wonder if you're from Sri Lanka too and whether you know Gayan as well? Thank you so much for joining with these comments. Best wishes, Sarah (Sumane Rathnasuriya)" > wrote: > > As desired I wish to detail my interests etc. as > > hereunder. > > > > I was interested in the concept "Finding the > > Moment". > > > > I do not wish to intensely debate on intricate > > deeprooted concepts/beliefs > > but would use basics in abhidhamma occasionally to > > sort out matters. I > > prefer understanding situations on a "chain > > analysis" not making analysis > > complicated. > > > > I wish to understand rather than believe, that is in > > respect of Dhamma. > > > > Sumane Rathnasuriya 7405 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: rapidity of the processes Hi, Herman - I think you raise important and interesting questions here. I eagerly await Nina's reply. Meanwhile, I'll chat a bit about this matter. In a message dated 8/12/01 8:22:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Herman writes: > Nina, > > Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but to my limited understanding a > person who dwelt in a realm of colours, hardnesses and softnesses, > sounds, smells, tastes, coldness and warmness etc only, and makes no > further associations and connections between these separate events, > would be a completely dysfunctional person. The diagnosis would be > along the lines of disassociative state. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What you say here makes sense to me. Certainly the Buddha had a keen conceptual ability which he constantly made use of for communication purposes. However, at the very same time, he didn't reify his concepts, but saw through them by means of wisdom. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Is it incorrect to say that the process of combining information from > separate events and so forming concepts, is the actual basis for > insight and wisdom, and that the reverse process of deconstructing > concepts into separate and non-related events would remove all > foundations for wisdom and insight? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It would seem to me that in the process of *cultivating* wisdom, concepts play an important role, and they do so via both analysis and synthesis. To me, concepts are a kind of mental short hand which enables us to grasp patterns of interrelationships in a single step. They can also be useful as meditative tools as, for example, in the light-labelling technique of Mahasi Sayadaw. Concepts are indispensable for understanding the world in a conventional manner, but they also lay traps for us, the traps of substantialism and nihilism, and the trap of "living in one's mind", substituting intellectualization for direct seeing. I suspect that wisdom, itself, is an immediate knowing which can directly apprehend the nature of all examined dhammas and the interrelationships among them, and thereby can supercede the conceptual faculty. ----------------------------------------------------- > > > Regards > > > Herman > > ============================= 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) 7406 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Erik - Thank you for the following clarification! It seems we actually agree completely on this matter. :-) With metta, howard In a message dated 8/12/01 10:16:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Erik - > > > Howard: > > I am among the first to agree that the entire path, > including Right > > Concentration, which the Buddha defined as the jhanas, is needed. > However, I > > would also like to point out that nothing that happens in time > happens at any > > time other than the present, for, as the Buddha pointed out, > neither the past > > nor the future is existent. (Of course, the present doesn't remain > for even > > an instant, and so there is an essential magical quality to time, a > kind of > > unreality.) > > On this point we do not at all disagree, just to be perfectly clear. > There IS no other moment than the present moment. HOWEVER, this is > not what I was driving at. > > I don't recall seeing the Buddha teaching in those terms. This > is not an issue of whether or not awareness--or for that matter, > awakening--occur in the present moment. They MUST! Past & future are > mere mental elaborations, constructs. So nowhere will you see me > disagree with the notion that nothing, NOTHING, happens outside of > the "present moment"! > > What I am specifically questioning is any METHODOLOGY that appears to > get hung up on the "present moment" to the point of excluding the > more convenmtional view of past, present, and future, of kusala and > akusala, and more important, of directed PRACTICE. > > All of my objections are about pedagogy--strategic pedagogy. Any > objections I raise here are not denying there is only this present > moment because, let's face it, that's all there really is. > > But when there is no mention of anything BUT recognizing the present > moment as a pathway out of dukkha, BIG objection. The Buddha didn't > teach that way. The Buddha spoke of past, present, and future. The > Buddha spoke of conventional realities arising and passing away. The > Buddha taught practices like Right Mindfulness and Right > Concentration ande all the other limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path. > > If I were to really get cooking and go all Prajnaparamita on everyone > here, there are many who would no doubt accuse me of nihilism. In the > Perfection of Wisdom there ulitmately isn't even past, or present, > not to mention eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; no Buddha, not > Path, no Path leading to cessation! There aren't even any suffering > sentient beings at all! But who really understands that directly? > > We have to begin where we are, coming back to my earlier point. And > where we are is a place where we are enmeshed in our confusion, stuck > in our stories about the past and our expectations for the future. > And we have to work with those as well. No amount of wishing to > understand realty in the present moment can change this fact. > > Therefore, we need to work SKILLFULLY with our delusions of past and > future, and to work SKILLFULLY with practices designed to finally > snap the grip of our delusion abuot how things exist (and don't > exist). What I question is just how skillful the strategy > of "recognizing realities this moment" is as a means of doing that. > > That is, and alwyas has been the question I've had about this. It's > pretty simple, I think. So again, no denial there is only now. But > HOW to recognize that--REALLY recognize that? How do we get from > point A (sufering sentient being) to point B (Buddha?). > > That is the MOST important question, in terms of putting the horse > before the cart. Can we realize this by just talking about present > moment? By just talking about paramattha dhammas? Or must there be, > in addition to this, skillfully working with the conventional > realities of sentient beings that perceive non-existent things like > the past or future? > > The Buddha taught in just this way, if you read all his suttas. The > Buddha spoke of past lives, and of future lives. The Buddha spoke of > practices that exist at the purely conventional level, like > cultivating Right Effort and Right Mindfulness and Right > Concentration. The Buddha, to the best of my knowledge, did NOT speak > about ONLY recognizing realities in the present moment as a way out > of dukkha, but taught a wide variety of skill-in-means approaches to > bringing that understanding about directly. > > To recognize there is only reality in the present moment would be a > FRUIT of these more boring, mundane practices. But then one wuold > also recognize at the same time there are not now, nor have there > ever been nor will there ever be sentient beings, the triple-realm, > no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, not > even a path leading to the cessation of suffering! > > > Erik, I seem to be missing your point here. What is the > positive > > assertion that you are making? > > I hope the above clarifies my intent & meaning some more. > > Cheers, > Erik > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7407 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Erik - In a message dated 8/12/01 10:20:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Erik - > > > > In a message dated 8/12/01 4:57:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > Erik writes: > > > > > > > --- Cybele Chiodi > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Sarah > > > > > > > > Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is > > > > in a retreat in Angkor. > > > > > > And what a retreat it was! I thought the week before was > seriously > > > reality-bending, but this past few days takes the cake. Had > anyone > > > told me just a week ago I'd return to BKK with a new fiancee (not > in > > > tow, however), I'd have laughed them out of the room. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > REALLY!! If you are serious - that is, not metaphorical in > some way - > > then you have my heartiest congratulations!! > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Yes, that was SERIOUS, as in NOT metaphorical! :) (though don't think > for an instant that the metaphotrical dimension of this entire > situation isn't far greater than the conventional reality of this, > either :) :) :) > > > =========================== Wonderful! I'm very happy for you. Heartiest congratulations! 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) 7408 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Derek - > Hi, Howard, > > > I'm a bit confused, Derek. Are you saying that someone on > this list > > is, in your estimation, like the person characterized by Ajahn > Chah? > > He was talking about people who don't actually practice. But I think > we already had the study vs practice discussion. > > Derek. > ============================ Mmm. I do think that we should keep in mind that right speech and lovingkindness are parts of the practice. 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) 7409 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana hi Jon > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind >>carefully >and therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the >ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different >approaches and interpretations. > >I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any >source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. > >But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that >are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as >the teachings? Well Jon if you don't feel amenable to this possibility you are denying all Mahayana Buddhism for example as is an elaboration and expansion from the original teachings. I think that whatever teachings we learn must be necessarily supported by our capacity of assimilating them, the inner experience of understanding it properly. I don't rely on interpretations I can't relate inside me because I would be faking a knowledge I haven't attained. I maintain vivid and active my enquiring mind and I don't stick to anything at all without investigating and feeling responsive to it. > > > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. > >On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on >matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true >dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things >on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured >by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. I agree with you but as I contemplate the delusional configuration of my mind I also don't trust masters and schools for the sake of it. Our mind could be misleading us as well because that view is palatable to our conditionings. That's why I firmly believe in the power of meditation to develop right view. Only study and reasoning cannot accomplish this mental purification. The mind can figure out plenty of strategies very convincing to delude us. How can you trust that your interpretation of the traditional teachings is actually illuminating and trustworthy? > >The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its >commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in >relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only >the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make the >most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the >actual teachings. Very curious that you blame self proclaimed teachers as it seems you follow one of them. Nobody is 'appointed' as dhamma teacher and we follow the ones who resounds inside us. Rigidity is not discernement and avoiding contact with different sources doesn't imply in manipulating the original teachings. Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation being the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered fundamental I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional teachings. Sometimes our fervour for Dhamma creates personal cults Jon and it can happens whether you use the 'true source' of Tipitaka or a Nichiren text. 'The map is not the territory.' Metta Cybele 7410 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 0:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup dear sumane, ayubowan and welcome. hope your stay here will be a pleasant and skillful experience. regards gayan 7411 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:20am Subject: Re: the object of citta --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Eric, Howard and all, > Eric wrote: > >Rather than talk about abstract notions like cittas (and until you > have had DIRECT experience of a citta, please don't come back to me > with this "paramattha dhammas" business--cittas are WAY too abstract > an concept before such direct experience of them; who but a Buddha or > nearly a Buddha directly discern the billionth of a second of > awareness each citta represents? > Nina: > I can very well understand that for several people it is difficult to > understand what citta is. Hello Nina! :) I don't think the concept of citta is at all difficult to grasp. To the contrary, for many, it appears to serve as an object of grasping all too easily! :) > Since it falls away extremely rapidly, it seems > impossible to grasp it. I would contend that it IS impossible to "grasp" (if you mean by grasp, to be aware of) a single moment of citta unless we have the omniscient mind of a Buddha or nearly so--in the same way the naked eye cannot ever hope to perceive a subatomic particle. In other words, no normal person can possibly directly cognize a single citta. Therefore, for all but Buddhas or those with some amazing degree of direct knowledge of such infinitestimally miniscule mind-moments, citta is a mere abstraction. It may be a helpful abstraction in terms of breaking out the difference between "mere awareness" (citta combined with the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas) vs. say "awareness accompanied by either wholesome or unwholesome qualities" (the combination of citta & cetasika, more specifically the 14 akusala cetasikas or the 25 sobhana cetasikas). Once we know that there is a difference between mere "knowing" (the most basic function of citta) and the various qualities that make up a moment of knowing, now, to me, THAT seems to be a very helpful thing to understand. Helpful in the sense that it is very useful in terms of helping us to distinguish between skillful vs. unskillful qualities of mind. Helpful in the sense of helping us to distinguish what is to be put down vs. what is to be taken up (e.g. sammapadhana). If this is NOT the aim of studying citta & cetasika, then it would appear to me that the entire point of studinyg the Buddha's Dharma has been lost, and the study of the technical sysetm of Abhidhamma has degenerated into an entirely pointless and stagnant exercise, exactly as fruitful as the study of quantum mechanics--at least in terms of the SOLE aim of the Buddha's Dharma, which is to help suffering sentient beings terminate that suffering once and for all. > It seems an abstract notion, like all the other > categories described in the Abhidhamma. However, would the Buddha speak > about paramattha dhammas, not only described in the Abhidhamma, but also in > the Vinaya and Suttanta, if their characteristics could not be experienced, > even now while we are beginning to develop understanding? I am not speaking against the utility of terms like paramattha dhammas, only against reifying our ideas about these paramattha dhammas, which is an activity that DIRECTLY blocks the very wisdom that sees things as they truly are, the very wisdom that leads directly to release--which means the permanent termination of the mental afflictions through the arising of supramundane wisdom. > As Sarah wrote : > very paramattha dhammas, the 6 worlds appearing through eyes, ears, and the > rest. Then perhaps we have been reading a different recensions of the Pali Canon, because I have have rarely seen the words attributed to the Buddha mention these paramattha dhammas. The bulk of the Suttas I have read (and I confess I have not read anything close to the entire Pali Canon, so I could be all wet here) deal with far more pedestrian things, like suffering, for example. Specifically ever one of the Suttas I've read all partake of One Taste: the taste of freedom from suffering--by whatever means happen to be most expedient. > He talks about different mental states- ignorance, clinging , wisdom > and > all the other states which accompany the moments of experience. I agree the Buddha ofetn speaks on wisdom, ignorance, clinging, etc. But I have not yet come across a single sutta where he talks about these qualities in terms of infinitestimally tiny mind-moments and the various accompanying mental-factors of these infinitestimally tiny mind-moments. I have only ever heard the Buddha speak in terms of what his disciples could comprehend at their exact level of understanding. I have often, for example, heard the Buddha employ metaphors, similes, and parables. Many of his listeners seemed to easily relate to these kinds of stories, such as the parable of the raft, or the parable of the poison arrow. In most of the Sutta I have read, the Buddha used the simplest terms to illuminate even the deepest truths, often to the point that those listening with wise attention came to directly see what was being pointed at. > These are > not > abstract concepts but what make up our lives now. The reason he talked about > these dhammas is because it is possible right now to be aware of seeing ( a > citta) or visible object (a rupa). > This is the aim of the teachings. If this is the aim of your system of teaching, then I can only wish you godspeed in achieving it, because the sooner you do, the sooner you will see how this aim, like the aim of quantum physics, is an aim having nothing to do with permanently terminating the round of suffering we call samsara. THAT aim in specific is the SOLE aim of the Buddha's doctrine, which, when boiled down to its most essential message, is simply nothing other than suffering and the end of suffering. If one believes there is any other aim to the Buddha's teaching than just suffering and the end of suffering, then the entire point of the Buddha's teaching has been lost. It's really that cut-and-dried. 7412 From: Fenny Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. Enjoy. ==================================== Right View-The Place of Coolness By Ajahn Chah The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits; the truth goes against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some things that we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we take to be right might be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are in darkness, we don 't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the Truth. Some people don't want to listen to others at all, but this is not the way of a man of wisdom. A wise man listens to everything. One who listens to Dhamma must listen just the same whether he likes it or not, and not blindly believe or disbelieve. He must stay at the halfway mark, the middle point, and not be heedless. He just listens and then contemplates, giving rise to the right results accordingly. A wise man should contemplate and see the cause and effect for himself before he believes what he hears. Even if the teacher speaks the truth, don't just believe it, because you don't yet know the truth of it for yourself. It's the same for all of us, including myself. I've practiced before you; I've seen many lies before. For instance, "This practice is really difficult, really hard." Why is the practice difficult? It's just because we think wrongly; we have wrong view. Previously I lived together with a lot of monks, but I didn't feel right. I ran away to the forests and mountains, fleeing the crowd, the monks and novices, I thought that they weren't like me, they didn't practice as hard as I did. They were sloppy. That person was like this, this person was like that. This was something that really put me in turmoil; it was the cause for my continually running away. But whether I lived alone or with others I still have no peace. On my own I wasn't content, in a large group I wasn't content. I thought this discontent was due to my companions, due to my moods, due to my living place, the food, the weather, due to this and that. I was constantly searching for something to suit my mind. I was a dhutanga monk, I went traveling, but things still weren' t right. So I contemplated, "What can I do to make things right? What can I do?" Living with a lot of people I was dissatisfied, with few people I was dissatisfied. For what reason? I just couldn't see it. Why was I dissatisfied? Because I had wrong view, just that; because I still clung to the wrong Dhamma. Wherever I went I was discontent thinking, "Here is no good, there is no good." On and on like that. I bled others. I blamed the weather, heart and cold, I blamed everything! Just like the mad dog. It bites whatever it meets, because it's mad. When the mind is like this our practice is never settled. Today we feel good, tomorrow no good. It's like that all the time. We don't attain contentment or peace. The Buddha once saw a jackal, a wild dog. Run out of the forest where he was staying. It stood still for a while, then it ran into the underbrush, and then out again. Then it ran into a tree hollow, then out again. Then it went into a cave, only to run out again. One minute it stood, the next it ran, then it lay down, then it jumped up;. That jackal had mange. When it stood the mange would eat into its skin, so it would run. Running it was still uncomfortable, so it would stop. Standing was still uncomfortable, so it would lie down. Then it would jump up again, running into the underbrush, the tree hollow, never staying still. The Buddha said," Monks, did you see that jackal this afternoon? Standing it suffered, lying down it suffered. While in the underbrush, a tree hollow or a cave, it suffered. It blamed standing for its discomfort, it blamed sitting, it blamed running and lying down; it blamed the tree, the underbrush and the cave. In fact the problem was with none of those things. That jackal had mange. The problem was with the mange." We monks are just the same as that jackal. Our discontent is due to wrong view. Because we don't exercise sense restraint we blame our suffering on externals. Whether we live at Wat Pah Pong, in America or in London we aren't satisfied. Going to live at Bung Wai or any of the other branch monasteries we're still not satisfied. Why not? Because we still have wrong view within us, just that! Wherever we go we aren't content. But just as that dog, if the mange is cured, is content wherever it goes, so it is for us. I reflect on this often, and I teach you this often, because it's very important. If we know the truth of our various moods we arrive at contentment. Whether it's hot or cold we are satisfied, with may people or with few people we are satisfied. Contentment doesn't depend on how many people w area with; it comes only from right view. If we have right view then wherever we stay we are content. Bit most of us have wrong view. It's just like a maggot! A maggot's living place is filthy, its food is filthy.but they suit the maggot. If you take a stick and brush it ways from its lump of dung, it'll struggle and crawl back into it. It's the same when the Ajahn teaches us to see rightly. We opposed it; it makes us feel uneasy. We run back to sour 'lump of dung' because that' where we feel at home. We're all like this If we don't see the harmful consequences of all our wrong views then we can' t leave them, the practice is difficult. So we should listen. There's nothing else to the practice. If we have right view then wherever we go we are content. I have practiced and seen this already. These days there are many monks, novices and laypeople coming to see me. If I still didn't know, if I still hade wrong view, I'd be dead by now! The right abiding place for monks, the place of coolness, is just right view itself. We shouldn't look for anything else. To be continue........................ =================================== Let's practice the Dhamma, Fen ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 10:48 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > > hi Jon > > > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind >>carefully > >and therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the > >ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different > >approaches and interpretations. > > > > >I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any > >source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. > > > >But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that > >are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as > >the teachings? > > Well Jon if you don't feel amenable to this possibility you are denying all > Mahayana Buddhism for example as is an elaboration and expansion from the > original teachings. > I think that whatever teachings we learn must be necessarily supported by > our capacity of assimilating them, the inner experience of understanding it > properly. > I don't rely on interpretations I can't relate inside me because I would be > faking a knowledge I haven't attained. > I maintain vivid and active my enquiring mind and I don't stick to anything > at all without investigating and feeling responsive to it. > > > > > > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > > > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. > > > >On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on > >matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true > >dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things > >on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured > >by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. > > I agree with you but as I contemplate the delusional configuration of my > mind I also don't trust masters and schools for the sake of it. > Our mind could be misleading us as well because that view is palatable to > our conditionings. > That's why I firmly believe in the power of meditation to develop right > view. > Only study and reasoning cannot accomplish this mental purification. > The mind can figure out plenty of strategies very convincing to delude us. > How can you trust that your interpretation of the traditional teachings is > actually illuminating and trustworthy? > > > > >The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its > >commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in > >relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only > >the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make the > >most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the > >actual teachings. > > Very curious that you blame self proclaimed teachers as it seems you follow > one of them. > Nobody is 'appointed' as dhamma teacher and we follow the ones who resounds > inside us. > Rigidity is not discernement and avoiding contact with different sources > doesn't imply in manipulating the original teachings. > Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation being > the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered fundamental > I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional > teachings. > Sometimes our fervour for Dhamma creates personal cults Jon and it can > happens whether you use the 'true source' of Tipitaka or a Nichiren text. > 'The map is not the territory.' > > > Metta > > Cybele > 7413 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 1:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/13/01 5:34:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes with regard to my interest in possible confirmation (or the opposite) of such Abhidhamma positions as only one object of consciousness being possible at a time: > My point was simply this. Unless cognitive science can measure something > to a degree that is beyond the possibility of error, the result is of no > use, since it only *tends to* show one thing or the other. > > In any event, I think you'll find that what science investigates does not > coincide with the paramattha dhammas and other matters discussed by the > Buddha. > ============================== Perhaps so, Jon. I don't see this as a critical issue in any case, just an interesting one. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7414 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 6:05am Subject: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik MN 131, in > > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > > > A Single Excellent Night > > > > Let not a person revive the past > > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > > > ...Instead with insight let him see > > Each presently arisen state; > > Let him know that and be sure of it, > > .. > > ERIK:Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, > precisely? ______________________ Dear Erik, Satipatthana is only taught by a surpreme Buddha. It can only be heard about during the rare times of a Buddha sasana. To understand its development we need to hear many details of the teachings. Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and smelling. These are all realities they are happening now again and again. How much do we know about them? They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it," The development of satipatthana is about seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so short- namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this moment. There is nothing else. 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 crosslegged, or standing there can be awareness of dhammas – but not by clinging and trying and thinking that we need volition. NinaVG and Khun sujin often say "reduce yourself into one moment". That is it. There is no Robert; 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. 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. The more I learn about these things the more I see that lobha(attachment) and moha(ignorance) are very common. I do not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much longer and harder than when I began. Yet strangely I feel happier and more relaxed about it all. Understanding works its way once "we" get out of the way. No technique. No shortcuts. Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. That is satipatthana. If there are not the conditions then listen more, consider more- this is essential. Learn about seeing and color- do you think this computer is real, or is there a level of panna that knows only color and hardness? This is the time of a Buddhasasana - it is the only time that the the deep teachings on khandas, dhatus, ayatanas; on paticcasamupada and the 24 paccaya etc. can be heard. It would be regretable not to listen. robert 7417 From: Victor Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:17am Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik [snip] There is no Robert; [snip] > > robert Hi Robert, You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were referring to by the name "Robert"? Metta, Victor 7418 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 0:25pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- Robert wrote: > MN 131, in > > > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > > > > > A Single Excellent Night > > > > > > Let not a person revive the past > > > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > > > > > ...Instead with insight let him see > > > Each presently arisen state; > > > Let him know that and be sure of it, > > > .. > > > > ERIK:Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, > > precisely? > ______________________ > Dear Erik, > > Satipatthana is only taught by a surpreme Buddha. It > can only be heard about during the rare times of a > Buddha sasana. To understand its development we need > to hear many details of the teachings. Indeed, and taking a single passage like you quoted above, without considering the greater context of the corpus of teachings the Buddha explicitly taught on Satipatthana, would be a quite unwise, I think. So then, to place the above passage into the proper context, I think we should examine those Suttas where the Buddha spelled out the meaning of Right Mindfulness in the greatest and most explicit detail. Would you not agree, given the importance of Right Mindfulness as a definite factor of enlightenment, that this is a wise strategy? > Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; > Let him know that and be sure of it," And how does the Buddha enjoin his disciples to do just that? Here's what I've been able to dig up (from the Satipatthana Sutta): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn010.html Beginning with, yet again, Mindfulness of the Breath: "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." This is further continued with the various aspects of anapanasati (mediation on the breath--which you can read in the original Sutta in more detail--so no need to elaborate further on this vital aspect of Mindfulness). Robert: > The development of satipatthana is about > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > short- > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > moment. The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the Breath: "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to know! :)]. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, Robert! :)]. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself." > There is nothing else. 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. Agreed. That means coming to Right View through having wrong views pointed out as such, and by meditating carefully on such instructions, which thereby gradually loosens the fixations on wrong views, which in turn leads to Right View, which in turn leads to a correct understanding of right practice--the very practices that lead to total cessation of suffering. > Whether we are sitting crosslegged, or standing there can be > awareness of dhammas – Agreed completely, as the Buddha clearly notes in the Satipatthana Sutta. > but not by clinging and trying and thinking that we > need volition. Clinging is always a bad thing from the Buddha's perspective (especially clinging to ideas like getting "results" in meditation). But if you think we don't need to take volitional control of our actions to the degree possible RIGHT NOW, your contention is at serious variance with what the Buddha actually taught. The Buddha rejected the sort of determinism your statement imples in no uncertain terms, and in many, many places! > NinaVG and Khun sujin often say "reduce yourself > into one moment". That is it. Forget for a moment what anyone else you've heard has said on this point, Robert, and please consider listening carefully to what this collection of khandas is telling you for once. To quote Ajahn Chah on this point: "The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits; the truth goes against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some things that we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we take to be right might be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are in darkness, we don't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the Truth. "Some people don't want to listen to others at all, but this is not the way of a man of wisdom. A wise man listens to everything. One who listens to Dhamma must listen just the same whether he likes it or not, and not blindly believe or disbelieve. He must stay at the halfway mark, the middle point, and not be heedless. He just listens and then contemplates, giving rise to the right results accordingly. "A wise man should contemplate and see the cause and effect for himself before he believes what he hears. Even if the teacher speaks the truth, don't just believe it, because you don't yet know the truth of it for yourself." Now, as to considering nama-rupa, what did Lord Buddha actually say on this point? Further examination of the Satipatthana Sutta may shed some more light on this point: "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no further appearance in the future of a fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.)" Nowhere here does Lord Buddha speak about "realities in this moment" (though to a degree it's implied since we can't directly observe anything not arising here & now). What the Buddha EXPLICITLY enjoins us to reflect on (and REFLECTION involves notions of past, present AND future!) are the fetters! Not "realities arising right now," but the FETTERS, the very fetters (samyojanas) that keep us bound to the wheel of samsara! (I think I hear an echo here...) :) :) :) In fact, if you read every single one of the instructions the Buddha actually gave his disciples in the Suttas dealing with Right Mindfulness, in every one he mentions "remembrance" as a vital component of the practice of Right Mindfulness. Where does remembrance fit into "recognizing realities in the present moment"? (Other than noting the obvious fact that thre is nothing we can experience NOT happening in the present moment.) The fact is the Buddha NEVER teachers "just this moment," but SPECIFICALLY teaches REMEMBRANCE (which, to my understanding also happens to be the very definition of sati, or Mindfulness!) So then, I must inquire, what about sati has anything to do with "realities this moment"? Right Mindfulness litrally translated means RIGHT REMEMBRANCE of qualities that have ALREADY PASSED AWAY! But your definition of Satipatthana implies that sati is "remembrance of the present moment"! That would entail, in no uncertain terms, a total logical absurdity, my dear friend in the Dhamma. How can one possibly remember that which has not yet passed, been marked by sanna, for example? > There is no Robert; 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. 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. Ultimately nothing arises apart from conditions, but again, we nontheless are not deterministically bound without any shred of free will. We DO have volition and CAN choose out actions--in however limited a way--and act, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, for example to DECIDE to either listen to and put into practice the Holy Dharma. Or to refuse to listen to the Holy Dharma and continue to suffer further runds of misery. We can choose to kill, steal, lie, committ sexual miscondut, take intoxicants to the point of heedlessness. We can also choose not to. It may be difficult to make chioces because we are so heavily conditioned by past thoughts and deeds. But it is decidedly NOT impossible. If it were, why would the Buddha have said: "Abandon what is unwholesome, oh monks! One can abandon the unwholesome, oh monks! If it were not possible, I would not ask you to do so. If this abandoning of the unwholesome would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to abandon it. But as the abandoning of the unwholesome brings benefit and happiness, Therefore, I say, 'Abandon what is unwholesome!' Cultivate what is wholesome, oh monks. One can cultivate the wholesome. If it were not feasible, I would not ask you to do it. If this cultivation of the wholesome would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to cultivate it. But as the cultivation of the wholesome brings benefit and happiness, Therefore, I say, 'Cultivate what is wholesome!'" (AN) > The more I learn about these things the more I > see that lobha(attachment) and moha(ignorance) are very common. Indeed they are at root (at least moha) of all suffering. Which of course conditions grasping--particular one of the nastiest forms of grasping, the grasping at views. > I do > not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much > longer and harder than when I began. And yet it is much, much simpler that you can imagine. > Understanding works its way once "we" get out of the > way. No technique. I could not disagree more vehemently with this very wrong form of understanding. There is VERY MUCH technique, Robert! If there were no technique, the Buddha would have never taught technique in so many places! > No shortcuts. No disagreement there. There are truly no shortcuts, particularly when it comes to things like cultivating wholseome karma and directing one's best efforts at serious meditation practice. > Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there > are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in > conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other > kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. Just as it is also possible that buying a lottery ticket will make one a millionare! :) > That is satipatthana. That is not, I am afraid, Satipatthana. Satipatthana is what the Buddha specifically taught in both the Satipatthana Sutta as well as the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, which are avaialbe for all and sundery here to read firsthand. No sense my interjecting any moer commentary onto this very important parctice when the Buddhas direct and simple words are availbe for all to see so plainly. > This is the time of a Buddhasasana - it is the only > time that the the deep teachings on khandas, dhatus, > ayatanas; on paticcasamupada and the 24 paccaya etc. > can be heard. It would be regretable not to listen. And just as fortunate that during this Buddha-sasana there are those who have terminated all wrong views as well as all misunderstanding about intent and meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma. It would be even more regrettable if one chooses to ignore their direct instruction on the most essential points of the Dhamma! :) 7419 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:33pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- Erik wrote: > > > Robert: > > The development of satipatthana is about > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > short- > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > moment. _________________ > > ERIKThe Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > Breath: > [Erik: do you > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > know! :)]. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > Robert! If you think we don't need to take volitional control of our > actions to the degree possible RIGHT NOW, your contention is at > serious variance with what the Buddha actually taught. The Buddha > rejected the sort of determinism your statement imples in no > uncertain terms, and in many, many places! > >> Forget for a moment what anyone else you've heard has said on this > point, Robert, and please consider listening carefully to what this > collection of khandas is telling you for once. > > > Nowhere here does Lord Buddha speak about "realities in this moment" > (though to a degree it's implied since we can't directly observe > anything not arising here & now). > > > In fact, if you read every single one of the instructions the Buddha > actually gave his disciples in the Suttas dealing with Right > Mindfulness, in every one he mentions "remembrance" as a vital > component of the practice of Right Mindfulness. Where does > remembrance fit into "recognizing realities in the present moment"? > (Other than noting the obvious fact that thre is nothing we can > experience NOT happening in the present moment.) > > The fact is the Buddha NEVER teachers "just this moment," but > SPECIFICALLY teaches REMEMBRANCE (which, to my understanding also > happens to be the very definition of sati, or Mindfulness!) > > So then, I must inquire, what about sati has anything to do > with "realities this moment"? Right Mindfulness litrally translated > means RIGHT REMEMBRANCE of qualities that have ALREADY PASSED AWAY! > > But your definition of Satipatthana implies that sati is "remembrance > of the present moment"! That would entail, in no uncertain terms, a > total logical absurdity, my dear friend in the Dhamma. How can one > possibly remember that which has not yet passed, been marked by > sanna, for example? > > > We DO have volition and CAN choose out actions--in however > limited a way--and act, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, for example to DECIDE to > either listen to and put into practice the Holy Dharma. Or to refuse > to listen to the Holy Dharma and continue to suffer further runds of > misery. We can choose to kill, steal, lie, committ sexual miscondut, > take intoxicants to the point of heedlessness. We can also choose not -------------------------- RObERT;> > I do > > not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much > > longer and harder than when I began. ________________ > > ERIK:And yet it is much, much simpler that you can imagine. _________________ > > > Robert:Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there > > are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in > > conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other > > kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. > That is satipatthana. ____________________ > > That is not, I am afraid, Satipatthana. Satipatthana is what the > Buddha specifically taught in both the Satipatthana Sutta as well as > the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, which are avaialbe for all and sundery > here to read firsthand. No sense my interjecting any moer commentary > onto this very important parctice when the Buddhas direct and simple > words are availbe for all to see so plainly. there are those > who have terminated all wrong views as well as all misunderstanding > about intent and meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma. It would be even > more regrettable if one chooses to ignore their direct instruction on > the most essential points of the Dhamma! :) _____________________ Dear Erik, I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I think it would be unproductive to bother you with further explanations. best wishes robert 7420 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 4:13pm Subject: The Dhamma (was Satipatthana)-Robert --- Robert wrote: > I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I > think it would be unproductive to bother you with further > explanations. Robert, there's no need to beat a full retreat on a debate like this! If I may be blunt, you seem to have become all of a sudden afraid to engage this mere student and beginner on the essential teachings of Right Mindfulness! What gives? This begs a question, I think. If my hunch is correct, what is the REAL fear, the REAL concern here? Is it the Suttas reputed to be the words of Lord Buddha I have been directly quoting regarding Satipatthana? The very Suttas, I should add, which do not appear to provide any substantial support for your presentation of the meaning and intent of the Buddha's Dhamma as I understand it, and as my teachers (who I should add are considered the "first among the first" in Tibet's Geluk-pa lineage--the lineage all the Dalai Lamas belong to) have taught it--i.e. your argument that the point of the Dhamma is to recognize "realities this moment" vs. my contention and that of my teachers that the Buddha taught only "suffering and its cessation"? Again, I am using ONLY the ACTUAL erputed words of the Buddha from the Suttanta Pitaka here, without the slightest need to resort to general Mahayana or even Tibetan texts. This is all from the from the very Pali Canon we BOTH agree on, in other words--with practically NO gloss added. That's largely because I feel there's little need for gloss, since the Buddha detailed the practices of Right Mindfulness in such simple, direct terms, that I feel addding much more would be akin to gilding the lotus. I really belieev that these Suttas are so simple that even one with relatively little accumulated wisdom could take and begin applying almost immediately, with only the barest training in Buddhist theory--such as what is skillful vs. what is unskillful, and how all things lack "core," and how by implication all composed things are impermanent and therefore by nature also a considered painful. And Robert, my dear friend, you have many more years of experience studying the Dhamma than I do, have read far more of the texts than I have. Certainly a mere beginner like me shouldn't be able to engender what appears to be this degree of consternation in one so well- studied. Unless, perhaps, there are a few things being said that are hitting a little too close to some very deeply-held and cherished views. Recall the Buddha enjoined us to give up ALL our clinging to views. And that will, inevitably, create very extreme discomfort when those views, beliefs, and suppositions are directly challenged. Even more so when we have invested serious time in building up an edifice of fabrications in support of maintaining those cherished views. As I quoted from Ajahn Chah (gleaned from another poster's kind effort earlier), the most important thing is to consider the Dhamma carefully and DISPASSIONATELY (actually one of the requisite qualities of a TRUE student of the Dharma as elaborated in the Tibetan Lam Rim instructions)--no matter the source. Even if it's from sources we may personally agree with. And even from those sources we DISAGREE with! ESPECIALLY those sources we disagree with! And then, most importantly, we should take and TEST THOSE TEACHINGS OUT DIRECTLY, IN OUR OWN EXPERIENCE, such that we come to see, through wise consideration and reflection based on our own direct experience, that THESE activities lead to the increase of unskillful qualities to be put aside and abandoned--to the increase of greed, to the increase of aversion, to the increase of ignorance; and that THESE activities lead to the increase of skillful qualities to be taken up and developed--to the increase of non-grasping, to the increase of non-aversion, to the increase of knowledge. It is ONLY by this totally ruthless and dispassionate process of burning, cutting, grinding--just as one does to test what one suspects to be gold but is not yet certain--and putting into DIRECT PRACTICE the Dhamma we come across, that we can ever come to confirm or refute its correctness based on the above criteria. Furthermore, this is the only way that we will EVER have the hope of creating appropriate conditions for the very special type of wisdom to arise that permanently terminates ignorance at its very root, and the entire mass of suffering that follows on from that, thus fulfilling the entire aim of the Holy Life as taught by Lord Buddha and as taught to me directly by my teachers. It should again be stated that this process, performed properly, will undoubtedly cause some very serious discomfort--even severe shock and pain--all due to to the ego's cherished views and opinions. Because the authentic Dhamma, as Ajahn Chah succinctly observed, is NOT easy. As my incredibly dear & sweet friend Amara mentioned in one post to me when I first joined DSG, there were some monks who, on hearing the correct Dhamma explained by Lord Buddha, actually became so physically discomfited by the powerful truth of the Holy Dhamma they vomited blood! In fact, the authentic Dhamma is the ego's very worst enemy. And the mental afflictions we sometimes label the "ego" will throw up ALL the defense mechanisms it can muster to avoid its being ruthlessly dismantled by totally compassionate wisdom that realizes the emptiness and impermanence and inherent suffering of all conditioned phenomena--the direct knowledge of which the wisdom of the authentic Buddha's Dhamma is certain to reveal at some point--which is the ENTIRE POINT of the Buddhist Dhamma (to see through the fiction of an independent "self" with the faculty of supramundane wisdom--which is the ONLY way to permanently terminate the round of samsara)! If the authentic Dhamma doesn't cause discomfort or challenge our most deeply-held views and prejudices at some point, then it isn't the real thing. It's like fool's gold. It may glitter; but all that glitters, as the saying goes, is not gold. All I can say is I am supremely grateful for the "bad cops" (vs. the "good cops" like my holy lamas and my wonderful Ajahn of Satipatthana meditation at Wat Mahatat, Section 5) of the Dhamma, who I consider among my greatest teachers of all--those who directly challenged and undermined my most cherished beliefs, suppositions, and views I was clinging to about what is and is not the authentic Dhamma. I consider myself extremely fortunate in that I came to see directly that in truth, in spite of the temporary pain they caused my ego, they were all along my very greatest allies, the most compassionate among the compassionate. I hope for your sake that someday you come to see this as well. 7421 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: [d-l] Scholars and Meditators Dear Cybele & Friends, --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > >From the book "Numerical Discourses of the Buddha – An Anthology of > >Suttas from the Anguttara Nikaya" > >translated by Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi: > > > >125. Scholars and Meditators > > > >. . . "friends, you should train yourselves thus: `Though we > >ourselves are Dhamma-experts, we will praise also those monks who are > >meditators.' And why? Such outstanding men are rare in the world who have > >personal experience of the deathless element (Nibbana). > > And the other monks, too, should train themselves thus: `Though we > >ourselves are meditators, we will praise also those monks who are > >Dhamma-experts.' And why? Such outstanding persons are rare in the > >world who can by their wisdom clearly understand a difficult subject." > > (VI, 46) Thank you for posting this sutta. I like this anthology trans. by B.Bodhi and hope we see a complete Ang.Nik. by him in due course. I think this is a good example of a sutta that can be read and understood at many levels and so, even though (as I've been reminded by Jon & Rob) it's been posted and discusssed on dsg before, I'd like to make a few comments for those of us (read me) who had forgotten and for those who are relatively new to the list. When we first read it, we may appreciate the reminders for tolerance and respect and wise speech in regard to those who appear to follow different paths. We also note how useless bickering and disparaging others are. How easily these can lead to pride and 'puffing-up'. These are useful reminders at any level, for sure! When we just read a translation like this, it is easy to take 'scholars' for being those who are experts in book-learning without any 'inner' developed wisdom and it is easy to take 'meditators' for being those who do not study and who merely follow a 'practice'. If we really wish to know more about these two groups (of monks) who should be highly respected, we need to look at the Pali and commentary notes, I think. The Pali term for the first group is 'dhammayoga' . B.Bodhi adds 'AA says the term refers to preachers (dhamma-kathika). The second group of 'meditators' refers those who have attained jhanas. As Rob (or Nina) pointed out, obviously neither group are arahants, otherwise there would not have been any dispute! From the commentary notes, it seems that the second group, the 'meditators' have already realized the jhanas and they 'touch the deathless (amata) element by nama-kaya, (The mental body i.e.cetasikas)' The Dhammayoga bhikkus (the ones dedicated to Dhamma or the Scholars) "penetrate the deep meaning of the khandas (aggregates), the dhatus (elements) the ayatanas (sense fields). They clearly see it by magga-citta (i.e the citta that experiences nibbana)together with vipassana panna. But here it should be panna which penetrates by considering, and also panna on the level of asking questions and learning" Commentary ends. The last part of the sutta about the Dhammayoga Bhikkhus says 'Such outstanding persons are rare in the world who can by their wisdom (panna) clearly understand a difficult subject' (i.e realize nibbana). Obviously there is no suggestion that this is merely an intellectual approach. How could Nibbana be realized if it were? Likewise, Those who have jhana experience and have attained at least the first stage of enlightenment should be highly respected. Cybele, I should add that even now when I read a sutta like this, with extra notes, I still have many more questions than answers, but I just wished to give an indication about how these suttas can be read at different levels and with different interpretations and why I understand there should be high respect for these Bhikkhus. Best wishes as always and I hope you're enjoying some Italian sunshine! Sarah 7422 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Dhamma (was Satipatthana)-Robert Dear Erik, --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert wrote: > > > I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I > > think it would be unproductive to bother you with further > > explanations. > > Robert, there's no need to beat a full retreat on a debate like this! > If I may be blunt, you seem to have become all of a sudden afraid to > engage this mere student and beginner on the essential teachings of > Right Mindfulness! What gives? > > This begs a question, I think. If my hunch is correct, what is the > REAL fear, the REAL concern here? Is it the Suttas reputed to be the > words of Lord Buddha I have been directly quoting regarding > Satipatthana? Let me make one or two other wild guesses:-)) 1. Rob has repeated many times what he understands satipatthana to be, how the texts should be considered, but doesn't think you're really listening to what he's saying (or what K.Sujin, Nina and others are saying). 2. He's busy and tired and so it's difficult to go on repeating the same debates. 3. He may be considering writing to others who have other questions and appear to be more receptive to what he says. 4. He's run out of patience, and feels like a break;-)) 5. His kids want to go for a swim! 6. He knows you have the real expert (in his opinion) 'on your doorstep' so to speak. 7. He knows that many of his most helpful writings can be found under topics such as 'Satipatthana' in 'Useful Posts': http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 8. He'd like to encourage other members to 'have a say'! Don't worry, Erik, you're doing fine...we all have our limits and sometimes need some 'refuelling'.....! there are just very few of us who have your stamina! 'Hang in' and someone will get back to you (although I note you don't respond to EVERY post to Erik and EVERY point yourself!). One hint: you might consider a question and answer approach, just for a change, but no rule at all! Thanks for keeping us all 'challenged' and for your relatively recent sincere interest in the Tipitaka. Looking f/w to seeing you soon in Bkk (around 8th Sept). Sarah p.s Rob - excuse the presumptions and wild guesses!!;-)) 7423 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:47pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [d-l] Scholars and Meditators --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Cybele & Friends, > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > >From the book "Numerical Discourses of the Buddha – An Anthology of > > >Suttas from the Anguttara Nikaya" > > >translated by Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi: > > > > > >125. Scholars and Meditators > > > > > >. . . "friends, you should train yourselves thus: `Though we > > >ourselves are Dhamma-experts, we will praise also those monks who are > > >meditators.' And why? Such outstanding men are rare in the world who have > > >personal experience of the deathless element (Nibbana). > > > And the other monks, too, should train themselves thus: `Though we > > >ourselves are meditators, we will praise also those monks who are > > >Dhamma-experts.' And why? Such outstanding persons are rare in the > > >world who can by their wisdom clearly understand a difficult subject." > > > (VI, 46) > > Thank you for posting this sutta. I second your thanks, Sarah. > When we first read it, we may appreciate the reminders for tolerance and > respect and wise speech in regard to those who appear to follow different > paths. Indeed, there are many, many ways to rightly understanding the Dhamma. The Buddha listed several different avenues for this in the Sammaditthi Sutta, for example. This is one reason I always find that sutta among the most inspiring of them all. > We also note how useless bickering and disparaging others are. How > easily these can lead to pride and 'puffing-up'. These are useful reminders at > any level, for sure! Indeed, the affliction of mana is a nasty one! Though, let's be honest, for us beings who yet lack the enlightenment of arahants, it is an affliction we all remain subject to. :( > When we just read a translation like this, it is easy to take 'scholars' for > being those who are experts in book-learning without any 'inner' developed > wisdom and it is easy to take 'meditators' for being those who do not study and > who merely follow a 'practice'. I agree completely with this very wise observation. There is no disjunction at all, in my eyes, between scholarship and authentic wisdom, nor meditation as a practice combined with scholarship. Nor does scholarship in any way preclude meditative realization, and in no way does meditative realization preclude scholarship. For many (particularly in my own lineage), the two are teated as inseparable aspects of the path. For example, Tibetan Geluk-pa monks undergo a rigiorous twenty-five-year course of scholarship into the deepest aspects of the textual Dharma, including several years devoted specifically to the study of Abhidhamma--simultaneously, of course, with a clear and directed meditative practice emphasizing the jhanas and the union of samatha and vipassana. Many of Tibet's most revered sages have in fact also been scholars of great renown. For example, the Sakya Pandita, Je Tsongkhapa, Rinchen Zangpo, Lama Atisha, Marpa the Translator, not to mention the Dalai Lamas, etc. In addition, some of Tibet's most revered sages have been instead the unscholarly "meditator" types as well, for example Tibet's most famous yogi-meditator, the illustrious Jetsun Milarepa (disciple of Marpa the translator). There is truly no reason scholarship and realization are in any way inimical to one another. In fact, for those of my lineage, again, the two are treated as inseparable aids to the path. For others of other schools, meditation may be primarily emphasized (I think of Zen, for example). That said, in no school that I am aware of is scholarship alone--entirely devoid of a firm basis in the practice of meditation-- taught as a valid path. Thanks for the great and very dead-on comments, Sarah! May our collective studies and practices all bring about the direct awakening to the Deathless! :) 7424 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:58pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana & welcome Dear Fenny, --- "Fenny" wrote: > Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, > This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. Enjoy. Thanks for adding this article. We certainly all need lots of light.Of course there can be discontent with and without wrong view, but I like the examples of blaming the companions, moods, place, food, weather and this or that for our problems and also the story about the Jackal. Can someone give me a sutta reference for this story? I think this was your first post on dsg. I'm sure everyone would appreciate it if you'd fill us in a little with regard to your interest in dhamma, where you live and anything else you care to share. Hope you find dsg useful and we hear more of your own comments! Best wishes, Sarah p.s We try to encourage everyone to use hyperlinks for long articles which are on the net. Thanks. 7425 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 6:11pm Subject: Re: pls advice Dear Kelvin, --- "kelvin liew peng chuan" wrote: > > May u all b well & happy! long time since i've written to this group. > > i'm currently conducting a Dhamma get together for the Buddhist students in > my university, learning Dhamma weekly yes, it does seem like a long time..we've missed you! You've already received a couple of suggestions and i think both the books mentioned would be useful for studying and discussing Dhamma. Good for you for organising these activities! you could also invite any of the students who really show some interest in dhamma to join us here and ask any questions, the more basic the better! You could even use some of the questions and answers for your dhamma group. Please let us know how it goes and hope to hear more from you, Kelvin. Perhaps you can even arrange a field trip to Hong Kong! Best of luck, Sarah 7426 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 6:15pm Subject: Re: The Dhamma (was Satipatthana)-Robert --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Erik, > > This begs a question, I think. If my hunch is correct, what is the > > REAL fear, the REAL concern here? Is it the Suttas reputed to be the > > words of Lord Buddha I have been directly quoting regarding > > Satipatthana? > > Let me make one or two other wild guesses:-)) > > 1. Rob has repeated many times what he understands satipatthana to be, how the > texts should be considered, but doesn't think you're really listening to what > he's saying (or what K.Sujin, Nina and others are saying). That may well be. But for the record, I have listened VERY carefully to what all my aforementioned friends in the Dhamma have said. VERY carefully. :) > 4. He's run out of patience, and feels like a break;-)) Well then, he's found a true friend in Erik! :) :) :) As Master Shantideva said, "there is no evil equal to anger; and no virtuwe equal to patience." (sorry to quote outside the Tipitaka, but I don't know any other similar quote off the top of my head here :) :) :) > 5. His kids want to go for a swim! Now there's an idea! (not kids--not just yet anyway--I mean, we haven't even tied the knot yet! :) :) :) I have yet to take a dip in my apartment building's swimming pool, and I've been here a month already! > 6. He knows you have the real expert (in his opinion) 'on your doorstep' so to > speak. Perhaps I was being a tad impatient in getting back there to continue this specific debate in greater detail and dragged Robert in by proxy. :) > Don't worry, Erik, you're doing fine...we all have our limits and sometimes > need some 'refuelling'.....! there are just very few of us who have your > stamina! I can only hope my bride-to-be will be as kind with her comments! :) 'Hang in' and someone will get back to you (although I note you don't > respond to EVERY post to Erik and EVERY point yourself!). I know, I know. But pleaase be patient and give me a little time already! I'm still working on the abhinnas thingy of "from one form he becomes many, and from many he becomes one again," so I can do justice to all the points I'm now forced to skip due to lack of sufficient digits (I wonder if this iddhi also allows for the creation of emanations of computers and keyboards--this is not explicitly mentioned in the texts, though)! And I really do hope the wish I made at Phnom Kulen immediately after descending from seeing the 2,000-year-old reclining Buddha entering Parinibbana my fiancee had insisted on taking me to see (it is her favorita place in the world, according to her--talk about auspicious, and that ain't the HALF of it! :)--the wish to reach Buddhahood in this lifetime for the sake of all sentient beings--comes to pass just as the fortune-teller woman indicated on her reading immediately thereafter (that whatever you wish for will be fulfilled!)! :) > One hint: you might consider a question and answer approach, just for a change, > but no rule at all! I'll take this under consideration. I think a change of style may be helpful. Do you mean the sort of style the Buddha used, for example, with Yamaka? Also, as I recall, the Yamaka is one of the books of the Abhidhamma dealing with "paired logic." Is there anyone here who can explain a bit more about this volume to me? What about the provenance of "Yamaka" as a term--from the Sutta and the eponymous monk? Or does "Yamaka" actually mean "paired logic"? > Thanks for keeping us all 'challenged' and for your relatively recent sincere > interest in the Tipitaka. Recent interest? Why, I've been sincerely interested in the Tipitaka ever since I got my second book on the Buddhist Dhamma by Ven. Walpola Rahula, "What the Buddha Taught." I have made it a point to always read the Zen and Tibetan along with the Pali Suttas. My general interst is in, and has only been in, the actual Dhamma. The "schools" or "canon" to me matters not a whit, so long as I am convinced it is indeed a teaching that leads to the permanent cessation of suffering. It is only the Abhidhamma that is a recent development in my studies. > Looking f/w to seeing you soon in Bkk (around 8th Sept). Indeed, and I have MANY, MANY photos fropm my trip to Angkor to share with you! :) 7427 From: Herman Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:35pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Robert, I acknowledge up front that I am completely out of my depth here, and that what appears on your screen is what welled up out of , well, nowhere really. But it just seems to me that if you didn't pay your ISP account regularly , you wouldn't be able to share with the rest of us re Parramattha Dhammas. And why would you fly all the way to Bangkok just to experience a storm that isn't a storm, and meet a whole bunch of friends that aren't friends, just Parramattha Dhammas. Aren't there enough Parramattha Dhammas wherever we all are? No need to travel, I would think. Robert, I am not expecting a reply, the above is probably fairly trivial, but I do think that the distinction between absolute and convential reality is a very meaningless one. I think there are many, many different levels at which matter organises itself in a very coherent fashion. Surely you don't explain society in terms of protons, or the vascular system in terms of colour? Even though I know there is no absolute Robert, I know there is a tendency , a probability known as Robert, and that's what this tendency/probability known as Herman relates to. And I tend to want to keep it up, while conditions permit. Again, no answer required. BECAUSE SWIMMING WITH YOUR KIDS IS MUCH MORE IMPORTANT !!!!! (sorry for shouting :-) With Kind Regards Herman > _____________________ > Dear Erik, > I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I > think it would be unproductive to bother you with further > explanations. > best wishes > robert 7428 From: m nease Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Good to hear from you again, Victor. I hope you don't mind if I put in my two cents' worth. > There is no Robert; > [snip] > > > > robert > > Hi Robert, > > You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were > referring to by the name "Robert"? > > Metta, > Victor As I understand it it isn't 'who', but 'what'--that is, a confluence of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of conditions with nearly identical 'histories', I guess. The 'who' is a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manifestations of these conditions. Not real at all, but much more convincingly so than the momentary constituents which seem to give it life. The problem the Buddha defined, in a sense, is 'taking it personally'- -whether form, feeling, perception, mental formations or consciousnesses. For sure there is no Robert, no Victor and no Mike, except on a very superficial level. At least that's the way I see it. What do you think? 7429 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries Joshua --- Joshua wrote: > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > contain > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > ancient commentators, > > Could you give some examples? I will give one or two examples of what I had in mind. With this reservation, however: I do not mean to be questioning the personal views of the author. I am simply commenting on the article taken at its face value, as any reader might see it. With that caveat, I will give one example of a difference of detail and one of 'doctrine', both of which can be discussed from a reading of the Satipatthana Sutta itself or its commentary, as translated by Soma Thera in 'The Way of Mindfulness' (page numbers below are to this book). Here is the matter of detail. The description of the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness The article describes the four Foundations/Focuses of Mindfulness as "your own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind consciousness and the objects of the mind". In the Satipatthana Sutta, the first Foundation of Mindfulness, usually referred to as 'Contemplation of the Body', is not limited to one's own body, but include another's body as well. Each of the several aspects of contemplation of the body (breathing, the modes of deportment, the 4 kinds of clear comprehension, repulsiveness of the body, the modes of materiality, and the 9 cemetery contemplations) concludes with the passage -- "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body internally and externally." The commentary to the section on breathing explains (p.51) that this refers to contemplation of the body in one's own 'respiration-body', in another's 'respiration-body' or at one time in one's own and at another in another's 'respiration-body'. A similar comment is made after each of the other sections. There is quite a difference between one's own body as object of contemplation and one's own or another's body as object of contemplation (especially when it comes to breath!). The wrong understanding could, for example, lead one to the idea that this contemplation is best 'practised' in solitude, an idea that is not supported by a reading of the sutta as a whole. In fact, although the section on contemplation on the body in the sutta talks in term of different bodily postures, activities, cemetery contemplations etc (ie. in terms of conventional situations), the underlying meaning according to the commentary is all rupa-dhammas, the dhammas that comprise the first khandha. Indeed, the 4 Foundations between them refer to all the 5 khandhas (ie all paramattha dhammas that are subject to clinging). The commentary says on this (p. 119) -- "In the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of corporeality or materiality was spoken of by the Master; in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of feeling; in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of consciousness; and now [ie. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of the aggregates of perception and formations, …". The rupa-kkhandha includes of course not only the rupas that we take for our own body, but all rupas that are experienced through the various doorways. Most importantly, it refers to realities that are arising at the present moment, not at any other time. It is not necessary to 'choose' one or other of the 4 Foundations as the focus for contemplation. If there is awareness of any reality appearing at the present moment, that awareness is a moment of the development of (one or other of) the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness as taught in the Satipatthana Sutta. I hope this has given some idea of how careful we should be in taking parts of suttas at their face value, without reference to the whole sutta and its commentaries. Jon PS This post turned out longer than expected! I will mention the 'doctrinal' issue in a separate post. 7430 From: Binh A Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 11:12pm Subject: The Jackal suffering from mange... --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Thanks for adding this article. We certainly all need lots of > light.Of course there can be discontent with and without wrong > view, but I like the examples of blaming the companions, moods, > place, food, weather and this or that for our problems and also > the story about the Jackal. > > Can someone give me a sutta reference for this story? ================================================================= BA: Perhaps it was taken from this story in Samyutta Nikaya: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn17-8.html Metta, Binh 7431 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Hi, Erik (and Robert) - In a message dated 8/14/01 12:26:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes a lengthy post which I am about to lengthen even further! ;-)) > > --- Robert wrote: > > MN 131, in > > > > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > > > > > > > A Single Excellent Night > > > > > > > > Let not a person revive the past > > > > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > > > > > > > ...Instead with insight let him see > > > > Each presently arisen state; > > > > Let him know that and be sure of it, > > > > .. > > > > > > ERIK:Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, > > > precisely? > > ______________________ > > Dear Erik, > > > > Satipatthana is only taught by a surpreme Buddha. It > > can only be heard about during the rare times of a > > Buddha sasana. To understand its development we need > > to hear many details of the teachings. > > Indeed, and taking a single passage like you quoted above, without > considering the greater context of the corpus of teachings the Buddha > explicitly taught on Satipatthana, would be a quite unwise, I think. > > So then, to place the above passage into the proper context, I think > we should examine those Suttas where the Buddha spelled out the > meaning of Right Mindfulness in the greatest and most explicit > detail. Would you not agree, given the importance of Right > Mindfulness as a definite factor of enlightenment, that this is a > wise strategy? > > > Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him > see > > Each presently arisen state; > > Let him know that and be sure of it," > > And how does the Buddha enjoin his disciples to do just that? Here's > what I've been able to dig up (from the Satipatthana Sutta): > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn010.html > > Beginning with, yet again, Mindfulness of the Breath: "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." > > This is further continued with the various aspects of anapanasati > (mediation on the breath--which you can read in the original Sutta in > more detail--so no need to elaborate further on this vital aspect of > Mindfulness). > > Robert: > > The development of satipatthana is about > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > short- > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > moment. > > The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > Breath: > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of > itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally > & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the > phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon > of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of > origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > know! :)]. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. The mind is used here, and a conventional object is being observed. This is all that one *can* do at less than the most advanced stages of insight meditation. ------------------------------------------------------- Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > Robert! :)]. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. This, I think, is an aspect of "clear comprehension". ------------------------------------------------------- And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging > to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the > body in & of itself." > > > There is nothing else. 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. > > Agreed. That means coming to Right View through having wrong views > pointed out as such, and by meditating carefully on such > instructions, which thereby gradually loosens the fixations on wrong > views, which in turn leads to Right View, which in turn leads to a > correct understanding of right practice--the very practices that lead > to total cessation of suffering. > > > Whether we are sitting crosslegged, or standing there can be > > awareness of dhammas – > > Agreed completely, as the Buddha clearly notes in the Satipatthana > Sutta. > > > but not by clinging and trying and thinking that we > > need volition. > > Clinging is always a bad thing from the Buddha's perspective > (especially clinging to ideas like getting "results" in meditation). > > But if you think we don't need to take volitional control of our > actions to the degree possible RIGHT NOW, your contention is at > serious variance with what the Buddha actually taught. The Buddha > rejected the sort of determinism your statement imples in no > uncertain terms, and in many, many places! ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think your statement is put a tad strongly, Erik. However, I agree that there is a suggestion of determinism in what you write here, Robert, and more strongly so in the writings of some others on the DSG. Volition, in the form of conventional right effort is, as I understand it, an *essential* part of the Buddha's path. Either cultivation occurs because we have made the effort to cultivate, or, if it occurs at all, it will be a random event *in the sense* that it occurs independent of our efforts. But if that latter circumstance were the case, why would the Buddha have enjoined us to exert right effort, and,in fact, why would he have presented the 8-fold path at all? ----------------------------------------------------- > > > NinaVG and Khun sujin often say "reduce yourself > > into one moment". That is it. > > Forget for a moment what anyone else you've heard has said on this > point, Robert, and please consider listening carefully to what this > collection of khandas is telling you for once. To quote Ajahn Chah on > this point: ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Heh, heh, heh! ;-)) Sorry, Erik, I couldn't resist. Forget about what others say .. uh, except for perhaps Ajahn Chah!! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ > > "The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits; the truth goes > against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some > things that we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we > take to be right might be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are > in darkness, we don't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know > anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is > right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say > is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own > masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind > and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the Truth. > > "Some people don't want to listen to others at all, but this is not > the way of a man of wisdom. A wise man listens to everything. One who > listens to Dhamma must listen just the same whether he likes it or > not, and not blindly believe or disbelieve. He must stay at the > halfway mark, the middle point, and not be heedless. He just listens > and then contemplates, giving rise to the right results accordingly. > > "A wise man should contemplate and see the cause and effect for > himself before he believes what he hears. Even if the teacher speaks > the truth, don't just believe it, because you don't yet know the > truth of it for yourself." > > Now, as to considering nama-rupa, what did Lord Buddha actually say > on this point? Further examination of the Satipatthana Sutta may shed > some more light on this point: > > "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of > themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense > media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of > themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense > media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns > forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He > discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he > discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. > And he discerns how there is no further appearance in the future of a > fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the > remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.)" > > Nowhere here does Lord Buddha speak about "realities in this moment" > (though to a degree it's implied since we can't directly observe > anything not arising here & now). > > What the Buddha EXPLICITLY enjoins us to reflect on (and REFLECTION > involves notions of past, present AND future!) are the fetters! > Not "realities arising right now," but the FETTERS, the very fetters > (samyojanas) that keep us bound to the wheel of samsara! (I think I > hear an echo here...) :) :) :) > > In fact, if you read every single one of the instructions the Buddha > actually gave his disciples in the Suttas dealing with Right > Mindfulness, in every one he mentions "remembrance" as a vital > component of the practice of Right Mindfulness. Where does > remembrance fit into "recognizing realities in the present moment"? > (Other than noting the obvious fact that thre is nothing we can > experience NOT happening in the present moment.) > > The fact is the Buddha NEVER teachers "just this moment," but > SPECIFICALLY teaches REMEMBRANCE (which, to my understanding also > happens to be the very definition of sati, or Mindfulness!) ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I do agree that sa~n~na is essential for the process. The path to insight lies, in part, in the cultivation of the faculty of recognition, by means of joining clear comprehension to the bare attention of mindfulness. It has seemed to me for a long time that pa~n~na (wisdom) must, in fact, be a transformation of sa~n~na. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > So then, I must inquire, what about sati has anything to do with "realities > this moment"? Right Mindfulness litrally translated > means RIGHT REMEMBRANCE of qualities that have ALREADY PASSED AWAY! ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, there is another way of thinking about sati (mindfulness) as remembrance/recollection, and that is that it consists of remembering to stay present, to not get lost in thought, to not lose track of exactly what is happening to and in oneself right now. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > But your definition of Satipatthana implies that sati is "remembrance > of the present moment"! That would entail, in no uncertain terms, a > total logical absurdity, my dear friend in the Dhamma. How can one > possibly remember that which has not yet passed, been marked by > sanna, for example? > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, as I put it above, it isn't a matter of "remembrance of the present moment", but rather "remembering to stay present". ----------------------------------------------------- > > > There is no Robert; 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. 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. > > Ultimately nothing arises apart from conditions, but again, we > nontheless are not deterministically bound without any shred of free > will. We DO have volition and CAN choose out actions--in however > limited a way--and act, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, for example to DECIDE to > either listen to and put into practice the Holy Dharma. Or to refuse > to listen to the Holy Dharma and continue to suffer further runds of > misery. We can choose to kill, steal, lie, committ sexual miscondut, > take intoxicants to the point of heedlessness. We can also choose not > to. It may be difficult to make chioces because we are so heavily > conditioned by past thoughts and deeds. But it is decidedly NOT > impossible. If it were, why would the Buddha have said: > > "Abandon what is unwholesome, oh monks! > One can abandon the unwholesome, oh monks! > If it were not possible, I would not ask you to do so. > If this abandoning of the unwholesome would bring harm and suffering, > I would not ask you to abandon it. > But as the abandoning of the unwholesome brings benefit and > happiness, > Therefore, I say, 'Abandon what is unwholesome!' > Cultivate what is wholesome, oh monks. > One can cultivate the wholesome. > If it were not feasible, I would not ask you to do it. > If this cultivation of the wholesome would bring harm and suffering, > I would not ask you to cultivate it. > But as the cultivation of the wholesome brings benefit and happiness, > Therefore, I say, 'Cultivate what is wholesome!'" (AN) > > > > The more I learn about these things the more I > > see that lobha(attachment) and moha(ignorance) are very common. > > Indeed they are at root (at least moha) of all suffering. Which of > course conditions grasping--particular one of the nastiest forms of > grasping, the grasping at views. > > > I do > > not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much > > longer and harder than when I began. > > And yet it is much, much simpler that you can imagine. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: If I may add something here: It is easy to despair of real progress being made. But each act of cultivation leaves a trace, and awakening can occur at any time. As the Buddha said: "Practice diligently". And I think we need to include "Do it without hope or expectation.", because, as Dhammapiyo Bhikkhu wrote on another list, "Get rid of the hope. It has a partner - despair.", and as I replied there, the hoping, itself, is suffering. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Understanding works its way once "we" get out of the > > way. No technique. > > I could not disagree more vehemently with this very wrong form of > understanding. There is VERY MUCH technique, Robert! If there were no > technique, the Buddha would have never taught technique in so many > places! > > > No shortcuts. > > No disagreement there. There are truly no shortcuts, particularly > when it comes to things like cultivating wholseome karma and > directing one's best efforts at serious meditation practice. > > > Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there > > are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in > > conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other > > kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. > > Just as it is also possible that buying a lottery ticket will make > one a millionare! :) ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. And just as pa~n~na requires certain conditions for it to arise, these conditions, in turn, have certain conditions for *their* arising, among which is that we exert the volition and right effort of practice. The conditions for the arising of pa~n~na do not themselves arise randomly. It is, indeed, not a lottery-type situation. The limited-control aspect of anatta does not imply either a deterministic fatalism or a powerlessness due to randomness. There is a path we can *choose* to follow , else the Buddha was a fool or worse. ------------------------------------------------------ > > > That is satipatthana. > > That is not, I am afraid, Satipatthana. Satipatthana is what the > Buddha specifically taught in both the Satipatthana Sutta as well as > the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, which are avaialbe for all and sundery > here to read firsthand. No sense my interjecting any moer commentary > onto this very important parctice when the Buddhas direct and simple > words are availbe for all to see so plainly. > > > This is the time of a Buddhasasana - it is the only > > time that the the deep teachings on khandas, dhatus, > > ayatanas; on paticcasamupada and the 24 paccaya etc. > > can be heard. It would be regretable not to listen. > > And just as fortunate that during this Buddha-sasana there are those > who have terminated all wrong views as well as all misunderstanding > about intent and meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma. It would be even > more regrettable if one chooses to ignore their direct instruction on > the most essential points of the Dhamma! :) > > ============================= My response here was rather strong, because this is a matter of great concern to me. Please be assured, Robert, that I mean no disrespect at all - just the opposite, in fact. If, at any point in this post I may have said anything to offend, let me assure that that was not my intent, and I apologize in advance for possibly coming on "too strongly". 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) 7432 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 1:09am Subject: concepts and realities Dear Hermann, Eric, Howard and all, Hermann wrote: Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but to my limited understanding a person who dwelt in a realm of colours, hardnesses and softnesses, sounds, smells, tastes, coldness and warmness etc only, and makes no further associations and connections between these separate events, would be a completely dysfunctional person. The diagnosis would be along the lines of disassociative state. Is it incorrect to say that the process of combining information from separate events and so forming concepts, is the actual basis for insight and wisdom, and that the reverse process of deconstructing concepts into separate and non-related events would remove all foundations for wisdom and insight? --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: Khun Sujin > explained that when we are reading, we translate colours into letters, > sentences, meaning. It goes on by conditions. > Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of visible object whioch > appears, until one knows clearly that what appears through eyes is only > colour. Khun Sujin said that if it is not in this way one cannot detach from > the inclination to take realities for self, being, person. > Knowing that what was seen is this or that thing, this or that person, it is > a type of nama... There must be a reality that knows the meaning of sound > which appeared through the ears, there are different namas experiencing > objects through different doorways... When we know it is nama it means it is > not self. When we know it is rupa, it means it is not self. > Nina: Eric is perfectly right when he says that if you would only live in the world of colours, sounds, etc. there would be a cognitive dysfunction. How unnatural and forced it would be. The Buddha, as Howard says, used concepts, he knew who was Sariputta , who were his other disciples. But he had no wrong view, he did not take concepts for ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas. We read in the "Kindred Sayings"(I, The Devas, Ch II, § 5) that the Buddha said: He of the monks who is arahat, Who has accomplished all there was to do, Who drug-immune does live the final life: He might say thus: ' "I" say '; 'they say it is "mine." ' So saying he, expert in usages Of men, aware of the worth of common names, Would speak merely conforming to such use. As Howard explained, concepts are helpful to understand the world, and we also need them to understand paramattha dhammas. They can also be a trap, as he said. That is, if we do not know the difference between concepts and paramattha dhammas. Thus, wrong view and ignorance make them into a trap. Long ago I heard of someone who was in a meditation center and thought that she should not look at her watch, and that she should not recognize her parents. But insight should be developed very naturally, otherwise it is attachment, not paññå. Some people believe that they have to lead two kinds of lives: their meditation life and their daily life. But whatever one does is conditioned, and gradually we can learn that there are in the ultimate sense nama and rupa arising because of conditions. Usually we only pay attention to concepts, we have done this our whole life and during many former lives, we do not have to be reminded of concepts. Through the Buddha's teachings we learn that in the ultimate sense there are only nama and rupa and that in developing vipassanå we can come to realize the truth directly. Sati can be aware of what appears through the six doors, but there are very few moments of sati in a day. We cannot force sati by special practices, then attachment to a result is in the way again. What we need, as Khun Sujin often said, is listening to the Dhamma and considering it. We need reminders of the fact that paramattha dhammas appear in daily life, no need to go apart. We can pursue all our hobbies, do our work. We will not fall in a hole in the street, we will not drive carelessly, because we know what different things and situations are. But in between, if there is a short moment of sati, understanding can develop. It is so short anyway, and then there is thinking again of concepts for a long time, that is natural. How could awareness of realities interfere with daily life? On the contrary, when there is sati accompanying the kusala citta, arising sometimes in between, we shall do our chores with more efficiency. Thinking of concepts is natural, and we can learn that also thinking is a conditioned nama. Awareness of nama and rupa is not a matter of deconstructing concepts into entities, I would not put it this way. We don't do anything with concepts, we think of a person, that is one moment of thinking. At another moment there can be awareness of what is seen or of the thinking itself, it depends on conditions what the object of citta is. Summarizing, no need to lead an unnatural life and only pay attention to paramattha dhammas, but, it is beneficial if we remind one another of paramattha dhammas in daily life. Paññå is so weak, we need reminders. That is why I appreciate so much the reminders of Sarah and Robert K. Looking forward to these. Nina. 7433 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 1:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] three rounds op 12-08-2001 18:09 schreef m. nease op m nease: > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of >> visible object which > appears, until one knows clearly that what appears > through eyes is only > colour. > Where you write, 'until one knows clearly' what is the > nature of this knowledge (since there's obviously no > one knowing)? Is it conceptual understanding > 'assembling' itself out of the memories of many recent > instants of sati, or is it yet another instantaneous > and conventionally unknowable moment? > > In other words, when 'sati studies with awareness the > characteristic of visible object which appears', what > accumulates as a result? Conceptual understanding > (vitakka, I guess), or pa??aa which can only be > 'known' by other incomprehensively brief dhammas--or > both, or neither? >Dear Mike, When sati studies visible object, there is a beginning of right understanding, paññå, but it is very weak. There have to be countless moments of awareness again, so that right understanding of paramattha dhammas can be accumulated. When sati is aware, and studies, this is different from studying a Dhamma book, which is understanding of the level of pariyatti, theoretical understanding, which is however a firm foundation of the practice, pa.tipatti, eventually leading to the realization of the truth, pa.tivedha. Pariyatti is not just vitakka, or as you say, conceptual thinking; it is paññå, right understanding accompanying kusala citta. Vitakka accompanies many cittas, also akusala cittas which think with attachment of concepts. I would not use the term conceptual thinking for pariyatti. When you study a Dhamma book, you read about realities and there are concepts that are used for denoting realities. Even while reading or listening there can be moments of awareness of nama and rupa in between. Another way of explaning different levels of understanding: there are three rounds of understanding the four noble truths: knowledge of what should be realized (sacca ~naa.na), the practice, developing direct understanding of realities (kicca ~naa.na) and the direct realization of the truth (kata ~naa.na). (Commentary to the Kindred Sayongs V, Book XII, Ch 2,§1, The Foundation of the Kingdom of the Norm). Khun Sujin often stresses these three rounds to indicate that paññå develops gradually, going through different stages. Best wishes, Nina. 7434 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 10:39pm Subject: The Paradox of Volition Hi, all - All dhammas other than nibbana arise according to causes and conditions. This includes acts of volition. Volition never arises without cause, randomly, but only when the conditions necessary for its arising have come together. Are we unhappy with this? I think so. But if volition were to arise randomly, without cause, there where would lie any source of pleasure in that? What would be "free will" if volition arose in such a manner? We would be at least as unhappy if choosing were to be choosing for no reason whatsoever! The fact is that given that volition, as all other worldly dhammas, only arises when the necessary conditions are in place, there is no *uncaused* choosing to act volitionally; it just happens when it is appropriate for it to happen. After all, any choosing to act volitionally is, itself, an act of volition, which is not random, but caused. So we seem caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of strict determinism and strict randomness, between a rock and a hard place. The middle way out of this dilemma seems to elude us. But why does this upset us so much? Why is this an obsessive philosophical problem for us? I suspect that we are consumed by this because we are distraught over the idea that WE might not be able to exercise free will. But there IS no "we". There is no self to be exercising anything!! I suspect that the paradox/problem of volition is a pseudo-problem which will be solved by its disappearance. When? With the advent of full liberation, if not sooner. And meanwhile, we can be happy that conditions have brought "us" to the current happy circumstances in which we can study and practice the Dhamma. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7435 From: Victor Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- <> wrote: > Good to hear from you again, Victor. I hope you don't mind if I put > in my two cents' worth. > > --- <> wrote: > > [snip] > > There is no Robert; > > [snip] > > > > > > robert > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were > > referring to by the name "Robert"? > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > As I understand it it isn't 'who', but 'what'--that is, a confluence > of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of > conditions with nearly identical 'histories', I guess. The 'who' is > a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manifestations of > these conditions. Not real at all, but much more convincingly so > than the momentary constituents which seem to give it life. > > The problem the Buddha defined, in a sense, is 'taking it personally'- > -whether form, feeling, perception, mental formations or > consciousnesses. > > For sure there is no Robert, no Victor and no Mike, except on a very > superficial level. At least that's the way I see it. What do you > think? Hi Mike, Good to hear from you again too. Are you a confluence of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of conditions with nearly identical 'histories'? Are you a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manifestations of these conditions? The names "Robert", "Victor", "Mike" are used for designation. I use the name "Mike" to refer to you, and you use it to refer to yourself. Similary, you use the name "Victor" to refer to me, and I use it to refer to myself. What do you think? Does the view "there is no Mike, no Victor, no Robert" convey any of the three characteristics of the conditioned phenomenon; namely, form(or feeling, or perception, or formations, or consciousness) is impermanent, dukkha, to be regarded as it actually is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self"? If so, how? Metta, Victor 7436 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:36am Subject: Re: Satipatthana , Dear Howard, I'm at an internet cafe so can only give a quickly thought out reply to your post. > > >Robert: Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him > see > > Each presently arisen state; > > Let him know that and be sure of it,"" > > The development of satipatthana is about > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > short- > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > moment. > > ERIK: The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > Breath: > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of > itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally > & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the > phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon > of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of > origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > know! :)]. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. The mind is used here, and a conventional object is being observed. This is all that one *can* do at less than the most advanced stages of insight meditation. ------------------------------------------------------- Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > Robert! :)]. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. This, I think, is an aspect of "clear comprehension". ------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard I think that when we read the suttas we should not forget what we know from the Abhidhamma. It is sometimes thought that the Dhamma is easy to understand, but I think this is not so. The Buddha knew how difficult it was for people to understand the deep aspects of Dhamma. After his enlightenment he was at first inclined not to teach the Dhamma when he reflected on the tendencies of people and the Dhammas extreme profundity (all Buddha's have this initial hestitation the commentaries say). Many people do not like the idea that there is no self and that all dhammas are uncontrollable. In the 'Discourse to Vacchagotta on Fire' (Aggi- Vacchagotta-sutta, Majjhima Nikaya II, Paribbajaka-vagga)the Buddha said to Vacchagotta: "".. this dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic, subtle, intelligible to the wise;.."" The Atthasalini refers to (translated as the expositor p31)those monks who know sutta but don't know Abhidhamma "the bhikkhu who is ill-trained in the Suttas gets a wrong idea, ..consequently he arrives at wrong view" It notes that this is because the suttas use conventional language. If one doesn't have clear understanding of the difference between conventional truth and paramattha dhammas this is bound to happen. (I picked up more copies of Realities and Concepts while in bangkok and would be happy to send you a copy Howard? And anyone else on the list -please write) Now about the meaning of 'Body' in the satipatthana sutta quoted above and what awareness of the 'body' means. Here is a section from the attahakatha to the satipatthana sutta . """"The Buddha, after dealing in the aforesaid manner with body- contemplation in the form of respiration-meditation, in detail, said: "And further," in order to deal exhaustively with body- contemplation, here, according to the meditation on the modes of deportment [iriyapatha]. Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" 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. Going. The term is applicable both to the awareness of the fact of moving on and to the knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities of moving on. The terms sitting, standing and lying down, too, are applicable in the general sense of awareness and in the particular sense of knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities. Here (in this discourse) the particular and not the general sense of awareness is to be taken. "" ENDQUOTE Howard, please note "knowledge of the (true) characteristic quality" (which refers exclusively to paramattha dhamma)and that "the particular and NOT the general sense of awareness is to be taken." It carries on: "From the sort of mere awareness denoted by reference to canines and the like, proceeds the idea of a soul, the perverted perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an experiencer. One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non- opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative practice cannot be called one who develops anything like a subject of meditation."" Endquote. Hope this helps. On your questions about determinism I will try to answer later. best wishes robert 7437 From: m. nease Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Hello Again, Victor, --- Victor wrote: > Are you a confluence of continuous conditions > resulting from a very > great number of conditions with nearly identical > 'histories'? Are > you a kind of dancing image resulting from the > present manifestations > of these conditions? Yes--as I see it, that's what 'I' always is. > The names "Robert", "Victor", "Mike" are used for > designation. I use > the name "Mike" to refer to you, and you use it to > refer to > yourself. Similarly, you use the name "Victor" to > refer to me, and I > use it to refer to myself. Even the Buddha and the Arahats spoke in conventional terms (names, nouns, pronouns etc.) in the discourses and surely knew that these were terms designating illusory identification with the aggregates of attachment (not 'selves'). Those (like me) who understand this only conceptually can hardly expect to communicate without them. > What do you think? Does the view "there is no Mike, > no Victor, no > Robert" convey any of the three characteristics of > the conditioned > phenomenon; namely, form(or feeling, or perception, > or formations, or > consciousness) is impermanent, dukkha, to be > regarded as it actually > is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is > not my self"? If > so, how? You truncated the sentence, "there is no Mike, no Victor, no Robert" in a way that lost its original meaning. Without the phrase, "except on a very superficial level" I wouldn't have written it. My point is just that 'Mike', 'Victor', 'Robert' and even common nouns refer to concepts--that's all. I believe this is consistent with the Dhammavinaya. You asked > Does the view...convey any of the three > characteristics of > the conditioned > phenomenon; namely, form(or feeling, or perception, > or formations, or > consciousness) is impermanent, dukkha, to be > regarded as it actually > is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is > not my self"? If > so, how? As I understand it, the idea of the 'selves' of things and people falls into the fourth aggregate, sankharupaadaana. This surely partakes of the three characteristics of unsatisfactoriness, impermanence and emptiness and is also surely "to be regarded as it actually is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self." My apologies if I've misunderstood you. I certainly didn't mean to start a debate--I'm not much for debates. Best wishes, sir, mike 7438 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana , Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/14/01 8:37:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > > Dear Howard, > I'm at an internet cafe so can only give a quickly thought out reply > to your post. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I've already looked ahead to what you write here, and I'm impressed with what you can do quickly! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > >Robert: Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > > > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > > > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > > > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > > > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > > > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > > > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > > > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > > > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > > > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him > > see > > > Each presently arisen state; > > > Let him know that and be sure of it,"" > > > > The development of satipatthana is about > > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > > short- > > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > > moment. > > > > ERIK: The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're > putting it. > > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > > Breath: > > > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of > > itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both > internally > > & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on > the > > phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the > phenomenon > > of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of > > origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you > > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > > know! :)]. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree. The mind is used here, and a conventional object is > being > observed. This is all that one *can* do at less than the most > advanced stages > of insight meditation. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > > Robert! :)]. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes. This, I think, is an aspect of "clear comprehension". > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Dear Howard > I think that when we read the suttas we should not forget what we > know from the Abhidhamma. It is sometimes thought that the Dhamma is > easy to understand, but I think this is not so. > The Buddha knew how difficult it was for people to understand the > deep aspects of Dhamma. After his enlightenment he was at first > inclined not to teach the Dhamma when he reflected on the tendencies > of people and the Dhammas extreme profundity (all Buddha's have this > initial hestitation the commentaries say). ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it is certainly profound. I think that the main depth lies in the resistance people have to seeing all dhammas as empty, insubstantial, fleeting, and like foam, and especially in seeing the impersonality of all dhammas. We are primed to misinterpret the Dhamma. We even tend to misinterpret the fundamental scheme of dependent arising, thinking that it pertains to real, self-existent entities between which a connecting relation of causality holds. -------------------------------------------------------------- Many people do not like > the idea that there is no self and that all dhammas are > uncontrollable. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: For sure. This is a point I was making in my post on the "Paradox of Volition". ----------------------------------------------------------- In the 'Discourse to Vacchagotta on Fire' (Aggi- > Vacchagotta-sutta, Majjhima Nikaya II, Paribbajaka-vagga)the Buddha > said to Vacchagotta: > > "".. this dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, > peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic, subtle, intelligible to the > wise;.."" > > > The Atthasalini refers to (translated as the expositor > p31) those monks who know sutta but don't know Abhidhamma "the bhikkhu > who is ill-trained in the Suttas gets > a wrong idea, ..consequently he arrives at wrong view" > It notes that this is because the suttas use conventional language. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. But those of us who are mired in illusion - and this, I believe, includes all of us - are prone to arrive at wrong view also when studying Abhidhamma, because we will cling to and reify the notions there as well. Only real practice can ultimately be a cure as I see it. --------------------------------------------------- > If one doesn't have clear understanding of the difference between > conventional truth and paramattha dhammas this is bound to happen. (I > picked up more copies of Realities and Concepts while in bangkok and > would be happy to send you a copy Howard? And anyone else on the > list -please write) -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would be MOST appreciative of receiving a copy, Robert. Should I e-mail you my address? -------------------------------------------------------- > > Now about the meaning of 'Body' in the satipatthana sutta quoted > above and what awareness of the 'body' means. > Here is a section from the attahakatha to the satipatthana sutta . > > """"The Buddha, after dealing in the aforesaid manner with body- > contemplation in the form of respiration-meditation, in detail, > said: "And further," in order to deal exhaustively with body- > contemplation, here, according to the meditation on the modes of > deportment [iriyapatha]. > > Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a bhikkhu) > understands: 'I am going.'" 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. > > Going. The term is applicable both to the awareness of the fact of > moving on and to the knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities > of moving on. > The terms sitting, standing and lying down, too, are applicable in > the general sense of awareness and in the particular sense of > knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities. Here (in this > discourse) the particular and not the general sense of awareness is > to be taken. "" ENDQUOTE > > Howard, please note "knowledge of the (true) characteristic quality" > (which refers exclusively to paramattha dhamma)and that "the > particular and NOT the general sense of awareness is to be taken." > > It carries on: "From the sort of mere awareness denoted by reference > to canines and the like, proceeds the idea of a soul, the perverted > perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an experiencer. > One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non- > opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative > practice cannot be called one who develops anything like a subject of > meditation."" Endquote. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, of course. One's observation must be a direct seeing of what is actually there. It must have the flavor of the initial phase of consciousness wherein there is a mere observing of the object without further reaction of a conceptual or emotional sort. When these arise, they simply constitute further objects to which bare attention is to be applied. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Hope this helps. > On your questions about determinism I will try to answer later. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I look forward to that. --------------------------------------------------------- > best wishes > robert > > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7439 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > ============================== > Thank you for this. I do understand it, seeing it as a > "higher-order", > Abhidhammic explanation of Right Effort, without disputing the > conventional > Right Effort emphasized in the Sutta Pitaka. I would be interested in > sutta > references which also suggest such an interpretation. Would you or > anyone > know of such? Well, it's a matter of the wider context of the Eightfold Path and the body of the Suttanta as a whole. I will try to come back on this later. In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in your own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your 'Paradox' post - move forward.) And I have 2 questions for you to ponder, Howard. 1. As far as effort for kusala generally is concerned, would it be correct to say that the more one's understanding is developed and the more one sees the value in kusala and the danger in akusala, the less 'effort' is required for kusala to arise? 2. I think we have all had experiences of occasions when kusala has arisen spontaneously, without the slightest 'effort' on our part, for example when giving a hand to someone in need, or responding to a request for assistance from a colleague, etc., while at other times kusala manifestly fails to arise despite our best 'efforts'. What would be the explanation for this? Jon PS Thanks for the excellent posts recently, I have enjoyed the useful reminders. 7440 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 11:15am Subject: satipatthana Hello all dsg members, Since the subject of satipatthana is currently being discussed online, I thought it might be appropriate to share a very interesting example of satipatthana which arose for me a few days ago. The important things to note are: --it arises unbidden; there is no control one can have over the process since there is no “one” who can control it. It is only cittas, cetasikas arising and then falling away in a process. --it can arise any time in the course of daily life if the conditions are there for it to do so. Focusing on realities as they arise at any moment in the course of a day and study of the Dhamma act as conditions for satipatthana to arise later. When one has made some initial study of the process itself, one can be better aware of what is happening when it actually does arise. Our teachers, kalayanamitr, are guides, good friends in Dhamma who can lead the way. But only “I” or “we” can take the steps that lead to the conditions that will allow understanding to arise later. This is my story: I had been very upset with the turn of events over the opening Sunday night of my cousin's epic movie Suriyothai, in which I did the subtitles. However, his team put them onto the film itself and they are not native English speakers. There were too many careless mistakes to count when viewing it in its entirety at the gala premier performance which Their Majesties attended. I felt totally mortified when many who knew I had done them pointed out the mistakes to me. To add insult to injury, my name was not even listed among the credits. My mana intensified a great deal and brought many tears the following day. Late Monday night I was sitting and ruminating when (thankfully) panna arose and it was realized that I had nothing to be ashamed of. I did them well, to the best of my ability. And if others think I am to blame, that is their problem of moha, not mine. And if they think less of me, that is my vipaka and there is nothing I can or should do about it. But mostly I realized how much mana had arisen to cause such unhappiness for me. And even more important: who is really "there" to feel any hurt? An analysis then ensued as to which cetasikas had probably been arising throughout that day of unhappiness. So, instead of feeling dhosa against my cousin, I silently thanked him and his team for being part of the conditions for panna to arise. I thank Achaan Sujin, my guide and kalayanamitr, for having given me the "tools" with which to have done that analysis. It is this same satipatthana process which we all need to understand if we are to see our own daily situations clearly. For, only when panna arises can the various defilements, moha, lobha, dhosa, be let go. with metta, Betty __________________________ Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 7441 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path vs 5-fold path Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom, Howard an Jon, > > This is extremely interesting. Kom, 'fermentations' > or 'taints' here is from 'aasavas', one definition of > which is 'ideas which intoxicate the mind'. Jon has > often stated that the 8-(or5-)fold path refers > exclusively to moments on the brink of awakening (my > apologies, Jon, if I've mis-paraphrased you). Just to clarify, because I may not have been clear or consistent throughout, here is a summary in purely 'technical' terms of what I have been trying to say-- 1. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as the Fourth Noble Truth means a moment of consciousness when all 8 path-factors arise together. This occurs only at a moment of magga-citta (path-consciousness), ie. at one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. It is a moment of supramundane consciousness, with Nibbana as its object. 2. There is a mundane version of the path, which is a moment when 5 (or sometimes 6) of the factors of the eightfold path (in their 'mundane version') arise. This refers to a moment of satipatthana (or 'mundane path-consciousness'). Its object will be any presently appearing reality. It may arise at any time, given the right understanding and other conditions. 3. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as one of the 37 requisites of enlightenment means, at any time before actual enlightenment, a moment of mundane (5-fold) path-consciousness and, at or subsequent to the first stage of enlightenment, the supramundane 8-fold path consciousness. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify, and apologies for any past confusion. Jon 7442 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 2:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Path-factors with/without the asavas Mike > It's obvious from reading the discourses (and the > discipline) that the Buddha sometimes spoke of > thought, speech and action leading to happy rebirths > (e.g. the divine abodes) and other times of thought, > (sometimes with and sometimes without) speech and > action leading to unbinding--I say obvious because he > stated so explicitly. (By the way, there's one > discourse in which the Buddha chides Ananda (I think) > for having taught the divine abodes to a dying person > who could have attained enlightenment before death had > he taught the path instead--anyone remember where this > is?) > > Anyway, the Great Forty seems to me to support Jon's > position on this to some extent--not quite to the > extent that the path-factors refer only to > near-enlightenment, but certainly to the extent that > there's a real and important difference between the > factors with and without aasavas. > > The question remaining to me is, if the Buddha taught > 'only dukkha and the way out of dukkha', then why did > he teach kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana? > Off-hand I'm inclined to think that, kusala that > doesn't lead to nibbana mayabe leads to kusala that > DOES lead to nibbana. Maybe. Another answer, and this may sound trite but it's not, is that the Buddha taught *all* realities, including even the akusala ones. Whatever the reality, he taught how it can be known for what it is, and he taught how it conditions, or is conditioned by, other realities. If you look closely at the language of this sutta, I think the Buddha talks in much the same terms whether the reality under discussion is akusala or (one or other kind of) kusala. He leaves it very much to the listener to draw his own conclusions, according to the listener's accumulations and level of understanding. (This is another example of what I call descriptive rather than prescriptive language.) > Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > through the discourses and the discipline, the > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > skilful reflections. Do you think there is a link > between this sort of reflection and the > path-factors-with-aasavas? I'm sure there is a link. Unless and until the kusala qualities have been developed to a high degree, they cannot perform the function of subduing the defilements. Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. Jon 7443 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Paradox of Volition Dear Howard, You've really considered carefully and I enjoyed this piece very much. --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > All dhammas other than nibbana arise according to causes and > conditions. This includes acts of volition. Volition never arises without > cause, randomly, but only when the conditions necessary for its arising have > come together. Are we unhappy with this? I think so. > But if volition were to arise randomly, without cause, there where > would lie any source of pleasure in that? What would be "free will" if > volition arose in such a manner? We would be at least as unhappy if choosing > were to be choosing for no reason whatsoever! > The fact is that given that volition, as all other worldly dhammas, > only arises when the necessary conditions are in place, there is no > *uncaused* choosing to act volitionally; it just happens when it is > appropriate for it to happen. After all, any choosing to act volitionally is, > > itself, an act of volition, which is not random, but caused. So we seem > caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of strict determinism and strict > randomness, between a rock and a hard place. The middle way out of this > dilemma seems to elude us. May I add a comment? I think the missing piece here is sati or awareness. Thinking alone can never solve the dilemma although the wise reflecting and considering as you're doing here are essential requisites for sati to arise. At the moment of thinking that 'this is a dilemma' or that 'we seem caught between A & B', there can be awareness of thinking at that very moment. It's a nama (mental pheonomenon) arising for a moment, thinking about concepts. When there is a moment of awareness of its characteristic, there's no dilemma and no 'being caught...'. and no upset either! > But why does this upset us so much? Why is this an obsessive > philosophical problem for us? I suspect that we are consumed by this because > we are distraught over the idea that WE might not be able to exercise free > will. But there IS no "we". There is no self to be exercising anything!! Exactly so....the problem is created by the clinging to self and the wrong view associated with this. I > suspect that the paradox/problem of volition is a pseudo-problem which will > be solved by its disappearance. When? With the advent of full liberation, if > not sooner. Yes, sooner! At any moment of satipatthana, when awareness is aware of thinking or seeing or any other paramattha dhamma, there is no paradox and no pseudo problem for a moment. Of course, afterwards there are bound to be the doubts and dilemmas again, but as you seem to be finding, they become fewer and it becomes clearer that there is no self that has any control over them! >And meanwhile, we can be happy that conditions have brought "us" > to the current happy circumstances in which we can study and practice the > Dhamma. Yes and very well put....... I can't imagine, Howard, why you would consider that anything you write might ever cause any offence;-)) You're a model for the rest of us in terms or wise and considered speech! Many thanks. Btw, while I was watching the news on CNN this morning and doing my yoga, I found I was reflecting on your question about the timing of awareness. We talk about awareness of a reality when that reality in actuality occurred in a process just fallen away. As Nina replied, the characteristic still appears (not a memory or concept) and hence we say it is (and for all intents and purposes it is) the reality which appears at the present moment. When sati is aware of it, there is no thought or concern about processes or billionth of a second intervals or any other time concepts which only the Buddha could fully appreciate. Back to CNN and an analogy which may not work (not my strong point!) We say we're watching live coverage from Jerusalem and for our purposes that is correct. It is being relayed direct by satellite and what we see is what is being transmitted at that time. In fact, however, I'm told that there is a very small interval between what appears on my gym's TV screen and what is being transmitted. Now the experts can give a scientific explanation of how this works, but it doesn't affect the live coverage I see. This doesn't mean it's not helpful to understand intellectually the detailed processes and timing of cittas or of satellite transmission (as an analogy only!), but it shouldn't distract us from understanding what sati is, what the objects of sati are or enjoying the picture in front of us on CNN! ....And while thinking of processes, satellites, yoga poses and other stories, there can be a moment of awareness again of thinking, a conditioned citta or hardness or visible object for a moment. Just for that moment, there is true calm from any restlessnes or other unwholesome mental factors and no dilemma at all. Then the stories continue, but this is so natural as Nina has been stressing. No need to TRY and change it or stop thinking of concepts..... I know you're getting full mail bags these days Howard....hope you find something useful! Sarah Sarah 7444 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Determinism? Dear Howard, Your post today about the paradox was spot on; I find it encouraging when I read Dhamma such as this. On Dsg several of us to tend to put a lot of emphasis on anatta, and some find that disturbing. They think it means we are saying are 'anything goes'. We should know that all types of kusala except satipatthana vipassana can be done with self-view still firmly embedded. However, knowing about anatta doesn't mean one forgets sila or dana or metta or other types of kusala (I personally don't practice anapanasati but if others do that's fine with me). True insight into anatta develops only to the degree that there is understanding of conditions. And since one of the main conditions is kamma if there is any insight then one is becoming ever more sensitive to the fact that what is done or even thought now brings a result in the future - as well as accumulating more tendencies to do whatever type of deed of thought is been done. I am still a little pushed for time so I did a copy /paste job from a couple of earlier letters. The "Kindred Sayings"(III, Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake or pillar, keeps running round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar, even so, monks, the untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling, perception, activities, consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and round from body to body, from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception, from activities to activities, from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released therefrom, they are not released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow and grief, from woe, lamentation and despair... they are not released from dukkha, I declare... " It then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any dhamma for self is released from dukkha. This applies just as much to cetana(volition) as to any other dhamma. Often when "I" investigate the 6 doors there is just that: "I". Sati is taken for self or I think "I" made awareness happen. But cetana (volition, intention) and awareness are part of sankharakkhandha, they are "not-self because uncontrollable" Visuddhimagga xiv224. This doesn't mean fatalism or that nothing can be done but it should remind us that the right conditions are needed for the right results. It is to our great advantage to learn more about the Dhamma. 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".ENDQUOTE Anatta is the core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom. Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up like grass and sticks" Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight into nama and rupa takes time. xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit; phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right" XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agregate of formations) this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc. "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and because of precluding a self". This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self and control. (Just as you mentioned in your paradox post Howard) Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer". This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it is a conditioning factor. What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later they get interested and surpass in understanding those who studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. ___________ BRUCE: "that's where I get stuck...if all dhammas except nibbana > are > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > thinking one > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > micchaditthi.... _______ _________________ Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees the danger in samsara and thus there is naturally effort that arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or towards the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. ____________________________ > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > lack of a > better f-word) "fate"? "" __________________ Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did this that or the other nothing would make a thread of difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. It is true that some are past conditions but there are also present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way and is neither. When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on the understanding of the listener. I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop them - but without wisdom. It was because I didn't understand anatta. Later, I understood that defilements can't be quickly got rid of. That when desire arises it is by conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it demonstrates the truth of anatta. Now my focus is to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at all doing anything. This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima Nikaya 148 Chachakka Sutta The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known. The six external media should be known. The six classes of consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six classes of CRAVING should be known." Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the stage where all craving is gone but first it should be understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true characteristic can be seen. Howard, as you see some of this adressed your points and some was a bit off target. I would be very happy to continue if you make further comments. Just one further point. I personally don't find in any way that accepting the uncontrollabilty of dhammas hinders effort. I think we spend a lot of energy worrying and wanting and trying to control. Knowing that deeper conditions than just intention and effort are needed for any result, even in the material world, should mean we become more detached from expectation and desire. One knows that the past is completely gone, the future unknown and so it is very natural to live more in the moment, giving and doing as much as we can here and now. And yes please send me your adress off-list so I can send the book (and any others who want a copy please write) best wishes robert 7445 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] satipatthana Dear Betty, Thank you for your good reminders and for sharing this story: --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" wrote > This is my story: I had been very upset with the turn of events over the > opening Sunday night of my cousin's epic movie Suriyothai, in which I did > the subtitles. However, his team put them onto the film itself and they are > not native English speakers. There were too many careless mistakes to count > when viewing it in its entirety at the gala premier performance which Their > Majesties attended. I felt totally mortified when many who knew I had done > them pointed out the mistakes to me. To add insult to injury, my name was > not even listed among the credits. My mana intensified a great deal and > brought many tears the following day. Late Monday night I was sitting and > ruminating when (thankfully) panna arose and it was realized that I had > nothing to be ashamed of. I did them well, to the best of my ability. And if > others think I am to blame, that is their problem of moha, not mine. And if > they think less of me, that is my vipaka and there is nothing I can or > should do about it. But mostly I realized how much mana had arisen to cause > such unhappiness for me. And even more important: who is really "there" to > feel any hurt? An analysis then ensued as to which cetasikas had probably > been arising throughout that day of unhappiness. So, instead of feeling > dhosa against my cousin, I silently thanked him and his team for being part > of the conditions for panna to arise. As Erik reminded us yesterday in 'Scholars and Meditators', we're stuck with a lot of mana for a very long time.....Such an ugly best that brings so many tears and only occasionally is there enough wisdom and clarity to be brave and honest enough to recognise it, better still be aware of it, when it raises its ugly head. Afterwards, of course it's only thinking and reflecting about it, but still it's very skilful reflecting and hopefully can help us to see 'the mange' as the problem that the poor Jackal never could. Thanks, Betty......like Nina, I find these daily life reminders very helpful and hope to hear more! Your cousin is fortunate indeed to have your help and I hope the movie's a success. (Ooops! Howard and Ven Dhammapiyo, that's a lot of hoping for one paragraph!!;-)) Sarah 7446 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Herman --- Herman wrote: > Dear Jon, > > > > Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really > give any > > > indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? > > > > > My readings in cognitive science, and most other sciences for that > matter, certainly confirm that the notion of a controlling self is > without foundation. We are a mass of fermenting chemical processes, > each one ultimately knowable and predicatable in its outcome, > conforming as they all are to knowable laws. > > I take this not so much as a confirmation of the teachings, but as > the honest finding of open minded enquiry. For the object of true > scientific investigation is to know, not to confirm Planck, Newton or > the Buddha. > > And how does modern science know it knows? When it is able to > accurately predict and recreate. This is one kind of knowledge. But it shows, I think, the different worlds inhabited by cognitive science and dhamma. The teachings of the Buddha are not concerned with the knowledge that can accurately predict or recreate events, but with knowledge about the essential characteristic of a reality that appears and its conditioning factors. That's why I suggested that no confirmation of the teachings could be found in the works of cognitive science. (That is not to deny the very important role that cognitive science plays in our lives.) > What is the basis for confidence in a Theradavin worldview? > You can start with rebirth if you like. Is not all of Buddhism > predicated on the notion of rebirth? Is there anything in rebirth > that is knowable? > > Personally, I see more heuristic value in the the anatta, anicca and > duhka of modern genetics. As far as I know, there is only one basis for confidence in the Theravadin view of things, namely the understanding gained by the study and application of the teachings. In terms of an objective basis, such as could be explained to another with a QED as the conclusion, I am sure there is none. However, there are aspects of the teachings that can be verified by anyone right away and at this very moment, such as the fact that the object appearing through, say, the eye-door is wholly different in nature from the experiencing of that object, and is also wholly different from the object appearing through the ear door or any other sense-door. From such beginnings, the teachings can be knowable, but only 'by each person for themself' ie. not by any objectively demonstrable experiment, thoerem or the like. Both kinds of knowledge can be pursued without mutual inconsistency. Jon 7447 From: Fenny Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:04pm Subject: Hello, everyone Clear Day Dear Sarah and everyone in the list, Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted on the list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some time (about a week) before I started posted. I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being a male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my tertiary study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, starting in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My line of practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an admirer of Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. Gassho, Fen 7449 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:12pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Jon, To be totally honest, I wouldn't know kusala or akusala if I fell over them. Especially since joining this forum. This is not a criticism of the forum, by the way. How on earth do I know the difference between wrong view and kusala? Where is the yardstick that tells me that? Could there not be a deception lurking near every citta that suggests wholesomeness? What is the basis for a monks confidence that there was a wholesome citta? Regards Herman --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Howard > > > And I have 2 questions for you to ponder, Howard. > > 1. As far as effort for kusala generally is concerned, would it be > correct to say that the more one's understanding is developed and the more > one sees the value in kusala and the danger in akusala, the less 'effort' > is required for kusala to arise? > > 2. I think we have all had experiences of occasions when kusala has > arisen spontaneously, without the slightest 'effort' on our part, for > example when giving a hand to someone in need, or responding to a request > for assistance from a colleague, etc., while at other times kusala > manifestly fails to arise despite our best 'efforts'. What would be the > explanation for this? > > Jon 7450 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:27pm Subject: The limits of awareness Hi all, Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular sequence. Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is effect, not cause. Time for dinner. It smells good. Wish you were here :-) Herman 7451 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 7:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries Dear Jonothan, You said any 4 objects can be done for anyone.Please beware that com said kaya and vedana for samathayanika /craving people but citta and dhamma for sukkhavipassaka /viewing people. >From: Jonothan Abbott >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries >Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:30:39 +0800 (CST) > >Joshua > >--- Joshua wrote: > > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > contain > > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > > ancient commentators, > > > > Could you give some examples? > >I will give one or two examples of what I had in mind. With this >reservation, however: I do not mean to be questioning the personal views >of the author. I am simply commenting on the article taken at its face >value, as any reader might see it. > >With that caveat, I will give one example of a difference of detail and >one of 'doctrine', both of which can be discussed from a reading of the >Satipatthana Sutta itself or its commentary, as translated by Soma Thera >in 'The Way of Mindfulness' (page numbers below are to this book). > >Here is the matter of detail. > >The description of the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness >The article describes the four Foundations/Focuses of Mindfulness as "your >own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind >consciousness and the objects of the mind". > >In the Satipatthana Sutta, the first Foundation of Mindfulness, usually >referred to as 'Contemplation of the Body', is not limited to one's own >body, but include another's body as well. Each of the several aspects of >contemplation of the body (breathing, the modes of deportment, the 4 kinds >of clear comprehension, repulsiveness of the body, the modes of >materiality, and the 9 cemetery contemplations) concludes with the passage >-- > >"Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives >contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating >the body in the body internally and externally." > >The commentary to the section on breathing explains (p.51) that this >refers to contemplation of the body in one's own 'respiration-body', in >another's 'respiration-body' or at one time in one's own and at another >in another's 'respiration-body'. A similar comment is made after each of >the other sections. > >There is quite a difference between one's own body as object of >contemplation and one's own or another's body as object of contemplation >(especially when it comes to breath!). The wrong understanding could, for >example, lead one to the idea that this contemplation is best 'practised' >in solitude, an idea that is not supported by a reading of the sutta as a >whole. > >In fact, although the section on contemplation on the body in the sutta >talks in term of different bodily postures, activities, cemetery >contemplations etc (ie. in terms of conventional situations), the >underlying meaning according to the commentary is all rupa-dhammas, the >dhammas that comprise the first khandha. Indeed, the 4 Foundations >between them refer to all the 5 khandhas (ie all paramattha dhammas that >are subject to clinging). The commentary says on this (p. 119) -- > >"In the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of >corporeality or materiality was spoken of by the Master; >in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of >feeling; >in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of >consciousness; >and now [ie. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of >the aggregates of perception and formations, …". > >The rupa-kkhandha includes of course not only the rupas that we take for >our own body, but all rupas that are experienced through the various >doorways. Most importantly, it refers to realities that are arising at >the present moment, not at any other time. > >It is not necessary to 'choose' one or other of the 4 Foundations as the >focus for contemplation. If there is awareness of any reality appearing >at the present moment, that awareness is a moment of the development of >(one or other of) the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness as taught in the >Satipatthana Sutta. > >I hope this has given some idea of how careful we should be in taking >parts of suttas at their face value, without reference to the whole sutta >and its commentaries. > >Jon > >PS This post turned out longer than expected! I will mention the >'doctrinal' issue in a separate post. > 7452 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Paradox of Volition Hi, Sarah - Thank you for your insightful comments below and also for your kind words. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/15/01 3:05:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah Procter Abbott writes: > Dear Howard, > > You've really considered carefully and I enjoyed this piece very much. > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > > > All dhammas other than nibbana arise according to causes and > > conditions. This includes acts of volition. Volition never arises without > > cause, randomly, but only when the conditions necessary for its arising > have > > come together. Are we unhappy with this? I think so. > > But if volition were to arise randomly, without cause, there where > > would lie any source of pleasure in that? What would be "free will" if > > volition arose in such a manner? We would be at least as unhappy if > choosing > > were to be choosing for no reason whatsoever! > > The fact is that given that volition, as all other worldly > dhammas, > > only arises when the necessary conditions are in place, there is no > > *uncaused* choosing to act volitionally; it just happens when it is > > appropriate for it to happen. After all, any choosing to act volitionally > is, > > > > itself, an act of volition, which is not random, but caused. So we seem > > caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of strict determinism and strict > > randomness, between a rock and a hard place. The middle way out of this > > dilemma seems to elude us. > > May I add a comment? I think the missing piece here is sati or awareness. > Thinking alone can never solve the dilemma although the wise reflecting and > considering as you're doing here are essential requisites for sati to arise. > > At the moment of thinking that 'this is a dilemma' or that 'we seem caught > between A & B', there can be awareness of thinking at that very moment. > It's a > nama (mental pheonomenon) arising for a moment, thinking about concepts. > When > there is a moment of awareness of its characteristic, there's no dilemma > and no > 'being caught...'. and no upset either! > > > But why does this upset us so much? Why is this an obsessive > > philosophical problem for us? I suspect that we are consumed by this > because > > we are distraught over the idea that WE might not be able to exercise > free > > will. But there IS no "we". There is no self to be exercising anything!! > > Exactly so....the problem is created by the clinging to self and the wrong > view > associated with this. > > I > > suspect that the paradox/problem of volition is a pseudo-problem which > will > > be solved by its disappearance. When? With the advent of full liberation, > if > > not sooner. > > Yes, sooner! At any moment of satipatthana, when awareness is aware of > thinking or seeing or any other paramattha dhamma, there is no paradox and > no > pseudo problem for a moment. Of course, afterwards there are bound to be the > doubts and dilemmas again, but as you seem to be finding, they become fewer > and > it becomes clearer that there is no self that has any control over them! > > >And meanwhile, we can be happy that conditions have brought "us" > > to the current happy circumstances in which we can study and practice the > > Dhamma. > > Yes and very well put....... I can't imagine, Howard, why you would consider > that anything you write might ever cause any offence;-)) You're a model for > the > rest of us in terms or wise and considered speech! Many thanks. > > Btw, while I was watching the news on CNN this morning and doing my yoga, I > found I was reflecting on your question about the timing of awareness. We > talk > about awareness of a reality when that reality in actuality occurred in a > process just fallen away. As Nina replied, the characteristic still appears > (not a memory or concept) and hence we say it is (and for all intents and > purposes it is) the reality which appears at the present moment. When sati > is > aware of it, there is no thought or concern about processes or billionth of > a > second intervals or any other time concepts which only the Buddha could > fully > appreciate. > > Back to CNN and an analogy which may not work (not my strong point!) We say > we're watching live coverage from Jerusalem and for our purposes that is > correct. It is being relayed direct by satellite and what we see is what is > being transmitted at that time. In fact, however, I'm told that there is a > very > small interval between what appears on my gym's TV screen and what is being > transmitted. Now the experts can give a scientific explanation of how this > works, but it doesn't affect the live coverage I see. > > This doesn't mean it's not helpful to understand intellectually the detailed > processes and timing of cittas or of satellite transmission (as an analogy > only!), but it shouldn't distract us from understanding what sati is, what > the > objects of sati are or enjoying the picture in front of us on CNN! > > ....And while thinking of processes, satellites, yoga poses and other > stories, > there can be a moment of awareness again of thinking, a conditioned citta or > hardness or visible object for a moment. Just for that moment, there is true > calm from any restlessnes or other unwholesome mental factors and no > dilemma at > all. Then the stories continue, but this is so natural as Nina has been > stressing. No need to TRY and change it or stop thinking of concepts..... > > I know you're getting full mail bags these days Howard....hope you find > something useful! > > Sarah > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7453 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Jonothan, > If you look closely at the language of this sutta, I think the Buddha > talks in much the same terms whether the reality under discussion is > akusala or (one or other kind of) kusala. He leaves it very much to the > listener to draw his own conclusions, according to the listener's > accumulations and level of understanding. (This is another example of > what I call descriptive rather than prescriptive language.) Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be descriptive but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. Sukin. 7454 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 4:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Determinism? Hi, Robert - Thank you for this wonderful post! There is nothing in it with which I have any disagreement. It is, indeed, a deep and difficult matter. I would like to point out that the material you present on anatta and uncontrollability is like a venomous snake; if it is grasped wrongly, it can turn and bite the grasper. Much care needs to be taken. It is better to have a completely conventional, and even somewhat atta view, I think, than to misinterpret the view expressed in your post (and mine on the Paradox of Volition), and take it to suggest a complete impotence leading to despair. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/15/01 3:10:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Dear Howard, > Your post today about the paradox was spot on; I find it > encouraging when I read Dhamma such as this. > On Dsg several of us to tend to put a lot of emphasis on anatta, > and some find that disturbing. They think it means we are saying > are 'anything goes'. > We should know that all types of kusala except satipatthana > vipassana can be done with self-view still firmly embedded. > However, knowing about anatta doesn't mean one forgets sila or > dana or metta or other types of kusala (I personally don't > practice anapanasati but if others do that's fine with me). > True insight into anatta develops only to the degree that there > is understanding of conditions. And since one of the main > conditions is kamma if there is any insight then one is becoming > ever more sensitive to the fact that what is done or even > thought now brings a result in the future - as well as > accumulating more tendencies to do whatever type of deed of > thought is been done. > > I am still a little pushed for time so I did a copy /paste job > from a couple of earlier letters. > > The "Kindred Sayings"(III, > Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) > Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake > or pillar, keeps running > round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar, > even so, monks, the > untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling, > perception, activities, > consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and > round from body to body, > from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception, > from activities to activities, > from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released > therefrom, they are not > released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow > and grief, from woe, > lamentation and despair... they are not released from > dukkha, I declare... " > > It then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any > dhamma for self is released from dukkha. This applies just as > much to cetana(volition) as to any other dhamma. > > Often when "I" investigate the 6 doors there is just > that: "I". Sati is taken for self or I think "I" made awareness > happen. But cetana (volition, intention) and awareness are part > of sankharakkhandha, they are "not-self because > uncontrollable" Visuddhimagga xiv224. > This doesn't mean fatalism or that nothing can be done but it > should remind us that the right conditions are needed for the > right results. > > It is to our great advantage to learn more about the > Dhamma. 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".ENDQUOTE > > Anatta is the > core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom. > Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are > really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is > void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up > like grass and sticks" > Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect > in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight > into nama and rupa takes time. > xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit; > phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right" > > XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agregate of formations) > this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It > includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc. > "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised > over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because > owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and > because of precluding a self". > This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is > controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of > reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self > and control. (Just as you mentioned in your paradox post Howard) > Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer". > > This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is > not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in > one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in > another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it > is a conditioning factor. > What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the > Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of > merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so > interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban > interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention > to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it > unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it > just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later > they get interested and surpass in understanding those who > studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for > all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. > ___________ > BRUCE: "that's where I get stuck...if all dhammas except > nibbana > > are > > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > > thinking one > > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > > micchaditthi.... > _______ > > _________________ > Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the > idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self > view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or > intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees > the danger in samsara and thus there is naturally effort that > arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into > self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or > towards the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. > > ____________________________ > > > > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > > lack of a > > better f-word) "fate"? "" > __________________ > Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did > this that or the other nothing would make a thread of > difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing > would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not > get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the > Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. > It is true that some are past conditions but there are also > present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism > and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who > can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way > and is neither. > When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a > condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on > the understanding of the listener. > I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we > have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me > when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized > how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became > frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop > them - but without wisdom. > It was because I didn't understand > anatta. Later, I understood that defilements can't be > quickly got rid of. That when desire arises it is by > conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it > demonstrates the truth of anatta. Now my focus > is to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at > all doing anything. > This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima > Nikaya 148 > Chachakka Sutta > The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known. > The six external media should be known. The six classes of > consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should > be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six > classes of CRAVING should be known." > > Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I > think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the > stage where all craving is gone but first it should be > understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not > possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can > be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens > of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true > characteristic can be seen. > > > Howard, as you see some of this adressed your points and some > was a bit off target. I would be very happy to continue if you > make further comments. > Just one further point. I personally don't find in any way that > accepting the uncontrollabilty of dhammas hinders effort. I > think we spend a lot of energy worrying and wanting and trying > to control. Knowing that deeper conditions than just intention > and effort are needed for any result, even in the material > world, should mean we become more detached from expectation and > desire. One knows that the past is completely gone, the future > unknown and so it is very natural to live more in the moment, > giving and doing as much as we can here and now. > And yes please send me your adress off-list so I can send the > book (and any others who want a copy please write) > best wishes > robert > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7455 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/14/01 11:21:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of > 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in your > own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your 'Paradox' > post - move forward.) > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'll try to answer this in a few ways. An example of conventional right effort during meditation is to initiate mindfulness and focus on the meditation subject, to further these when already present, and to return to these when the mind has wandered. When not meditating, a general example is to let go of akusala thoughts when these are present, to initiate kusala thoughts when not present, and to further kusala thoughts when already present. A somewhat dramatic application of right effort in daily life occurred about 5 years ago to me. I had gone through a year of extreme tiredness, discomfort in the lower-left abdomen, and a constant low-grade fever. My doctor threw every test in the book at me except the right one. Finally I saw a gastroenterologist who arranged for me to get a colonoscopy in the hospital. After only five minutes into it, the procedure was stopped. The doctor couldn't get any further than the sigmoid colon because of an impassable blockage! They immediately arranged for surgery for later the same day. When they showed my wife and me the full-color glossies taken during the colonoscopy, it was obvious that the situation was a bad one, and the doctors didn't mince any words in describing the possibilities. That afternoon I had a colon resection done during which they removed several feet of colon. Afterwards, the doctors spoke to me. They said that it would take 6 days for the biopsy results to be returned. Meanwhile they talked to me about the use of radioative seeding vs radiation! From the way the gastroenterologist and the surgeon were talking, I considered it likely that I had colon cancer, and that I might very well die from it. (The doctors had ordered a catscan to check on the status of the liver!) At that point, in the depths of my non-existant soul ;-)), I made a decision. The decision was that I *would* not hope! I *would* not desire that things be "okay". I decided to be openly accepting of however things were and of however events would unfold. I *knew* that without hoping for things to be "a certain way", there would be no suffering. This decision of mine was deep, thoroughgoing, and *real*. For the next six days, while my wife was terribly distraught and my doctors were upset, I was truly and completely at peace. At the end of the six days, my gastroenterologist bounced into the room, positively beaming! Grinning ear to ear, he said that despite the surgeon's certainty of cancer when he held the huge mass of abscessed colon tissue in his hands, there was no malignancy at all, just a severe case of diverticulits (quite dangerous in itself, but now no problem). And my reaction, unspoken, was not one of great joy, but rather a completely calm one, which, if voiced, would be: "Oh, so it's that way, and not the other." Craving, I had learned first hand, was suffering. And lack of craving is peace. But a decision was required, an instance of the exercise of conventional right effort. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > And I have 2 questions for you to ponder, Howard. > > 1. As far as effort for kusala generally is concerned, would it be > correct to say that the more one's understanding is developed and the more > one sees the value in kusala and the danger in akusala, the less 'effort' > is required for kusala to arise? > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. But effort is required to pay attention. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > 2. I think we have all had experiences of occasions when kusala has > arisen spontaneously, without the slightest 'effort' on our part, for > example when giving a hand to someone in need, or responding to a request > for assistance from a colleague, etc., while at other times kusala > manifestly fails to arise despite our best 'efforts'. What would be the > explanation for this? ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Previous cultivation. Current "efforts" towards kindness can only affect our current *action*, not our current mental state. We cannot *make* ourselves feel warmth and kindness at the moment. But a lifetime or lifetimes of cultivation can transform the mind into one which typically is loving. ================================= 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) 7456 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Mike and Jon, Mike, I don't have many comments on your response as I am still trying to understand the sutta meaning. Jon, I have some questions for you. --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > > The question remaining to me is, if the Buddha taught > > 'only dukkha and the way out of dukkha', then why did > > he teach kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana? > > Off-hand I'm inclined to think that, kusala that > > doesn't lead to nibbana mayabe leads to kusala that > > DOES lead to nibbana. Maybe. > > Another answer, and this may sound trite but it's not, is that the Buddha > taught *all* realities, including even the akusala ones. Whatever the > reality, he taught how it can be known for what it is, and he taught how > it conditions, or is conditioned by, other realities. The sutta definitely mentioned akusala realities. However, the Buddha explicitly divided each of the right (kusala) factor into two: one accompanying by taints, and one without. Although it is apparent (to me) that each kusala one without taint is mentioned to be supramundane as a factor of the path, do you interpret satipatthana to be one with or without taints? > > Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > > through the discourses and the discipline, the > > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > > skilful reflections. Do you think there is a link > > between this sort of reflection and the > > path-factors-with-aasavas? > > I'm sure there is a link. Unless and until the kusala qualities have been > developed to a high degree, they cannot perform the function of subduing > the defilements. Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. I have also heard that the supramundane path factors will not rise unless one has developed the 10 perfections (parami) to the appropriate degree. If you look at the 10 parami, it is all (obviously!) about subduing defilements. However, even the paramis are subtle (do you expect othewise?). For example, I have heard that only dana for the explicit purpose of relieving defilements (attachment, stinginess, etc.) can be considered parami. Dana for the purpose of having a good rebirth or the 5-sensualities is not a parami. kom 7457 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:16pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > > If you look closely at the language of this sutta, I think the Buddha > > talks in much the same terms whether the reality under discussion is > > akusala or (one or other kind of) kusala. He leaves it very much to the > > listener to draw his own conclusions, according to the listener's > > accumulations and level of understanding. (This is another example of > > what I call descriptive rather than prescriptive language.) > > Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be descriptive > but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. I find this comment most unusual, and certainly not in accord with anything I've heard taught by Lord Buddha (or taught to me by my teachers, who have an uncanny knack for restating the Buddha's teachings as they do). For example, how, in light of this notion that "it is a mistake to think the Buddha taught paths of action" would you explain, for example, the following passage? [AN X.176 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10- 176.html]? "Now, Cunda, there are three ways in which one is made pure by bodily action, four ways in which one is made pure by verbal action, and three ways in which one is made pure by mental action. "And how is one made impure in three ways by bodily...verbal...mental action? [...] And how is one made pure in three ways by bodily...verbal...mental action? [...] ***"These, Cunda, are the ten courses of skillful action."*** [my emphasis] Sukinderpal, if you read the actual words Lord Buddha reputedly spoke to his disciples, what he says sounds an awful lot to me like ***paths of action***! (the word "courses" is, after all, a synonym for the word path!--and just to reiterate Howar'd wise reminder from another post, we're not talking about "courses of ***expectations of results***" here, just to be clear, which is a rather nasty form of grasping in & of itself) :) Then again, perhaps the the Buddha was just a horribly confused individual (all those years wandering around naked, eating a single grain of rice a day, etc., aren't exactly what many people would associate with sanity, after all; not to mention sitting like a catatonic schiziphrenic under a tree for days on end, unmoving...but I digress) and couldn't properly express himself in any meaningful way. Perhaps the Buddha was just goofing around and babbling things to confuse us all, for chuckles or something. I don't know about you, but I would consider anyone who articulated their intended meaning so poorly, who spoke words having nothing to do with their understanding, to be either a liar, a fool, or completely insane. To get down to specifics, I'm curious to examine how the notion that there are "no paths of action" can possibly be supported when the following passage is taken into wise consideration, especially given the Buddha explicitly uses words like "DEVELOP" and "PURSUE"? "And how are the seven factors of awakening developed & pursued so as to bring clear knowing & release to their culmination? There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening ... persistence as a factor of awakening ... rapture as a factor of awakening ... serenity as a factor of awakening... concentration as a factor of awakening ... equanimity as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. "This is how the seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." Khun Sukinderpal, again, what does the pair of terms "DEVELOPED AND PURSUED" mean to you? Are these merely adjectives describing something? They certainly don't fall under the category adjective in my dictionary. Rather, they both fall distinctly into the category of words we call VERBS--ACTION words, in other words. To use a little analogy. What if you went to the doctor dying of a horrible terminal illness and he simply began describing all the various wondderful qualities of a healthy body? What if he further suggested that by merely DESCRIBING what health is you'll be cured of your disease? Would you trust that physician with your life? I know I wouldn't. In fact, I'd be on the phone to the medical board asking that his license be revoked immediately for total quackery! :) :) :) Just to be perfectly clear, I think would be most helpful to examine a few more passages from the Pali Suttas: "And how are the four frames of reference developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination? "[1] On whatever occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world, on that occasion his mindfulness is steady & without lapse. When his mindfulness is steady & without lapse, then mindfulness as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Erik: Geez, there the Buddha goes AGAIN! Talking all this pointless nonsense about DEVELOPING and PURSUING. And regarding things like DEVELOPING and PURSUING ***mindfulness** even! I mean, who could possibly do such a thing!?!? :) :) :) I mean come on, Sukinderpal, what sort of quack physician must he be to think that we can POSSIBLY DEVELOP and PURSUE ANYTHING at all? Especially when we all know the SOLE cure for the terminal disease of dukkha is found in merely DESCRIBING its cessation!?!?!? :) :) :)] "[2] Remaining mindful in this way, he examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment. When he remains mindful in this way, examining, analyzing, & coming to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[3] In one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, unflagging persistence is aroused. When unflagging persistence is aroused in one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then persistence as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Erik: Now the Buddha gets REALLY wacky! Talking about things involving EFFORT, like PERSISTENCE! (viriya)! We ought to haul him up in front of the Guru board and have his license to preach Dhamma revoked outright for this sort of quackery! :) :) :)] "[4] In one whose persistence is aroused, a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises. When a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then rapture as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[5] For one who is enraptured, the body grows calm and the mind grows calm. When the body & mind of an enraptured monk grow calm, then serenity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[6] For one who is at ease -- his body calmed -- the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind of one who is at ease -- his body calmed - - becomes concentrated, then concentration as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[7] He oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity. When he oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity, equanimity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Erik: And now the Buddha's REALLY gone off the deep-end, talking about, Devas forbid, CONCENTRATION! Oh my! I can see the class-action- suit lawyers slavering already over this one! :) :) :)] [Similarly with the other three frames of reference: feelings, mind, & mental qualities.] "This is how the four frames of reference are developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination." So, Khun Sukinderpal, I am quite curious to hear how the idea that there are no paths to be developed and pursued is supported by what Lord Buddha actually taught in any way, shape, or form! Enquiring minds, as they say, want to know! :) :) :) 7458 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:22pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > sequence. > > Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is > effect, not cause. This is of course, unprovable yet or anytime soon unless you are developing arupa-jhana. The beings in the arupa planes are said to exist as mental states only, and their mental states don't have any rupa as a condition, whereas in the plane with 5-kandhas, all nama is conditioned by rupas. kom 7459 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:45pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of > > 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in your > > own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your 'Paradox' > > post - move forward.) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'll try to answer this in a few ways. An example of conventional > right effort during meditation is to initiate mindfulness and focus on the > meditation subject, to further these when already present, and to return to > these when the mind has wandered. Yes! > When not meditating, a general example is > to let go of akusala thoughts when these are present, to initiate kusala > thoughts when not present, and to further kusala thoughts when already > present. That sounds suspiciously like something the Buddha would have said :) (i.e. sammapadhana :)) > A somewhat dramatic application of right effort in daily life occurred > about 5 years ago to me. I had gone through a year of extreme tiredness, > discomfort in the lower-left abdomen, and a constant low-grade fever. Thanks for telling this story, Howard! I still recall this story so vividly from your telling me over that delicious lunch of sword-fish steak (I wonder if they may have come from aquine emanations of Manjushri just for the occasion :) :) :) at that little place nearby Columbus Circle. Mmmm... YUMMY!!! 7460 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 6:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Erik - In a message dated 8/15/01 9:46:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > Thanks for telling this story, Howard! I still recall this story so > vividly from your telling me over that delicious lunch of sword-fish > steak (I wonder if they may have come from aquine emanations of > Manjushri just for the occasion :) :) :) at that little place nearby > Columbus Circle. Mmmm... YUMMY!!! > ======================== Mmm, hmm! That was a nice afternoon. Great fish, and even better company! BTW, I agree completely with the recent post of yours about the Buddha's teaching being prescriptive and not just descriptive. OF COURSE! He taught a path of ACTION! 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) 7461 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone Dear Fenny, Thanks for sharing your background.....there are a few other Indonesians here, but not from Medan I think. I'm very, very impressed by your keen interest in the Dhamma at a relatively young age (but not the youngest here;-)) Thanks for also telling us you're female as it is easy to make mistakes;-) I'm also very glad you're following so keenly and finding the list useful. Sarah --- Fenny wrote: > Clear Day Dear Sarah and everyone in the list, > Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted on the > list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some time > (about a week) before I started posted. > I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being a > male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my tertiary > study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, starting > in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My line of > practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an admirer of > Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). > I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. 7462 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 11:22pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: Hello again, Khun Jonothan! :) > Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. I beg to differ, counsel! (please, stop looking so surprised!!! :) :) :) Sure we can "will" kusala! Or more accurately, we can use our "will" to help establish the appropriate conditions for the non-arising of abandoning of unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen; the abandoning of unskillful qualities that have already arisen; the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen, and the increase of skillful qualities that have already aerisen. For example, we can DEFINITELY "will" to sit down and "will" to endeavour to mindfully follow the in-breath and the out-breath, and when our mindfulness lapses, we can use our "will" to help bring our attention back to the breath (keeping in mind not to strain too hard while doing so, in keeping with the lute-string analogy Lord Buddha taught). These acts of "will," while not DIRECTLY "creating" skillful mental qualities, nevertheless create a far more favorable climate for wholesome mental qualities to sprout, grow, and and thrive--in this case by helping pacify the five hindrances of ill-will, sensuous desire, sloth & torper, restlessness & brooding, and doubt. That, for example, is the entire reason to perform samatha (calm abiding) meditation in the first place! In a similar way, though we can't "will" a Bodhi tree to grow from a seed we're holding in our palm, we can nevertheless find a favorable, sunny and secluded location with the appropriate soil, diligently clear that soil of any weeds, plant our seed, add fertilizer, and water our little seed every day without fail, all the while ensuring we keep our patch of soil cleared of dangerous clinging vines and creepers and other nasty hindering growths. All of this takes quite a bit of will and effort. It involves sweating and getting our hands dirty. And yet even after all this work and effort, it is still quite possible that even given all these favorable conditions, no Bodhi tree will sprout because, perhaps, we just didn't happen to have a viable seed this time around, or for some other reason we can't quite make out. But any wise gardener won't get upset over something like this; we can't force it to happen, after all, and perhaps all we need is instead to plant a better seed. At least the effort of clearing out our little patch of soil will enable us to quickly begin again right where we left off before. No matter what, though, what we CAN be assured of is that if we DON'T clear the soil of nasty clinging vines and creepers and other weeds, DON'T ever plant the seed, ignore adding nutrients in the form of fertilizer, and neglect to water it daily, that there is NO chance AT ALL we will ever live to see that seed sprout, grow, and thrive, no matter how much we may wish it to, no matter what gods we pray to, no matter how much we BELIEVE it will sprout! And consequently, all our wishing and thinking about this wonderful tree that we keep hoping and wishing for will never appear. And the reason reqwuires very little analysis to understand: it lacked one or more of the appropriate conditions for its sprouting, growth, and thriving. An in precisely because it lacked one or more of the appropriate conditions it is assured we will NEVER, EVER know the incomparable bliss of the taste of its fruit. 7463 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:57am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 11:45 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > Hi, Anders, > > I just bought the Wisdom Publications translations because they're > the most recent and widely-available. I didn't do any comparisons > with other translations. > > If you only want to buy one, I'd recommend getting the Majjhima > Nikaya first. I find it the best source for the core teachings -- > assuming that's what you want. Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover such a wide range of subjects. > I'm also getting fond of the Sutta Nipata, which is a short > collection of verses that have quite a different flavor to them than > the first four Nikayas. > > The Samyutta Nikaya has lots of miscellaneous teachings in it > covering many, many minor points -- though curiously enough this is > the only one with the Buddha's very first sermon it. > > And the Digha Nikaya, as you know, has the longer narratives. So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? 7464 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:48am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Sarah Procter Abbott Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 11:54 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > unless your name is Anders!> Well, since I do fall into that category..... :-) > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > There's a sutta which says: > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming defilements. > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming defilements." > > > > That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, as it > > retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances > > Anders, whenever the mind is referred to, I understand that cittas ( > conditioned moments of consciousness) are being referred to and indeed the > Buddha made it clear there are only 5 khandhas, not 5 khandhas and a mind. Five Kandhas and Nibbana? > back to Anders and Sarah! Well, as you did with the two venerable Ajahns, I shall take the liberty of disregarding this too. > >(and this > > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). > > Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the Mahayana Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > > Which pretty much spells Nibbana, but Kom pointed out that the translation > > as this being consciousness was dubious, although I get the impression that > > this was primarily because Nibbana as consciousness like this is mentioned > > very few places in the Pali Canon (correct me if I'm wrong here, Kom). > > B.Bodhi translates the passage as: > 'the consciousness that makes no showing, > And in becoming about to disbecome, > Not claiming being with respect to all: > that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc > > I think your comments are correct according to BB's notes. He adds, "MA takes > the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the sense > that "it can be cognized" '. Hmm, well, we enter the realm of speculation as regards to the definition of "consciousness" in this case. > Anders, I don't know any of the pali here (which probably wouldn't help > anyway), but I fail to see why this description of nibbana has anything to do > with the idea of Nivana being present in us..... Well, I would have to explain the whole Tathagatagarbha doctrine to make it really clear.... > > But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn > > Chah: > > I think I'll leave comments on his writings as I may misunderstand him. And Mun? > Now i know why i've been slow to reply to you! OK just tracked it down. I just > have the PTS translation of this with no footnotes or Pali. Haha :-) > I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading above. > > Here it says (with my notes after S.): > 'The Wayfarer dwells free, detached and released from physical body, > feeling,perception, mental factors and consciousness and released in the sense of no clinging to the 5 khandhas>....from rebirth, > decay and death ....from the passions, Bahuna, > the Wayfarer is free, detached and released, and dwells with a mind whose > barriers are broken down' kilesa eradicated, so no more akusala cittas> "The Wayfarer" as with Tathagata is of course a conventional image, but do we find support in the Sutta pitaka for the view that this conventional image does not point to an actuality (Nibbana-mind - Buddha-nature)? > I hope I have at least given an indication of why some of us say that reading > the suttas is not quite as simple as it seems and how a little understanding of > abhidhamma comes into play here. Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am uncertain as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I think, too). > Anders, I really appreciate your keen interest and Tipitaka citations. I look > forward to more. Well, I must say I find this discussion fascinating. I am sorry for being so late to reply to all messages, but I have been quite busy recently. School started just this week, so my interaction on this forum might be somewhat limited in the near future. 7465 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:27 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > Anders > > Just a question here to clarify, please. > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > ----- Original > Message ----- > > From: > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:33 PM > > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > > > > > > > Hi, Anders - > > > > That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my > > body > > > > calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath > > because > > > > of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes > > extremely > > faint > > > > after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and > > hence > > my > > > > attention wanders. > > > > > > > > Anyone got any advice? > > > ============================== > > > The fact that the breath becomes faint and subtle *is* a > > problem, > > but > > > also a great opportunity. As the breath sensation fades, there must be > > a > > > corresponding strengthening of energy, mindfulness, and concentration > > > (directed by will) in order to "stay in touch", and this will take the > > mind > > > to a deeper and stronger levels. This becomes easier to carry out the > > longer > > > and more consistently one practices. > > > > Wow, thanks a lot. Just that change of perspective is something I find > > quite > > illuminating. > > When you talk about meditation on breath, do you mean breath as object of > the development of samatha or of vipassana? ('Meditation' is such a vague > term, don't you find?) Samatha. That's what I feel I need to develop right now. 7466 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:21am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 6:03 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > Again, there is never a tagatha in the sense of identification or self. The > conventional buddha was in reality just a stream of kandhas that end > when there are no more conditions for the kandhas to arise. Hmmm, you got a sutta to prove it? :-) 7467 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:55am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 3:57 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > > I'd say that from a Samatha perspective, it's kusala (not much, but a > > little), but from the perspective of Vipassana, it's akusula. > > Perhaps you refer to the concentration aspect, when you say kusala from a > samatha perspective? Concentration can be either kusala or akusala -- it > is not intrinsically one or the other. Unless one knows by direct > experience the characteristics of kusala and akusala, it would not be > possible to say for sure in any particular case. However, we do know that > only certain objects of concentration are conducive to calm (samatha). > These include the body, in its repulsive aspect(!). Oh, when I said Kusala from the Samatha perspective, I just meant conduicive to concentration. I dodn't think of "right objects". In that case, I guess it's akusala anyhow. > Happy finger-watching! Haha, thanks! 7468 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:09am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Diamond Sutra ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > Hi, Anders - ================================ > If you would like to post parts of that sutra so that we and others might discuss it from various vantage points, especially that of Theravada, I would be very happy to participate. (David Kalupahana, an academic who is a Theravadin is much appreciative of this sutra and others from the Perfcion of Wisdom writings.) I would be delighted (provided it's not off-topic?), as this is also my favourite sutra. Two passages I would like quote in this regard. The first is more in relation to the discussion about the existence or non-existence of the Tathagata, which some of us has been discussing recently (translation: Patton): "If by form one looks for the Tathàgata Or by the sound of the voice seeks me, This person walks the wrong path And is unable to see the Tathàgata." I think someone mentioned that there never really was a Tathagata in the first place, and that this is only a conventional term for the impermanent kandhas we know as the Buddha. Yet this passage seems to indicate otherwise... Any suggestions? The other one I would like to quote, is the following, in relation to Buddhist practises in the Pali Canon: "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odors, tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has an abode, then it would be the non-abode." How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded in the Pali Canon? 7469 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:24am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana ----- Original Message ----- From: Fenny Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 8:02 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, > This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. Enjoy. > > ==================================== > > Right View-The Place of Coolness > > By Ajahn Chah Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant Theravada one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this century. No modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. 7470 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:19am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > > Hi Robert E. > > As I am the one the one who posted Ajahn Bramavamso, I would suggest you to > read more of his texts as well. Actually, it was me, but feel free to take credits... :-) 7471 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:52am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 3:55 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:32 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > >Thank you for explaining the (not yours) view point. Why do we say the > tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't= > exist? > > Nibbana? >So, you are saying that you think we understand that the only thing that exists in Nibbana, and not all the kandhas? Your guess is as good as mine ;-) 7472 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:21am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:40 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > Cybele > > Thanks for your comments. > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > Dear Jon > > Dear Robert E. > > > > > > > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > > > > > >that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. > > > > > >In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > contain > > >statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > >ancient commentators, so one might want to consider things carefully. > > >Only by one's own study and investigation over a long period of time > > can > > >one learn to discriminate. > > > > > >Jon > > > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind carefully > > and > > therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the > > ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different > > approaches and interpretations. > > I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any > source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. > > But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that > are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as > the teachings? > > > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. > > On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on > matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true > dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things > on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured > by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. > > The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its > commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in > relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only > the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make > the most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the > actual teachings. well, could you explain how Ajahn Brahms contradicts the commentaries? 7473 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:31am Subject: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Hi, all. I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 7474 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 6:15am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover such a wide range of > subjects. > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? Hi, Anders, I wouldn't say the Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. It just depends what you want. Certainly the Majjhima has the most comprehensive coverage of the core teachings. But if you like Zen, you might appreciate the Sutta Nipata, especially the verses in the fourth section (A.t.thkavaggo). Derek. 7475 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:38am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders > > >(and this > > > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > > > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). > > > > Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. > >Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the Mahayana >Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to >this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. You are too smart to don't have yet fully realized that here only Tipitaka is recognized as genuine teachings and reliable source. Refer to my recent discussion with Jon. They stick to Abhiddhamma in Pali Canon version therefore obviously they don't regard Mahayana youngish viking. :-))) By the way, transferring my mails to Outlook I lost the links you gave me off list; if you still have the mails, could you resend them to me please or at least the links. Thank you very much, I have messed up my mails with this syncronization in Outlook. Gassho Cybele 7476 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:44am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Sweetheart > > Hi Robert E. > > > > As I am the one the one who posted Ajahn Bramavamso, I would suggest you >to > > read more of his texts as well. > >Actually, it was me, but feel free to take credits... :-) Really? I thought it was one of the texts I sent and indeed have been rebuked because it was too long and the moderators prefer only the link for access. Are you sure? Well then I posted the very same thing on d-l and intended to post here as well...what a syncronism! Sorry I disclaim the credit then; you are the only heretic this time. :-( Love Cybele 7477 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:50am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Anders Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu. Cybele > > Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, > > This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. >Enjoy. > > > > ==================================== > > > > Right View-The Place of Coolness > > By Ajahn Chah > > >Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant Theravada >one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this century. No >modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. > 7478 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 8:04am Subject: Re: Modern masters (was Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant Theravada > one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this century. No > modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. Well, that may be true, but two contemporary Zen monks I've enjoyed reading about are Kyudo Roshi (as described in Lawrence Shainberg's book, "Ambvivalent Zen"), and Ta Tsung (whom I know only from the article "Keep Sweeping" in Tricycle magazine for Winter 1996). Derek. 7479 From: Herman Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 9:18am Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom, The beings in the arupa plane are, of course, also unprovable. And there is a distinct lack of devas lighting up my grove at night :-) The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as object, though I tend to ignore it. Regards Herman --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > > sequence. > > > > Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is > > effect, not cause. > > This is of course, unprovable yet or anytime soon unless you are > developing arupa-jhana. The beings in the arupa planes are said to exist > as mental states only, and their mental states don't have any rupa as a > condition, whereas in the plane with 5-kandhas, all nama is conditioned by > rupas. > > kom 7480 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 9:54am Subject: Abhidhamma and the Termination of Suffering --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am uncertain > as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once > commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and > many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I > think, too). Anders, the more I study of the Abhidhamma, the more my opinion is finding harmony with the words of these great masters like Ajahn Chah, and I find my previous enthusiasm for the Abhidamma waning by the day. Of course, not the Abhidharmakosa--which details very many important aspects of the Bodhisattva path I have to learn more about. I am finding that the Abhidhamma of the Pali Canon is engendering interpretations in many that are quite remote from the actual meanings and teachings the Buddha gave during his forty-five year ministry in this sasana. While I do not question the Abhidhamma as the word of the Buddha, and I find it theoretically sound and technically correct, it appears that the study of this system alone-- particularly when divorced from the words Lord Buddha spoke in the Suttas and the practice of directed meditation--has little or no bearing on actually helping suffering sentient beings bring that suffering to complete and total cessation. This is not to say at all I'm giving up on my Abhidhamma studies. To the contrary. I haev found the theoretical underpinnings of the Dhamma elaborated in the Abhidhamma Pitaka to be incredibly helpful aids for one whose aim is to act as translator (or possibly even Dhamma-instructor in the kalyana-mitrata sense) of Buddhist texts, and is therefore something I still consider an indispensible aspect of my own pariyatti (study). However, as a means to the cessation of sufering, the Abhidhamma (not to mention the commentaries) taken by itself, without being placed in the proper context of the original words spoken by Lord Buddha directly to his disciples, appears to me more and more to be leading only to the establishment of the very worst enemy of true insight- wisdom: "a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views." And as Lord Buddha said in the Sabbasava Sutta: "Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair. He is not freed from suffering, I say." "The well-taught noble disciple...discerns what ideas are fit for attention, and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention, and attends instead to ideas fit for attention...He attends appropriately, This is stress...This is the origin of stress...This is the cessation of stress...This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts and practices." It is the Suttas--the oh-so simple and direct words of the Buddha-- that for me, anyway, I find most clearly and succinctly articulate the SOLE intent of ALL of Lord Buddha's teachings: "dukkham ceva pannapemi, dukkhassa ca nirodham" (suffering and the end of suffering), whis is specifically the reason the Buddha arose in this sasana at all, and for no other reason than this. 7481 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 0:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Herman You got me concerned... >> >The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as >object, though I tend to ignore it. > I cannot even see the tip of my nose, I tried and makes me fee dizzy. It means that I cannot follow the path? Or that you have a long nose? :-) Can you smile... I can smile a lot at least but I cannot see my smile - is it serious? Please advice. Love Cybele 7482 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 1:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone Sarah & Fenny, This kind of interest to Dhamma - we here call in Sinhala "Sansara Puruddha". Sansara is your past lives and Puruddha is "habbits". Nice to know you Fenny... ~mettha Ranil >From: Sarah >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:05:26 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Fenny, > >Thanks for sharing your background.....there are a few other Indonesians >here, >but not from Medan I think. > >I'm very, very impressed by your keen interest in the Dhamma at a >relatively >young age (but not the youngest here;-)) > >Thanks for also telling us you're female as it is easy to make >mistakes;-) > >I'm also very glad you're following so keenly and finding the list useful. > >Sarah > >--- Fenny wrote: > Clear Day Dear Sarah and >everyone in the list, > > Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted >on the > > list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some >time > > (about a week) before I started posted. > > I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being >a > > male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my >tertiary > > study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, >starting > > in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My line of > > practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an >admirer of > > Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). > > I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. > > > > 7483 From: Herman Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:40pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Cybele, As long as one understands that a smile is nothing more than facial muscles tensed in a particular fashion, nothing will be serious :-) But it's interesting how smiling can alter the mood. Unless you're an arahant, of course, but you are in no danger of that for a couple of aeons yet :-) Now be good and leave those nice viking boys to their Dhamma :-))))) Those extra )))'s are my double and triple chins, by the way. Love Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > Herman > > You got me concerned... > > >> > >The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as > >object, though I tend to ignore it. > > > > I cannot even see the tip of my nose, I tried and makes me fee dizzy. > It means that I cannot follow the path? > Or that you have a long nose? :-) > Can you smile... I can smile a lot at least but I cannot see my smile - is > it serious? > Please advice. > > Love > > Cybele 7484 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Erik, I hope you don't mind that I do not answer your mail since we already discussed this in person just a couple of hours ago. Feeling somewhat exhausted coming back from the income tax people. Our difference I think is not so much on whether there need to be any kind of development, but on when, where and how that development can take place. In other words I understand the verb 'to do' more like meaning 'to be and to understand'. See you on saturday at the foundation. May all grow in wisdom. Sukin. Erik wrote: > --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > > Dear Jonothan, > > 7485 From: Herman Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:20pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Erik, you are undoubtedly one of the great Danes :-). I am not much given to saying sadhu, sadhu, sadhu, but there is little reason to do otherwise here. Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu !!!!!!!!!!!!!! When the lute string resonates, let it resonate....... Heartfelt congrats on your engagement. There are hearts breaking all over the net :-) Herman --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hello again, Khun Jonothan! :) > > > Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even > > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. > > I beg to differ, counsel! (please, stop looking so > surprised!!! :) :) :) > > Sure we can "will" kusala! Or more accurately, we can use our "will" > to help establish the appropriate conditions for the non-arising of > abandoning of unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen; the > abandoning of unskillful qualities that have already arisen; the > arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen, and the > increase of skillful qualities that have already aerisen. > > For example, we can DEFINITELY "will" to sit down and "will" to > endeavour to mindfully follow the in-breath and the out-breath, and > when our mindfulness lapses, we can use our "will" to help bring our > attention back to the breath (keeping in mind not to strain too hard > while doing so, in keeping with the lute-string analogy Lord Buddha > taught). > > These acts of "will," while not DIRECTLY "creating" skillful mental > qualities, nevertheless create a far more favorable climate for > wholesome mental qualities to sprout, grow, and and thrive--in this > case by helping pacify the five hindrances of ill-will, sensuous > desire, sloth & torper, restlessness & brooding, and doubt. That, for > example, is the entire reason to perform samatha (calm abiding) > meditation in the first place! > > In a similar way, though we can't "will" a Bodhi tree to grow from a > seed we're holding in our palm, we can nevertheless find a favorable, > sunny and secluded location with the appropriate soil, diligently > clear that soil of any weeds, plant our seed, add fertilizer, and > water our little seed every day without fail, all the while ensuring > we keep our patch of soil cleared of dangerous clinging vines and > creepers and other nasty hindering growths. > > All of this takes quite a bit of will and effort. It involves > sweating and getting our hands dirty. And yet even after all this > work and effort, it is still quite possible that even given all these > favorable conditions, no Bodhi tree will sprout because, perhaps, we > just didn't happen to have a viable seed this time around, or for > some other reason we can't quite make out. But any wise gardener > won't get upset over something like this; we can't force it to > happen, after all, and perhaps all we need is instead to plant a > better seed. At least the effort of clearing out our little patch of > soil will enable us to quickly begin again right where we left off > before. > > No matter what, though, what we CAN be assured of is that if we DON'T > clear the soil of nasty clinging vines and creepers and other weeds, > DON'T ever plant the seed, ignore adding nutrients in the form of > fertilizer, and neglect to water it daily, that there is NO chance AT > ALL we will ever live to see that seed sprout, grow, and thrive, no > matter how much we may wish it to, no matter what gods we pray to, no > matter how much we BELIEVE it will sprout! > > And consequently, all our wishing and thinking about this wonderful > tree that we keep hoping and wishing for will never appear. And the > reason reqwuires very little analysis to understand: it lacked one or > more of the appropriate conditions for its sprouting, growth, and > thriving. An in precisely because it lacked one or more of the > appropriate conditions it is assured we will NEVER, EVER know the > incomparable bliss of the taste of its fruit. 7486 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 9:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Rob. E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Jon, > When you say that the citta that experiences nibbana is 'supramundane', > this means > to me that it is a consciousness transcendent to worldy conditions. In > other > words, would supernatural be an equivalent term? Well I'm not aware of the term 'supernatural' being used to describe the citta that experiences nibbana. And it is nibbana, not the citta that experiences it, that is said to be the transcendent reality. The best I can do is give you following from the summarised commentary of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha (from the Bhikkhu Bodhi/Narada translation). It describes at p. 66 supramundane consciousness (lokuttaracitta) as the consciousness that "pertains to the process of transcending (uttara) the world (loka)". (This doesn't seem to me to be quite the same as saying that the consciousness itself transcends the world.) It also explains (p. 31) that "world" in this context means not the world of beings or the physical universe but rather "the world of formations (sankharaloka), that is, all mundane phenomena included within the five aggregates of clinging". It is because the consciousness directly accomplishes the realisation of nibbana, which itself "transcends the world of conditioned things" that it is called lokkutaracitta, supramundane consciousness. > If the consciousness is beyond earthly conditions, it would certainly > get me > closer to understanding how it could apprehend Nibbana. Well it depends what you mean here by "earthly conditions". It really has nothing to do with this world, except of course to the extent that it arises in a being who inhabits this world. To borrow from another context, in this world but not of it! Jon 7487 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Satipatthana Sutta and the Hindrances Joshua (and Anders) --- Joshua wrote: > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > contain > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > ancient commentators, > > Could you give some examples? Here is the second example (Anders, the first appears under the subject "Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries" as post #7429 in the archives). Once again, let me say that I am not questioning the personal views of the author--simply commenting on the article taken at its face value, as any reader might see it. The Hindrances The articles suggests, I think, that it is not possible to develop mindfulness of any useful degree unless and until the Hindrances have been abandoned (which, it is said, is to be achieved by the attainment of jhana) To my reading, the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary suggest otherwise In the sutta, the hindrances themselves are given as an objects of contemplation Under the section on 'Mental Objects', it says (p. 22) -- "And how does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental objects? Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances. How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances? Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I have sensuality' … [and so on for the other hindrances]". Unless the hindrances are arising and appearing as actual lobha or dosa, a person cannot "know with [direct] understanding" that he has sensuality (attachment). It is not a matter of somehow recollecting the hindrances from a previous (pre-abandonment) occasion; awareness can only take as its object a reality that appears at the same moment as the awareness itself. As the commentary explains (p. 129), the hindrances are actually *laid hold of* by awareness: "In this way the bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects, by laying hold of the five hindrances amongst the mental objects of his own mind …" This can only occur if the hindrances are present and arising. This idea about the need to suppress the hindrances is often based on the passages from the texts which say that the hindrances have the function of 'weakening insight' or 'concealing reality'. Therefore, it is reasoned, they must be subdued in order for awareness to be developed. While this may sound 'logical', it is not how things are, according to the commentary. The com. explains that the reason the hindrances arise in the first place is *unwise attention to the object* and that, by the same token, at any moment of *wise attention to an object*, the hindrances are not present. Here is what the commentary says on this point with regard to the first hindrance (p. 119)-- "In connection with the hindrances it must be known that the hindrance of sensuality arises because of wrong reflection on an object that is sensuously agreeable … Sense-desire arises when wrong reflection occurs plentifully… Sense-desire is cast out, indeed, with right reflection on a sensuously inauspicious object. … When there is much right reflection on the sensuously inauspicious object, sense-desire is knocked out." A similar explanation is given for each of the other 4 hindrances-- with wrong reflection and right reflection playing the same crucial roles. I think that a careful study of the commentaries can be helpful, and is probably necessary, if one wants to understand the suttas properly, and can be useful when considering others' ideas or teachings. Jon 7488 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:22pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Herman, Do you not at all accept the possibility that, although something is unproveable to you now, that it is the way it is. I am not talking about faith, but just the acceptance of the possibility that something is there when you haven't experienced it, or even if you *don't* believe in it. I did give you an advanced warning about the immediate *unprovability* of that concept... ;-) I was only relating that this is an accepted Theravadin view. You can prove it of course, by developing arupa jhana, and when you die, you can see if you re-appear in an arupa world... I am curious about something. You mentioned in the past that you are a student of reality, not really a Buddhist who places great faith in the Buddha's words. How else do you expand your learning of realities besides being associated with Buddhists who place great emphasis (or a few of them, anyway) on the Buddha's words? Have you learned anything (in and out of Buddhisms) recently that you would like to share? kom ps: I haven't seen any devas either, although if I see one in this life, I most likely would interpret it as something else except for devas. --- Herman wrote: > Dear Kom, > > The beings in the arupa plane are, of course, also unprovable. And > there is a distinct lack of devas lighting up my grove at night :-) > > The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as > object, though I tend to ignore it. > > Regards > > > Herman 7489 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:28pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? The digha has very detailed explanation whereas the Majhimas covers a more varieties of topics. Detail is good, and variety is good. Get both! The digha definitely did cover (in details) the topics on Annihilationism, = Eternalism, and other wrong views. ;-) kom 7490 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:30am Subject: Undesirable objects Dear Betty, I greatly appreciate your report about the vipaka experienced and your wise consideration of the events. Those are helpful reminders. I also had unpleasant vipaka, there were some unpleasant and blunt words, that can happen. But still this was a reminder for me not to be neglectful as to sati and then we can even be grateful to the person who uttered them. When I read your post I just had a similar experience. Thank you, looking forward for more. Nina. 7491 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:47am Subject: Loving kindness to you Hi Erik Please let me know something and John is willing to help me as usual and will send the money with Western Union to get there faster, he is ready to do it anytime. I would have refunded you anyway; I am collecting money selling stuff and rearranging my life. Thank you for your kind intentions even if you couldn't be able to accomplish them. Conditions are impermanent. Thank you for your support when I was in full crisis, it helped to lift up my morale and your affection has been comforting. May all beings be happy. May all live in safety and joy. All living beings, whether weak or strong, tall, stout, medium or short, seen or unseen, near or distant, born or to be born, may they all be happy. Let no one deceive another or despise any being in any state, let none by anger or hatred wish harm to another. As a mother watches over her child, willing to risk her own life to protect her only child, so with boundless heart should one cherish all living beings, suffusing the whole world with unobstructed loving kindness. With sincere love Cybele 7492 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:58am Subject: Thousands of excuses to everybody and Erik in particular Dear Erik Dear group I am extremely sorry for my mistake. Mea culpa, I am embarrassed. So sorry. I just sent a personal mail to Erik in the list, I got confused because I took one mail at random to copy his address afterwards and I forgot and clicked before realizing it. Tried to stop but it was too late. Erik forgive my unmindfulness, using outlook now I get confused, I am not familiar with it and could not abort the message on time. Sorry everybody for the misplaced message. I am so ashamed, want to dig a hole and put my head inside. Cybele >From: Jonothan Abbott >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Bruce's question (Ken) >Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:13:29 +0800 (CST) > >Ken > >Thanks for your post and my apologies for being slow in replying. I am >behind on the messages from last week, and am just starting to catch up. > >--- Ken 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!" > >Yes, wouldn't we all! But as Kom's reply to you made clear, it's the same >path for everyone and there's no short cut. We on this list are very >fortunate to have this goal in common and so hopefully can be of support >to each other in this endeavour. > > > 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. > >Thanks for your kind and encouraging words. There is I hope no chance of >ever getting tired of going over the same ground, since if there is one >thing I have come to realise it is that one never gets beyond needing to >be reminded again and again of the same basic truths -- that it is the >reality appearing at the present moment that is to be known, that reality >and nothing else. > >Jon > > 7493 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 11:05am Subject: Re: Undesirable objects and people --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Betty, I greatly appreciate your report about the vipaka experienced > and your wise consideration of the events. Those are helpful reminders. I > also had unpleasant vipaka, there were some unpleasant and blunt words, that > can happen. But still this was a reminder for me not to be neglectful as to > sati and then we can even be grateful to the person who uttered them. When I > read your post I just had a similar experience. Thank you, looking forward I truly appreciate your wisd post, Nina. Whnever I hear unlpeasant or blunt words--particularly related to the Dhamma, I always prefer to reflect on this passage from the Suttas: "Regard him as one who points out treasure, the wise one who seeing your faults rebukes you. Stay with this sort of sage. For the one who stays with a sage of this sort, things get better, not worse." There are even more specicific passages in this vein in Master Shantideva's "Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life in the chapter dealign with the Perfection of Patience. However, of all the teachings in this vein, my favorite of all is the "Eight Verses in Mind Training" composed by the eleventh Century Tibetan Geshe Langri Tangpa: "With a determination to accomplish The highest welfare for all sentient beings Who surpass even a wish-granting jewel I will learn to hold them supremely dear. "Whenever I associate with others I will learn To think of myself as the lowest among all And respectfully hold others to be supreme From the very depths of my heart. "In all actions I will learn to search into my mind And as soon as an afflictive emotion arises Endangering myself and others Will firmly face and avert it. "I will learn to cherish beings of bad nature And those oppressed by strong sins and suffering As if I had found a precious Treasure very difficult to find. "When others out of jealousy treat me badly With abuse, slander, and so on, I will learn to take on all loss, And offer victory to them. "When one whom I have benefitted with great hope Unreasonably hurts me very badly, I will learn to view that person As an excellent spiritual guide. "In short, I will learn to offer to everyone without exception All help and happiness directly and indirectly And respectfully take upon myself All harm and suffering of my mothers. "I will learn to keep all these practices Undefiled by the stains of the eight worldly concerns And by understanding all phenomena are like illusions Be released from the bondage of attachment." *** I am also including a correspondence to a sangha friend back in New Jersey I wrote her yesterday on precisely this matter, relating my story of how my former business partners in a company we co-founded left me with an enormous debt (after raking in tens of millions of dollars for themselves) and treated me with great, or what appeared to me at that time, disregard, derision, even cruelty: As Master Shantideva has said very clearly in the "Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life" in his verses on the Perfection of Patience: "there is no evil equal to anger; and no virtue equal to patience." The illustrious and supremely holy Je Tsongkhapa further noted that "a single moment of anger can destroy an entire lifetime of virtue." When I took Geshe Michael's [Roach] class on Lojong--specifically based on Geshe Langri Tangpa's "Mind Training in Eight Verses" (which can be found in Rinpoche's "The Mahayana Essence of Lojong"), I remember him saying "this practice may sound so very easy on the surface, but I assure you, it is THE hardest practice you will EVER do!" And you know what? Geshe Michael was, as always, 100% on the money on this one! M., I had to meditate on those verses CAREFULLY, over and over again, specifically regarding this situation. Beginning with this all-important verse: "I will learn to cherish beings of bad nature And those oppressed by strong sins and suffering As if I had found a precious Treasure very difficult to find. " I had no choice, M., but to meditate and reflect so very carefully on this, and these versed were SO HARD and yet, I also knew that they are 100% right, no matter how unpleasant they were to consider at that time. Because I have never had any "enemies" in this life so seemingly evil and mean-spirited as the "enemies" who had appeared to me in the guise of my two former business partners. After careful meditation on this verse, I began a long and careful consideration and meditation on the following verse, which is even more important: "When others out of jealousy treat me badly With abuse, slander, and so on, I will learn to take on all loss, And offer victory to them. " And it was the meditation on this verse that made it perfectly clear that if there were ever an opportunity to TRULY put my holy lama's instructions into practice, THIS WAS IT. And by carefully meditating and reflecting on these verses, over and over again (and you must trust me when I say this was THE most difficult practice I've EVER had to do), one night I had a dream. And in that dream, I saw my former business partners not as these vengeful, hateful beings bent on my destruction, but as my holy spiritual guides, my very most precious friends, the very rarest treasures! *** Therre is much more to this story I cannot relate publicly. Suffice it to say that it is ONLY due to the kindness of these holy spiritual guides who appeared in the guise of my enmies that I was able to terminate the worst and coarsest of my afflictions of ill-will, in particular. 7494 From: Victor Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:24pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik > > Are you a confluence of continuous conditions > > resulting from a very > > great number of conditions with nearly identical > > 'histories'? Are > > you a kind of dancing image resulting from the > > present manifestations > > of these conditions? > > Yes--as I see it, that's what 'I' always is. "I am a confluence of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of conditions with nearly identical 'histories'" is a personality view. So is "I am a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manisfestations of these conditions." Metta, Victor 7495 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thousands of excuses to everybody and Erik in particular Dear Cybele, --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Erik > Dear group > > I am extremely sorry for my mistake. > Mea culpa, I am embarrassed. So sorry. Don't be too hard on yourself! We all make mistakes and some (read me for one) make more internet mistakes than others;-)) Everyone knows you didn't intend any harm or discomfort. I think it was before you joined dsg that for what seemed quite a while (to me anyway) my server was sending out double messages of everything I wrote. Each time the 'double' appeared, I felt embarrassed too, but occasionally there was a little awareness of the dosa (aversion) at that time as yet another conditioned reality. When we're feeling embarrased, we're just accumulating more dosa..so useless;-)) Sympathizing! Sarah 7496 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 2:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Jackal suffering from mange... Dear Binh, --- Binh A wrote: Of course there can be discontent with and without wrong > > view, but I like the examples of blaming the companions, moods, > > place, food, weather and this or that for our problems and also > > the story about the Jackal. > > > > Can someone give me a sutta reference for this story? > > > BA: Perhaps it was taken from this story in Samyutta Nikaya: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn17-8.html > Thanks for the reference and reminders of 'how cruel gains, offerings, & fame are: a harsh, bitter obstacle to the attainment of the unexcelled rest from bondage'. Binh, I'm glad to see you're following here on dsg and appreciate the references you give from time to time. I hope we can encourage you to join the discussions from time to time too! As I've mentioned before, I appreciate the user-friendly style and tremendous work you've put into your website here: BuddhaSasana A Buddhist page by Binh Anson of English books & Suttas http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm dsgmods Edit Delete Cut Nina, you may not know that 'Abhidhamma in DL' is on this website too. Thanks, Binh, Sarah 7497 From: Bruce Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 5:04pm Subject: thanks to everyone i just wanted to drop a note of thanks to all of you i met in bkk...sarah, jon, sukin, betty, robert once again, amara, erik, and kevin....everyone was so very kind and so dedicated to understanding what's-really-happening....and my sincerest apologies to several others, for whose names my brain doesn't seem to have dns entry at the moment.... the conversations were lively, though i'd liked to have heard khun sujin speak more at length....really, though, only one thing she said has remained w/me: "but what is being experienced right now?" i spent my last week in bkk at wat mahathat w/my teacher Bhante Vidhuro....meditating!....time well spent: i know now that for me, i need a break -- a very long break -- from reading others' discussions and intellectualizations about, and attempts at teaching and at learning **about** the Dhamma...."what is being experienced right now" seems, to this little worldling, to be more than enough, maybe even precisely just enough.... mettacittena bruce 7498 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 6:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries Teng Kee Another of your brief but provocative posts! Sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I follow your meaning. I would like to check out the Com. myself before making any comment. Grateful if you could you please let me know: -- whereabouts in the Com. (and in reference to exactly which section of the sutta) the passage in question appears -- whether the passage is included in Soma Thera's (or some other) English translation--if so, a page reference would be much appreciated. Thanks Jon --- Ong Teng Kee wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > You said any 4 objects can be done for anyone.Please beware that com > said > kaya and vedana for samathayanika /craving people but citta and dhamma > for > sukkhavipassaka /viewing people. > > > >From: Jonothan Abbott > > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its > commentaries > >Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:30:39 +0800 (CST) > > > >Joshua > > > >--- Joshua wrote: > > > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > > contain > > > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by > the > > > > ancient commentators, > > > > > > Could you give some examples? > > > >I will give one or two examples of what I had in mind. With this > >reservation, however: I do not mean to be questioning the personal > views > >of the author. I am simply commenting on the article taken at its face > >value, as any reader might see it. > > > >With that caveat, I will give one example of a difference of detail and > >one of 'doctrine', both of which can be discussed from a reading of the > >Satipatthana Sutta itself or its commentary, as translated by Soma > Thera > >in 'The Way of Mindfulness' (page numbers below are to this book). > > > >Here is the matter of detail. > > > >The description of the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness > >The article describes the four Foundations/Focuses of Mindfulness as > "your > >own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind > >consciousness and the objects of the mind". > > > >In the Satipatthana Sutta, the first Foundation of Mindfulness, usually > >referred to as 'Contemplation of the Body', is not limited to one's own > >body, but include another's body as well. Each of the several aspects > of > >contemplation of the body (breathing, the modes of deportment, the 4 > kinds > >of clear comprehension, repulsiveness of the body, the modes of > >materiality, and the 9 cemetery contemplations) concludes with the > passage > >-- > > > >"Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he > lives > >contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives > contemplating > >the body in the body internally and externally." > > > >The commentary to the section on breathing explains (p.51) that this > >refers to contemplation of the body in one's own 'respiration-body', in > >another's 'respiration-body' or at one time in one's own and at > another > >in another's 'respiration-body'. A similar comment is made after each > of > >the other sections. > > > >There is quite a difference between one's own body as object of > >contemplation and one's own or another's body as object of > contemplation > >(especially when it comes to breath!). The wrong understanding could, > for > >example, lead one to the idea that this contemplation is best > 'practised' > >in solitude, an idea that is not supported by a reading of the sutta as > a > >whole. > > > >In fact, although the section on contemplation on the body in the sutta > >talks in term of different bodily postures, activities, cemetery > >contemplations etc (ie. in terms of conventional situations), the > >underlying meaning according to the commentary is all rupa-dhammas, the > >dhammas that comprise the first khandha. Indeed, the 4 Foundations > >between them refer to all the 5 khandhas (ie all paramattha dhammas > that > >are subject to clinging). The commentary says on this (p. 119) -- > > > >"In the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of > >corporeality or materiality was spoken of by the Master; > >in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of > >feeling; > >in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of > >consciousness; > >and now [ie. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold > of > >the aggregates of perception and formations, …". > > > >The rupa-kkhandha includes of course not only the rupas that we take > for > >our own body, but all rupas that are experienced through the various > >doorways. Most importantly, it refers to realities that are arising at > >the present moment, not at any other time. > > > >It is not necessary to 'choose' one or other of the 4 Foundations as > the > >focus for contemplation. If there is awareness of any reality > appearing > >at the present moment, that awareness is a moment of the development of > >(one or other of) the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness as taught in the > >Satipatthana Sutta. > > > >I hope this has given some idea of how careful we should be in taking > >parts of suttas at their face value, without reference to the whole > sutta > >and its commentaries. > > > >Jon > > > >PS This post turned out longer than expected! I will mention the > >'doctrinal' issue in a separate post. > > > > 7499 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 6:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thanks to everyone Dear Bruce, Good to hear from you..I was wondering whether you had returned to Japan.. It must have been quite an 'intense' 3 weeks of dhamma all in all and your teaching and life in Japan will probably seem like a holiday;-)) We really enjoyed meeting you (seems ages ago now!) and your very sincere and keen interest in dhamma....You were really picking up the 'essence' of what Khun Sujin was saying and I'm quite sure it'll be helpful in your ordinary life. I know just what you mean about live discussions or wishing you'd heard more of Khun Sujin.....we get a bit spoilt here in terms of being able to 'focus' on posts we're interested in and zap through others more speedily;-))) I'm glad you had a good week at Wat Mahathat too. I also understand the need for a break from the 'talk'.....I find the same too, which is why I like swimming or yoga or hiking....perhaps my 'alternative meditations' and often times for reflecting or even sati then. Talking of which, I've just finished teaching and it's time for my Tai Chi class.... Keep in touch, Best wishes, Sarah p.s I think it was Ivan, not Kevin --- Bruce wrote: > i just wanted to drop a note of thanks to all of you i met in > bkk...sarah, jon, sukin, betty, robert once again, amara, erik, > and kevin....everyone was so very kind and so dedicated to > understanding what's-really-happening....and my sincerest apologies to > several others, for whose names my brain doesn't seem to have dns > entry at the moment.... > > the conversations were lively, though i'd liked to have heard khun > sujin speak more at length....really, though, only one thing she said > has remained w/me: "but what is being experienced right now?" > > i spent my last week in bkk at wat mahathat w/my teacher Bhante > Vidhuro....meditating!....time well spent: i know now that for me, i > need a break -- a very long break -- from reading others' discussions > and intellectualizations about, and attempts at teaching and at > learning **about** the Dhamma...."what is being experienced right now" > seems, to this little worldling, to be more than enough, maybe even > precisely just enough.... > 7500 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:46pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover such a wide range of > > subjects. > > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? > > Hi, Anders, > > I wouldn't say the Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. It just > depends what you want. Certainly the Majjhima has the most > comprehensive coverage of the core teachings. But if you like Zen, > you might appreciate the Sutta Nipata, especially the verses in the > fourth section (A.t.thkavaggo). Thank you, Derek. 7501 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > You are too smart to don't have yet fully realized that here only Tipitaka > is recognized as genuine teachings and reliable source. > Refer to my recent discussion with Jon. They stick to Abhiddhamma in Pali > Canon version therefore obviously they don't regard Mahayana youngish > viking. :-))) Well, that's just a question I would like to see answered, as it would make things a lot easier. > By the way, transferring my mails to Outlook I lost the links you gave me > off list; if you still have the mails, could you resend them to me please or > at least the links. Thank you very much, I have messed up my mails with this > syncronization in Outlook. Damn, I think I lost it myself too. Let me get back to you later this week off-list. 7502 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: Modern masters (was Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant > Theravada > > one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this > century. No > > modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. > > Well, that may be true, but two contemporary Zen monks I've enjoyed > reading about are Kyudo Roshi (as described in Lawrence Shainberg's > book, "Ambvivalent Zen"), and Ta Tsung (whom I know only from the > article "Keep Sweeping" in Tricycle magazine for Winter 1996). There are certainly some fascinating Zen master out there as well, I'll grant that. But I don't think we'll see much of the brilliance of the old masters of the T'ang dynasty anymore. 7503 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:51pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta and the Hindrances --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Joshua (and Anders) > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > contain > > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > > ancient commentators, > > > > Could you give some examples? > > Here is the second example (Anders, the first appears under the subject > "Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries" as post #7429 in the archives). > Once again, let me say that I am not questioning the personal views of the > author--simply commenting on the article taken at its face value, as any > reader might see it. > > The Hindrances > The articles suggests, I think, that it is not possible to develop > mindfulness of any useful degree unless and until the Hindrances have been > abandoned (which, it is said, is to be achieved by the attainment of > jhana) Hmm, as I read it, it just says that if one wants the guarantee of the Buddha, one needs to do Satipatthana trhough Jhana. > To my reading, the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary suggest otherwise > In the sutta, the hindrances themselves are given as an objects of > contemplation Under the section on 'Mental Objects', it says (p. 22) -- > > "And how does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental > objects? > Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental > objects of the five hindrances. > How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects > of the five hindrances? > Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I > have sensuality' … [and so on for the other hindrances]". > > Unless the hindrances are arising and appearing as actual lobha or dosa, a > person cannot "know with [direct] understanding" that he has sensuality > (attachment). It is not a matter of somehow recollecting the hindrances > from a previous (pre-abandonment) occasion; awareness can only take as > its object a reality that appears at the same moment as the awareness > itself. As the commentary explains (p. 129), the hindrances are actually > *laid hold of* by awareness: > > "In this way the bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects, by laying > hold of the five hindrances amongst the mental objects of his own mind …" > > This can only occur if the hindrances are present and arising. > > This idea about the need to suppress the hindrances is often based on the > passages from the texts which say that the hindrances have the function of > 'weakening insight' or 'concealing reality'. Therefore, it is reasoned, > they must be subdued in order for awareness to be developed. While this > may sound 'logical', it is not how things are, according to the > commentary. The com. explains that the reason the hindrances arise in the > first place is *unwise attention to the object* and that, by the same > token, at any moment of *wise attention to an object*, the hindrances are > not present. Here is what the commentary says on this point with regard > to the first hindrance (p. 119)-- > > "In connection with the hindrances it must be known that the hindrance of > sensuality arises because of wrong reflection on an object that is > sensuously agreeable … > Sense-desire arises when wrong reflection occurs plentifully… > Sense-desire is cast out, indeed, with right reflection on a sensuously > inauspicious object. … > When there is much right reflection on the sensuously inauspicious object, > sense-desire is knocked out." > > A similar explanation is given for each of the other 4 hindrances-- with > wrong reflection and right reflection playing the same crucial roles. > > I think that a careful study of the commentaries can be helpful, and is > probably necessary, if one wants to understand the suttas properly, and > can be useful when considering others' ideas or teachings. Yes, perhaps. Thank you for your comments. 7504 From: m. nease Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 8:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Thanks again, Victor. mike --- Victor wrote: > > > Are you a confluence of continuous conditions > > > resulting from a very > > > great number of conditions with nearly identical > > > 'histories'? Are > > > you a kind of dancing image resulting from the > > > present manifestations > > > of these conditions? > > > > Yes--as I see it, that's what 'I' always is. > > > "I am a confluence of continuous conditions > resulting from a very > great number of conditions with nearly identical > 'histories'" is a > personality view. > > So is "I am a kind of dancing image resulting from > the present > manisfestations of these conditions." > > Metta, > Victor > 7505 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness to you dear cybele, much merit to you for giving us the opportunity to 'anumodana' the good deeds done by erik. muditacittena, rgds, gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:47 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness to you > > Hi Erik > > Please let me know something and John is willing to help me as usual and > will send the money with Western Union to get there faster, he is ready to > do it anytime. > I would have refunded you anyway; I am collecting money selling stuff and > rearranging my life. > > Thank you for your kind intentions even if you couldn't be able to > accomplish them. > Conditions are impermanent. > Thank you for your support when I was in full crisis, it helped to lift up > my morale and your affection has been comforting. > > May all beings be happy. > May all live in safety and joy. > > All living beings, whether weak or strong, tall, stout, medium or short, > seen or unseen, near or distant, born or to be born, may they all be happy. > > Let no one deceive another or despise any being in any state, let none by > anger or hatred wish harm to another. > > As a mother watches over her child, willing to risk her own life to protect > her only child, so with boundless heart should one cherish all living > beings, suffusing the whole world with unobstructed loving kindness. > > With sincere love > > Cybele > 7506 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 10:43pm Subject: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > > --- "Anders Honoré" > > > wrote: > > > Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover > such a wide range > of > > > subjects. > > > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? > > > > Hi, Anders, > > > > I wouldn't say the Majjhima is "better" than the > Digha. Hello Derek and Anders. I would say that the Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. Just my opinion though. Majjhima tends to be concise and to the point, and while I do value some of the longer detailed explanations in the Digha, many of the suttas in the Digha tend to focus (in great detail) on nonessential (or less essential) elements of the dhamma, whereas the MN seems to really hone in on the important core teachings. The SN I think is also definitely worth getting, although some sections are more pertinent to core teachings than others, overall I think the SN adds some insight that you don't get from MN. The MN is the one I reread the most often. I rarely reopen the DN. Metta, -fk 7507 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:34pm Subject: More Thoughts Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi again, Robert - In a message dated 8/9/01 10:52:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > > > ============================== > > You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind > states > > are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is > something > > that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What > I find > > perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at > a greater > > rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather > how it is > > possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I > understand > > Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the > flow of > > cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual > citta. In > > what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared > with the > > flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a > problem here. > > Can you help my understanding with this? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > ____________ > Dear Howard, > I think we have an idea of what panna knows and how it knows. > > Like the recent discussion about the fact that panna knows the > immediately preceeding mind processes: > > This worries us if we assume that citta can only know itself at the > exact moment it arises. In fact as we discussed a moment of citta > with lobha cannot understand itself- but following processes with > panna can understand the lobha. It is all happening fantastically > fast and thus it is still correct to talk about knowing the present > moment. Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after these. > > The moments of javanna citta with panna arise in a series of seven > cittas that are conditioned by each other. There is an accumualation > of understanding during this time (see the Patthana) and also there > are further conditions by upanissaya paccaya for more insight in > future processes. > If we think of panna as a sort of mind atom that knows only some > cittas (say) then we limit the nature and function of panna. Panna > has the function of understanding and is a dhamma that has no limits. > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now when > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight into > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) and > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > I don't know if this helps. > best wishes > robert > ================================ Just a little brainstorming out loud: Except for the possibility of parallel processing, it is to be assumed that there is only one aramana at a time. The duration of that object of discernment marks off "one citta". (Of course, an identical or near-identical version of the same object could be the aramana of subsequent cittas.) Now, assuming that any knowing is within the duration of a citta, and not as some overarching mental state simultaneous with a process of cittas, how is the observation and comparison of the flow of cittas and rupas to occur? It seems to me that this might be viewed as follows: There is an accumulation of "information" passed on from citta to citta, an extremely intricate information structure which is modified and transmitted with each passing citta (like a store & forward technique in a communications network, to give a tech simile); this structure makes essential use of sa~n~na, both in remembering and in comparing. Thus, what can be "packed into" a given citta can be of enormous complexity, because it incorporates an enormous history. I realize that what I write here is neither the description of my direct observation nor is it culled from the tipitaka, and thus is probably filled with errors. However, it is helpful to me to see even *one* means of understanding the claims of Abhidhamma. 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) 7508 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Diamond Sutra Hi, Anders - In a message dated 8/15/01 4:54:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cybele chiodi writes: > "If by form one looks for the Tathàgata > Or by the sound of the voice seeks me, > This person walks the wrong path > And is unable to see the Tathàgata." > > I think someone mentioned that there never really was a Tathagata in the > first place, and that this is only a conventional term for the impermanent > kandhas we know as the Buddha. Yet this passage seems to indicate > otherwise... Any suggestions? > > The other one I would like to quote, is the following, in relation to > Buddhist practises in the Pali Canon: > > "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when > engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in > forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odors, > tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He > should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has > an abode, then it would be the non-abode." > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > in the Pali Canon? > > ============================ No answers here; just some thoughts. With regard to the first question, about the tathagata: An arahant is sometimes described as "traceless". Certainly, when "entered into" nibbanic discernment, whether during life or beyond the moment of parinibbana, there is no support for discernment of any objects, there is no subject; there is no is no "being" in ANY sense. But even during the "ordinary" mind of the arahant-in-the-world, there is no sense of self whatsoever, and, moreover, all dhammas are seen through as transparent and empty, and, so, there is no "being" present in the person of the arahant or in any objects discerned by the arahant - there is nothing but emptiness. The second quote reminds me of a sutta, perhaps in the Samyutta Nikaya, where the Buddha warns against being trapped by "the tangle within" and "the tangle without". It seems to speak of detachment. 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) 7509 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:47am Subject: Re: Diamond Sutra > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > > in the Pali Canon? Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. 7510 From: Binh A Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:26am Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- Erik wrote: > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > > > in the Pali Canon? > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. ---------------------------------------------------------- BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima Nikaya in English is available at: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/index.html Metta Binh PS. If the above URL is too long to fit in one line, try this first: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/ --------------------------- 7511 From: Binh A Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 8:31am Subject: Misc... Re: The Jackal --- Sarah wrote: > Binh, I'm glad to see you're following here on dsg and appreciate the > references you give from time to time. I hope we can encourage you to join the > discussions from time to time too! ---------------- BA: Thanks for the kind words, Sarah. I think the list is well managed by you and Jon, with active participation by many sincere and knowledgeable Dhamma friends. For me, my time and energy are rather limited. I have been devoting most of my free time to build up the on-line library at the BuddhaSasana website, especially in the Vietnamese section ( I still have over 20 more books in digital format to edit and transform into a web format!). As you may know, Theravada Buddhism in Vietnam is not popular, and it is my wish to see it flourishing there as much as possible. --------------- > As I've mentioned before, I appreciate the user-friendly style and tremendous > work you've put into your website here: > > BuddhaSasana > A Buddhist page by Binh Anson of English books & Suttas > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm ----------------- BA: Thanks for mentioning that site. Much appreciated. I would also appreciate any comments and contributions from Dhamma friends. ----------------- > Nina, you may not know that 'Abhidhamma in DL' is on this website too. ----------------- BA: That is a good introductory book on Abhidhamma (which I read some 20+ years ago, and still like it). It was translated into Vietnamese language and printed in Saigon early this year. I have also uploaded a digital copy to the website. The translator, Bhikkhu Thien-Minh, a young Theravadin monk, is now in the UK, spending the Vassa at Ajahn Sumedho's monastery. Metta, Binh 7512 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 0:28pm Subject: An Invitation to All Here > As you may know, Theravada Buddhism in Vietnam is not > popular, and it is my wish to see it flourishing there as much as > possible. Bihn, I heartily encourage you in your endeavors of aiding the growth and flourishing of this vital aspect of the holy Ariyan Dhamma in your home country! I have precisely the same feeling with regard with my wish to see the so-called "Mahayana" take root and flourish here in the parts of SE Asia where it is not so popular these days, in the same way that the Theravada in Vietnam, is not popular at this point in time. The reason I feel particularly strongly about this is that we now live in a very new era--with instantaneous worldwide communications, and speedy travel possible in ways never before known in mankind's recorded history (for those not possessed of the abhinnas of the great Mahasiddhas, at any rate :), where the chance of reuniting once again these two beautiful and correct strains of the Ariyan Dharma is possible now, in such a way that has not been true for perhaps even centuries. For the record, one of my primary motivations for coming to Thailand has been to learn and internalize as much of the holy facet of Ariyan Dharma known as Theravada as possible, to bring many of its elements-- some of which have been neglected or even lost from my own tradition (such as the practice of walking meditation, for example)--to help the process of re-assimilating them back into what is presently known as the Tibetan Dharma (which is currently in the process of mutating into the American Dharma, the Australian Dharma, the German Dharma, the Brazilian Dharma, the Italian Dharma, etc., etc.) Also, as many here may know, Theravada is the presently dominant form of Buddhism in Cambodia (whence I just returned), and similar to your wish to see the Theravada flavor of the Dharma flourish in Vietnam, one of my sincerest wishes is to see the re-establishment and flourishing of tantric and so-called "Mahayana" (hopefully no one here will take offense at my using that term; it is not meant at all to imply anything derogatory about Theravada, as some foolish sectarians sometimes do by implying Theravada is "Hinayana," or "lesser vehicle", which is FAR from the truth of things--because it IS the actual Ariyan Dhamma and as such, in perfect accord with ALL the teachings of Lord Buddha) Buddhism in Cambodia--for so many reasons, and in no small part because this is the very form of Buddhism that influenced the design and construction of the magnificent Buddhist temples at Angkor, and as such is integral to Khmer and Cambodian history, a well as being an integral part of my own linage and by extension, practice. At present, Theravada Buddhism only "dominates" (in its very feeble and haphazard way now since the Pol Pot time, where he had all monks, or anyone of learning for that matter, brutally tortured and executed) in Cambodia and elsewhere in SE Asia, including Thailand now due to strong royal patronage (some have said "edict" but I have not heard this confirmed in actual fact) for the Lankavamsa flavor thanks to the influence of the Thai King Ramkamheng, such that before, where the two great streams had coexisted peacefully side-by- side, the Theravada as we now know it began to dominate, perhaps (this is only speculation on my part) due to the unwholesome influence of those who might have mistakenly criticized the Mahayana as being anariyan Dhamma (which is certainly a common activity today among many who call themselves Theravadins--those who still actively promulgate the extremely severe wrong view that the Mahayana doctrine is somehow a "corrupted" version of the Buddha's Dharma--thus leading to the very heavy bad kamma of disparaging the Ariyan Dhamma in any of its extant forms, but I digress). In fact, my most sincere wish of all would be to once again see the side-by-side flourishing of ALL these holy and correct traditions of the Buddha's Dharma (as they did together here in SE Asia and in India centuries ago--even coexisting side-by-side within the same monasteries, where each tradition would "debate" the other in a process leading to the accumulation of greater and greater wisdom for all participants and spectators alike!), and in particular, the re- establishment of this harmonious unity--not a merging of traditions, but a mutual accord and respect--of these two skillful methods taught by Lord Buddha during his appearance in this sasana, which he taught for one reason only: the end of suffering. Expanding a bit on this theme, I find few more inspiring places in this world than the Angkor complex of 180 temples. One reason I find Angkor so inspiring is due to the influence of the Chakravartin (wheel-turning monarch Bodhisattva like the recent Thai King Rama IV and His Holiness XIV Dalai Lama), King Jayavarman VII--who like His Holiness The 14th Dalai Lama, is considered an emanation of Avalokiteshvara (a.k.a. Kwan Yin in China, Kannon in Japan, and Chenresik in Tibet)--who constructed in addition to many other Buddhist temples, the temple/city of Angkor Thom, which is an enormous tantric mandala with the famed temple Bayon at its center, which displays Avalokiteshvara's gently smiling compassionate face radiating metta and karuna out in all directions, for the sole welfare of all sentient beings. Among all the temples commissioned by King Jayavarman VII, however, my favorite among them is the former tantric monastic temple complex of Ta Prohm (it actually served as the "temple" backdrop in the new movie "Tomb Raider" for those who may have seen this movie, and once housed over 2,700 monks, as well as serving as the supply center for all the region's hospitals). Ta Prohm is not only aesthetically beautiful by design. It has also purposefully been left in its unrestored state--meaning that throughout the crumbling stones of this impermanent temple grow enormous fig trees (of the "ficus" genus--the same genus of tree we know as the Bodhi tree under which Lord Buddha achieved his unsurpassed and complete self-awakening), leaving to me, at least, a clear reminder of both the impermanence of all composed phenomena, as well as the fact that this fact of this impermanent nature of all composed thing provides the only fertile soil for the growth and flourishing and fruiting of the enlightened mind, just as the perfect lotus arises from the muck and mud of samsara! And Ta Prohm is my favorite temple of all the temples for another reason: its representation of the beautifully carved "devatas" and "apsaras" (representations of the tantric Buddhist feminine principle of enlightened mind also known by the Sanskrit term "dakini" or the Tibetan word "khadro-ma"--who represent key aspects of tantric sadhana ritual because they symbolize the empty nature of the wisdom aspect of reality)--not to mention the fact that my fiancée was born and raised and has lived her entire life at this very temple! The most significant reason for my love of this temple, though, is that Jayavarman VII built and dedicated it specifically to his "mother," as one can read in any of the innumerable guidebooks on Angkor one may come across should one ever decide to visit this holiest of holy places on this planet earth (it certainly has to rank up there with the Four Great Sites of traditional Buddhist pilgrimage in India, in my opinion--if for no other reason than its sheer majestic scope and unparalleled execution and stunning architecture representing the Buddhist cosmos in its entirety). What the authors of few of these guidebooks ever note, though, is that while it is technically correct King Jayavarman VII dedicated Ta Prohm to his mother, the "mother" in question was not the King's birth-mother, but in actuality, to the "Mother of the Buddhas"-- "Prajnaparamita" (Perfection of Wisdom), which also happens to be THE central wisdom-teaching of ALL sects of "Mahayana" Buddhism, and is recited in Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan, by every sincere practitioner--often daily--as a reminder of the truth that "form is only emptiness; emptiness no other than form," thus underscoring vividly the ultimate nature that all dhammas are empty of self- nature, and all composed phenomena are impermanent and dependently arisen, and the fact that it is only due to the grasping nature of the defiled mind, that they appear to us as dukkha. Furthermore, the temple Ta Prohm's West entrance (where my fiancée and I met last January in what can only be called a MOST auspicious meeting, but nowhere near as auspicious as our meeting this time around, especially when she placed the krama--the traditional Khmer scarf--around the back of my neck after presenting her a small gift I had brought along just to give to her this time around! :) :) :)) is associated with the Buddha Amitabha of the Five Buddha Families as taught in "Mahayana" Buddhism. From the little card given to me by a nun at Wat Mahatat, Section 5 (from my visit there recently), with Amitabha's picture and his prayer, which I find unbelievably inspiring. "I vow that when my life approaches its end; All obstructions will be swept away; I will see Amitabha Buddha, And be born in his land of Ultimate Bliss and Peace. "When reborn in the Western land, I will perfectly and completely fulfill Without exception these Great Vows, To the delight and benefit of all sentient beings." NAMO AMITABHA! Incidentally, the Buddha Amitabha's ("boundless light", whose primary symbolic function is to transform the passions and craving into discerning wisdom) main associated Bodhisattva is none other than Avalokiteshvara, whose gently smiling face is graces the West entrance of the gateway into the center of the mandala.of temple of Ta Prohm. It should be noted that the Bodhisattva of Compassion, Avalokiteshvara, In the "Mahayana" school's teachings, represents specifically the compassion aspect (the active principle) of full enlightenment. And it is taught that only through this compassionate activity (that arises with no thought of giver or recipient--it merely acts spontaneously to fulfill the ultimate needs of sentient beings in the triple-realm, which is why images of Avalokiteshvara are often depicted with eleven heads which look out in all directions and into all the various realms of suffering beings, in addition to his having a thousand arms, which serve the purpose of spontaneously reaching out to suffering sentient beings to help remove their suffering) conjoined with the feminine wisdom aspect realizing emptiness (represented by the "Divine Mother," the dakini Prajnaparamita, who represents the empty wisdom aspect of ultimate reality), that all the steps to Buddhahood are fulfilled, which is called the perfection of union of the method and wisdom. (By the way, this is often graphically depicted in tantric imagery as the "yab- yum" (lit. "father-mother") mudra of the two aspects inseparably joined in sexual embrace, which in the Tibetan is also ultimately symbolized by the "dorje" (or "vajra"), which means "diamond" and also "thunderbolt"--as it represents the flash of intuitive wisdom that arises instantaneously upon realizing the ultimate nature of reality. OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA! It is said that only through the union of these two essential aspects, the aspect of method (brought about by accumulating wholesome karma) conjoined with wisdom (the wisdom that realizes emptiness), that full and complete enlightenment is brought about. In other words, what this specifically says is that the wisdom aspect alone is insufficient, that we must in addition accumulate deeds of great merit, just as Lord Buddha himself did over many kalpas, to bring to fruition the unsurpassed and complete enlightenment enjoyed by the Buddha. For example, there was one famous debate held on this very point--the most famous and important debate in Tibet's history--as a means of establishing the correct Dharma for all Tibetans to study and practice which exists up to this very day in the Land of Snows, which was held in Lhasa during the years 792-4, between the Chinese monk "Hvashang Mohoyan," who made the claim that enlightenment was "sudden" and there was no need to do anything. His main challenger in this debate was the renowned Master Kamalasila, the great Indian sage and disciple of Santarakshita (a contemporary of the legendary Padmasambhava, a.k.a. Guru Rinpoche), who was instrumental in helping bring the Buddhist Dharma into Tibet from India during the first period of the Dharma's propagation in the "rooftop of the world." The particular debate was overseen by the Tibetan King Trisong Detsen (himself considered to be an emanation of Manjushri), and it was through this long, epistolary debate, spanning two years, that it was finally made clear and decisively indicated by King Trisong Detsen to from then on reject the teachings of the Chinese monk Hvashan'g interpretation of the Dharma--specifically that one need do "nothing at all," that enlightenment just happens spontaneously, as a corrupted version of the Dharma; and to instead take up Santaraksita's (and Kamalasila's) linage teachings on gradual cultivation (with the understanding that insight-wisdom yet arises in a flash after much diligent effort at cultivation). This Great Debate led to the establishment of the Dharma we now know by the name Tibetan Buddhism. (a scholarly essay on this critical debate can be found here, for example: http://sino-sv3.sino.uni-/ heidelberg.de/FULLTEXT/JR-JOCP/gregory.htm). By the way, it is Kamalasila's teachings on the nine stages of meditation (Bhavana Krama) I was trained in by my lama, beginning with following the breath, and it is Kamalasila's instructions on meditation, based on the Buddha's exact teachings of the same, which is taught as THE central form of cultivating Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration in the Geluk lineage--the lineage of the Dalai Lamas. Anyway, in keeping with the overall theme of this little missive, I would like to formally offer my most heartfelt invitation to any members of our little sangha here in the Dhamma Study Group, who happen to be reading this message, and who might feel it beneficial to make a Buddhist pilgrimage to this holiest of holy Buddhist sites-- Angkor--to be present for this wedding--which, barring unforeseen circumstances (anatta being non-controlling after all--and who knows what vipaka this very next moment will bring, any one of us could die this very next moment!), is presently planned to be held sometime around the end of November. By the way, this is the very best time of year to visit SE Asia for those not in this part of the world (and the time to see Angkor is now, rather than later, as the number of tourists visiting has been doubling each year since the surrender of the Khmer Rouge three years ago), and it is now safe to travel (and very inexpensive by Western standards) in and around Angkor. Plus, this would afford the opportunity of having an incomparable Khmer-speaking (and fluent English-speaking as well) tour-guide, my fiancée Aert, who, as I mentioned, was born in and has lived her entire life among the temples of Angkor! Angkor, is a way similar to the Four Great Sites in India, is truly not a place to be missed by anyone who seriously considers himself or herself a Buddhist, and who has both the leisure and fortune to visit this holy place--as the entire complex of temples serves as nothing if not a supreme opportunity to meditate on all the qualities so heavily praised by Lord Buddha: those of the union of wisdom and compassion (method). 7513 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 1:29pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- <> wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the > practises expounded > > > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the > Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima > Nikaya in English is available at: > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/index.html > > Metta > Binh > > PS. If the above URL is too long to fit in one line, try this first: > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/ > > --------------------------- Ah, Anders has no excuse to buy it now. Maybe he ought to buy the Samyutta after all. 7514 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 1:56pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here (hopefully no one > here will take offense at my using that term; it is not meant at all > to imply anything derogatory about Theravada, as some foolish > sectarians sometimes do by implying Theravada is "Hinayana," > or "lesser vehicle", which is FAR from the truth of things--because > it IS the actual Ariyan Dhamma and as such, in perfect accord with > ALL the teachings of Lord Buddha) See, I've read a small deal of the Pali Canon and am amazedhow much 'Zen' stuff is in it. Why do you think they even wrote different Sutras (The Mahayana)? > (this is only speculation on my part) due to the unwholesome > influence of those who might have mistakenly criticized the Mahayana > as being anariyan Dhamma (which is certainly a common activity today > among many who call themselves Theravadins--those who still actively > promulgate the extremely severe wrong view that the Mahayana doctrine > is somehow a "corrupted" version of the Buddha's Dharma--thus leading > to the very heavy bad kamma of disparaging the Ariyan Dhamma in any > of its extant forms, but I digress). > What happens when you disparage the hell out of something and then stop disparaging it? Still go to hell? > For example, there was one famous debate held on this very point--the > most famous and important debate in Tibet's history--as a means of > establishing the correct Dharma for all Tibetans to study and > practice which exists up to this very day in the Land of Snows, which > was held in Lhasa during the years 792-4, between the Chinese > monk "Hvashang Mohoyan," who made the claim that enlightenment > was "sudden" and there was no need to do anything. His main > challenger in this debate was the renowned Master Kamalasila, the > great Indian sage and disciple of Santarakshita (a contemporary of > the legendary Padmasambhava, a.k.a. Guru Rinpoche), who was > instrumental in helping bring the Buddhist Dharma into Tibet from > India during the first period of the Dharma's propagation in > the "rooftop of the world." > > The particular debate was overseen by the Tibetan King Trisong Detsen > (himself considered to be an emanation of Manjushri), and it was > through this long, epistolary debate, spanning two years, that it was > finally made clear and decisively indicated by King Trisong Detsen to > from then on reject the teachings of the Chinese monk Hvashan'g > interpretation of the Dharma--specifically that one need do "nothing > at all," that enlightenment just happens spontaneously, as a > corrupted version of the Dharma; and to instead take up > Santaraksita's (and Kamalasila's) linage teachings on gradual > cultivation (with the understanding that insight-wisdom yet arises in > a flash after much diligent effort at cultivation). > Would that make Sudden Enlightenment Ch'an Buddhism corrupt, or just corrupt for Tibetans? And did they really say, "Just sit around and BOOM!" or more that they emphasized undirected awareness instead of the progressive meditations? Maybe I ought to read the article.... In dharma Joshua 2001 7515 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:21pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > What happens when you disparage the hell out of something and then stop disparaging it? Still go to hell? Fortunately, even the heaviest misdeeds can be purified in this lifetime by diligently applying Right Effort: abandoning what is unskillful and taking up what is skillful! :) :) :) And es[pecially, to diligently attempt to straighten one's views through carefuly reflection and dispassionate analysis of all points of Dhamma under discussion--not through a "mere agreement on views," for example, but through coming to direct understanding by following the prescription the Buddha gave the Kalamas, for example. > Would that make Sudden Enlightenment Ch'an Buddhism corrupt, or just corrupt for Tibetans? There was NO suggestion "Ch'an" as a system is corrupt, just to be perfectly clear! Not even close! It was one famous monk's particular INTERPRETATION of Ch'an doctrines which disparaged actual meditation practice which emphasized non-thinking and just experiencing (for example, among other things--and please forgiev me if I mix up a few details, as I have admittedly faulty recollection of all the underlying issue of the debate) that was challenged by Master Kamalasila. To begin the process of separating the wheat from the chaff, I'd perfer to use the Buddha's own guidelines from the Suttas here: "Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.' "As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self- aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; ****to aroused persistence, not to laziness****; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" > And did they really say, "Just sit around and BOOM!" or more that they emphasized undirected awareness instead of the progressive meditations? That is my general (and admittedly faulty recolletion) of an important general point of the debate--or at least a very near variation on this general theme, and it may not have even involved so much as even sitting with no thoughts in the mind, but rather, doing nothing at all, not even bothering to sit! > Maybe I ought to read the article.... Please do. There are MANY subtle point to this debate, and many variations on it, and also many definitions of "sudden" vs. "gradual" as well, and the point you raise here is another angle on this sort of thing, yet another debate, which may have actually been a part of this very debate at Samye, but I can't recall right now all the details. For the record, I have no quibbles with "sudden"--if interperted in the sense that enlightenment, after gradual cultivation of mundane factors, happens in a single instant, and then is gradually deepened, and is aagin interspersed with "sudden" flashes of insight which arise to terminate more fetters, all the way to arahat or Buddhahood. That idea is also fully supported by the Abhidhamma and all the teachings of my school, for example. And just to add another point. There ARE skill-in-means teachings that emphasize the wisdom aspect of insatntaneously recognizing our true, undefiled nature, such as found in Zen and even moresoe, in practices like Dzogchen. However, does Ch'an/Zen (or even Dzogchen) as we know it discourage the practice of meditation, for example? To the contrary! The very NAMES of these great and correct traditions of the Ariyan Dharma derive from the Sanskrit "dhyana" (Pali "jhana"), and emphasize sitting ameditation beginning with following the breath, as well as walking meditation (kinhin), as INTEGRAL aspects of bhavana--in fact, as THE MAIN aspects of these paticular paths! On the other hand, if it is ever suggested that a view is Right View and that view discourages the directed and diligent practice of meditation, for example, Right Mindfulness as taught in the Maha- Satipatthana Sutta, or denies the importance of Right Concentration, or especially, discourages the forerunner of these two, Right Effort, then that would not at all be in accord with the Buddha's Dharma. Again, if there is the suggestion, by anyone preaching the Dhamma, that ANY ONE OF THESE EIGHT LIMBS IS OPTIONAL, then that would be at DIRECT variance with the Buddha's Dhamma as expounded repeatedly in his Discourse on Right View, and THAT view would NOT be in accord with the teacher's instruction, if one goes by the Buddha's own definition of cleaving Dhamma from adhamma, as he says in the passage above (from AN VIII.53). The gist of all of this is that one cannot abandon any of the limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path and be said to have Right View. By the Buddha's own definition, Right View includes the understanding of suffering, its origin, its cessation, AND the PATH LEADING TO ITS CESSATION, which is none other than the Noble Eightfold Path (of which Right View is of course the forerunner). Please refer to the Sammaditthi Sutta where in EVERY instance of how one is possessed of Right View the Buddha never fails to include, as a condition of Right View, that one FULLY know: "The way leading to the cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, Right view, Right Resolve, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, ***Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration.***" And as I understand it, while there were many points debated this particular debate at Samye Ling (Tibet's first monastery, bhy the way) from the aforementioned paper: "An examination of the content of these debates reveals that the putative issue-the sudden/gradual controversy-included a whole complex of issues which can be grouped into various sets of polarities (e.g., insight vs. concentration, activity vs. rest, developed vs. innate Buddhahood, the obligatory nature of moral practices vs. their natural unfolding, etc.)....The sudden/gradual controversy thus does not divide along any single polarity. Nor does there seem to be any way to predict the specific doctrinal positions of a proponent of one side or the other in the debates. Nevertheless, there is considerable overlap in the way clusters of positions group together in the actual debates. Sudden and gradual therefore do not form a simple and static polarity, but represent more, two opposing modes of thought which can best be translated into the basic, and very general, dichotomy of intuition and effort." So from this, one can hopefully see that at least one important component of this debate related to practices such as cultivating Right Effort, as well as the other limbs like Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration. And again, to reiterate, nothing about this debate was in any way a condemnation of Ch'an, nor was there any implication in the slightest way that Ch'an or Zen (or Theravada!) are corruptions of the Dhamma! This was rather rather a challenge on a consetallation of points of Dharma, which after lengthy epistolary debate spanning at least two years, these issues were hashed back and forth in great detail, and after lengthy and careful consideration, that the views propounded by "Hvashang Mohoyan" were determined to be subtle distortions of the Buddha's Dharma, thus leading to the establishment of the Indian flavor of the Dharma in Tibet as propounded by Santaksita and his chief disciple Master Kamalasila (keep in mind the Tibetans used this ruthless winnowing process throughout the propagation of the Dharma there, and ONLY after long and careful consideration were there any decisions made). Some more relevant citations on this specific debate from the web: "Over a two-year period (792-794) a debate was held between Kamalashila, the Indian pandit, and Hoshang, a renowned Chinese Buddhist monk. The debate was held at Samye and was presided over by Trisong Detsen. The Chinese Hoshang school maintained that enlightenment was an instantaneous realization that could be attained only through complete mental and physical inactivity. The Indian school maintained that enlightenment was a slow process, requiring an individual's gradual mental and moral development. At the end of the debate the Tibetan king declared Kamalashila the winner and issued a proclamation establishing Buddhism as the state religion of Tibet." And another one: "My feeling is that if Santarakshita built a separate wing in the Samye temple for the residence of the Chinese Chan masters, he must have welcomed that tradition and recognized it as an important element of Buddhism in Tibet. However, it seems that during the time of his disciple, Kamalashila, certain followers of Chan in Tibet perhaps promoted a slightly different version of the original doctrine. They placed tremendous emphasis on rejecting all forms of thought, not just in the context of a specific practice, but almost as a philosophical position. This is what Kamalashila attacked. Therefore, it seems to me, there were two different versions of Chan that came to Tibet." The Buddha himself spoke clearly on the "Five Future Dangers" leading to the corruption of his teachings: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-077.html For example, Lord Buddha spoke quite clearly on this: "There will be in the course of the future monks undeveloped in bodily conduct... virtue... mind... discernment. They -- being undeveloped in bodily conduct... virtue... mind... discernment -- will become elders living in luxury, lethargic, foremost in falling back, shirking the duties of solitude. ******They will not make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. They will become an example for later generations, who will become luxurious in their living, lethargic, foremost in falling back, shirking the duties of solitude, and who will not make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet- unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized******. Thus from corrupt Dhamma comes corrupt discipline; from corrupt discipline, corrupt Dhamma. This, monks, is the fifth future danger, unarisen at present, that will arise in the future. Be alert to it and, being alert, work to get rid of it." The reason such debates sometime seem so fierce is because, to quote Robert (if I may, and Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Robert for this important point): "It is the monks who keep strict sila and who study the abhidhamma BUT who, in very subtle ways, distort the practice who seem most dangerous. This is counterfeit Dhamma that is very hard to detect - hence it tricks many people, even those who teach it. It is hard to detect because it mixes right and wrong and thus benefits in some ways while hurting in others." I hope this help to put this LIFE AND DEATH issue into clearer perspective. :) 7516 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:33pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah Dear Anders, These were really interesting sutta extracts you quoted which encouraged me to consider and research further, thankyou. I also checked some of the Pali (with help from Jim). --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > There's a sutta which says: > > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming > defilements. > > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming > defilements." > > > > > > That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, > as it > > > retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances > > Sarah: > > Anders, whenever the mind is referred to, I understand that cittas ( > > conditioned moments of consciousness) are being referred to and indeed the > > Buddha made it clear there are only 5 khandhas, not 5 khandhas and a mind. > Anders:> Five Kandhas and Nibbana? -------------------------------------- No Nibbana while there are defilements- just the 5 khandhas of grasping. Mind is translated from citta. The sutta explains a little later that 'the learned, noble disciple (ariyasaavakassa) has developed the mind (cittabhaavanaa)' in the sense of understanding it as it really is (yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati). All realities and mind-states, including the defilements (upakilesas) have to be known as stressed here. I understand the 'pure or luminous mind-states' to refer to bhavanga cittas before objects impinge on the 6 door-ways giving rise to the defilements. Anders, this is not an easy sutta at all and I gave more detail last time. This deep consideration and reflection may seem unnecessary, but just to quote from one of the lines following yours above, 'for the ordinary person (puthujjanassa) who has not listened (assutavato), there is no mental development (cittabhaavanaa). " Anders: > > >(and this > > > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > > > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). Sarah: > > Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the Mahayana > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. ---------------------------------- Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will be able to answer that bettter;-)) If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! ************************************************************** With regard to the MN 49 (24-26) passage you quoted: Sarah: >> B.Bodhi translates the passage as: > > 'the consciousness that makes no showing, > > And in becoming about to disbecome, > > Not claiming being with respect to all: > > that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc Maj NIk, 49, The Invitation of a Brahma,24-26 -------------------------------- The word 'consciousness' is translated from 'vi~n~naa.na.m' to be understood as 'cognizable' (vijaanitabba.m) and not consciousness according to the com. as explained to me. As I mentioned, BB also added in his notes (513). , Sarah: >>"MA takes > >the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the > >sense that "it can be cognized" '. ----------------------------------- Perhaps another translation of the first line could be: 'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shininig in all directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)' Anders: > Hmm, well, we enter the realm of speculation as regards to the definition of > "consciousness" in this case. -------------------------------------- I think we all agree it refers to Nibbana. Sarah > >, but I fail to see why this description of nibbana has anything to > do > > with the idea of Nivana being present in us..... --------------------------------------- I hope that clarifies and thanks for raising these tricky lines! ******************************************************** Anders:> > > But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn > > > Chah: > > Sarah: > > I think I'll leave comments on his writings as I may misunderstand him. > Anders: > And Mun? Pls re-quote a relevant paragraph for either if you particularly think my comments may be of any interest! (Sorry, I don't have the original anymore). I admit I prefer discussing Tipitaka suttas or the understanding of members like yourself! ********************************************************* ------------------------------------- Finally, you quoted from Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, Text V, 151-2) Sarah: > > I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading ------------------------------ Now I find the Pali in the last line (vimariyaadikatena cetasaa viharatii ti) means literally ' with a mind made without boundary. The com. mentions 'having severed the boundary of the defilements' (kilesamariyaada.m bhinditva . . .)which is much closer to the translation and my comment below I think. Sarah: > > Here (PTS translation) it says (with my notes after S.): > > 'The Wayfarer dwells free, detached and released from physical body, > > feeling,perception, mental factors and consciousness detached > > and released in the sense of no clinging to the 5 khandhas>....from > rebirth, > > decay and death ....from the passions, > Bahuna, > > the Wayfarer is free, detached and released, and dwells with a mind whose > > barriers are broken down' > kilesa eradicated, so no more akusala cittas> Anders: > "The Wayfarer" as with Tathagata is of course a conventional image, but do > we find support in the Sutta pitaka for the view that this conventional > image does not point to an actuality (Nibbana-mind - Buddha-nature)? ---------------------------------------- There is no suggestion of a Buddha nature here.....As you suggest, Wayfarer (not my favourite term!) or Tathagata or merely conventional terms: '....So, When the khandhas are present, 'A being is said in common usage' (KS 1, 135) ********************************************** Anders: > Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am uncertain > as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once > commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and > many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I > think, too). Yes, well as others have pointed out, there will be a day when the whole Tiptitaka is canned because no one can understand it or see its relevance:-)) I believe many modern famous teachers would benefit a lot from a greater appreciation and understanding of abhidhamma, but I know this is controversial;-)) Anders: > Well, I must say I find this discussion fascinating. I am sorry for being so > late to reply to all messages, but I have been quite busy recently. School > started just this week, so my interaction on this forum might be somewhat > limited in the near future. ------------------------------------------------- Anders, please don't ever be sorry for replying late...there are no time limits at all here.I hope Shool is going well and please look in from time to time. We all appreciate your dhamma contributions here! This has been quite challenging for me, but I've really appreciated the chance to look at the suttas and the pali. Btw, I had another look at your site the other day (sorry the link isn't handy) and I was very impressed. (Just surprised dsg wasn't mentioned amongst your many discussion groups and hadn't received its 'gold cup' yet;-)) ) One of these days, Jon and I are going to turn up in Elsinore to go on a long walk in your woods discussing dhamma with you! In the meantime, we look forward to more rewarding chats with you here! Thanks Anders, Sarah ********************************************************** 7517 From: Herman Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:37pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom, Comments follow interspersed with yours. --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > Do you not at all accept the possibility that, although something is > unproveable to you now, that it is the way it is. I am not talking about > faith, but just the acceptance of the possibility that something is there > when you haven't experienced it, or even if you *don't* believe in it. Yes, I certainly accept the limits of my own awareness, and that other people and beings have abilities far different to my own. > > I did give you an advanced warning about the immediate *unprovability* > of that concept... ;-) I was only relating that this is an accepted > Theravadin view. You can prove it of course, by developing arupa jhana, > and when you die, you can see if you re-appear in an arupa world... What would seeing be like in an arupa world? I hope I am not being to picky :-) I am trying to keep an open mind. > > I am curious about something. You mentioned in the past that you are a > student of reality, not really a Buddhist who places great faith in the > Buddha's words. How else do you expand your learning of realities > besides being associated with Buddhists who place great emphasis (or a > few of them, anyway) on the Buddha's words? Being the proud father of a number of boys I have come to accept that you cannot teach anyone anything. You can be the unknowing trigger to activating things that are potentially already there, and if those potentials are not there, one is wasting one's time trying to trigger anything. The capacity for learning is built into most babies, and over time those babies learn to speak Chinese, Dutch or Swahili. They also learn to walk, tie shoe laces, and other imitations of cultural practises in their milieu. Some become devout Catholics, others Buddhists, Jews , atheists etc. Then over time, while matching experience against what one has been taught, some people learn to accept that what they have accepted to be true as a child or young person, is not a useful model for further categorisation of experience. I used to be the minister of a Christian church. I quit when I could no longer maintain a belief in the things I was supposed to be teaching other people. So what I have learnt over time is to ruminate, redigest, chew over again and again the things that were spoonfed to me. I may yet end up in the Christian version of hell, and if I do I'll have a few things to say to the administrators there, don't you worry :-) Have you learned anything > (in and out of Buddhisms) recently that you would like to share? > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about your post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not really an essential component of the machinations of daily life. > kom > > ps: I haven't seen any devas either, although if I see one in this life, I > most likely would interpret it as something else except for devas. Yes , same here. Regards Herman > > > --- Herman wrote: > > Dear Kom, > > > > The beings in the arupa plane are, of course, also unprovable. And > > there is a distinct lack of devas lighting up my grove at night :- ) > > > > The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as > > object, though I tend to ignore it. > > > > Regards > > > > > > Herman 7518 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Hi Anders, Anders Honoré wrote: > Hi, all. > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. I was going to reply to this as well, but all my brain cells have been used up on the last post, so may I suggest you read posts under Eightfold Path in 'Useful Posts' and come back with questions or comments? What is your particular interest here? Sarah http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Anders Honoré wrote: > Hi, all. > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. 7519 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 5:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Gayan, This was interesting and I've been meaning to write a 'quickie'! --- Asterix 7 wrote: > > I made a vow to myself that I will stop all 'majjapamadatthana' > (intoxicants) and meat eating for a while. > So I spent two years of drug-abstinence and pure-vegetarianism > (vegetarianism was just for the fun of it, trying to see that whether > I can live without the meat eating I love so much - Obelix was my > childhood hero), that 2 years expired on last week (27th july). > > So now, I again started breaking the precepts, impermanence of > the 'happiness' is evident again, > I confess that I was looking forward to the 'day' ( not during the > whole 2 years :o) , only in the last week, ) > fantasizing about all the beverages I can drink, all the substances > that I can use to get stoned, ( all the dishes that I can eat). > {ridiculous, I agree} Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. Personally, I eat very little meat, but that's a health choice rather than an act of sila..... When I first travelled with Khun Sujin in Sri Lanka, I was strictly vegitarian at the time and was being very fussy about what I could and couldn't eat....She'd say to me: "Khun Sarah, have just a little of this and a little of that to please the hostess...kusala cittas are more important" or something very similar...I can still hear her saying it so sweetly more than 25yrs ago. (Nina probably remembers too!) With regard to the precepts and vows, we can see how these can be followed for a very long time, but sooner or later when there are the right conditions they will be broken if enough wisdom has not been accumulated. I've known monks who've kept excellent vinaya for long periods, but when they disrobe, the same accumulations and tendencies are there. Even if one remains a monk for the rest of this life, what about next life? > > And of course when the experience is finally realised , it lost its > appeal, good old unsatisfactoriness came to me again. Good;-)) Let us know how it goes! Thanks Gayan for sharing your experiences....I always enjoy hearing from you! Sarah 7520 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 5:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Suan, Thanks for all your contributions here..it's always good to hear from you. I must say I have a lot of reservations about your post below however: > " is it important to know that one is in the first or second (or > whatever) Jhana and if so why?" > > Reason? A simple reason is that one thing leads to another. As you > might have read this phenomenon in Visuddhimagga, when we become > quite skillful in a practice, we kind of get bored! We want to try > out something slightly different and difficult, don't we? > > Mental cultivation practices are very addictive (the only case of > good addiction?) because they are our very minds in progress, > literally. Once you are hooked, you want to go further and further. > So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca > samadhi), you won't stop at there. You would go for the First Jhana > in due course. And you know what you don't like at the present level, > and you would make every effort to get rid of it or them. As a > result, you would end up at the next higher level of jhana. Suan, it all sounds very easy as af anyone can just decide to go for levels of jhana without any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment. I know that many teachers encourage these views, but I find them quite disturbing. > > You also wrote: > > "Having asked that let me also add that I do not think (perhaps hope) > that Jhana practice is not out of reach for anyone with diligent > persistence and a very good teacher as guide. What do you think?" > > I agree with you. The most important keyword to remember to make > jhana within our reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from > sensuous preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this > keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. What about as soon as we open our eyes or hear a sound? Sensuous preoccupations immediately! No self that can stop or control clinging at these times. > Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn > their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, > of course)! In theory! I'm not sure how far this discussion will go, but I'd like to encourage you (and others) to consider a little more! Sarah 7521 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 8:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Rob E. Thanks for your many skilful and interesting posts to Kom and others. In one you mentioned that you 'sometimes step off a limb on this list', using your 'own logic and my knowledge of Buddhism...'. I'd just like to encourage you to 'step off a limb' as much as you'd like and I hope you're finding the discussions rewarding. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Do I really exist? When I've tried to look into the 'non-existence of self' > personally, in the past I was just confused. But lately when I've tried to > investigate this, there has been more of a conviction that there is no "I" as > a > kind of internal entity, but that "Robert E." is a habitual convention of > thought, > feeling and belief. If I accept the fact that Robert E. does not really > exist as > such, there is a feeling of loneliness that arises. It is as if this system, > this > bodymind, is very sad without the thought of an ego inhabiting it. When it > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series of arisings with no > inhabitant > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, almost of despair. > There are many wise words here and you seem to be appreciating the core of the Buddha's Teachings. it seems for many people that when understanding begins to develop there are these times of despair, sadness or loneliness arising at times. I think it's thinking with aversion (dosa) and of course it doesn't last. Of course as we know, clinging (whether to a self or anything else) brings aversion and sadness in its wake. Of course loneliness and living alone are very different. The first is a kind of aversion but living alone at a moment of seeing or hearing without the bondage of craving , whether we are in the city or forest is what the Buddha encouraged us to do: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-063.html I've always found this particular sutta to be really inspiring. Instead of being depressing or lonely, being aware of these realities as not self is liberating and uplifting I think. Rob E, ....let me just encourage you to keep posting and sharing your experiences. Sarah 7522 From: m. nease Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 8:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Sarah and Robert E., --- Sarah wrote: --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > When it > > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series > of arisings with no > > inhabitant > > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, > almost of despair. I've been thinking about Robert's post too. I had the same thought as Sarah re. grief (my interpretation) as aversion. But I was reminded of this: "'Grief 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 grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. 'Grief 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-pañha Sutta Sakka's Questions http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html Since I'm confident that the Buddha never suggested any kind of akusala was to be pursued, this seems to me to suggest there's a kind of grief that isn't aversion? This doesn't make much sense to me however. One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that there's the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the point but unfortunately I can't cite it from the Dhammavinaya. mike 7523 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 10:01pm Subject: Good Grief! Dear Mike (and Rob E), Funny, I nearly dropped you a line a short while ago when I had trouble locating the Migajala Sutta (I'm just hopeless at remembering the names and locations!) but Jon came to my rescue for once;-)) --- "m. nease" wrote: > I've been thinking about Robert's post too. Right, some first-hand experience...;-)) I had the > same thought as Sarah re. grief (my interpretation) as > aversion. Yes a bit too much aversion in my post...thanks for another word! But I was reminded of this: > > "'Grief 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 > grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental > qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities > decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. > When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue > this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and > skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Grief 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-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html > > Since I'm confident that the Buddha never suggested > any kind of akusala was to be pursued, this seems to > me to suggest there's a kind of grief that isn't > aversion? This is a very quick stab as I look at my BB translation without reading the full sutta: I think the sentence before this verse (actually the preceding 2 paragraphs) which says: 'Well, sir, what prctice has the monk undertaken, who has reached the right way which is needful and leading to the cessation of the tendency to proliferation?" In other words, I think we should read the verse in the light of seeing the danger/overcoming our old dsg 'friends', the papanca (proliferations). It would be interesting to consider the Pali here, but I wonder if the meaning isn't related to pursuing or not pursuing the papanca with regard to pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling, (somanasa, domanassa and upekkha). As it said in the preceding paragraph 'When the mind thinks about something, desire arises; when the mind thinks about nothing, desire does not arise.......Thinking...arises from the tendency to proliferation (papanca). This doesn't make much sense to me however. > One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that there's > the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha > leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the point > but unfortunately I can't cite it from the > Dhammavinaya. I've no idea what he means, but one could say that as all conditioned realities are dukkha, some (i.e all akusala cittas and even those kusala cittas which are adding bricks to samsara) lead to more dukkha and others (5fold and 8fold path factors) are leading out of dukkha.... I won't buy the good anger/grief/aversion theory, but others may! Look forward to more, Mike......sleep-time for me! Sarah P.s. I hope you approve of the new subject heading as we're no longer in Parinibbana mode her..... 7524 From: Joshua Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like visiting brothels! 7525 From: m. nease Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 0:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Good Grief! Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > I think the sentence before this verse (actually the > preceding 2 paragraphs) > which says: > > 'Well, sir, what prctice has the monk undertaken, > who has reached the right way > which is needful and leading to the cessation of the > tendency to > proliferation?" > > In other words, I think we should read the verse in > the light of seeing the > danger/overcoming our old dsg 'friends', the papanca > (proliferations). It > would be interesting to consider the Pali here, but > I wonder if the meaning > isn't related to pursuing or not pursuing the > papanca with regard to pleasant > feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling, > (somanasa, domanassa and > upekkha). As it said in the preceding paragraph > 'When the mind thinks about > something, desire arises; when the mind thinks about > nothing, desire does not > arise.......Thinking...arises from the tendency to > proliferation (papanca). This is an interesting analysis. The context you added does make more sense of it, it particularly the reference to papañca and to thought. It doesn't seem reasonable to me that 'pursuit or non-pursuit of papañca' is meant, as papañca is alway akusala. Still the reference papañca is obviously significant. So is the reference to thought. Since he is referring to something to be pursued, it may be skilful thought (e.g. of beneveolence, non-harming and renunciation, as these thoughts are extolled elsewhere in the suttas and the vinaya). Though even kusala thoughts do, as you said, 'add bricks', and are no doubt inferior to satipatthana, they are certainly superior to akusala thoughts, as the Buddha often pointed out (ditto of course for words and deeds). As you said it would be good to know the Paali. And it would be good to know what the commentaries have to say. > This doesn't make much sense to me however. > > One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that > there's > > the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha > > leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the > point > > but unfortunately I can't cite it from the > > Dhammavinaya. > > I've no idea what he means, but one could say that > as all conditioned realities > are dukkha, some (i.e all akusala cittas and even > those kusala cittas which are > adding bricks to samsara) lead to more dukkha and > others (5fold and 8fold path > factors) are leading out of dukkha.... I think this is correct except that certain kusala cittas do lead to the Path even though they aren't the Path (if I understand what you mean by 'kusala cittas'). In other words (and for example), kusala in general (theoretically) leads to rebirth in (or of) conditions favorable to hearing and understanding the Dhamma. Maybe this is why the Buddha didn't just say, 'practice satipatthaana' and drop it there. > I won't buy the good anger/grief/aversion theory, > but others may! I don't either. This reminds me of hiri and ottapa (shame and fear) which also sound like aversion but are considered kusala. mike 7526 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 1:01am Subject: undesirable objects Dear Eric, thank you for the verses by Geshe Langri Tangpa and Shantideva, on patience, especially with regard to the eight worldly conditions, we can never have enough reminders. I also appreciate it that you speak about your remarkable personal experiences when you were in trouble. We meet people who behave like enemies but now they can be our teachers, I like that very much. Nina. 7527 From: Num Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:08am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hi Sarah and o0ss12345, Sorry, o0ss12345, for not addressing your name properly. I am kind of lost after got back from vacation, DSG is pretty busy and very popular with a lot of messages. BTW my name is Num. > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. > > Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 > > I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like visiting brothels! From what I remembered from my hi-school class, the Buddha mentioned 10 different kinds of meat that improper to eat. I kind of remember there is a sutta about a group of Brahmins looked down on the Buddha that he still ate meat, and how said that how could he say that he live a holy, higher life. And he explained them that purity comes from one's deed not from what one ate, as well as the mind can be impure even one does not eat meat b/c he is not free from lobha/dosa and moha. Pra-Dhevadhatta ( the Buddha's Cousin) also asked the Buddha to lay down the precept that the monk should completely abstain from meat-eating but the Buddha did not grant that, anyway a big group of monks agreed with Pra Devathatta and followed his idea. And I think the Buddha did not say that vegetarianism is wrong, some of his great disciples were vegetarian. Sorry, I could not come up with the referenece. I could not open my Thai tipitaka CD, something wrong with it. I did look upon accesstoinsight, Jivaka sutta there is under Anguttara nikaya and it is not about vegetarianism. Some of my friends are vegetarian and they are kind of surprised that I am a Buddist and still eat meat. They say eventhough I not kill the animal but if I still eat meat, someone else needs to them for me anyway. Num 7528 From: Joshua Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 1:47pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > From what I remembered from my hi-school class, > the Buddha mentioned 10 different kinds of meat > that improper to eat. Well, I think he said not to eat dogs, but there was a more cultural than kammic reason for this, I believe. I wouldn't fault anyone for eating a dog or an elephant. > I could not open my Thai tipitaka CD, something > wrong with it. I did look upon accesstoinsight, > Jivaka sutta there is under Anguttara nikaya and it > is not about vegetarianism. Ah, check the Majjhima Nikaya. I don't know if it's on access to insight or not, but thanks to Binh Anson no one has to shell out 50 bucks to get the full Majjhima. Accesstoinsight, understandably, leaves out some of the more shocking suttas, like the one where an Arahant kills himself (not out of mental pain, mind you). > Some of my friends are vegetarian and they are kind > of surprised that I am a Buddist and still eat meat. > They say eventhough I not kill the animal but if I > still eat meat, someone else needs to them for me > anyway. What attracted me to Buddhism in the first place was it was a vegetarian (or so I thought) religion without Bhagwhans in Mansions. I figured it must be good if it accorded with my ignorant, self-aggrandizing views. But then, in the course of time, I ate a beef burrito, and never looked back... 7529 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hi Num, and All, Monks are forbidden to eat the flesh of humans, elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, and panthers. Also, raw fish or meat; or any fish or meat that he sees, hears or suspects was killed specifically for him. These rules do not imply that a monk must not eat meat - only that a monk must be careful as to which kinds of meat he does eat. Also, there are six articles on Buddhism and Vegetarianism on: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm 1. On Vegetarianism - compiled by Binh Anson 2. What the Buddha said about eating meat - Ajahn Bramavamso 3. Buddhism and Vegetarianism - Ajahn Jagaro 4. Buddhism and Vegetarianism: The Rationale for the Buddhas' views on the consumption of meat - V.A. Gunasekara 5. Are you a 'herbivore' or 'carnivore'? - Jan Sanjivaputta 6. Vegetarianism - Ven. K. S. Dhammananda metta, Christine > Hi Sarah and o0ss12345, > > Sorry, o0ss12345, for not addressing your name > properly. I am kind of lost after got back from > vacation, DSG is pretty busy and very popular with > a lot of messages. BTW my name is Num. > > > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha > advocated vegitarianism and > > > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the > contrary. > > > > Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 > > > > I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the > Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they > liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like > visiting brothels! > > From what I remembered from my hi-school class, > the Buddha mentioned 10 different kinds of meat > that improper to eat. I kind of remember there is a > sutta about a group of Brahmins looked down on > the Buddha that he still ate meat, and how said that > how could he say that he live a holy, higher life. > And he explained them that purity comes from one's > deed not from what one ate, as well as the mind can > be impure even one does not eat meat b/c he is not > free from lobha/dosa and moha. > > Pra-Dhevadhatta ( the Buddha's Cousin) also asked > the Buddha to lay down the precept that the monk > should completely abstain from meat-eating but the > Buddha did not grant that, anyway a big group of > monks agreed with Pra Devathatta and followed his > idea. And I think the Buddha did not say that > vegetarianism is wrong, some of his great disciples > were vegetarian. Sorry, I could not come up with the > referenece. > > I could not open my Thai tipitaka CD, something > wrong with it. I did look upon accesstoinsight, > Jivaka sutta there is under Anguttara nikaya and it > is not about vegetarianism. > > Some of my friends are vegetarian and they are kind > of surprised that I am a Buddist and still eat meat. > They say eventhough I not kill the animal but if I > still eat meat, someone else needs to them for me > anyway. > > Num 7530 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 3:46pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > > I did give you an advanced warning about the immediate > *unprovability* > > of that concept... ;-) I was only relating that this is an > accepted > > Theravadin view. You can prove it of course, by developing arupa > jhana, > > and when you die, you can see if you re-appear in an arupa world... > > What would seeing be like in an arupa world? I hope I am not being to > picky :-) I am trying to keep an open mind. According to the story I have heard, the beings in the arupa plane don't have the 5-sense doors, and therefore, they cannot see, hear, taste, smell, etc (which is why the Buddha couldn't teach his meditation teachers). They exist purely as mental phenomenon which is refined, free of aversion, and very long. > Being the proud father of a number of boys I have come to accept that > you cannot teach anyone anything. You can be the unknowing trigger to > activating things that are potentially already there, and if those > potentials are not there, one is wasting one's time trying to trigger > anything. I think we can relate this to the Buddha as well. Despite his unparalleled teaching ability, he cannot bring wisdom to those who were not ready. We can also see how the interactions in DSG go. We can at best suggest to people that this is how things could plausibly work. It totally depends on the person's accumulation (including reading and considering other people's posts) how the person would take a message. > The capacity for learning is built into most babies, and over time > those babies learn to speak Chinese, Dutch or Swahili. They also > learn to walk, tie shoe laces, and other imitations of cultural > practises in their milieu. Some become devout Catholics, others > Buddhists, Jews , atheists etc. Yes, I notice that animals also (particularly evident for the larger animals) learn. I am pretty sure my roommates' cats learned how to manipulate my behaviors by knowing me for sometimes. > Then over time, while matching experience against what one has been > taught, some people learn to accept that what they have accepted to > be true as a child or young person, is not a useful model for further > categorisation of experience. Thank you for this opportunity to reflect on the wisdom and kindness of the Buddha. Without his teachings, I wouldn't have found a teaching that seems to fit so well to the situations and to my inclination. > So what I have learnt over time is to ruminate, redigest, chew over > again and again the things that were spoonfed to me. I may yet end up > in the Christian version of hell, and if I do I'll have a few things > to say to the administrators there, don't you worry :-) At least you will have us as companions, which should make your eternal stay perhaps seem bearable or even more eternal.... ;-) > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work > without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about your > post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a > multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not really an > essential component of the machinations of daily life. Yes, by the Buddha teachings, awareness or mindfullness only rises with kusala mental states. Do you think our daily life's activities are kusala or akusala? Thank you for sharing the experiences; I enjoyed it. I wouldn't have been able to draw the same conclusion about learning as I don't have any kids! kom 7531 From: Joshua Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:06pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Well, I think he said not to eat dogs, but there was a more cultural than kammic reason for this, I believe. I wouldn't fault anyone for eating a dog or an elephant. > > Another example of very, very wrong speech. I suspect they're already drawing straws to see who can cut my tongue out first in hell. 7532 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:10pm Subject: Re: Good Grief! Dear Sarah and Mike, I have a fussy explanation about this phenomenon, so please read it at your own risk! If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level progresses. Apparently, the piti and somanassa vedana in Jhana is very refined and highly suitable for attachment that when the Jhana mental states stop, the person feels aversion of losing it. This theory is losely collaborated by some sutta that mention that to reach the 5th rupa jhana (where there is no more somanassa, and piti), one must leave both Domanassa and Somanassa. Besides Satipatthana, the Buddha appeared to encourage attaining more and more refined Jhana (perhaps because the kusala is higher, and because the latent tendencies for the 5-sensualities are not being accumulated?). Besides the Arahat, apparently, the aversion toward losing the Jhana is part of attaining higher level of jhana. I hope you have noticed the disclaimer above. This question needs to be discussed some more. kom 7533 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Good Grief! Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > I think the sentence before this verse (actually the > > preceding 2 paragraphs) > > which says: > > > > 'Well, sir, what prctice has the monk undertaken, > > who has reached the right way > > which is needful and leading to the cessation of the > > tendency to > > proliferation?" > > > > In other words, I think we should read the verse in > > the light of seeing the > > danger/overcoming our old dsg 'friends', the papanca > > (proliferations). It > > would be interesting to consider the Pali here, but > > I wonder if the meaning > > isn't related to pursuing or not pursuing the > > papanca with regard to pleasant > > feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling, > > (somanasa, domanassa and > > upekkha). As it said in the preceding paragraph > > 'When the mind thinks about > > something, desire arises; when the mind thinks about > > nothing, desire does not > > arise.......Thinking...arises from the tendency to > > proliferation (papanca). > > This is an interesting analysis. The context you > added does make more sense of it, it particularly the > reference to papañca and to thought. It doesn't seem > reasonable to me that 'pursuit or non-pursuit of > papañca' is meant, as papañca is alway akusala. I think I didn't make myself quite clear above.. What I was suggesting was that it is related to pursuing the papanca in relation to the vedana (feelings), which as you say are always akusala, or not pursuing the papanca, i.e. no akusalabcittas, wholesome restraint or 'guarding of the senses' instead which is being discussed. Still > the reference papañca is obviously significant. So is > the reference to thought. Since he is referring to > something to be pursued, it may be skilful thought > (e.g. of beneveolence, non-harming and renunciation, > as these thoughts are extolled elsewhere in the suttas > and the vinaya). Though even kusala thoughts do, as > you said, 'add bricks', and are no doubt inferior to > satipatthana, they are certainly superior to akusala > thoughts, as the Buddha often pointed out (ditto of > course for words and deeds). As you said it would be > good to know the Paali. And it would be good to know > what the commentaries have to say. I understand 'pursued' to refer to being aware of feeling without thinking, though as you rightly point out, thinking can be skilful. I have a question about these lines in BB's translation: 'Now, of such happiness as is accompanied by thinking and pondering, <611> and of that which is not so accompanied, the latter is the more excellent. The same applies to unhappiness, and to equanimity.' At his footnote to <611> he writes '(vitakka-vicara>. This refers to the second jhana.' I'm unclear if this is correct (not a MA note), and if so whether the whole paragraph should be read in this light. As I said, i've only looked quickly at it without reading the sutta carefully to look at the entire context. One other point here with regard to 'grief' as translation. It's clear that they are the vedana (feelings) being discussed and as such I would find pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling a lot less confusing. When one reads about grief, one assumes it is dosa being discussed, don't you think? To summarise in reverse order, I understand the Buddha to be saying that on account of feelings(somanassa, domanassa, upekkha) , arise the tendency to proliferation (papanca). On account of this, thinking (vitakka) arises which leads to desire (chanda, equated by DA with tanha). On account of desire, like and dislike (piya-appiya, 'dear and not-dear') arise. These lead to jealousy and avarice (issa-macchariya) wihich 'bind beings' so that although 'they wish to live without hate, harming, hostility or malignity, and in peace, they yet live in hate, harming one another, hostile and malign.' > > I think this is correct except that certain kusala > cittas do lead to the Path even though they aren't the > Path (if I understand what you mean by 'kusala > cittas'). In other words (and for example), kusala in > general (theoretically) leads to rebirth in (or of) > conditions favorable to hearing and understanding the > Dhamma. Maybe this is why the Buddha didn't just say, > 'practice satipatthaana' and drop it there. I agree that all kinds of kusala are encouraged....and are a support, but kusala that isn't satipatthana, including jhana, still add bricks as I understand....remember the Atthasalini passage which Rob quoted? > > > I won't buy the good anger/grief/aversion theory, > > but others may! > > I don't either. This reminds me of hiri and ottapa > (shame and fear) which also sound like aversion but > are considered kusala. Many examples here of how just a very little understanding of abhidhamma helps..... Hopefully we'll be able to pursue this a little further... thanks, Sarah 7534 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Kom, Just sent my note before looking at your post here which I'll read with interest.....I'm glad you've raised the jhana link. I wonder if you have any Thai com notes too? S. --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Sarah and Mike, > > I have a fussy explanation about this phenomenon, so please read it at > your own risk! > > If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has > always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the > suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level > progresses. Apparently, the piti and somanassa vedana in Jhana is very > refined and highly suitable for attachment that when the Jhana mental > states stop, the person feels aversion of losing it. This theory is losely > collaborated by some sutta that mention that to reach the 5th rupa jhana > (where there is no more somanassa, and piti), one must leave both > Domanassa and Somanassa. > > Besides Satipatthana, the Buddha appeared to encourage attaining more > and more refined Jhana (perhaps because the kusala is higher, and > because the latent tendencies for the 5-sensualities are not being > accumulated?). Besides the Arahat, apparently, the aversion toward > losing the Jhana is part of attaining higher level of jhana. > > I hope you have noticed the disclaimer above. This question needs to be > discussed some more. > > kom 7535 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Num, Good to see you back...we've missed your insights and maybe Nina has missed your good questions! --- Num wrote: > Hi Sarah and o0ss12345, > > Sorry, o0ss12345, for not addressing your name > properly. I am kind of lost after got back from > vacation, DSG is pretty busy and very popular with > a lot of messages. BTW my name is Num. You'll have noted by now that this is Joshua. A few new members while you were away. Hope you had a good trip and I can see others like Christine have replied far more helpfully than I could have on the meat-eating issue! Speak soon, Jon's turn for the computer! Sarah 7536 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 5:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom >I think we can relate this to the Buddha as well. Despite his unparalleled >teaching ability, he cannot bring wisdom to those who were not ready. >We can also see how the interactions in DSG go. We can at best suggest >to people that this is how things could plausibly work. It totally depends >on the person's accumulation (including reading and considering other >people's posts) how the person would take a message. According with my limited understanding capacity and my past accumulations plus my present conditionings and actual moment of awareness and mood condition (how many factors indeed...) I agree that wisdom cannot be imposed but assimilated if the 'conditions' are ripe. BUT dear Kom when you candidly declare that we can observe it in the interactions in DSG affirming 'we can at best suggest to people this is how things could plausibly work' I cannot but perceive a [patronizing] taste like one of a person who doesn't discuss to share and with an openmind to consider the various aspects of a subject but as somebody who has already 'made up his mind' and listen to others in a 'paternalistic mood' like 'oh never mind he doesn't has the right accumulations to understand yet, we must be patient'. Why Kom do you really think that you got it right in your Dhamma studies and others are deluded? read carefully how you wrote it and tell me with an openmind and no aversion because is not a mere provocation but I am inviting all of us to observe this strategies of our mind and how it 'slips' not deliberately unmasking our tendencies.ù Most evident I am including myself in the remark. Love Cybele 7537 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 6:17pm Subject: Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Frank, I like hearing which parts of the suttanta people turn to most. These are good comments below which I pretty much agree with, though this list takes me all over the Tipitaka! Frank, on another note, I think you slipped in quietly here..I don't think you've posted on dsg before? (If this is all repetition, just ignore it!) Anyway, glad you've found us and looking forward to more useful words from you! Let us know a little about your interest in dhamma, where you live and anything else if it's not too much of a bore to do so;-) Hope you find dsg useful. Sarah --- frank kuan wrote: > Hello Derek and Anders. I would say that the > Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. Just my opinion > though. Majjhima tends to be concise and to the point, > and while I do value some of the longer detailed > explanations in the Digha, many of the suttas in the > Digha tend to focus (in great detail) on nonessential > (or less essential) elements of the dhamma, whereas > the MN seems to really hone in on the important core > teachings. > The SN I think is also definitely worth getting, > although some sections are more pertinent to core > teachings than others, overall I think the SN adds > some insight that you don't get from MN. > The MN is the one I reread the most often. I rarely > reopen the DN. > > Metta, > -fk 7538 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- <> wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the > practises expounded > > > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the > Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima > Nikaya in English is available at: > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/index.html Wow! Thanks, Binh! I have visited this site before, but it was pretty incomplete back then. I have since forgot about it. Thank you very much. I'll defnitely be exploring this one. That's the second time you've provided a great link like that! Sadhu! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 7539 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 8:45pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- Erik wrote: > --- <> wrote: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the > > practises expounded > > > > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the > > Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima > > Nikaya in English is available at: > > > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/index.html > > > > Metta > > Binh > > > > PS. If the above URL is too long to fit in one line, try this first: > > > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/ > > > > --------------------------- > > Ah, Anders has no excuse to buy it now. Maybe he ought to buy the Samyutta after all. Haha, it looks like it! I'll buy the Samyutta once I have 150 dollars to spare. Right now, those money are earmarked for a unforseen trip to Rome in September. 7540 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 8:49pm Subject: Re: Diamond Sutra --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Anders - > > In a message dated 8/15/01 4:54:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Anders: > > > > "If by form one looks for the Tathàgata > > Or by the sound of the voice seeks me, > > This person walks the wrong path > > And is unable to see the Tathàgata." > > > > I think someone mentioned that there never really was a Tathagata in the > > first place, and that this is only a conventional term for the impermanent > > kandhas we know as the Buddha. Yet this passage seems to indicate > > otherwise... Any suggestions? > > > > The other one I would like to quote, is the following, in relation to > > Buddhist practises in the Pali Canon: > > > > "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when > > engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in > > forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odors, > > tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He > > should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has > > an abode, then it would be the non-abode." > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > > ============================ > No answers here; just some thoughts. > With regard to the first question, about the tathagata: An arahant is > sometimes described as "traceless". Certainly, when "entered into" nibbanic > discernment, whether during life or beyond the moment of parinibbana, there > is no support for discernment of any objects, there is no subject; there is > no is no "being" in ANY sense. But even during the "ordinary" mind of the > arahant-in-the-world, there is no sense of self whatsoever, and, moreover, > all dhammas are seen through as transparent and empty, and, so, there is no > "being" present in the person of the arahant or in any objects discerned by > the arahant - there is nothing but emptiness. I agree about the whole thing, excepot no Being (except in the sense of being=Samsara), as I would still say that Nibbana is. > The second quote reminds me of a sutta, perhaps in the Samyutta > Nikaya, where the Buddha warns against being trapped by "the tangle within" > and "the tangle without". It seems to speak of detachment. Yeah, when I read that sutta, I thought of the Diamond Sutra as well. 7541 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > Please do. There are MANY subtle point to this debate, and many > variations on it, and also many definitions of "sudden" vs. "gradual" > as well, and the point you raise here is another angle on this sort > of thing, yet another debate, which may have actually been a part of > this very debate at Samye, but I can't recall right now all the > details. I'm not really interested in getting into the "Sudden vs. Gradual" debate, as I don't think this is leading anywhere, so I'll just skip that. Overall, I think the word "Sudden" is misleading. "Direct" would be a more accurate term. To use Dogen's definition of it: In Zen, the practise and realisation is not different. > However, does Ch'an/Zen (or even Dzogchen) as we know it discourage > the practice of meditation, for example? To the contrary! The very > NAMES of these great and correct traditions of the Ariyan Dharma > derive from the Sanskrit "dhyana" (Pali "jhana"), and emphasize > sitting ameditation beginning with following the breath, as well as > walking meditation (kinhin), as INTEGRAL aspects of bhavana--in fact, > as THE MAIN aspects of these paticular paths! I would tend to agree. It is true that this is usually the routine in Zen today, but the masters of the T'ang dynasty, those who founded the various schools, such as Huineng, Linji, Mazu, Huangpo, Yunmen, Tungshan and others all *de-emphasised* subject-object meditation. Huineng, who must be considered the greatest authority on Sudden Zen, in fact didn't teach seated meditation at all! Have you ever read his Platform Sutra? My favourite one. 7542 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Anders, > > Anders Honoré wrote: > Hi, all. > > > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. > > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition > > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. > > I was going to reply to this as well, but all my brain cells have been used up > on the last post, so may I suggest you read posts under Eightfold Path in > 'Useful Posts' and come back with questions or comments? What is your > particular interest here? Someone mentioned a supramundane eightfold path (Ithink it also mentioned supramundane Jhanas) which begins after stream-entry or something like that. I was curious because I have never heard of such a thing, and I was interested to see what others thought of it. 7543 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah and Robert E., > > --- Sarah wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > When it > > > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series > > of arisings with no > > > inhabitant > > > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, > > almost of despair. > > I've been thinking about Robert's post too. I had the > same thought as Sarah re. grief (my interpretation) as > aversion. But I was reminded of this: > > "'Grief 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 > grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental > qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities > decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. > When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue > this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and > skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Grief 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-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html > > Since I'm confident that the Buddha never suggested > any kind of akusala was to be pursued, this seems to > me to suggest there's a kind of grief that isn't > aversion? This doesn't make much sense to me however. > One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that there's > the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha > leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the point > but unfortunately I can't cite it from the > Dhammavinaya. I can pretty much relate to that sutta from personal experience. At one point, I was feeling pretty down and depressed by the whole thing. It didn't matter what I did. It was all futile and Samsaric. But it didn't really bother me, because I knew that this was a good thing, that I was becoming more dispassionate about the world. I figured, I'd either be succesful on the path or hit rock bottom. And rock bottom wasn't really such a poor alternative. After all, Who is hitting rock bottom ;-) 7544 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The traditional teachings Hi, Cybele --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > hi Jon > Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation > being > the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered > fundamental > I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional > teachings. There is one thing I'm sure we can agree on, Cybele--it is what the Buddha said on the subject that is the 'traditional teaching'. And I think we can also agree that the best source of information on what the Buddha said is the suttas and the vinaya, read in the light of the abhidhamma, and as elucidated by the commentaries. On my reading of these texts, the Buddha taught exclusively about understanding the reality of the present moment, and nothing he said should be read as otherwise. Let's consider for a moment mindfulness of breathing. We all breathe all day long, but breath is usually not an object of our attention. However, when it is, is there any reason why it should not be possible to experience the hardness or softness, heat or cold, appearing through the body door, that we normally take for breath? A moment of cognising one of the realities that we normally take for 'breath' is surely a moment of satipatthana with 'breath' as object. This would not seem to require a special time, place or posture. In a recent post you mentioned the passage from the Satipatthana Sutta on mindfulness of breathing. (This is an extremely difficult sutta to understand, but we need not go into that here.) To my understanding, that particular passage is an instruction specially directed to those who were already adept at samatha of a high level with breath as object. In the words of the commentary (p. 54 of Soma Thera's translation), "This is the portal to emancipation of the bhikkhu devoted to meditation on breathing". So when it talks about having gone to a quiet place, adopting a classic 'meditation' posture, long and short in-breaths and out-breaths etc it is describing the established practice of the very audience to whom it was primarily directed. Why did the Buddha see the need to address this particular audience on satipatthana with breath as object? Perhaps because when the development of samatha has already progressed to the level that the object of samatha has been replaced by an 'image' (nimitta) of that object, moments of satipatthana are not possible during absorption on the image, since the object of the moment of consciousness is a concept rather than a reality. If this interpretation is correct, then this part of the sutta should not be regarded as requiring us, or even as advising us, as relative beginners at samatha/vipassana, to undertake a particular kind of 'meditation practice' in order to develop mindfulness of breathing. So to return to your comment, I am very much interested the traditional teachings. But I do not necessarily accept the modern-day interpretation of them. However, I am always happy to discuss any views that are reasonably open on the texts. Jon 7545 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:07pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Anders, > > These were really interesting sutta extracts you quoted which encouraged me to > consider and research further, thankyou. I also checked some of the Pali (with > help from Jim). Great. This will probably be a pretty long post with more quotes, but what else is new? :-) > This deep consideration and reflection may seem unnecessary, but just to quote > from one of the lines following yours above, 'for the ordinary person > (puthujjanassa) who has not listened (assutavato), there is no > mental development (cittabhaavanaa). " Yes. I think it can be interpreted both ways though, so it's a hard one to reach any definitive answer to. > Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the > Mahayana > > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to > > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > ---------------------------------- > Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will be able to > answer that bettter;-)) Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is > always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, but I'm too lazy. Instead, I will turn to my own favourite, Huineng, who writes in one of his gathas (I've inluded some non-relevant parts here too, simply because I think they're great): Erroneous views keep us in defilement While right views remove us from it, But when we are in a position to discard both of them We are then absolutely pure. Bodhi is immanent in our Essence of Mind, An attempt to look for it elsewhere is erroneous. Within our impure mind the pure one is to be found, And once our mind is set right, we are free from the three kinds of beclouding (hatred, lust and illusion). If we are treading the Path of Enlightenment We need not be worried by stumbling-blocks. Provided we keep a constant eye on our own faults We cannot go astray from the right path. Since every species of life has its own way of salvation They will not interfere with or be antagonistic to one another. But if we leave our own path and seek some other way of salvation We shall not find it, And though we plod on till death overtakes us We shall find only penitence in the end. If you wish to find the true way Right action will lead you to it directly; But if you do not strive for Buddhahood You will grope in the dark and never find it. He who treads the Path in earnest Sees not the mistakes of the world; If we find fault with others We ourselves are also in the wrong. When other people are in the wrong, we should ignore it, For it is wrong for us to find fault. By getting rid of the habit of fault-finding We cut off a source of defilement. When neither hatred nor love disturb our mind Serenely we sleep. Those who intend to be the teachers of others Should themselves be skilled in the various expedients which lead others to enlightenment. When the disciple is free from all doubts It indicates that his Essence of Mind has been found. The Kingdom of Buddha is in this world, Within which enlightenment is to be sought. To seek enlightenment by separating from this world Is as absurd as to search for a rabbit's horn. Right views are called 'transcendental'; Erroneous views are called 'worldly'. When all views, right or erroneous, are discarded Then the essence of Bodhi appears. NB. "Essence of Mind" is another Mahayana term for Nibbana. Sarah, if you ever have the time to do so, you should try and read Huineng's Platform Sutra (It's at my website under 'Sutras' in the Zen/Ch'an Writings section). He is considered one of the three greatest Zen masters ever, and is just about the most canon source of Zen you''ll find. If you read this, you'll know more about Zen than most Zennists! Seriously though, it's some 28 A4 pages, so it's should be easily read, and I'd really love to see what a Theravadin like you can make of a text like that. To me, it's brilliant (even Ajahn Chah has praised it as true and highly profound), but if you have time (and willingness) to read it, I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. > ************************************************************** > > With regard to the MN 49 (24-26) passage you quoted: > > Sarah: >> B.Bodhi translates the passage as: > > > 'the consciousness that makes no showing, > > > And in becoming about to disbecome, > > > Not claiming being with respect to all: > > > that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc > Maj NIk, 49, The Invitation of a Brahma,24-26 > -------------------------------- > The word 'consciousness' is translated from 'vi~n~naa.na.m' to be understood as > 'cognizable' (vijaanitabba.m) and not consciousness according to the com. as > explained to me. As I mentioned, BB also added in his notes (513). , > > Sarah: >>"MA takes > > >the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the > > >sense that "it can be cognized" '. > ----------------------------------- > Perhaps another translation of the first line could be: > 'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shininig in all > directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)' > > Anders: > Hmm, well, we enter the realm of speculation as regards to the > definition of > > "consciousness" in this case. > -------------------------------------- > I think we all agree it refers to Nibbana. I'm not sure what you mean here. do you mean it refers refers to the consciousness *as* Nibbana, or as consciousmess *of* Nibbana? That's what I meant when I said the realm of speculation. > --------------------------------------- > I hope that clarifies and thanks for raising these tricky lines! > > ******************************************************** Haha, always happy to help :-) > Anders: > And Mun? > > Pls re-quote a relevant paragraph for either if you particularly think my > comments may be of any interest! (Sorry, I don't have the original anymore). I > admit I prefer discussing Tipitaka suttas or the understanding of members like > yourself! > > ********************************************************* I quote people like Chah and Mun to "stretch" the boundaries of understanding "Theravada." These people are 100% Theravada (not mention some of the most acclaimed teachers of this century), yet they present a different view of Theravada than you (I feel tempted to say: "Than your abidhammic school). I'll birefly requote a small passage by Mun: All that remains is the primal mind, true & unchanging. > ------------------------------------- > Finally, you quoted from Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, Text V, 151-2) > > Sarah: > > I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading > ------------------------------ > Now I find the Pali in the last line (vimariyaadikatena cetasaa viharatii ti) > means literally ' with a mind made without boundary. The com. mentions 'having > severed the boundary of the defilements' (kilesamariyaada.m bhinditva . . > .)which is much closer to the translation and my comment below I think. Hmm, I think the commentaries should be taken with a grain of salt in this case. Personally, the literal translation is much closer to what I am trying to say (haha, and hence I discard all else! bad formuluation on my part, but you know what I mean :-)). Teachers like Chah and Mun are really just commentators too, and they present a different commentary. > Anders: > "The Wayfarer" as with Tathagata is of course a conventional image, > but do > > we find support in the Sutta pitaka for the view that this conventional > > image does not point to an actuality (Nibbana-mind - Buddha- nature)? > ---------------------------------------- > There is no suggestion of a Buddha nature here.....As you suggest, Wayfarer > (not my favourite term!) or Tathagata or merely conventional terms: > > '....So, When the khandhas are present, > 'A being is said in common usage' (KS 1, 135) Could you post a larger quote, so the context can be seen? I don't think this quote here necessarily opposes what I am trying to say, since this Nibbana-mind/Buddha-nature (assuming, just for a second, that it is real) is traceless, unconditioned, non-dwelling and without any sign and hence can hardly be termed a 'being' (in the sense of Samsaric existence). > ********************************************** > Anders: > Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am > uncertain > > as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once > > commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and > > many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I > > think, too). > > Yes, well as others have pointed out, there will be a day when the whole > Tiptitaka is canned because no one can understand it or see its relevance:-)) I > believe many modern famous teachers would benefit a lot from a greater > appreciation and understanding of abhidhamma, but I know this is > controversial;-)) Well, I think we could argue for years there without reaching a definitive conclusion. :-) > ------------------------------------------------- > Anders, please don't ever be sorry for replying late...there are no time limits > at all here.I hope Shool is going well and please look in from time to time. It's going quite well! I am a lot more motivated than last year (the second year is always the hard one), and I am kinda sorry to see that this year will be my last. > We > all appreciate your dhamma contributions here! This has been quite challenging > for me, but I've really appreciated the chance to look at the suttas and the > pali. I am glad that my contributions aren't entirely in vain :-) > Btw, I had another look at your site the other day (sorry the link isn't handy) I know. But I refuse to pay money to keep it up, and am even more resistant to banners and pop-ups, so unless I can find a generous (and modest/discrete) sponsor, I don't think I'll find a domain name that's easier to remember anytime soon. > and I was very impressed. (Just surprised dsg wasn't mentioned amongst your > many discussion groups and hadn't received its 'gold cup' yet;-)) ) Haha, I need to update my links page soon. I have tons of links that I need to add and revise. I just haven't got around to it yet. Dsg will be mentioned the next time I revise the links page ;-) > One of these days, Jon and I are going to turn up in Elsinore to go on a long > walk in your woods discussing dhamma with you! In the meantime, we look forward > to more rewarding chats with you here! I will certainly be looking forward to it. Both the chats and the visit :-) Sincere regards Anders 7546 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:16pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. > > Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 > > I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like visiting brothels! Haha, that's true. I am curious though. Does this sutta condole that a Bikkhu should kill his own food (say, if he's caught in a polar region with no vegetation, and this seel is hooping about)? 7547 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:33pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > I'm not really interested in getting into the "Sudden vs. Gradual" > debate, as I don't think this is leading anywhere, so I'll just skip > that. You're of course welcome to skip it if it's of no use to you, just as I discard ways of presenting the Dhamma I know for sure are not helpful to my own practice--the moment I become aware they are no longer of ultimate benefit (i.e. connected with the goal). > Overall, I think the word "Sudden" is misleading. "Direct" would be a > more accurate term. To use Dogen's definition of it: In Zen, the > practise and realisation is not different. Ha ha! It appears you don't seem so inclined to skip it after all! Perhaps it IS leading somewhere! :) :) :) I'm glad there's finally a new "defender" willing to rise to the occasion in this "subitist" vs. "gradualist" debate here! :) :) :) So Anders, let me put the question to you: is just the ACT of sitting (or whatever practice we're talking about) the same thing as the enlightenment of a Tathagata? Is a hen sitting on her egg the same as a Buddha? (no Tathagatagharba stuff here for a minute) > I would tend to agree. It is true that this is usually the routine in > Zen today, but the masters of the T'ang dynasty, those who founded > the various schools, such as Huineng, Linji, Mazu, Huangpo, Yunmen, > Tungshan and others all *de-emphasised* subject-object meditation. So did Nagarjuna, whose Root Verses of the Middle Way should nuke any sort of subject/object views if meditated on properly. So should correctly-taught vipassana meditation--insight into whatever's arising at the moment, simply noting its characteristics, which also teaches not to force the mind on to a particular object but to note things as they are actually occurring. But that is not what is being driven at here. It is quite possible to carry ANY teaching to an unhealthy extreme, to the point of neglecting the other aspects of the Buddha's teachings. ANY teaching, even if right, when taken too far, becomes wrong. For example, the Dhamma is not to ONLY study scriptures, but to actually apply the teachings here and now--to eat the fruit rather than just look at it, in other words. That is why the Buddha enjoined his disciples to extert themselves, to endeavour, to arouse persistence and diligence in abandoning unskillful qualities and taking up skillful qualities. The Buddha NEVER said that we're just a collection of dependently arising, impermanent parts arising and passing away, and therefore we have no volitional control (conventionally) over our actions, for example. That is taking the doctrine of anatta to an unhealthy (even fatal) extreme. At core, the Dhamma is none other than the Middle Way between the extremes. For example, wisdom (insight) alone is insufficient to bring abuot the end of suffering; merit is also necessary--a prerequisite, in fact, as I was reminded by one of the kind instructors today at Wat Mahatat, when I asked him SPECIFICALLY about vipassana/insight, if there were any prerequisites for insight to arise. He said that there are definitely prerequisites. For example, one must have first given up taking life, taking what is not given, lying, sexual misconduct, and taking intoxicants that cause heedlessness. He further noted that insight won't arise without these factors being present (the Buddha said the same thing, as a matter of fact). (And I can also vouch for this in my own experience, because I began with "wisdom" teachings of Zen but was still violating panca-sila by drinking, for example, and consequently made VERY SLOW progress in inreasing mindfulness and concentration, for example--to the point that YEARS of effort were expended in a direction I mistakenly believed was correct, that, after abandoning those unskillful activities and being instructed on Right View from a far more conventioanl perspective, positive changes came so quickly I could barely process them! Much like the difference between swimming from Copenhagen to Bornholm vs. taking a hydrofoil!). Again, the Buddha usually taught in the most conventional terms of cause-and-effect. Why? Because cause-and-effect are irrelevant to our understanding of how to terminate suffering? The Buddha taught dana, sila, and bhavana, WHY? The Buddha taught Right Effort, WHY? Read the Simsapa Sutta to find out why the Buddha taught what he did, the WAY he did! :) :) :) This is ALL about skill-in-means--strategic pedagogy, in other words. Whatever works. Whatever will get us to give up the unskillful and uwholesome, and to take up the skillful and wholesome. Whatever will get us disenchanted with the torments of cyclic existence, help us disentangle ourselves from our thickets of views, lead us out of our wilderness of views, straighten our contortion of views, pacify our writhing of views, unchain us from our fetter of views. The point is for each of us to find the "sweet spot," the place between the Scylla and Charybdis of the extremes: especially extreme views and practices. The Middle Way is not difficult at all. It's that most of us make it MUCH more difficult than it need be. > Huineng, who must be considered the greatest authority on Sudden Zen, > in fact didn't teach seated meditation at all! Have you ever read his > Platform Sutra? My favourite one. I have not read the Platform Sutra. I lost interest in Zen some years ago since I found everything I need in the Tibetan teachings expressed in the qway I find most helpful for these accumulations, though I did begin my Dharma practice this go-round with Zen. Anyway, emptiness is subtle, difficult to see, to-be-experienced-by- the-wise, and for MOST people (with the rare exception of the Hui Nengs of the world and other spiritual savants who ended the effluents on simply hearing a single sutta by the Buddha), REALISTICALLY, in terms of sentient beings who are suffering RIGHT NOW, to believe that just hearing a few stanzas or believing there is no need for development (bhavana)--which includes directed effort and persistence (as taught all over the place by Lord Buddha in the Suttas) of any sort--that just THINKING about "seeing things as they arise" will liberate us instantly, appears to me to be putting the cart way before the horse! What about all the requisite nutriment conditions for true insight- wisdom to arise? This is true for ALL practitioners, even the Hui Nengs. It's just that some have already developed this to such a high degree that a single stanza will liberate them. But the requisite nutriment conditions (sila, etc.) are still present in them all the same. I would be curious to know, in terms of percentages, just how many of those who have awakened to the Deathless have done so without a degree of serious applied bhavana (development) as a part of that. There's Hui Neng. There's the arahat Bahiya. These practitioners are RARE EXCEPTIONS. So Lord Buddha, out of compassion for suffering beings, mostly teaches at the conventional level, where most people are RIGHT NOW. And again, what is the point of all of this Dharma business anyway? If we go by the Buddha's own words (Simsapa Sutta), the SOLE point of this Dharma is to help sentient beings terminate their suffering. How to do that? Start where we are NOW, not where we wish we are. And what does that mean, for most of us? Mundane, boring, WORK, that serves to generate lots of bitching and moaning for most of us but is nonetheless indispensible. Stuff like training in generosity and keeping morality--at least to the degree of panca-sila. Then purification practices to wear away at the coarsest of our negativities (dhutanga/Tibetan ngondro). And THEN, things like applied mindfulness meditation, taking specific objects, like the body, the feelings, the mind, and mental qualities, which serves as the basis for concentration to arise, which when combined with insight-wisdom, in a flash terminates the fetters binding us to the wheel of samsara. This follows that, in other words. When this arises, that arises. When this ceases, that ceases. Basic cause-and-effect stuff, just like the Buddha said: "Now, I tell you, clear knowing & release have their nutriment. They are not without nutriment. And what is their nutriment? The seven factors of awakening... And what is the nutriment for the seven factors of awakening? The four frames of reference... And what is the nutriment for the four frames of reference? The three forms of right conduct... And what is the nutriment for the three forms of right conduct? Restraint of the senses... And what is the nutriment for restraint of the senses? Mindfulness & alertness... And what is the nutriment for mindfulness & alertness? Appropriate attention... And what is the nutriment for appropriate attention? Conviction... And what is the nutriment for conviction? Hearing the true Dhamma... And what is the nutriment for hearing the true Dhamma? Associating with people who are truly good..." Anyway, I'm greatly enjoying this debate! (and I suspect you are too!). If you like, you can continue to play the subitist, I'll continue to play gradualist (until we tired of it, and then perhaps we can switch sides)? :) Hva tror du? :) 7548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! op 19-08-2001 10:10 schreef Kom Tukovinit op Kom Tukovinit: > Dear Sarah and Mike, > > I have a fussy explanation about this phenomenon, so please read it at > your own risk! > > If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has > always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the > suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level > progresses. > > Dear Kom, as I explained in "Conditions", Ch 14, jhana-factors can be taken in a wide sense and then, according to the Patthana, akusala jhana-factors are related to the associated aggregates by jhana-condition. See also Dhammasangani, in the Summary, where jhana-factors are mentioned arising with kusala citta which is unaccompanied by panna and also with akusala citta (§147, and § 397 a) Without the jhana-factors good or evil deeds cannot be performed. A similar case we find under Path-condition, where akusala path-factors are taken into account. Nina. 7549 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:46pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > --- Sarah wrote: > > Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you > regard the > > Mahayana > > > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An > answer to > > > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > > ---------------------------------- > > Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will be > able to > > answer that bettter;-)) > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) You know, I have yet to find any contradiction between the Mahayana and the Pali Canon either. In fact, the more I study, the more one simply serves to confirm the other. 7550 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 11:08pm Subject: Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Sarah How have you been? How is your stay in Hong Kong? I am glad to hear from you, too. You wrote: "Suan, it all sounds very easy as af anyone can just decide to go for levels of jhana without any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment." I agree with you. It is a very difficult path for us just to reach the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca samadhi). That is why I wrote: "So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca samadhi), you won't stop at there." Please notice the adverb "ever" in the above statement. I was merely following the flow of Sakula's questions, so I had to start with the assumption that a hypothetical woman sush as Sakula had already attained pre-jhanic concentration. Once you got there, though, you would aim at higher levels. You also wrote: "I know that many teachers encourage these views, but I find them quite disturbing." You must forgive me, Sarah, I do not understand the above statement. What do "these views" refer to? Are there any views in my message that you find disturbing? If so, please help me identify them so that I could properly address them to your satisfaction. But, I do stand by my following statements: "The most important keyword to remember to make jhana within our reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from sensuous preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, of course)!" Please kindly read (kamesu vivicceva, my spelling error) as vivicceva kamehi. You also asked: "What about as soon as we open our eyes or hear a sound? Sensuous preoccupations immediately! No self that can stop or control clinging at these times." Not necessarily so, Sarah, I am afraid. You sounded somewhat Freudian here. But, whatever we see or hear do not necessarily bring about the mental events with clinging or greed (lobhamula cittani) responsible for sensuous pre-occupations. If they were true as you adviced, you would have contradicted yourself because you wrote the following: " any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment." Your statement above clearly shows that there are certain other types of people whose preoccupatins are other than sensuous ones. With regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7551 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:06am Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > > >I think we can relate this to the Buddha as well. Despite his unparalleled > >teaching ability, he cannot bring wisdom to those who were not ready. > >We can also see how the interactions in DSG go. We can at best suggest > >to people that this is how things could plausibly work. It totally depends > >on the person's accumulation (including reading and considering other > >people's posts) how the person would take a message. > > According with my limited understanding capacity and my past accumulations > plus my present conditionings and actual moment of awareness and mood > condition (how many factors indeed...) I agree that wisdom cannot be imposed > but assimilated if the 'conditions' are ripe. > BUT dear Kom when you candidly declare that we can observe it in the > interactions in DSG affirming 'we can at best suggest to people this is how > things could plausibly work' I cannot but perceive a [patronizing] taste > like one of a person who doesn't discuss to share and with an openmind to I certainly didn't mean it to be patronizing. The person included in the list of "suggested but not taken" includes myself. Do you remember how many times you suggested to the list that sitting down meditation is a must, but yet I have never (or not yet, never say never) taken it? kom 7552 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:18am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Hi Sarah, You're right, I did kind of slip in quietly and try to avoid the common courtesy of introducing myself, but since you called me on it, I suppose I must :-) More in context below. --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Frank, > > I like hearing which parts of the suttanta people > turn to most. These are good > comments below which I pretty much agree with, > though this list takes me all > over the Tipitaka! The six sets of six is my favorite sutta of all time (mn 148? one forty something anyways). Sometimes when talking about 5 aggregates it can seem abstract and disconnected from our normal moment to moment experience, but when the Buddha goes through the six sense organs, the sense objects, contact, craving associated through each of the six doors, etc, and show that they are impermanent, that if a abiding soul were to exist they would also arise and pass away continuously, which would be an untenable position, it really seems so clear when explained this way. It's just such a practical and clear way that outlines the whole buddhist path. When I was young, my mother forced me to memorize and regularly recite the heart of prajnaparamita sutra in Chinese. I hated it. It made no sense, and after I read over 10 commentaries on it, it still made no sense. Well, I was young then. Now when I read the heart sutra, I have a new appreciation for it, but I still think it's completely pointless to force young kids to memorize it. That's not the way to get people to learn. If I were to memorize anything, memorizing the six sets of six would have made much more sense. But even that, I object to forcing young kids to memorize it for their own good. People have to want to learn on their own initiative. But I digress. Many other suttas in the MN I am very fond of, but I am short an time and will have to talk about them another time. > > Frank, on another note, I think you slipped in > quietly here..I don't think > you've posted on dsg before? (If this is all > repetition, just ignore it!) Some of you on this list already know me from dhamma-list, which I am sometimes pretty active on. Quick info about me: I'm 32, but I often feel like I'm 32,000 years old. Even when I was 16. Sometimes, when I wake up I get this indescribably intense feeling that is wordless and very momentary, maybe just 2 seconds, but it takes me many paragraphs to describe what the feeling is. In short, that feeling is, "Surely, an end to this whole mass of suffering can be found." It's a sense of urgency to practice dhamma more diligently. Already I have wasted too much of my precious life doing meaningless things. I've resolved to retire from the rat race next year, about 5 years short of my original timetable to devote full time to dhamma practice. I may ordain in the future, I may not. I may live in a dhamma community somwehre in the world with other serious cultivators, or maybe I'll live secluded in a forest for 20 years with only animals as my company walking around naked subsisting on nuts, seeds, mangos, young coconuts. I don't know yet. Most likely, I'll probably alternate between those two options every few years. I'm not fluent in Pali, and I don't know if I'll ever be. But I am going to learn a bit of it. I tend to prefer quiet and solitude, but in the company of cultivators and dhamma practitioners I have moments resembling a normal functioning human with decent communication skills. I love animals. I work with computers. I used to love computers, video games, hi-tech toys, now I just want to drop it all and return to nature. I'm heavily into yoga (taoist, indian, tibetan), health, nutrition. I'm a big fan of Taoism, Zen, but I really don't discuss it much. I prefer to stick to the pragamtic Theravada tradition as the optimal form of transimitting dhamma to the public at large. I don't watch t.v., and although I still love classical music and jazz, I decided it was time to let it go. I don't listen to music cd's anymore, and I miss it, but it's a feeble craving, not the kind where I am tormented by my decision to let it go. Long ago I learned that renunciation won't work until you're ready for it, so I let things go only when I'm good and ready. You can set goals, but you have to relax into it, can't force it or repress if you want stable long term results. About a year and a half ago, I had a major insight, one of those "a-ha", lightbulbs turn on, devas are singing kind of moments where a simple truth that has been intellectually obvious for my whole lifetime suddenly crystalizes and becomes part of my moment to moment awareness. If I were to ask anyone, if you had a choice, would you abide in a pleasant state or unpleasant state? Without question, everyone would answer "a pleasant state." It doesn't matter what kind of twist I throw in, I could stipulate, what if you're asleep, what if you're in a different country, what if I wave my hands in front of your face and try to distract you, everyone would pick (a) and never (b) (unpleasant state). So if that's the case, why would anyone ever choose to be angry? That was my light bulb moment, and anger really loosened and became easy to let go of after that. What else about me? Let's see. I like to rock climb, surf, hike, bike, I spend lots of time walking/jogging on the beach. I hardly ever socialize. I'm voluntarily celibate (strict - to the point where I don't tolerate lustful thoughts for more than a few seconds). My idea of a good time is spending friday or saturday night reading the MN or SN or visudhimagga, and discussing insights in dhamma with other serious cultivators. That's me in a nutshell, probably more than most of you wanted to know :-) And when I'm in a hurry, I just type in my message in one pass without editing or checking for errors or removing things I wrote that I might regret later. I'll probably be lurking on this list most of the time, but occasionally I'll pop in with some left field comment that just makes everyone wonder what planet I'm from. Loving kindness, -fk 7553 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:26am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- Erik wrote: > --- "Anders Honore" > wrote: > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > > Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you > > regard the > > > Mahayana > > > > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An > > answer to > > > > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > > > ---------------------------------- > > > Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will > be > > able to > > > answer that bettter;-)) > > > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > > You know, I have yet to find any contradiction between the Mahayana > and the Pali Canon either. In fact, the more I study, the more one > simply serves to confirm the other. Yes, I feel the same way. Of course there are great differences in expression, and some differences in the practises too, but the only real difference I've found is the Bodhisattva doctrine (which, as I've mentioned before, might not be a difference after all!). 7554 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:53am Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > --- "Anders Honore" > wrote: > > Overall, I think the word "Sudden" is misleading. "Direct" would be > a > > more accurate term. To use Dogen's definition of it: In Zen, the > > practise and realisation is not different. > > Ha ha! It appears you don't seem so inclined to skip it after all! > Perhaps it IS leading somewhere! :) :) :) I'm glad there's finally a > new "defender" willing to rise to the occasion in this "subitist" > vs. "gradualist" debate here! :) :) :) > > So Anders, let me put the question to you: is just the ACT of sitting > (or whatever practice we're talking about) the same thing as the > enlightenment of a Tathagata? Is a hen sitting on her egg the same as > a Buddha? (no Tathagatagharba stuff here for a minute) See, this is exactly why I don't wish to enage in the debate. I could explain all about the different levels at which this would have to be understood and all, but it wouldn't have any relevance to your practise, would it? As Derek skilfully pointed out at one point: Initially, Buddhism was just a practise, but at one point in history, it somehow switched to become a philosophical endeavour. > The Buddha NEVER said that we're just a > collection of dependently arising, impermanent parts arising and > passing away, and therefore we have no volitional control > (conventionally) over our actions, for example. That is taking the > doctrine of anatta to an unhealthy (even fatal) extreme. That's what I've been trying to say too, but it's seems there isn't much support for this though. I disagree about the volition part, btw. > (And I can also vouch for this in my own experience, because I began > with "wisdom" teachings of Zen but was still violating panca-sila by > drinking, for example, and consequently made VERY SLOW progress in > inreasing mindfulness and concentration, for example--to the point > that YEARS of effort were expended in a direction I mistakenly > believed was correct, that, after abandoning those unskillful > activities and being instructed on Right View from a far more > conventioanl perspective, positive changes came so quickly I could > barely process them! Much like the difference between swimming from > Copenhagen to Bornholm vs. taking a hydrofoil!). Yeah, it's the same for me. That's also one of the main reasons why I am attracted to Theravada (and the reason why I'll probably ordain in a Theravada monastery over a Zen one), because they emphasise Samadhi and (especially) Sila more. My Prajna is still much sronger than my Samadhi and Sila, and my Sila is still stronger than my Samadhi (not necessarily one-pointed concentration under this definition). And hence I need to develop those. I still hold Zen in high esteem, but I think one of the flaws of Zen, is that it doesn't include the establishment of a solid base to a proper degree before developing that Prajna (it's least not nowadays. It was probably different before). > This is ALL about skill-in-means--strategic pedagogy, in other words. > Whatever works. Whatever will get us to give up the unskillful and > uwholesome, and to take up the skillful and wholesome. Whatever will > get us disenchanted with the torments of cyclic existence, help us > disentangle ourselves from our thickets of views, lead us out of our > wilderness of views, straighten our contortion of views, pacify our > writhing of views, unchain us from our fetter of views. Yes. That's also why I think it odd that one should think that it is *only* within Buddhism that liberation is found. Btw, did you find the sutta we talked about? > The point is for each of us to find the "sweet spot," the place > between the Scylla and Charybdis of the extremes: especially extreme > views and practices. The Middle Way is not difficult at all. It's > that most of us make it MUCH more difficult than it need be. Yeah, I love what Foyan (a brilliant Zen teacher) said about this: "All that is necessary is that there be no perceiver or perceived when you perceive [no separation of perceiver and perceived], no thinker or thought when you think [no separation of thinker and thought]. Buddhism is very easy. Just let go, then step back and look....." "Buddhism is extremely easy and saves the most energy. It's just that you yourself waste energy and cause yourself trouble. The ancients saw people helpless, and told them to try meditating quietly. This was good advice, but later people didn't understand what the ancients meant, and closed their eyes, suppressed body and mind, and sat like lumps waiting for enlightenment. How foolish!" That's the direct path, if you ask me (and that's all I'll say about it ;-)) > I have not read the Platform Sutra. I lost interest in Zen some years > ago since I found everything I need in the Tibetan teachings > expressed in the qway I find most helpful for these accumulations, > though I did begin my Dharma practice this go-round with Zen. Yes, Dzogchen is based on the same (direct) principles, although it is usually more clear and approachable than Zen. The strength of Dzogchen is that it is easily approachable. The strength of Zen is that it defies conceptual thought, and forces the student to go beyond it. I've got the First Treasury of Longchenpa (Precious Treasury of the Dharmadatu) on my computer, which I'll be reading eventually. Great stuff, from what little I've read so far. You should read the Platform Sutra anyway (it's at my site). I think you'll appreciate his directness. And again, what is the point of all of this Dharma business anyway? > If we go by the Buddha's own words (Simsapa Sutta), the SOLE point of > this Dharma is to help sentient beings terminate their suffering. > > How to do that? Start where we are NOW, not where we wish we are. > > And what does that mean, for most of us? > > Mundane, boring, WORK, that serves to generate lots of bitching and > moaning for most of us but is nonetheless indispensible. Stuff like > training in generosity and keeping morality--at least to the degree > of panca-sila. Then purification practices to wear away at the > coarsest of our negativities (dhutanga/Tibetan ngondro). And THEN, > things like applied mindfulness meditation, taking specific objects, > like the body, the feelings, the mind, and mental qualities, which > serves as the basis for concentration to arise, which when combined > with insight-wisdom, in a flash terminates the fetters binding us to > the wheel of samsara. > > This follows that, in other words. When this arises, that arises. > When this ceases, that ceases. Basic cause-and-effect stuff, just > like the Buddha said: > > "Now, I tell you, clear knowing & release have their nutriment. They > are not without nutriment. And what is their nutriment? The seven > factors of awakening... And what is the nutriment for the seven > factors of awakening? The four frames of reference... And what is the > nutriment for the four frames of reference? The three forms of right > conduct... And what is the nutriment for the three forms of right > conduct? Restraint of the senses... And what is the nutriment for > restraint of the senses? Mindfulness & alertness... And what is the > nutriment for mindfulness & alertness? Appropriate attention... And > what is the nutriment for appropriate attention? Conviction... And > what is the nutriment for conviction? Hearing the true Dhamma... And > what is the nutriment for hearing the true Dhamma? Associating with > people who are truly good..." Yes, that is true. I think they link up at various levels beyond what is described here. Nonetheless, this is pretty much the basic scheme. > Anyway, I'm greatly enjoying this debate! (and I suspect you are > too!). Growl, I'll be hard pressed to admit it! ;-) > If you like, you can continue to play the subitist, I'll continue to > play gradualist (until we tired of it, and then perhaps we can switch > sides)? :) > > Hva tror du? :) Haha, jeg vil hellere være ikke-positionalist! 7555 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Going on Vacation Hi, all - My wife and I are leaving tomorrow (Monday 8/20, our anniversary) for vacation, then to return home on Saturday 8/25. I am just letting the posts pile up! ;-)) If any are directed to me, I'll try to respond to them when we return. Be well, 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) 7556 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 2:04am Subject: Re: Good Grief! Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has > > always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the > > suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level > > progresses. > > > > Dear Kom, as I explained in "Conditions", Ch 14, jhana-factors can be taken in > a wide sense and then, according to the Patthana, akusala jhana- factors are > related to the associated aggregates by jhana-condition. See also > Dhammasangani, in the Summary, where jhana-factors are mentioned arising > with kusala citta which is unaccompanied by panna and also with akusala > citta (§147, and § 397 a) Without the jhana-factors good or evil deeds > cannot be performed. A similar case we find under Path-condition, where > akusala path-factors are taken into account. > Nina. Thank you, Maa'm, for pointing this out. My mistake is in the case of paying attention to the words more than the meanings. Do you by any chance have further explanation about why Domanassa would assist the citta to be fixed on the object (but not anger, for example)? I think I can understand about how the rest of the factors assist the citta in being fixed on the object, but I still don't see how domanasa does this. kom 7557 From: Num Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Hi Kom and Nina, Hope you guys don't mind I try to get in the discussion about paccaya. It's hard for me reading about paccaya. Again, please do correct me and I always appreciate every input. This is only my opinion. From your writing (Nina's) about conditions and from other sources I have read and listened, Jhana paccaya included both miccha-samadhi and samma-samadhi. Also from your books and some discussion with Kom, all 7 Jhana( esp ekaggata) factors can arise in both kusula or akusula citta. In Dosa based samadhi, only domanassa can be a vedana along with other Jhana factors, viakka, vicara as well as ekaggata. In Lobha based samadhi vitakka, vicara, piti, somanassa(sukha), ekaggata and I think even upekkha can be a Jhanna factors here b/c at time lobha-mula-citta can accompany by upekkha as well, not only in last stage of Jhana in both four and five level. But if samadhi is samma-samadhi, which means it's accompanied by panna, Jhana cannot be akusala in nature. So panna distinguishs Jhana into kusala and akulasa. Also in Magga paccaya, miccha-ditthi has been included as a factor, but ditthi and panna(samma-ditthi) cannot arise together. If magga paccaya at that moment has samma-ditthi(panna), all other magga factors also have been entitled as samma- ….., if it's not a right path (with miccha-ditthi) whatever magga factors which coarise at that moment all become part of miccha-magga. Num 7558 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 6:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom > >I certainly didn't mean it to be patronizing. The person included in >the list of "suggested but not taken" includes myself. Do you >remember how many times you suggested to the list that sitting down >meditation is a must, but yet I have never (or not yet, never say >never) taken it? > >kom Indeed Kom but for example as I am openminded and openhearted I took your suggestion and from others list members of studying Abhidhamma that I use to postpone because of the complexities, reading from original texts while I used to read the commentaries because the language were much more palatable to me and improving my knowledge of pali to deepen my knowledge of Dhamma what I had previously neglected. Even if I have various divergences with your approach (I mean the dsg approach) mostly regarding meditation and a certain self assurance clan like about your practice and your devotion to Khun Sujin this doesn't prevents me of appreciating and taking in consideration the valuable sharings and your keeness on Dhamma. I am not prejudiced or 'dogmatic' and I don't cling to anything 'a priori': the proof of the pudding... :-) Metta and a hug Cybele 7559 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: Good Grief! Dear Sarah, I am looking at the commentaries for the particular sutta that Mike mentioned (MN 21). The commentaries in Thai is as challenging as the sutta itself. I think you really should look at an English translation or look at it in Pali. The commentary mentioned that domanassa that should not be pursued includes domanassa that is connected to the 5 sensualities. The domanassa that should be pursued includes domanassa resulting from wanting to attain the lokutarra phala but doesn't attain adaquate amount of vipassana in a certain period of time, the wanting of the same kind of ayatana as the ariyans. As a result of the want, the domanassa arises. "To be pursued" domannassaa includes: domanassa resulting from leaving the 5 sensualities, from vipassana, from being mindful - being aware, from the 1st Jhana, etc. It was then explained in detail how a Bikhu can have domanassa resulted from wanting to have the result but has not attained. kom --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Kom, > > Just sent my note before looking at your post here which I'll read with > interest.....I'm glad you've raised the jhana link. > > I wonder if you have any Thai com notes too? > > S. > 7560 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > > So Anders, let me put the question to you: is just the ACT of > sitting > > (or whatever practice we're talking about) the same thing as the > > enlightenment of a Tathagata? Is a hen sitting on her egg the same > as > > a Buddha? (no Tathagatagharba stuff here for a minute) > > See, this is exactly why I don't wish to engage in the debate. I could > explain all about the different levels at which this would have to be > understood and all, but it wouldn't have any relevance to your > practice, would it? I dunno, would it? Just yesterday I recall the Theravadin professor (another teacher I was brought to by one of my Theravadin teachers there) said the most curious thing to us--including the several Theravadin monks in attendance: that we were all Buddhas! :) :) :) And my lamas have trained me to endeavor to see all sentient beings as Buddhas as well. And that has really, truly helped my practice in so many ways, to the point there have been times I have seen things that might have otherwise appeared to be quite ordinary appear in the most miraculous ways to these eyes. > As Derek skillfully pointed out at one point: > Initially, Buddhism was just a practice, but at one point in history, > it somehow switched to become a philosophical endeavor. Yes, and that was yet ANOTHER point emphasized by my teacher yesterday in our little classroom at Wat Mahatat. One, I should add, I could not agree more heartily about with both you and he. Which is why my teacher was emphatic that we must "taste the fruit" by our practice of the Dhamma, rather than merely intellectualize it away with more layers of abstractions; that we must directly come to know it in our own lives through the mindful application of Right Effort. He particularly emphasized the uselessness of mere study for its own sake, and that such an endeavour leads not to the fruits of the Noble Path, but to further entanglement in views, and directly blocks the very wisdom we are seeking, the very wisdom that arises to terminate once and for all the sufferings of cyclic existence. And I recall so clearly on hearing these words, sitting in that room feeling so at ease and comfortable (I believe the Thai and Khmer word for this feeling is so much nicer that any words we have for it in English: "sabai"), in the exactly same way I feel so "sabai" in my lama's gompa (instruction and meditation hall). This was in addition to the great happiness I was feeling at seeing my dear friend Noppan and her friend Yu (whose original name was "viriya," believe it or not!) sitting beside me, having come for their first time for formal instruction in the Buddha's Dhamma after having lived their entire lives here in Bangkok as Buddhists, without ever having undertaken formal instruction in the Buddha's Dhamma (I had met Noppan some months ago via the Internet because I had been seeking someone to help me pick up a little Thai and act as a guide on my planned move to this City of Angels). > > The Buddha NEVER said that we're just a > > collection of dependently arising, impermanent parts arising and > > passing away, and therefore we have no volitional control > > (conventionally) over our actions, for example. That is taking the > > doctrine of anatta to an unhealthy (even fatal) extreme. > > That's what I've been trying to say too, but it's seems there isn't > much support for this though. By "much support," where do you mean? Here in DSG? Or in the words of the Buddha? If it's support in terms of what the Buddha actually taught, if you read the Pali Suttas, you will find support for this everywhere! That view you will find no support for in the Buddha's teachings: the idea that because all phenomena are empty and ultimately beyond control, that there is no conventional possibility of choices, such as choosing to train in sila, or "generating desire, arousing persistence, endeavouring, upholding and exerting our intent" for the abandoning of unskillful/unwholesome qualities and the taking up of skillful/wholesome qualities. > Yeah, it's the same for me. That's also one of the main reasons why I > am attracted to Theravada (and the reason why I'll probably ordain in > a Theravada monastery over a Zen one), because they emphasise Samadhi > and (especially) Sila more. My Prajna is still much stronger than my > Samadhi and Sila, and my Sila is still stronger than my Samadhi (not > necessarily one-pointed concentration under this definition). And > hence I need to develop those. Yeah, I have a much practice yet to do in terms of the samadhi part as well (and I still have to perfect my patience and efforts at present to make this midstream more fertile soil for the perfection of samadhi and wisdom). Which is why I shall be attending a three-day meditation retreat August 24-26 at the invitation of one of the meditation masters present in yesterday's class--which my present level of development will provide me with better conditions for the practices of sati and samadhi taught to me so far at Wat Mahatat. Not that we technically need any special places for meditation, as my teacher there emphasized: we can be aware of all of these realities RIGHT NOW in the midst of our daily activities--indeed we MUST! And yet, practically speaking, for myself, I have found it of immense benefit to follow the Buddha's advice in the Satipatthana Sutta in terms of seeking out solitude and favorable conditions for cultivating this all the same. For a more average practitioner like me, I have found it to be an enormous help to be freed from the distractions of daily life for a little while, because I have found that this really, REALLY helps get my mind unscattered and focused in just the right place, such that when I return to daily life my mindfulness and concentration are that much more developed and stable. But that's just this beginner on the path. I am sure there are some great beings whose mindfulness and concentration are so well-developed that this sort of effort and practice in things like solitude and retreat is merely gilding on the lotus. > I still hold Zen in high esteem, but I > think one of the flaws of Zen, is that it doesn't include the > establishment of a solid base to a proper degree before developing > that Prajna (it's least not nowadays. It was probably different > before). Like you, I still hold Zen in great esteem, but, like you, have found myself drawn to the Tibetan Dharma for the very reasons you mentioned you find the Theravada appealing to you: that it emphasizes the more mundane, foundational aspects, such as sila, which I found in my own life were lacking to where I was unable to take any real slightest advantage of the deep and sublime wisdom-aspect teachings I had learned about therein (which as I noted, resulted in VERY LITTLE progress for me on the path). > > The Middle Way is not difficult at all. It's > > that most of us make it MUCH more difficult than it need be. > > Yeah, I love what Foyan (a brilliant Zen teacher) said about this: > "All that is necessary is that there be no perceiver or perceived > when you perceive [no separation of perceiver and perceived], no > thinker or thought when you think [no separation of thinker and > thought]. Buddhism is very easy. Just let go, then step back and > look....." > "Buddhism is extremely easy and saves the most energy. It's just that > you yourself waste energy and cause yourself trouble. The ancients > saw people helpless, and told them to try meditating quietly. This > was good advice, but later people didn't understand what the ancients > meant, and closed their eyes, suppressed body and mind, and sat like > lumps waiting for enlightenment. How foolish!" To add to that, in the Tibetan teachings there are "Four Faults" to recognizing our Buddha-nature, when we fail to recognize that the nature of mind is: 1) too near 2) too easy 3) too subtle 4) too excellent > Yes, Dzogchen is based on the same (direct) principles, although it > is usually more clear and approachable than Zen. The strength of > Dzogchen is that it is easily approachable. The strength of Zen is > that it defies conceptual thought, and forces the student to go > beyond it. Indeed! Like all correct Dhamma its purpose it to terminate our clinging views. > I've got the First Treasury of Longchenpa (Precious Treasury of the > Dharmadhatu) on my computer, which I'll be reading eventually. Great > stuff, from what little I've read so far. Excellent choice, my friend! Dzogchen is quiet the practice (not mine, as in the Geluk and Kagyu schools we have the equivalent, Mahamudra, the Great Seal). > You should read the Platform Sutra anyway (it's at my site). I think > you'll appreciate his directness. I have already taken your advice and began reading last night. I particularly enjoy this passage: "Learned Audience, those who recite the word 'Prajna' the whole day long do not seem to know that Prajna is inherent in their own nature. But mere talking on food will not appease hunger, and this is exactly the case with these people. We might talk on Sunyata (Emptiness) for myriads of kalpas, but talking alone will not enable us to realize the Essence of Mind, and it serves no purpose in the end. "The word 'Mahaprajnaparamita' is Sanskrit, and means 'great wisdom to reach the opposite shore' (of the sea of existence). What we have to do is to put it into practice with our mind; whether we recite it or not does not matter. Mere reciting it without mental practice may be likened to a phantasm, a magical delusion, a flash of lightning or a dewdrop. On the other hand, if we do both, then our mind will be in accord with what we repeat orally." I look forward to much, much more reading of this excellent Sutra! Many deep bows of thanks pointing this out to me, Anders! > > If you like, you can continue to play the subitist, I'll continue > to > > play gradualist (until we tired of it, and then perhaps we can > switch > > sides)? :) > > > > Hva tror du? :) > > Haha, jeg vil hellere være ikke-positionalist! You appear to be in perfect agreement here with both Nagarjuna: "emptiness is beyond taking any position," and Master Chandrakirti: "any position breeds a counter-position, and neither is valid in itself," both of whom are considered the key proponents of the true Middle Way as expounded in my own Geluk school's "Madhyamika- Prasangika" system of tenets. This has been wonderfully articulated by the true Master Acharya Professor Richard Hayes (the "baddest of the bad cops" for me and a true master of the Buddha's Dharma who there mere though of causes tears of gratitude to well up in me): http://www.kaihan.com/library/RH-Nagarjuna.htm As always, Anders, it's been a pleasure! 7561 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 2:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Undesirable objects - Betty Dear Betty, Well I got to see an extract of the film on CNN this morning - quite stopped my yoga practice in its stride! Looks set to be another 'Crouching Tiger' with wonderful sets, costumes, elephants and the rest..... There was also an interview with your cousin (or husband's cousin), Prince C? Yugala, and he came across very well. I learned that 5oo yrs ago in Thailand, the monks kept their eyebrows which they don't today. I appreiciate the examples given by you, Nina and Erik with regard to being grateful to those who speak harsh words or who act as a condition for us to receive unpleasant vipaka......not easy at all. Like you suggested, mana really blinds us! Thankyou . Sarah p.s We seldom get to movies these days even though the best cinema in town is 2mins walk from home, but when there's a 'personal connection' it gives us a good excuse (which is how I justify the Jacky Chan films too - I had a few years trying to teach his wild son). We'll be giving you full credit for the English dialogue and ignore any mistakes! --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Betty, I greatly appreciate your report about the vipaka experienced > and your wise consideration of the events. Those are helpful reminders. I > also had unpleasant vipaka, there were some unpleasant and blunt words, that > can happen. But still this was a reminder for me not to be neglectful as to > sati and then we can even be grateful to the person who uttered them. 7562 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 3:11pm Subject: Re: Undesirable objects - Betty --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Betty, > > Well I got to see an extract of the film on CNN this morning - quite stopped my > yoga practice in its stride! Looks set to be another 'Crouching Tiger' with > wonderful sets, costumes, elephants and the rest..... Oh jeez, great, another reminder to quit my slacking and take up my former practice of yoga (which I have been shirking since arriving in Thailand and getting so heavily involved in all these other wonderful aspects of the Dhamma to the point of neglecting the only possible vehicle for awakening to these truths at all--this fathom-long body! :) :) :) Look forward to seeing you and Jon again soon! All my love, Erik 7563 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 3:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah Hi Anders, --- Anders Honore wrote: > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > > > If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is > > always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! > > I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, > but I'm too lazy. Anders, I'm really not making any comments about Mahyana texts. My comment above is in regard to any comment on the Theravada Tipitaka interpreted in this way. Originally we were discussing Tipitaka suttas mentioned by you, and I'd prefer to stick to this, partly because I have no knowledge of Mahayana texts, but mainly because this is a forum for the study of dhamma according to the Theravada texts and ancient commentaries:-)) I'm sure you have several other forums for discussing Zen and other Mahayana teachings.... > Sarah, if you ever have the time to do so, you should try and read > Huineng's Platform Sutra (It's at my website under 'Sutras' in the > Zen/Ch'an Writings section). He is considered one of the three > greatest Zen masters ever, and is just about the most canon source of > Zen you''ll find. If you read this, you'll know more about Zen than > most Zennists! Thanks, Anders... I'll keep your requests in mind.....I appreciate your interest in my comments which I'm sure would not do this or the other Sutras justice! > > > ************************************************************** > > > > With regard to the MN 49 (24-26) passage you quoted: > I'm not sure what you mean here. do you mean it refers refers to the > consciousness *as* Nibbana, or as consciousmess *of* Nibbana? That's > what I meant when I said the realm of speculation. Sorry. What I understand is Nibbana as cognizable, i.e knowable or realizable.....(in other words realizable by magga and phala cittas) > > ******************************************************** > > Haha, always happy to help :-) > > > Anders: > And Mun? > > ********************************************************* > I quote people like Chah and Mun to "stretch" the boundaries of > understanding "Theravada." These people are 100% Theravada (not > mention some of the most acclaimed teachers of this century), yet > they present a different view of Theravada than you (I feel tempted > to say: "Than your abidhammic school). I'll birefly requote a small > passage by Mun: I'm not sure what it means to be 100%Theravada (but that's another 'debate') > > All that remains is the primal mind, > true & unchanging. Sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.... > > > ------------------------------------- > > Finally, you quoted from Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, > Text V, 151-2) > > Now I find the Pali in the last line (vimariyaadikatena cetasaa > viharatii ti) > > means literally ' with a mind made without boundary. The com. > mentions 'having > > severed the boundary of the defilements' (kilesamariyaada.m > bhinditva . . > > .)which is much closer to the translation and my comment below I > think. > > Hmm, I think the commentaries should be taken with a grain of salt in > this case. Personally, the literal translation is much closer to what > I am trying to say (haha, and hence I discard all else! bad > formuluation on my part, but you know what I mean :-)). Actually I don't know. Are you saying that if the commentaries written by the arahats who helped preserve the Tipitaka don't support your interpretation that they should be taken with a 'pinch of salt'?? May I also remind you that the way I understood the literal translation (before having looked at the Pali or commentary notes) was a little different from yours...... >Teachers like > Chah and Mun are really just commentators too, and they present a > different commentary. That's true....just as your commentary is a little different from mine;-)) > > > '....So, When the khandhas are present, > > 'A being is said in common usage' (KS 1, 135) > OK, that was just the part I could remember quickly. Vis XV111, 25: 'After defining mentyality-materiality thus according to its true nature, then in order to abandon this worldly dsignation of 'a being' and 'a person' more thoroughly, to sumount confusion about beings and to establish his mind on the plane of non-confusion, he makes sure that the meanng defined, namely, 'This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person' is confirmed by a number of suttas. For this has been said: 'As with the assembly of parts The word 'chariot' is countenanced, So, when the aggregates are present, "A being" is said in common usage' (S.i,135) > Could you post a larger quote, so the context can be seen? Just done > I don't think this quote here necessarily opposes what I am trying to > say, since this Nibbana-mind/Buddha-nature (assuming, just for a > second, that it is real) is traceless, unconditioned, non-dwelling > and without any sign and hence can hardly be termed a 'being' (in the > sense of Samsaric existence). May I be a 'tad strong' to coin a Howard expression here? I think the 'problem' is when people like yourself have read a lot of Mahayana teachings and then try to make it all 'fit' into the 'original' Tipitaka.....It reminds me a little when I first came to study abhidhamma having trained as a psychologist....it took a while before I could read and consider what was in front of me as a new 'subject' or explanation of realities without trying to make it all fit together with my ealrlier studies. Anders, just a 'tad strong' view for your consideration only;-)) ********************************************** > > It's going quite well! I am a lot more motivated than last year (the > second year is always the hard one), and I am kinda sorry to see that > this year will be my last. Glad to hear this....keep up your school studies.....maybe a Professor of Religions would suit you better than being a doctor - either way, keep working hard! > > I will certainly be looking forward to it. Both the chats and the > visit :-) Us too... Thanks for considering my comments so carefully and in real appreciation of your fine interest in dhamma. This post is a little rushed as I'm expecting a group of giggling girls at my door any moment! Sarah 7564 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:09pm Subject: Re: Undesirable objects - Betty --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Betty, > > Well I got to see an extract of the film on CNN this morning - quite stopped my > yoga practice in its stride! Looks set to be another 'Crouching Tiger' with > wonderful sets, costumes, elephants and the rest..... > > There was also an interview with your cousin (or husband's cousin), Prince C? > Yugala, and he came across very well. I learned that 5oo yrs ago in Thailand, > the monks kept their eyebrows which they don't today. I was going to aqdd some more to the post earlier, but your inspiration led me straight to do a short yoga sadhana--which as I've mentioned I've been neglecting for some time now. Anyway, in the course of my brief (not straining too hard getting back into it now after all), I couldn't help but reflect on Six Yugalas since your letter as addressed to Betty and all, and BTW every time I think of Betty I can't help but recall these important factors from the Abhidhamma), and anyway, was recalling, at this point directly in my asanas, how this simple practice of yoga has done so much for me to engender these "six yugalas" (pairs, from I presume to be the same Sanskritic origin of "yuj" shared by the word "yoga"--which means to "to yoke," and I suspect is also a part of samYOJana--though those actually learned in the Pali or Sanskrit languages may feel free to correct me if I am mistaken here, since I have not been trained in nor do I speak either language). So my best guess here is that "yugala" refers to the union of mind and body, which from my faulty recollection from the Abhidhamma are broken out as the pair (yugala) of "citta" and "kaya." From my faulty recollection the six are: tranquility, agility, pliancy, workableness, steadfastness, and uprightness (and again, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of my recollection here of these six factors here and I left my "Abhidhamma Studies" book back in NYC, so I have no reference to back me up, and anyone please correct me if I have gotten these six mixed up here). So regarding yoga, I have found yoga to be an excellent support condition for both citta and kaya passadhi (tranquility), for example. (And passadhi being one of the seven enlightenment factors, this is no trivial thing! Especially for someone as typically restless as me! :) Also, I have found yoga to engender this and all the other five yugalas to a very high degree. I have found physical pliancy has helped engender mental pliancy, workableness, uprightness, etc. etc., in both mind and body, not to mention I have found yoga to serve as an excellent support condition for yet another enlightenment factor, piti (joy), and as such, is a practice that has greatly assisted my own development of samatha and jhana meditation--since with piti, even that which is normally difficult to endure becomes easy to endure--for example normally dificult-to-endure practices like finding a secluded place and sitting cross-legged, with the intention to mindfully note that when breathing in long, there is breathing in long; when breathing out long, there is breathing out long; when breathing in short, there is breathing in short; and when breathing out short, there is breathing out short. Yoga has in addition to this served as a support condition for yet more enlightenment factors. Including viriya (yoga energizes the mind and body, after all), passadhi (one o the yugalas), samadhi, and upekkha! This is just by way of personal experience, of course. Others' experiences may vary. As an aside, I have fond that that the practice of yoga, because of serving as nutriment conditions for these six yugalas as wll as the enlightenment factors in my own practice, has also had the side- effect of being a support condition for pacifying the five hindrances! Again, it has helped me to grow calmer by helping reduce bodily tension, and by extension hindrances like restlessness and worry; and furthermore, by energizing my body and mind, has also served as a support condition for the sort of aroused and energetic persistence needed to remain seated on my cushion, at ease, such that I have found it far easier for the mind to be free from the disturbances that normally hinder the concentration and unification of the mind to the point of absorption, and of course, that absorption when naturally (and unforcedly) arisen from these previous conditions has served as the basis for the union of both calm abiding and insight, the conjoined pair (yuganaddah) said by Lord Buddha to be the indispensible pair of "swift messengers" needed to waken to the Deathless, Nibbana! So Sarah, I once again thank you by demonstrating, via your example (thus inspiring me straightaway to restart this wonderful practice I have found so helpful), such that my body and mind are at far greater ease and peace than they were just thirty minutes ago, and that my progfress on the path has been re-enrgized and my persisetnce aroused to the point I will vow to work steadfastly to maintain a consistent practice of yoga once again! So many deep bows and thank-yous to you for your most inspiring example, Sarah! :) :) :) > p.s We seldom get to movies these days even though the best cinema in town is > 2mins walk from home, but when there's a 'personal connection' it gives us a > good excuse (which is how I justify the Jacky Chan films too - I had a few > years trying to teach his wild son). I think my favorite movie of this summer for the "personal connection" reason would have to be Tomb Raider, given many of the scenes in that move were shot at the temple at Angkor Ta Prohm (dedicated to the "Mother Goddess" Prajnaparamita--aka "Perfection of Wisdom," by King Jayavarman VII) where my fiancee and I met, and where she was born and has lived her entire life (and NO "Cradle Raider" jokes either about my seventeen-year-old bride-to-be from anyone here, either!!! :) :) :) 7565 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:43pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > I think I understand what you are saying: that development of the path > > involves > > expansion of awareness and knowledge of what is really there in the > > moment, and > > that this is not a way of working out unwholesome tendencies, but a > > separate > > endeavor. > > Yes, if I understand you correctly. One is the development of the path. > 'Working out' unwholesome tendencies is not the development of the path; > it is usually driven by an idea of 'self'. > > > But what I have not gotten from this response is how you deal with the > > akusula. > > You say that you would like to have less, as a person, of lust or greed, > > whatever > > the akusula may be. Is this something that you work out, and if so how? > > Like you said, we deal with akusala with more akusala. Unless there's any > kusala (don't reckon there is, though, in my case, except occasionally > some useful reflection later). > > > Since we > > agree that this is part of the foundation of the path, and that neither > > suppression nor satisfaction of desire lessens the pull of desire, which > > I would > > think we would agree would tend to pull us from the path, what is the > > proper way > > of dealing with akusula to lessen its presence and its pull? > > Here we differ, perhaps. It is my understanding of the teachings that > there is no need to deal with one's akusala in order to begin the > development of the path. > > > I think that mindfulness of the experience of the akusula lessens its > > pull. You > > are saying that these are and should be separate issues. So what is > > your answer > > to attachment and desire? > > I can't do better that re-post here something that Mike wrote recently. > He said -- > > "Tendencies and accumulations (what I think of as > sankharakhanda) are fertile ground for mindfulness > (dhammanusati(sp?)). Unfortunately they are the > continuous results of incomprehensibly vast numbers of > unimaginably complex conditions from the past--since we > can't change the past, we also can't change the > present manifestations of its conditions. > > "Fortunately, on the other hand, tendencies and > accumulations CAN be understood as not-self--at that > moment, 'personality' can be seen for the > insignificant thing that it is. Having a rather > rotten personality myself, I find this reflection > quite liberating. (This isn't to say that kusala can't > or shouldn't be cultivated despite personality--it can > and should)." > > The accumulated akusala are so strong and entrenched that nothing we can > 'do' can have any real effect. The only fix in the long run is the > development of panna which can gradually attenuate and eventually > eradicate completely and finally all traces of akusala. > > As Mike also pointed out in a lsubsequent post, when kusala has been > developed to a certain level (power?), it can have the effect of subduing > akusala -- > > "Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > through the discourses and the discipline, the > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > skilful reflections. > > This again is only a temporary fix. But we should not think that it is > simply a matter of 'thinking kusala'. As I understand it, this refers to > a high level of development of kusala. > > I hope this clarifies what I have been trying to say. > > Jon Thanks, Jon, yes it does clarify what you are trying to say. I tend to think that particularly for Theravada, that purification of the vehicle would be part of the path. I am interested to see that you feel strongly that it is not, and that rather than trying to make the vehicle more receptive, one simply sees it as not-self and focusses on the matter of what there is to be mindful of. This actually makes sense to me. I assume, however, that you would try to resist acting on impure tendencies, such as being promiscuous, etc., which would create further obscurations? Robert E. 7566 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- Victor wrote: > [snip] > There is no Robert; > [snip] > > > > robert > > Hi Robert, > > You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were > referring to by the name "Robert"? > > Metta, > Victor He could have been just referring to the name, and saying that it doesn't reference anyone. Certainly there is a body that is recognizeable that is referred to by that name, and there are speech acts and physical acts associated with that body and name, but what I think he is saying is that the name refers only to that and not to anyone that could be referenced as an actual entity beyond that. Robert E. [the other Robert, who also existeth not....... ] 7567 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The limits of awareness --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > sequence. I disagree, but have no scientific basis for doing so. Perhaps this is because I believe that science can never prove anything other than what it already establishes as a given. And thus sheds no light on the truth of human experience, which is beyond presuppositions. Robert =============== > Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is > effect, not cause. > > Time for dinner. It smells good. Wish you were here :-) > > > Herman > > > > > > ===== 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" 7568 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 5:41pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom, --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: Herman: > > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work > > without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about your > > post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a > > multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not really an > > essential component of the machinations of daily life. > Kom: > Yes, by the Buddha teachings, awareness or mindfullness only rises with > kusala mental states. Do you think our daily life's activities are kusala or > akusala? > kom Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a kusala moment? I had come to understand that kusala meant "leading to wholesome moments". And honestly, attempting to pick the causes of each moment would be impossible to me. I have some doubts about the usefulness of dividing all experience between wholesome and unwholesome. First of all because I can only guess at the consequences of anything thought or done, whether in the next minute or millenium, and secondly because wholesomeness is such a subjective concept (unless I misunderstand it). There is the saying, one man's meat is another man's poison. Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger akusala, is all dana kusala? Kind regards Herman 7569 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 6:08pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > > sequence. > > I disagree, but have no scientific basis for doing so. Perhaps this is because I > believe that science can never prove anything other than what it already > establishes as a given. And thus sheds no light on the truth of human experience, > which is beyond presuppositions. > > Robert > Did you read about the woman who recently gave birth naturally to a baby after having been in a vegetative state since the first week of pregnancy? I do not propose to project some truth of human experience onto this woman, because I know nothing about her experience. But to have human experience as the starting point for any truth statement sounds to me like an invitation for a self to arise. Awareness identified with is self. Solipsism if you will. The laws of physics and kamma would still be working if there were no bodies to experience their effects. Kind Regards Herman 7570 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 7:06pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honore" > > Haha, it looks like it! I'll buy the Samyutta once I have 150 dollars > to spare. Right now, those money are earmarked for a unforseen trip > to Rome in September. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are about to change the course of history. For the sake of the inhabitants of Abenraa and Halsingor, please buy the Samyutta and leave Rome to the Romans :-) Herman 7571 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 7:34pm Subject: Re: The traditional teachings Dear John, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Cybele > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > hi Jon > > > Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation > > being > > the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered > > fundamental > > I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional > > teachings. > > There is one thing I'm sure we can agree on, Cybele--it is what the Buddha > said on the subject that is the 'traditional teaching'. > > And I think we can also agree that the best source of information on what > the Buddha said is the suttas and the vinaya, read in the light of the > abhidhamma, and as elucidated by the commentaries. I agree the suttas, vinaya, abhidhamma and commentaries are there for us to read. But the cetasikas that accompanied the writing of this material are gone forever. As a simile, in the seventies/eighties there was a movement that attempted to recreate how Baroque music must have sounded in it's day. Instruments were made according to baroque specifications, performance techniques of the day were researched to the hilt, the settings in which the music was originally played were recreated etc etc. All good and well, there was only one thing missing, the mindstates of the composer and his/her original audience. Do you accept the importance of this component ie the mindstate of the author and projected audience in determining meaning ,and it's irretrievably lost state in the case of the Dhamma? Regards Herman 7572 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] An Invitation to All Here Dear Dhamma friends, Therawada - Mahayana - I dont know the difference. What if simply "Buddha Dhamma"? ~mettha Ranil >From: Erik >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] An Invitation to All Here >Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:28:17 -0000 > >--- Bihn A wrote: > > > As you may know, Theravada Buddhism in Vietnam is not > > popular, and it is my wish to see it flourishing there as much as > > possible. > >Bihn, I heartily encourage you in your endeavors of aiding the growth >and flourishing of this vital aspect of the holy Ariyan Dhamma in >your home country! I have precisely the same feeling with regard with >my wish to see the so-called "Mahayana" take root and flourish here >in the parts of SE Asia where it is not so popular these days, in the >same way that the Theravada in Vietnam, is not popular at this point >in time. The reason I feel particularly strongly about this is that >we now live in a very new era--with instantaneous worldwide >communications, and speedy travel possible in ways never before known >in mankind's recorded history (for those not possessed of the >abhinnas of the great Mahasiddhas, at any rate :), where the chance >of reuniting once again these two beautiful and correct strains of >the Ariyan Dharma is possible now, in such a way that has not been >true for perhaps even centuries. > >For the record, one of my primary motivations for coming to Thailand >has been to learn and internalize as much of the holy facet of Ariyan >Dharma known as Theravada as possible, to bring many of its elements-- >some of which have been neglected or even lost from my own tradition >(such as the practice of walking meditation, for example)--to help >the process of re-assimilating them back into what is presently known >as the Tibetan Dharma (which is currently in the process of mutating >into the American Dharma, the Australian Dharma, the German Dharma, >the Brazilian Dharma, the Italian Dharma, etc., etc.) > >Also, as many here may know, Theravada is the presently dominant form >of Buddhism in Cambodia (whence I just returned), and similar to your >wish to see the Theravada flavor of the Dharma flourish in Vietnam, >one of my sincerest wishes is to see the re-establishment and >flourishing of tantric and so-called "Mahayana" (hopefully no one >here will take offense at my using that term; it is not meant at all >to imply anything derogatory about Theravada, as some foolish >sectarians sometimes do by implying Theravada is "Hinayana," >or "lesser vehicle", which is FAR from the truth of things--because >it IS the actual Ariyan Dhamma and as such, in perfect accord with >ALL the teachings of Lord Buddha) Buddhism in Cambodia--for so many >reasons, and in no small part because this is the very form of >Buddhism that influenced the design and construction of the >magnificent Buddhist temples at Angkor, and as such is integral to >Khmer and Cambodian history, a well as being an integral part of my >own linage and by extension, practice. > >At present, Theravada Buddhism only "dominates" (in its very feeble >and haphazard way now since the Pol Pot time, where he had all monks, >or anyone of learning for that matter, brutally tortured and >executed) in Cambodia and elsewhere in SE Asia, including Thailand >now due to strong royal patronage (some have said "edict" but I have >not heard this confirmed in actual fact) for the Lankavamsa flavor >thanks to the influence of the Thai King Ramkamheng, such that >before, where the two great streams had coexisted peacefully side-by- >side, the Theravada as we now know it began to dominate, perhaps >(this is only speculation on my part) due to the unwholesome >influence of those who might have mistakenly criticized the Mahayana >as being anariyan Dhamma (which is certainly a common activity today >among many who call themselves Theravadins--those who still actively >promulgate the extremely severe wrong view that the Mahayana doctrine >is somehow a "corrupted" version of the Buddha's Dharma--thus leading >to the very heavy bad kamma of disparaging the Ariyan Dhamma in any >of its extant forms, but I digress). > >In fact, my most sincere wish of all would be to once again see the >side-by-side flourishing of ALL these holy and correct traditions of >the Buddha's Dharma (as they did together here in SE Asia and in >India centuries ago--even coexisting side-by-side within the same >monasteries, where each tradition would "debate" the other in a >process leading to the accumulation of greater and greater wisdom for >all participants and spectators alike!), and in particular, the re- >establishment of this harmonious unity--not a merging of traditions, >but a mutual accord and respect--of these two skillful methods taught >by Lord Buddha during his appearance in this sasana, which he taught >for one reason only: the end of suffering. > >Expanding a bit on this theme, I find few more inspiring places in >this world than the Angkor complex of 180 temples. One reason I find >Angkor so inspiring is due to the influence of the Chakravartin >(wheel-turning monarch Bodhisattva like the recent Thai King Rama IV >and His Holiness XIV Dalai Lama), King Jayavarman VII--who like His >Holiness The 14th Dalai Lama, is considered an emanation of >Avalokiteshvara (a.k.a. Kwan Yin in China, Kannon in Japan, and >Chenresik in Tibet)--who constructed in addition to many other >Buddhist temples, the temple/city of Angkor Thom, which is an >enormous tantric mandala with the famed temple Bayon at its center, >which displays Avalokiteshvara's gently smiling compassionate face >radiating metta and karuna out in all directions, for the sole >welfare of all sentient beings. > >Among all the temples commissioned by King Jayavarman VII, however, >my favorite among them is the former tantric monastic temple complex >of Ta Prohm (it actually served as the "temple" backdrop in the new >movie "Tomb Raider" for those who may have seen this movie, and once >housed over 2,700 monks, as well as serving as the supply center for >all the region's hospitals). > >Ta Prohm is not only aesthetically beautiful by design. It has also >purposefully been left in its unrestored state--meaning that >throughout the crumbling stones of this impermanent temple grow >enormous fig trees (of the "ficus" genus--the same genus of tree we >know as the Bodhi tree under which Lord Buddha achieved his >unsurpassed and complete self-awakening), leaving to me, at least, a >clear reminder of both the impermanence of all composed phenomena, as >well as the fact that this fact of this impermanent nature of all >composed thing provides the only fertile soil for the growth and >flourishing and fruiting of the enlightened mind, just as the perfect >lotus arises from the muck and mud of samsara! > >And Ta Prohm is my favorite temple of all the temples for another >reason: its representation of the beautifully carved "devatas" >and "apsaras" (representations of the tantric Buddhist feminine >principle of enlightened mind also known by the Sanskrit >term "dakini" or the Tibetan word "khadro-ma"--who represent key >aspects of tantric sadhana ritual because they symbolize the empty >nature of the wisdom aspect of reality)--not to mention the fact that >my fiancée was born and raised and has lived her entire life at >this >very temple! > >The most significant reason for my love of this temple, though, is >that Jayavarman VII built and dedicated it specifically to >his "mother," as one can read in any of the innumerable guidebooks on >Angkor one may come across should one ever decide to visit this >holiest of holy places on this planet earth (it certainly has to rank >up there with the Four Great Sites of traditional Buddhist pilgrimage >in India, in my opinion--if for no other reason than its sheer >majestic scope and unparalleled execution and stunning architecture >representing the Buddhist cosmos in its entirety). > >What the authors of few of these guidebooks ever note, though, is >that while it is technically correct King Jayavarman VII dedicated Ta >Prohm to his mother, the "mother" in question was not the King's >birth-mother, but in actuality, to the "Mother of the Buddhas"-- >"Prajnaparamita" (Perfection of Wisdom), which also happens to be THE >central wisdom-teaching of ALL sects of "Mahayana" Buddhism, and is >recited in Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan, by every sincere >practitioner--often daily--as a reminder of the truth that "form is >only emptiness; emptiness no other than form," thus underscoring >vividly the ultimate nature that all dhammas are empty of self- >nature, and all composed phenomena are impermanent and dependently >arisen, and the fact that it is only due to the grasping nature of >the defiled mind, that they appear to us as dukkha. > >Furthermore, the temple Ta Prohm's West entrance (where my fiancée >and I met last January in what can only be called a MOST auspicious >meeting, but nowhere near as auspicious as our meeting this time >around, especially when she placed the krama--the traditional Khmer >scarf--around the back of my neck after presenting her a small gift I >had brought along just to give to her this time around! :) :) :)) is >associated with the Buddha Amitabha of the Five Buddha Families as >taught in "Mahayana" Buddhism. > >From the little card given to me by a nun at Wat Mahatat, Section 5 >(from my visit there recently), with Amitabha's picture and his >prayer, which I find unbelievably inspiring. > >"I vow that when my life approaches its end; >All obstructions will be swept away; >I will see Amitabha Buddha, >And be born in his land of Ultimate Bliss and Peace. > >"When reborn in the Western land, >I will perfectly and completely fulfill >Without exception these Great Vows, >To the delight and benefit of all sentient beings." > >NAMO AMITABHA! > >Incidentally, the Buddha Amitabha's ("boundless light", whose primary >symbolic function is to transform the passions and craving into >discerning wisdom) main associated Bodhisattva is none other than >Avalokiteshvara, whose gently smiling face is graces the West >entrance of the gateway into the center of the mandala.of temple of >Ta Prohm. > >It should be noted that the Bodhisattva of Compassion, >Avalokiteshvara, In the "Mahayana" school's teachings, represents >specifically the compassion aspect (the active principle) of full >enlightenment. And it is taught that only through this compassionate >activity (that arises with no thought of giver or recipient--it >merely acts spontaneously to fulfill the ultimate needs of sentient >beings in the triple-realm, which is why images of Avalokiteshvara >are often depicted with eleven heads which look out in all directions >and into all the various realms of suffering beings, in addition to >his having a thousand arms, which serve the purpose of spontaneously >reaching out to suffering sentient beings to help remove their >suffering) conjoined with the feminine wisdom aspect realizing >emptiness (represented by the "Divine Mother," the dakini >Prajnaparamita, who represents the empty wisdom aspect of ultimate >reality), that all the steps to Buddhahood are fulfilled, which is >called the perfection of union of the method and wisdom. (By the way, >this is often graphically depicted in tantric imagery as the "yab- >yum" (lit. "father-mother") mudra of the two aspects inseparably >joined in sexual embrace, which in the Tibetan is also ultimately >symbolized by the "dorje" (or "vajra"), which means "diamond" and >also "thunderbolt"--as it represents the flash of intuitive wisdom >that arises instantaneously upon realizing the ultimate nature of >reality. > >OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA! > >It is said that only through the union of these two essential >aspects, the aspect of method (brought about by accumulating >wholesome karma) conjoined with wisdom (the wisdom that realizes >emptiness), that full and complete enlightenment is brought about. In >other words, what this specifically says is that the wisdom aspect >alone is insufficient, that we must in addition accumulate deeds of >great merit, just as Lord Buddha himself did over many kalpas, to >bring to fruition the unsurpassed and complete enlightenment enjoyed >by the Buddha. > >For example, there was one famous debate held on this very point--the >most famous and important debate in Tibet's history--as a means of >establishing the correct Dharma for all Tibetans to study and >practice which exists up to this very day in the Land of Snows, which >was held in Lhasa during the years 792-4, between the Chinese >monk "Hvashang Mohoyan," who made the claim that enlightenment >was "sudden" and there was no need to do anything. His main >challenger in this debate was the renowned Master Kamalasila, the >great Indian sage and disciple of Santarakshita (a contemporary of >the legendary Padmasambhava, a.k.a. Guru Rinpoche), who was >instrumental in helping bring the Buddhist Dharma into Tibet from >India during the first period of the Dharma's propagation in >the "rooftop of the world." > >The particular debate was overseen by the Tibetan King Trisong Detsen >(himself considered to be an emanation of Manjushri), and it was >through this long, epistolary debate, spanning two years, that it was >finally made clear and decisively indicated by King Trisong Detsen to >from then on reject the teachings of the Chinese monk Hvashan'g >interpretation of the Dharma--specifically that one need do "nothing >at all," that enlightenment just happens spontaneously, as a >corrupted version of the Dharma; and to instead take up >Santaraksita's (and Kamalasila's) linage teachings on gradual >cultivation (with the understanding that insight-wisdom yet arises in >a flash after much diligent effort at cultivation). > >This Great Debate led to the establishment of the Dharma we now know >by the name Tibetan Buddhism. (a scholarly essay on this critical >debate can be found here, for example: http://sino-sv3.sino.uni-/ >heidelberg.de/FULLTEXT/JR-JOCP/gregory.htm). > >By the way, it is Kamalasila's teachings on the nine stages of >meditation (Bhavana Krama) I was trained in by my lama, beginning >with following the breath, and it is Kamalasila's instructions on >meditation, based on the Buddha's exact teachings of the same, which >is taught as THE central form of cultivating Right Mindfulness and >Right Concentration in the Geluk lineage--the lineage of the Dalai >Lamas. > >Anyway, in keeping with the overall theme of this little missive, I >would like to formally offer my most heartfelt invitation to any >members of our little sangha here in the Dhamma Study Group, who >happen to be reading this message, and who might feel it beneficial >to make a Buddhist pilgrimage to this holiest of holy Buddhist sites-- >Angkor--to be present for this wedding--which, barring unforeseen >circumstances (anatta being non-controlling after all--and who knows >what vipaka this very next moment will bring, any one of us could die >this very next moment!), is presently planned to be held sometime >around the end of November. > >By the way, this is the very best time of year to visit SE Asia for >those not in this part of the world (and the time to see Angkor is >now, rather than later, as the number of tourists visiting has been >doubling each year since the surrender of the Khmer Rouge three years >ago), and it is now safe to travel (and very inexpensive by Western >standards) in and around Angkor. Plus, this would afford the >opportunity of having an incomparable Khmer-speaking (and fluent >English-speaking as well) tour-guide, my fiancée Aert, who, as I >mentioned, was born in and has lived her entire life among the >temples of Angkor! > >Angkor, is a way similar to the Four Great Sites in India, is truly >not a place to be missed by anyone who seriously considers himself or >herself a Buddhist, and who has both the leisure and fortune to visit >this holy place--as the entire complex of temples serves as nothing >if not a supreme opportunity to meditate on all the qualities so >heavily praised by Lord Buddha: those of the union of wisdom and >compassion (method). > > > > 7573 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 8:25pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here Dear Ranil, I agree, but can take it further. How about just "Dhamma" or even " ". There is a saying "Don't shoot the messenger". There is a flipside "Don't venerate the messenger" . It is the message that is important, not the messenger. A discussion about truth (the message) tends to be a discussion about self, non-truth. Truth is just there, it doesn't require discussion or defense or understanding. That's why I suggested " ". Suffering ends when it is no longer imagined to be there. Herman --- "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > Therawada - Mahayana - I dont know the difference. What if simply "Buddha > Dhamma"? > ~mettha > Ranil > > > 7574 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 8:47pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > Therawada - Mahayana - I dont know the difference. What if simply "Buddha > Dhamma"? > ~mettha > Ranil Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! My true friend in the Dhamma! :) :) :) Speaking of which, Anders had asked me to provide a citation from the Suttas where the Buddha didn't just say that "MY WAY is the ONLY way." My suggestion then was that (similar to what was discovered when the original Pali of the Satipatthana Sutta the revealed that some who had been dogmatically insisting that the Buddha had taught "this is the only way" had in fact been misrepresented the Buddha's meaning & intent, which is that "this way leads to only one place"!), that the Buddha didn't ever teach THIS ALONE IS TRUE, ALL OTHER WAYS ARE FALSE. In fact, for those who prefer the commentaries of the Abhidhamma tradition, even in the Abhidhammata-Sangaha this view is explictly categorized as one of the "Four Bonds," as I believe I mentioned elsewhere. This key principle (which generally relates to the Buddha's teaching that the Dhamma is "merely a raft for crossing over, not for getting aholsd of") of the Buddha's teaching is expressed directly in the Vacchagotta Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn072.html "Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know." Note well the Buddha doesn't say "this alone is truth, all other ways are false"; the Buddha merely says that for "those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know." Which means that for us to pass judgment on any other system, whether labelled Buddhist or not, would be a huge mistake. If we were to do that, we would no longer be "guardians of the truth," but partisans, sectarians, fools, befuddled, ensnared in a thicket of views, lost in a wildernesss of views, twisted into a contortion of views, agonizing by a writhing of views, bound by a fetter of views: Evam me suttam (MN.95), "There are five ideas that ripen here and now in two ways. What five? Conviction, preference, hearsay-learning, arguing upon evidence, and liking through pondering a view. Now something may have conviction well placed in it and yet be hollow, empty, and false; and again something may have no conviction placed in it and yet be factual, true, and no other than it seems; and so with preference and the rest. If a man has conviction, then he guards truth when he says, "My conviction is thus," but on that account draws no unreserved conclusion, "Only this is true, the other is false." In this way he guards the truth; but there is as yet no discovery of truth. And so with preference and the rest. "How is truth discovered? Here a bhikkhu lives near some village or town. Then a householder or his son goes to him in order to test him in three kinds of ideas, in ideas provocative of greed, of hate, and of delusion, wondering, "Are there in this venerable one any such ideas, whereby his mind being obsessed he might not knowing, say 'I know,' unseeing, say 'I see,' or to get others to do likewise, which would be long for their harm and suffering?" While thus testing him he comes to find that there are no such ideas in him, and he finds that, "The bodily and verbal behavior of that venerable one are not those of one affected by lust or hate or delusion. But the True Idea that this venerable one teaches is profound, hard to see and discover; yet it is the most peaceful and superior of all, out of reach of logical ratiocination, subtle, for the wise to experience; such a True Dhamma cannot be taught by one affected by lust or hate or delusion. "It is as soon as by testing him, he comes to see that he is purified from ideas provocative of lust, hate, and delusion, that he then plants his conviction in him. When he visits him he respects him, when he respects him he gives ear, one who gives ear hears the True Dhamma, he remembers it, he investigates the meaning of the ideas remembered. When he does that he acquires a preference by pondering the ideas. That produces interest. One interested is actively committed. So committed he makes a judgment. According to his judgment he exerts himself. When he exerts himself he comes to realize with the body the ultimate truth, and he sees it by the penetrating of it with understanding. That is how there is discovery of truth. But there is as yet no final arrival at truth. How is truth finally arrived at? Final arrival at truth is the repetition, the keeping in being, the development, of those same dhammas. That is how there is final arrival at truth." To add some some more enlightening commentary as regards abandoning views, from Professor Richard Hayes: "My study of [Nagarjuna's] texts (on which I wrote my honours thesis and to which I have returned many times) has led me to see an interesting parallel between Nagarjuna's radical skepticism and Richard Rorty's notion of philosophical irony. Rorty's view is that philosophy is a process of inquiry that ultimately leads an honest person to the recognition that no conclusion is free from circularity, for every conclusion rests upon premises that are either pure assumption or have their verification resting on a hidden assumption that the conclusion derived from them is true. This does not mean that one must abandon all philosophical systems. It means only that whenever one goes to a philosophical system for refuge, one must realize that the decision to come to this particular one for refuge was ultimately arbitrary. Whatever solace this particular set of dogmas, institutions and practices may provide could have been provided by countless other sets of dogmas, institutions and practices. Realizing this, one continues to do philosophy, but one can only do it ironically, playfully, humorously. Play is the only work possible for the enlightened mind. 7575 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 9:18pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Hi Frank, Just a quick line to thank you for your really great intro and choice of sutta;-))) Lots I'd like to say, but it'll have to be when I have time. Really glad to have you with us here;-) Many, many thanks Sarah --- frank kuan wrote: > The six sets of six is my favorite sutta of all time > (mn 148? one forty something anyways). Sometimes when > talking about 5 aggregates it can seem abstract and > disconnected from our normal moment to moment > experience, but when the Buddha goes through the six > sense organs, the sense objects, contact, craving > associated through each of the six doors, etc, and > show that they are impermanent, that if a abiding soul > were to exist they would also arise and pass away > continuously, which would be an untenable position, it > really seems so clear when explained this way. It's > just such a practical and clear way that outlines the > whole buddhist path. ........................ 7576 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 10:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma dear sarah > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. yes, thats why I just observed it for the Fun of it. I wanted to know whether I can spend some years without eating the stuff I crave to eat. I will have to be ready for it when I finally get the chance to take robes. :o) >Personally, I eat very > little meat, Well, I a lot. >but that's a health choice rather than an act of sila..... When I > first travelled with Khun Sujin in Sri Lanka, I was strictly vegitarian at the > time and was being very fussy about what I could and couldn't eat....She'd say > to me: "Khun Sarah, have just a little of this and a little of that to please > the hostess...kusala cittas are more important" or something very similar...I > can still hear her saying it so sweetly more than 25yrs ago. (Nina probably > remembers too!) Yeah, I know what you mean. People sometimes(but more often than we think) get offended by these kind of stuff. I am thankful for that experience. I noted some people have hidden aversion towards other people's sila. > > With regard to the precepts and vows, we can see how these can be followed for > a very long time, but sooner or later when there are the right conditions they > will be broken if enough wisdom has not been accumulated. I've known monks > who've kept excellent vinaya for long periods, but when they disrobe, the same > accumulations and tendencies are there. Even if one remains a monk for the rest > of this life, what about next life? yeah, but my study of texts suggests that those periods of excellent vinaya are not useless at all. They are great foundation stones. And these sila will provide one with better surroundings and conditions to follow the path in future times. Without the right understanding the sila is less-powerful. Most of my sila is based on Saddha which I have for what Buddha says, for the moment what I can do is achieve what I can even though it is less-powerful rather than waiting for a 'better' time. > > > > And of course when the experience is finally realised , it lost its > > appeal, good old unsatisfactoriness came to me again. > > Good;-)) Let us know how it goes! > Well the tendencies are still very much there. Lot of booze and smoke and partying...full abuse of body and mind Sometimes the thoughtlines go as 'wow..this is life..blah,blah' but I internally laugh at such thoughts, I am aware of the internal mind cheating, (vancaka etc), but for the moment I will keep on investigating for me. > Thanks Gayan for sharing your experiences....I always enjoy hearing from you! I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, hey...see my life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what you are doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' :o) rgds gayan 7577 From: Num Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 6:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Undesirable objects - Betty Hi Sarah and Betty, Sarah: I just saw Rush Hours 2 on last Friday. Vow, Hong Kong from the movie looks like New York city, pretty packed and crowded. I have never been there. Jacky Chan is funny. Well at times I like light, funny and kind of no brainer movie. It's fun. Betty: I used this quote from Visudhimagga before, I like it : "As wind a massy rock doth never move, So neither praise nor dispraise moves the wise." Praise or dispraise cannot change kusula act to akusala act. Aprreciate and anumodhana in your deeds. Num 7578 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 11:20pm Subject: Mana --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > Thanks Gayan for sharing your experiences....I always enjoy hearing from > you! > > I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about > things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , > marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, hey...see my > life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what you are > doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' > :o) Ooh, that one hit "me" right where it hurts, Gayan! :) Thanks for bringing this important point up! Your mention of this forced me to meditate on whether or not my sharing some of my "experiences" here, for example, would fall into this category. This is a really tough one. The mana problem, I mean, which is the root issue here. As I presently see it, the first thing to know is that mana, as an affliction, is going to be there, like it or not, until we're either arahats or Buddhas. Observed and noted. :) Once this is known, then as I see it, we need to become aware of the various flavors of mana that exist. This is a subtle affliction and comes in many guises, and it's important to be aware of the many ways it can manifest so we can note it when it arises and let it go. There are mane degrees of mana, from the subtlest "I am" terminated by arahts and Buddhas only, vs. the coarser forms of "vanity" and so on. There's one obvious form of mana behind "boasting" for example. Talking about one's experiences and/or exploits can be a form of this, for sure. That is obviuos to many people. Then there's also the sort that of mana that expresses itself in terms of desiring to appear virtuous by remaining quiet and controlled! That's a REALLY nasty form of mana, beacause there's nothing anyone can make any outward criticisms of, and this form of mana can go on undetected for a LONG time wreaking all kinds of havoc! The Visuddhimagga notes that many of "greedy temperament" express themselves outwardly as controlled, etc., while inwardly their minsd are beclouded by grasping. For example, before sharing any experiences with my Dhamma friends here, I always endeavour to reflect on whether or not what I am saying is motivated by coarse mana, or if there is perhaps a skillful reason to use this collection of khandas as one would a laboratory instrument--perhaps as a medical student might use a cadaver, for example. If I decide, to the best of my ability, that the body-as-labaratory is the motivation, then I feel confident enough to share experiences without feeling that sharing is partaking of TOO MUCH coarse mana (though this is a tough one to detect at all times, mind you). There may even be the decision that while there may be some akusala mixed in there, that the kusala and the potential benefit to others overrides it in these insatnces to the point I feel it beneficial to share an experience. I confess again it is DIFFICULT to note at all times when there's vanity creeping in there, and I know I make my lapses, for sure, which is why your comment hit so close to home for me. There is still the noting that no matter what, the subtlest form of mana "I am" exists until the last magga-citta of arahat or Buddha arises in a mental continuum), so I try to remind myself (heh heh heh) there's no reason to get upset about this fact either. I try my best to keep the labaratory analogy in mind and keep it at that, though again, mana is a sneaky bastard and catches me off-guard quite often still. In sum, it is NOT always easy to detect, for these khandas at least, whether there is merely the dispassionate use of this composed entity labeled "Erik" being used skillfully--as a medical cadaver or experimental laboratory subject--as a way of sharing my understanding of various aspects of the Dhamma as a Dhamma friend--with the right motivation of the wish to benefit of other sentient beings: that they may be able to benefit on some way from the experiences I've been through somehow (much as former alcoholocs tell their "drinkalogues" as a way of sharing how they overcame their addiction and as a means of helping others do the same); or if there is some sort of vanity behid it all. Even RIGHT THIS MOMENT! I honestly believe that sharing "personal" experiences can be of great benefit in many instances among those who have had a LOT of exposure to the Dhamma as we hacve here (not with just anyone--I see DSG a place where longer-term practitioners come to share their understanding of the Dhamma and not a place where rank beginners tend to gather). But I realize this ort of sharing also carries with it an enormous danger, one to be extremely mindful of at all times: that it can EASILY degenerate into a form of coarse vanity and pride. This is a VERY difficult problem for me indeed, particularly in a forum like this, where on one hand there is the knowledge that sharing experiences is of real benefit to some, in the same way dissecting corpses is helpful to medical students. This is taken along with the understanding that that there should not be any speech motivated by any of the Eight Worldly Concerns such as praise, etc. THIS IS TOUGH STUFF INDEED! And mana is such a nasty bugger it makes it all the more difficult to admit to oneself when when it IS mana, since mana often uses itself to hide behind itself, as it were! This very reply could be mana wishing to appear more virtuous than Gayan by so readily talking about my own mana! What a demon this mana can be! :) :) :) My present strategy is to simply be as aware as possible of this tendency, and to note it as carefully as possible (with of course the helpful reminders of those such as yourself), to try to be mindful that if I share experiences that they are not motivated by coarse pride or conceit and are really being used as a means of expressing some aspect of the Dharma motivated primarily by the concenrn for the welfare of other sentient beings; and not for the purposes of self- aggrandizement or the seeking or praise or material assistance, whatever. The bottom line is that I can't will this mana to go away, after all; it will go of its own accord once the last five fetters are terminated at the point of arahatship (or Buddhahood in this case). Anyway, thank you for the reminder to be mindful of mana, Gayan! :) :) :) 7579 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 11:52pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness: Awareness Of Anger As Kusala Dear Herman How are you? You asked: "Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a kusala moment?" Yes, if you are aware of anger in the sense of sati (recollection, mindfulness), that would be a kusala moment. The supporting Pali in the words of the Buddha is as follows. "sadosam va cittam `sadosam cittan'ti pajanati" "Monks, how does the monk live as an observer of the mind in the mind? .....Monks, here, the monk knows comprehensively the mind with anger as the mind with anger..." The above quotation comes from Section 114, Cittanupassana, Mahasatipatthana Suttam, Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya. You also asked: "Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger akusala, is all dana kusala?" Yes,each of them should be considered as such because kusala and akusala gives different results. But, awareness of akusala can bring about kusala as a result. Even if one's anger has transformed one into a kind individual later for various reasons such as regret,(even if anger served as the cause of kindness) anger at the moment of arising is akusala. Dana at the moment of arising is kusala even if motivation for it was based on calculated selfishness. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Herman wrote: > Dear Kom, > > --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Herman: > > > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work > > > without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about > your > > > post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a > > > multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not > really an > > > essential component of the machinations of daily life. > > > > Kom: > > Yes, by the Buddha teachings, awareness or mindfullness only rises > with > > kusala mental states. Do you think our daily life's activities are > kusala or > > akusala? > > kom > > Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a > kusala moment? > > I had come to understand that kusala meant "leading to wholesome > moments". And honestly, attempting to pick the causes of each moment > would be impossible to me. I have some doubts about the usefulness of > dividing all experience between wholesome and unwholesome. > > First of all because I can only guess at the consequences of anything > thought or done, whether in the next minute or millenium, and > secondly because wholesomeness is such a subjective concept (unless I > misunderstand it). There is the saying, one man's meat is another > man's poison. Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger > akusala, is all dana kusala? > > Kind regards > > > Herman 7580 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mana dear Erik, your post is so Great that I really do not feel like messing it up with comments here and there.( laying my personality 'eggs' here and there like a hen) :o$ Eventhough my reply is so short, I feel like we had a 2 hour long (meaningful)discussion about 'Mana' and what a 'nasty bugger' it is. :o) These akusalas are so Recursive indeed! :oD Regards gayan > Ooh, that one hit "me" right where it hurts, Gayan! :) Thanks for > bringing this important point up! Your mention of this forced me to > meditate on whether or not my sharing some of my "experiences" here, > for example, would fall into this category. > > This is a really tough one. The mana problem, I mean, which is the > root issue here. > > As I presently see it, the first thing to know is that mana, as an > affliction, is going to be there, like it or not, until we're either > arahats or Buddhas. Observed and noted. :) > > Once this is known, then as I see it, we need to become aware of the > various flavors of mana that exist. This is a subtle affliction and > comes in many guises, and it's important to be aware of the many ways > it can manifest so we can note it when it arises and let it go. > > There are mane degrees of mana, from the subtlest "I am" terminated > by arahts and Buddhas only, vs. the coarser forms of "vanity" and so > on. > > There's one obvious form of mana behind "boasting" for example. > Talking about one's experiences and/or exploits can be a form of > this, for sure. That is obviuos to many people. > > Then there's also the sort that of mana that expresses itself in > terms of desiring to appear virtuous by remaining quiet and > controlled! That's a REALLY nasty form of mana, beacause there's > nothing anyone can make any outward criticisms of, and this form of > mana can go on undetected for a LONG time wreaking all kinds of > havoc! The Visuddhimagga notes that many of "greedy temperament" > express themselves outwardly as controlled, etc., while inwardly > their minsd are beclouded by grasping. > > For example, before sharing any experiences with my Dhamma friends > here, I always endeavour to reflect on whether or not what I am > saying is motivated by coarse mana, or if there is perhaps a skillful > reason to use this collection of khandas as one would a laboratory > instrument--perhaps as a medical student might use a cadaver, for > example. > > If I decide, to the best of my ability, that the body-as-labaratory > is the motivation, then I feel confident enough to share > experiences without feeling that sharing is partaking of TOO MUCH > coarse mana (though this is a tough one to detect at all times, mind > you). There may even be the decision that while there may be some > akusala mixed in there, that the kusala and the potential benefit to > others overrides it in these insatnces to the point I feel it > beneficial to share an experience. > > I confess again it is DIFFICULT to note at all times when there's > vanity creeping in there, and I know I make my lapses, for sure, > which is why your comment hit so close to home for me. > > There is still the noting that no matter what, the subtlest form of > mana "I am" exists until the last magga-citta of arahat or Buddha > arises in a mental continuum), so I try to remind myself (heh heh heh) > there's no reason to get upset about this fact either. I try my best > to keep the labaratory analogy in mind and keep it at that, though > again, mana is a sneaky bastard and catches me off-guard quite often > still. > > In sum, it is NOT always easy to detect, for these khandas at least, > whether there is merely the dispassionate use of this composed entity > labeled "Erik" being used skillfully--as a medical cadaver or > experimental laboratory subject--as a way of sharing my understanding > of various aspects of the Dhamma as a Dhamma friend--with the right > motivation of the wish to benefit of other sentient beings: that they > may be able to benefit on some way from the experiences I've been > through somehow (much as former alcoholocs tell their "drinkalogues" > as a way of sharing how they overcame their addiction and as a means > of helping others do the same); or if there is some sort of vanity > behid it all. Even RIGHT THIS MOMENT! > > I honestly believe that sharing "personal" experiences can be of > great benefit in many instances among those who have had a LOT of > exposure to the Dhamma as we hacve here (not with just anyone--I see > DSG a place where longer-term practitioners come to share their > understanding of the Dhamma and not a place where rank beginners tend > to gather). But I realize this ort of sharing also carries with it an > enormous danger, one to be extremely mindful of at all times: that it > can EASILY degenerate into a form of coarse vanity and pride. > > This is a VERY difficult problem for me indeed, particularly in a > forum like this, where on one hand there is the knowledge that > sharing experiences is of real benefit to some, in the same way > dissecting corpses is helpful to medical students. This is taken > along with the understanding that that there should not be any speech > motivated by any of the Eight Worldly Concerns such as praise, etc. > THIS IS TOUGH STUFF INDEED! > > And mana is such a nasty bugger it makes it all the more difficult to > admit to oneself when when it IS mana, since mana often uses itself > to hide behind itself, as it were! This very reply could be mana > wishing to appear more virtuous than Gayan by so readily talking > about my own mana! What a demon this mana can be! :) :) :) > > My present strategy is to simply be as aware as possible of this > tendency, and to note it as carefully as possible (with of course the > helpful reminders of those such as yourself), to try to be mindful > that if I share experiences that they are not motivated by coarse > pride or conceit and are really being used as a means of expressing > some aspect of the Dharma motivated primarily by the concenrn for the > welfare of other sentient beings; and not for the purposes of self- > aggrandizement or the seeking or praise or material assistance, > whatever. > > The bottom line is that I can't will this mana to go away, after all; > it will go of its own accord once the last five fetters are > terminated at the point of arahatship (or Buddhahood in this case). > > Anyway, thank you for the reminder to be mindful of mana, > Gayan! :) :) :) 7581 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 7:50am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Haha, that's true. I am curious though. Does this sutta condole that > a Bikkhu should kill his own food (say, if he's caught in a polar > region with no vegetation, and this seel is hooping about)? "Condole" means sympathize. "Condone" means allow. According to what I've read, a Bhikkhu would probably starve to death before he would ever intentionally kill another being. 7582 From: Binh A Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 9:35am Subject: The Chinese Madhyama Agama .... (MN vs. DN, another opinion ) --- frank kuan wrote: > ... I would say that the > Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. Just my opinion > though. Majjhima tends to be concise and to the point, > and while I do value some of the longer detailed > explanations in the Digha, many of the suttas in the > Digha tend to focus (in great detail) on nonessential > (or less essential) elements of the dhamma, whereas > the MN seems to really hone in on the important core > teachings. ======================================================= BA: If you're interested in the MN, then it's also beneficial to read the Madhyama Agama. I'm not sure if the complete English translation (either in hard copy format or Internet format) is available. I only read the Vietnamese translation. However, as a starter, to get some appreciation on the value of the Madhyama Agama, Ven Thich Minh-Chau's Ph.D. thesis (written in English) is highly recommended. It can be purchased from Wisdom bookshop: ------------ http://www.wisdombooks.org/chinese.html "Chinese Madhyama Agama & the Pali Majjhima Nikaya", by Thich Minh Chau Bhikkhu Compares the ninety-eight Suttas held in common by the two texts, with their differences and similarities in structure, and analyses extensively the Agama, particularly its relation to the extinct Sarvastivada school. H/back, 388 pp, £12.95, order code 3803 ------------ Metta, Binh 7583 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 9:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mana Dear Gayan Dear Erik Dear group Gayan: > > I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about >things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , >marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, >hey...see my life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what >you are doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' > > :o) Erik: >Ooh, that one hit "me" right where it hurts, Gayan! :) Thanks for bringing >this important point up! Your mention of this forced me to meditate on >whether or not my sharing some of my "experiences" here, for example, would >fall into this category. > >This is a really tough one. The mana problem, I mean, which is the root >issue here. Being a fiery temper I have been attentively considerating these mails about mana - conceit, pride. The equality-conceit (mana), the inferiority-conceit (omana) and the superiority-conceit (atimana): the threefold conceit that should be overcome. "Those ascetics and brahman priests who, relying on this impermanent, miserable and transitory nature of corporeality, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness, fancy: 'Better am I', or 'Equal am I', or 'Worse am I', all these imagine thus through not understand reality." (S. xxii, 49) Indeed in reality no ego-entity is to be found - anatta. I was analyzing my interactions mostly off list than here because I believe that despite my blunt honesty in a public list we tend to be much more refrained to keep a sort of acceptable image and also because in a private correspondance there is much more confidence what not always is matched by the due respect for one another. We are very much prone to defend strenuously not only our thoughts and feelings but a SELF IMAGE so dear to us. Difficult to cope with the fact that mostly this self image is an idealization and however a mental strategy to boost our self esteem. The fundamental delusion of self. I have observed that what most stings me to reaction are authoritative tones and self assurance, I feel immediately winded up and challenged. This is a very rooted conditioning quite persistent and is the origin of antagonism, belligerant confrontation. It is born from a extremely hurtful and conflictual relationship with a very demanding, thwarthing and arrogant mother so far it concerns my present incarnation; I don't know about past accumulations but I add them to the cocktail for sure. I have a very fiery temper indeed and I am extremely proud of my 'achievements', meaning not so much what I have realized but my steadiness and vigour in seeking in the midst of often adverse conditions. If this is discussed or mistrusted it hurts me very much, I have a sense of loyalty regarding this seeking and if not 'untouchable' is something I highly value. Yes I am conceited about it. It's a protection and a weapon, defensiveness and attack. How often I observe this attitude in other people and how scarcely I succeed myself in refraining from it. I think that we can talk resolutely about anatta but actually is very scary to absorb inside this basic principle that founds all buddhist philosophy. It's frightening renounce to self-view, self-image, self esteem: we feel naked, vulnerable, exposed. And we refuse with obstination to acknowledge it because of mana, pride. I AM this, I AM that, how you dare to refer to me like this, how can you dismiss me like that, why are you humiliating me in this way. And we perceive the unfairness and the despise when we feel aggression but we are forgetful of our own mana and the fact that if there is no abiding entity, why am I fussing so much around? Yes there is an inherent dignity also in nama rupa but how the perspective changes when there is not ME being 'hurt'. I was thinking of the importance of mana, how our pride, our conceit are the origin of separation and antagonism. How much we grasp to our beliefs and how we feel displaced if somebody do not 'respect' them. I suppose all of us can easily relate to this considerations. The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences. When love and hate are both absent everything becomes clear and undisguised. Make the smallest distinction however and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. Seng-T'San Love Cybele 7584 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: An Invitation to All Here Dear Erik [Which means that for us to pass judgment on any other system, whether labelled Buddhist or not, would be a huge mistake. If we were to do that, we would no longer be "guardians of the truth," but partisans, sectarians, fools, befuddled, ensnared in a thicket of views, lost in a wildernesss of views, twisted into a contortion of views, agonizing by a writhing of views, bound by a fetter of views...] I totally agree with this vision of Dhamma and Dhamma schools and personally I have no prejudices and all this attachment to 'so-called' original teachings is just a question of preference actually. Indeed I decided for Theravada tradition after having practiced Zen for some years because it resounded much more inside me, question of affinities but I could disclaim this any moment. What doesn't make me less loyal to Dhamma in my opinion. But following the thread regarding conceit what about 'passing judgements on people' what we very frequently do, drawing lines not to be surpassed and creating antagonisms? It is not the very same mechanism after all? Metta Cybele 7585 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Sarah Dear Gayan >When I first travelled with Khun Sujin in Sri Lanka, I was strictly >vegitarian at >the time and was being very fussy about what I could and couldn't >eat....She'd >say to me: "Khun Sarah, have just a little of this and a little of that to >please the hostess...kusala cittas are more important" or something very >similar...I can still hear her saying it so sweetly more than 25yrs ago. >Yeah, I know what you mean. People sometimes(but more often than we think) >get offended by these kind of stuff. >I am thankful for that experience. >I noted some people have hidden aversion towards other people's sila. I feel sympathetic with these sharings, I have been practicing vegetarianism and macrobiotic based on health and philosophycal principles for years long ago but travelling around I realized that I was creating lots of embarrasement to my hosts and I was also renouncing to taste the gastronomical culture of many places because of my dietetic convictions and I gave up. I noticed this fact recently observing buddhists friends of mine who came to visit me in Penang and I was accompanying them around and above all in the Visuddhacara's meditation center frequentation it was really a trouble because they were so strict about vegetarianism and naturally in chinese-malay cuisine they use animal fat to cook, therefore even in vegetables and cereals there was an hindrance for them. And how they would create disappointment and frustration refusing all the excellent food the devotees in the center would prepare for them as a welcome gesture and would provoke a sort of subtle ill will all these continuous dilemmas even for the very kind monk always trying to be conciliatory and satisfy eveybody. At a certain point I really took them apart with my habitual blunt honesty and warned them to don't fuss so much creating all that 'mortification' to both laypeople and the monk with their rigidity and I made the same reasoning Sujin has done with you Sarah. Well they relaxed a bit and a climate of mutual tolerance was encouraged. But sometimes people don't realize the importance of kindness above all principles. The monk was so concerned because of them that he asked me to accompany my friends in a good Indian restaurant with vegetarian food and that he wanted to offer the meal. Well first they did not want to accept because for them it was like 'exploiting the monk', good grief! I convinced them of the importance of accepting the gift and they agreed. After the monk was supposed to refund me for this dinner and it was my turn to refuse telling him it was my dana and he pointed out to me; No Cybele it was my choice and intention offer this meal, therefore it is my dana and as I accept yours, you should accept mine this time. And I have been refunded by a monk; after I compensate using that money to help the pubblication of dhamma books that in eastern countries are gifts and not sold. But I realized the importance of dana and sila. and being flexible more and more. Metta Cybele 7586 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:15am Subject: Re: Mana --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Being a fiery temper I have been attentively considerating these mails about > mana - conceit, pride. > The equality-conceit (mana), the inferiority-conceit (omana) and the > superiority-conceit (atimana): the threefold conceit that should be > overcome. Thanks for adding these three by their official names, Cybele! I was poking around the Suttas last night for them but couldn't find the references then, as you quote: > "Those ascetics and brahman priests who, relying on this impermanent, > miserable and transitory nature of corporeality, feelings, perceptions, > mental formations and consciousness, fancy: > 'Better am I', or 'Equal am I', or 'Worse am I', all these imagine thus > through not understand reality." > (S. xxii, 49) > We are very much prone to defend strenuously not only our thoughts and > feelings but a SELF IMAGE so dear to us. > Difficult to cope with the fact that mostly this self image is an > idealization and however a mental strategy to boost our self esteem. > The fundamental delusion of self. I agree, there is always this notion there "I am right," etc. For me, I have a tendency to speak in very authoritative-sounding ways at times, and to always belieev whatever I say is right. There are of course times when that is the case (and times when I am likewise mistaken). Regardless, thanks to my Dhamma-friends, I have learned to become far more mindful of this habitual tendency to speak this way. Perhaps it comes from accumulations of not being used to being challenged, to be able to overpower others for example. On one hand this is why I find the practice of playing "defender" in debate so helpful, because I do get my views challenged and my assumptions shaken. At the same time this can also serve to get "me" to dig in to a "position," so it's a double-edged sword, and at these times I always try to remind myself that as master nagarjuna said: "emptiness is beyond taking any positions," a well as Master Chandrakirti's advice that "any position generates a counter-position, and both are invalid." And yet we Tibetans rely on these great masters and debate the hell out of them and the issues they raise all the same! :) > I have observed that what most stings me to reaction are authoritative tones > and self assurance, I feel immediately winded up and challenged. I am much like you in this regard. I have a deeply-ingrained tendency of contempt for authority (feeling oppressed in one way or another by a rigid Mormon upbringing certainly hasn't helped in this regard!). In some cases when I express myself authoritatively, it's perhaps a subconscious way of "pushing back" at those years of feeling stepped on and ordered around, feeling fettered by others' seemingly arbitrary rules and expectations, which combined with my warrior tendency leads me to be a sometimes ferocious fighter. This has expressed itself in my life in manifold ways, such as in my strong rebellious streak and willingness to take risks that would scare the shit out of others, which has in so many cases been the fuel for accumulating true wisdom! So there is nothing inherently good or bad in anything, we enatta teaches, and even these negative tendencies can be transmuted through prajna, into supremem wisdom, from fatal liabilities into the very vehicle for the attainment of Buddhahood! This is one reason I find the Tibetan spin on the Dharma most helpful for these accumulations, in that it directly addresses these tendencies and uses prajna to trasnmute the vilest poisons into the most sublime nectar of immortality. For example, by meditating on the inseparabale nature of the peaceful and wrathful deities--the "wrathful" deities being merely divine aspects of the Buddha appearing in wrathful form to terminate our grasping and delusions, for example the peaceful prajna-sword- weilding Majushri and his fierce, wrathful aspect, Yamantaka: "Yamantaka is the wrathful form of Manjushri, the embodiment of all of the Buddha's wisdom. He took the form of a fierce bull headed deity in order to subdue the Lord of Death. Wrathful deities wear bone and skull ornaments and often have a terrifying and demonic appearance. But their "anger" is directed against our own negative emotions and ego grasping which prevent our attainment of Buddhahood. The Wheel of Sharp Weapons calls on Yamantaka to "trample him, trample him, dance on the head of this treacherous demon of selfish concern." It is the wisdom realizing emptiness that is Yamantaka's actual weapon of destruction and it is the self-grasping ego that is destroyed." I have given this isseue much careful consideration, but still, this mana business is TOUGH! It appears in so many guises. It's a real shape-shifter, appearing at one moment as the conceited "king" issuing his edicts; the next as the "humble" beggar playing oh-so lowly, the next as comparing my progess with others; the next as the conceit of appearing so open and honest about my mana! Ack! Which is why I also, in addition to using the Tibetan techings of transmuting these poisons, apply the more common method taught and edeavour to note this affliction as it arises--when I am midful enough to catch it of course. In any case I endeavour not to get upset about it when it comes. "There is mana maiefsting in the form of vanity, okay, now let it go and move on." > This is a very rooted conditioning quite persistent and is the origin of > antagonism, belligerant confrontation. > It is born from a extremely hurtful and conflictual relationship with a very > demanding, thwarthing and arrogant mother so far it concerns my present > incarnation; I don't know about past accumulations but I add them to the > cocktail for sure. We all have our unique brand of afflictions to deal with. I can say for sure that the practice of the Buddhadharma has helped me SIGNIFICANTLY reduce the VERY antagonistic bent I used to have toward all sentient beings--especially the training in lovingkindness, compassion, and sympathetic joy. I used to argue like crazy with people! Always asserting "my rightness." I am sure many here haev seen that tendency in these khandas STILL. yet, I can say, it is nevertheless VASSTLY reduced from what it was jsut a few years ago. So the practice of the Dhamma DOES REALLY WORK! Again, one of the msot helpful teachings for me in this regard has been, and still is, Geshe Langri Tangpa's "Mind Training in Eight Verses." > I have a very fiery temper indeed and I am extremely proud of my > 'achievements', meaning not so much what I have realized but my steadiness > and vigour in seeking in the midst of often adverse conditions. > If this is discussed or mistrusted it hurts me very much, I have a sense of > loyalty regarding this seeking and if not 'untouchable' is something I > highly value. > Yes I am conceited about it. > It's a protection and a weapon, defensiveness and attack. > How often I observe this attitude in other people and how scarcely I succeed > myself in refraining from it. Like all of us, Cybele. Like all of us. We are, after all, all suffering sentient beings here (excepting of course the fully- enlightened emananations of the Buddhas who are reading this smiling serenely at the wholesomeness of these exchanges). > I think that we can talk resolutely about anatta but actually is very scary > to absorb inside this basic principle that founds all buddhist philosophy. > It's frightening renounce to self-view, self-image, self esteem: we feel > naked, vulnerable, exposed. Indeed. It takes a very ruthless sort of honesty as regards to what is arising in the mind RIGHT NOW, and an unflinching fearlessness to confront our afflictions at the most fundamental level, and mana is definitely one of those that lies at the very deepset layers of our own ignorance. > And we refuse with obstination to acknowledge it because of mana, pride. > I AM this, I AM that, how you dare to refer to me like this, how can you > dismiss me like that, why are you humiliating me in this way. > And we perceive the unfairness and the despise when we feel aggression but > we are forgetful of our own mana and the fact that if there is no abiding > entity, why am I fussing so much around? You are truly wise, Cybele! :) > The Great Way is not difficult > for those who have no preferences. > When love and hate are both absent > everything becomes clear and > undisguised. > Make the smallest distinction > however > and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. > > Seng-T'San Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! 7587 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > > Haha, that's true. I am curious though. Does this sutta condole that > > a Bikkhu should kill his own food (say, if he's caught in a polar > > region with no vegetation, and this seel is hooping about)? > > "Condole" means sympathize. "Condone" means allow. > > According to what I've read, a Bhikkhu would probably starve to death before he would ever intentionally kill another being. Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? 7588 From: Purnomo . Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone Hello, I'm from Indonesia too. metta, Purnomo >From: "Fenny" >>Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:04:32 +0800 > >Clear Day Dear Sarah and everyone in the list, > Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted on >the list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some >time (about a week) before I started posted. > I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being a >male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my >tertiary study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, >starting in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My >line of practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an >admirer of Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). > I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. > > > >Gassho, >Fen > > >> 7589 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:43am Subject: Re: Mana --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > dear Erik, > > your post is so Great that I really do not feel like messing it up with > comments here and there Gayana, you are INDEED a true friend in the Dhamma! Your compliment "Great" served as a condition the arising of yet MORE mana in this mindstream--of the very coarsest variety! The sort that led this set of five khandas to feel all inflated and "wise" for a a few moments, until I recalled the nature of this entire discussion, and noted that this is indeed a very coarse form of conceit arising. So many bows to you once again for helping me spot this tendency and giving me an opportunity to note its arising and passing away! :) :) :) > Eventhough my reply is so short, I feel like we had a 2 hour long > (meaningful)discussion about 'Mana' and what a 'nasty bugger' it is. > :o) > These akusalas are so Recursive indeed! I am so happy to hear that this exchange has benefitted you in some way (that is NOT mana speaking by the way :)). 7590 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:56am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > I would say that what we think of as Kom or Robert E. does not exist as an actual > 'thing'. Instead it is an accumulated impression of various characteristics, > actions, etc. You exist for me as certain impressions that I have of you. Put > together, they form a mind-image which I call "Kom". The fact that I experience > you through the internet or by having coffee with you every day for 20 years is > probably inconsequential to the result. Except in the case of knowing you for a > long time, I would have an even stronger presumption that I knew who and what > *you* were. Thank you for putting a close on this thread. Your explanation is clear and helpful, and I am appreciative of your explanation that regardless of how we meet, our impressions of each other are just concepts which are only possible because of sense impressions. kom 7591 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 0:34pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The idea that the consciousness and mental factors can cognize the true > characteristics of the object, yet *not necessarily penetrate deeply* as you put > it, is particularly interesting. Yes, only when the wisdom (panna) arises at the moment of cognition (of realities) that the consciousness and its mental factors can begin to cognize, remember, penetrate, concentrate on, know thoroughly the true characteristics of the dhamma. Without panna, there is no way that the characteristics of impermanence (anicca), dukkha, and non-self (anatta) can be truly known (beyond the concept). > This helps me to understand how the advanced cittas could cognize the true > characteristics of Nibbana, but *not penetrate them deeply* as one would *in* > Nibbana, if I am hearing you correctly. I think we are still not in full agreement on this point. My view on this is only limited to the explanations of others who are more learned about the scriptures and hence, I only have one more offer beyond what were discussed in the previous posts. If we understand, conceptually and experientially, what the characterstics, functions, manifestations, and proximate causes of panna, we may understand more how conditioned consciousness, with panna co-arising, can thoroughly penetrate the characteristics of other realities, including the unconditioned one. > I can accept the idea that the higher consciousness could 'understand' the true > characteristics of Nibbana, to the extent one understands them without having > realized Nibbana. As far as I know, the actual characteristics of nibbana cannot be experienced by the consciousness and its mental factors in any manner (unlike the conditioned realities) until the supramundane path consciousness arises (with panna!) to cognize the characteristic of nibbana. Nibbana cannot be imagined accurately as its characteristics are not anything like conditioned realities that the consciousness is familiar with (but not thoroughly penetrates). The mundane consciousness, of course, can cognize the concept of nibbana. > I think you would agree that there must be some measure of > understanding that is reserved for the experience of Nibbana itself, and that > cannot be accessible to any prior state, however highly developed. Yes, only one who have attained successive degrees of vipassana wisdom can eventually truly know nibbana. > So the question is in what way and to what extent Nibbana is apprehended prior to > being realized. As *concept* only, as far as I know. > The danger is that someone [probably a lot more developed than me!] will think > they 'know' Nibbana prior to realizing it. Another danger is in turning Nibbana > into an object of mind, thus blocking its realization. > > Are either of these dangers mentioned in the Suttas? The Buddha spoke of micha 8 factors (opposite of the noble 8-fold path), wrong knowledge, and wrong release. I haven't seen the explicit details of this, but there must be such dangers. > This is just to have clarity of the path, but I know that to really answer these > questions I need to go to the trouble of getting there myself! Then I can really > worry about what is and isn't apprehended in a 'higher state'. Yes... There is no other way. Thank you for all the reminders. kom 7592 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 0:46pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and ceases to be > with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the Tathagata > never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas dissolve > having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise again? I am just re-reading this post again. I am pretty thrilled (I think beyond the point of being appreciative---must be attachment in this case!) that you understood both opposing arguments. Now, understanding both arguments and the rationals for the arguments, you will have a chance for yourself to find out (perhaps through reading the tipitakas and commentaries?) what Buddha's explanation was. kom 7593 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 0:52pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding > hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's > going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. 7594 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mana Dear Gayan, Erik and Cybele, many thanks for all your excellent examples and quotes on mana.....very helpful indeed. So easy to justify whenever we find ourselves important and not so easy to be aware of as 'a form of lunacy': '....Herein conceit is fancying (deeming, vain imagining). It has haughtiness as characteristic, self-praise as function, desire to (advertise self like) a banner as manifestation, greed disociated from opinionativeness as proximate cause, and should be regarded as (a form of lunacy.' Atth (11, Part 1X, ch 111, 256) This is quoted along with many other good quotes and examples by Nina in 'Cetasikas' which can be found on: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ Thanks again.....I could add a lot of first-hand examples from just yesterday and today, but more kids arriving! Sarah 7595 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding > > hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's > > going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? > > Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. As far as I know (having lived there & all :), Denmark is designated in dependence of a collection of various land-areas (dependent on their various conditions for arising, etc.). Denmark is designated on the basis of a peninsula (Jylland--whence many of my ancestors come from--its West coast, to be precise) that borders on a place designated Germany. Along with this flat peninsula Denmark is also designated in dependence on a few scattered islands in the Baltic, including Sjaeland, Samsø, and the outlying (and very beautiful) island of Bornholm, as well as the island of Fyn--the birthplace of my most recent ancestors such as my mother, grandmother, and grandfather, who come from Fyn's largest "city," Odense. Odense, for those who know anything about it at all (and there are few apart from Danes who do) is perhaps best known as the birthplace of the storyteller Hans Christian Andersen, who in my opinion, spun some the most beautiful tales ever told, which I grew up hearing from my mother and also recall reading many, many times as a youngster-- such as the fairy-tale of the "Little Mermaid," "The Princess and the Pea," "The Ugly Duckling," and one many here may familiar with (or of not, they mey wish to become so), the "Emperor's New Clothes." I find many of Hans Christian Andersen's stories delightful to reflect on even as an adult today, as many serve to illustrate deep truths, yet in such simple language even a child can understand them. For example, one story I particularly enjoyed hearing my mother tell me in my childhood is the fairy-tale of the "Princess and the Pea": http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/2575/princess.html Indeed, only a true Princess could be so sensitive to something as subtle as this tiny pea, hidden beneath layers and layers of matress- bedding as it was. Another favorite of mine is the story of "The Little Mermaid": http://hca.gilead.org.il/li_merma.html Another yet another one my favorites is the tale of "The Ugly Duckling", which on re-reading just now caused streams of tears to come which are still coming as I write this: http://hca.gilead.org.il/ugly_duc.html But perhaps my favorite tale of all of Hans Christian Andersen's tales is "The Emperor's new Clothes": http://www.geocities.com/Athens/2424/clothes.html Anyway, sorry for this long digression into fairy-tales and so on, when there was another point under discussion, namely, that of speculation and its importance or unimportance in terms of whether we can get rid of all our beliefs, views, and suppositions, and, like the little child in the tale of "The Emperor's new Clothes" who "could only see things as his eyes showed them to him," come to see the nakedness of the Emperor right before us. 7596 From: Herman Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hi 12345, I hope this finds you well. Starting a post with a greeting, and ending it with a pleasantry, helps create the feeling that you are participating in a friendly exchange of views. Regards Herman > > Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. 7597 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 2:50pm Subject: Re: Mana/Lunacy Dear Sarah > Dear Gayan, Erik and Cybele, > > many thanks for all your excellent examples and quotes on mana.....very helpful indeed. So easy to justify whenever we find ourselves important and not so easy to be aware of as 'a form of lunacy': > > '....Herein conceit is fancying (deeming, vain imagining). It has haughtiness as characteristic, self-praise as function, desire to (advertise self like) a banner as manifestation, greed disociated from opinionativeness as proximate cause, and should be regarded as (a form of lunacy.' Atth (11, Part 1X, ch 111, 256) I really liked very much the definition of a form of 'lunacy' for conceit. It's very pertinent! Indeed I am prone to declare that when we are so self assured it's a kind of MANIC phase. Lunacy IS another word for mania actually. Lunacy is delirium, dementia, derangement, frenzy, hysteria, illogicality, insanity, madness, mania, psychosis, unreason. It kind of illustrates perfectly that mental state of pride and conceit when we become so vain and arrogant, we are sort of nuts indeed! ;-) Oh Sarah, you led me to a deep insight promise! We are like crackpots, lunatics when we are 'self-possessed' by mana. We should continue this discussion, I think is very much valuable and regards everybody. Great Sarah, you made my day! Fundamentally we all suffer of 'mania'!!! Oh my goodness, now apart my recurrent depression I am also 'manic' and my doctor told me absolutely I did not suffer from mania but I was only exuberant, see! Never rely on doctors; don't beat me up Num, I am joking! ;-) Love and hugs Cybele 7598 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 3:18pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Rikpa How are you this fine day? You know, I agree with you that speculating is not something Buddha encouraged, but what did you learn from those fairy tales if not that a) animals are always trying to get you, b) they are very, very clever, and c) they are not afraid to swim thousands of miles to get you? Half-jokingly, Joshua 2001 7599 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 3:27pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Herman wrote: > Hi 12345, > > I hope this finds you well. > > Starting a post with a greeting, and ending it with a pleasantry, > helps create the feeling that you are participating in a friendly > exchange of views. > > > Regards > > > Herman Dear Herman, Ditto. I was unaware this was so. In the future I shall try to correct it. Thankfully, Joshua 2001 P.S. by the way, do you know what 'Thitibhutam' means in Pali? 7600 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 4:35pm Subject: The Myth of the Dhamma --- Erik wrote: > Dear Rikpa > > How are you this fine day? > > You know, I agree with you that speculating is not something Buddha encouraged, but what did you learn from those fairy tales if not that a) animals are always trying to get you, b) they are very, very clever, and c) they are not afraid to swim thousands of miles to get you? Great question, Joshua! :) The beauty of any well-spoken myth (like the Buddha's Dharma) is that it can be understood at many levels, and as such can enlighten certain principles--even subtle and profound ones--such that we are able to get the very most out of that myth, to whatever degree we're presently able to understand it and make use of it. Of course, as wisdom and insight grow, understanding of what may have at first appeared quite simple may reveal new dimensions and depths of profundity we could never have imagined upon our first hearing of a given myth--which is why I believe it is very beneficial to diligently seek out and try to understand the deeper meanings of any time-tested myth. Because any good myth, like the myth the Buddha spun, may be seen and understood at so many levels, and the level at which we first understand it may be a very suiperficial (yet nonetheless helpful) one indeed, with its true meaning yet hidden deeply away from us, dependent entirely upon our present degree of penetration of insight into its deeper meaning. And if we understand what the Buddha taught about emptiness and dependent origination, we must come to see that we are all living in a totally mythological world to begin with!--a world of constructs and labels and designations arising from other labels and designations that arise in dependence on other labels and designations, none of which have any substantial reality in and of themselves apart from the awareness conditioned by kamma creating these very distinctions in the first place! For example, there is no difference between the so-called material basis of a "pen" when viewed by a human or when viewed by a dog, to use a famous example employed by Geshe Michael Roach on the teachings on karma and emptiness, and how the two relate to one another. And yet, when we humans perceive "pen," there are an entirely different set of congnitive associations that tag along with that, such that we "see," in our minds, a "pen." And we see a "pen" SOLELY based on our ability to contextualize this cylindrical object via mental constructs overlaid onto a dark-liquid-filled cylindrical object, which is used conventionally to perform the function of writing; and also ercognize that this function of "writing" is in turn dependent on a fabrication we call language, which is in turn dependent on fabrications we call form, feeling, perception, mental impressions, and consciousness, which are in turn dependent on the notion of "self," the primary delusion the Buddha's myths were designed to lead us out of. To put it more simply, even though a dog and a human may see the very same cylindrical object we label "pen" (which is in turn composed of smaller cylindrical objects and pieces of metal, ink, and so on, which are in turn composed of molecules, that are in turn composed of atoms, which are composed of subatomic particles, which, as modern physics has demonstrated lack any subsatntial nature in & of themselves to begin with, being mere arisings and passings away that can even behave in seemingly contradictory ways dependent on how they're viewed--as possiblwe "waves," or as "particles," but I digress), a dog and a human see two very different things indeed! In the case of us fortunate enough to have the karma to see a "pen" (when the eye-sene makes conastct with these various shapes and colors the conditions the arising of long chain of mental fabrications and associations leading to the idea "pen" to arise) we see a writing implement. However, those beings with the unfortunate karma to have been born in the form of an animal, in this case a dog, will have the karma to see perhaps (speculating here, since it's impossible to know another's actual mind-state and that "dog" could very well be an enlightened emanation of a Buddha, after all) a "chewable object," or if it's a more playful dog, perhaps as a stick to be happily thrown in a agme of "fetch"! So Joshua, there is the exact physical basis present in this case, and yet there is a VERY different perception of that same collection of parts! And that difference between a "chewable object" and a "pen" is NONE OTHER THAN KAMMA-VIPAKA, or more precisely, the sum-total result of all our previously accumulated thoughts, words, actions! This is the immutable law (in the same way gravity is an immutable law of kamma and its results. That we are literally FORCED to see a pen, in dependence on the karma we have as humans, who have been raised in an environment where there is written language, where there is the technology to produce ink-filled writing implements, etc. This law of kamma is true for ALL sentient beings, from hell-beings all the way up to those on the brink of Buddhahood! In the case of hell-beings, their previously accumulated tendencies toward anger and hatred FORCE them to see terrifying visions, FORCE them to see themselves enchained, tortured mercilessly (and one need not even be a hell-being to experience such torments, as anyone who has ever visited Tuol Sleng "Genocide Prison" just outside Phon Phen, Cambodia, can see directly). Or through perhaps extreme stinginess one will come to see oneself in a state of constant want, grasping, neediness, always hungry, never enough material goods, desperately impoverished, etc. Or perhaps one has been extremely kind and generous and is thereby forced to see oneself living in splendorous gardens, hear celestial music, taste the most sensually delightful food, etc. etc. And yet--no matter whether we are being forced by our previous accumulations to see hellish, nightmarish agony-filled realms; or whether we are forced to see the most beautiful sights, hear the most beautiful sounds, smell the most delightful fragrances, taste the most delightful food, tough the most pleasant objects--within all these states there is still suffering: there is still birth; there is still old age; there is still sickness; there is still death. Because this is still SAMSARA. And again, all of these conitions are merely composed of all these mental constructs and labels that arise in SOLE DEPENDENCE on what we call kamma--out volitional choices, in other words. It is in dependence on these factors that the Buddha taught this very Truth of Suffering; its Origin; its Cessation; and the Path Leading to its Cessation. And it is to the degree we have penetrated the Noble Truth of Suffering, its Origin, its Cessation, and the Path leading to its cessation, that makes the diffefrence between whether we see this world of samsara as something defiled, or, of we possess the purified vision of a Buddha--to playfully see this world these non-truly- existent contructs we label "sentient beings" (for whom this non- truly-existent suffering nonetheless appears VERY real, even though as we have seen in truth even this suffering is a total fabrication arising from a set of accumulated tendencies stretching back to beginningless time) perceive as suffering of birth, old age, sickness, and death, as none other than a Buddha-paradise, Nirvana itself! May all beings see this world as a pure Buddha-field! :) :) :) 7601 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 5:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Suan (& Erik), --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > Dear Sarah > > How have you been? How is your stay in Hong Kong? Pretty hot right now and lots of hustle bustle as Num described...but we like it! Must be pretty cool and breezy these days in Canberra! I'm waiting for you to bump into Michael Jackson and give him dsg best wishes! (not Michael Jackson, the pop star;-) > Back to our discussion: > You wrote: > > "Suan, it all sounds very easy as af anyone can just decide to go for > levels of jhana without any understanding of the development of > samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms > the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas > (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment." > > I agree with you. It is a very difficult path for us just to reach > the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca samadhi). > > That is why I wrote: > > "So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca > samadhi), you won't stop at there." > > Please notice the adverb "ever" in the above statement. > > I was merely following the flow of Sakula's questions, so I had to > start with the assumption that a hypothetical woman sush as Sakula > had already attained pre-jhanic concentration. Once you got there, > though, you would aim at higher levels. OK, maybe I misunderstood a little here....you're talking about higher levels of samatha and jhana practice, starting with this assumption, which may well be true. > > You also wrote: > > "I know that many teachers encourage these views, but I find them > quite disturbing." > > You must forgive me, Sarah, I do not understand the above statement. > What do "these views" refer to? Are there any views in my message > that you find disturbing? If so, please help me identify them so that > I could properly address them to your satisfaction. What I meant, but perhaps clumsily didn't express well, was what I wrote in the first paragraph which you've already agreed with. In other words, I was talking about the beginning of the development of samatha. I find it disturbing to read that anyone can attain jhana with no understanding of moments of samatha even. > > But, I do stand by my following statements: > > "The most important keyword to remember to make jhana within our > reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from sensuous > preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this > keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. > Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn > their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, > of course)!" > > Please kindly read (kamesu vivicceva, my spelling error) as vivicceva > kamehi. > > You also asked: > > "What about as soon as we open our eyes or hear a sound? Sensuous > preoccupations immediately! No self that can stop or control clinging > at these times." > > Not necessarily so, Sarah, I am afraid. You sounded somewhat Freudian > here. But, whatever we see or hear do not necessarily bring > about the mental events with clinging or greed (lobhamula cittani) > responsible for sensuous pre-occupations. I think that for most of us, there is so very little understanding in the day of moments of clinging (lobha). All we know is when there are obvious gross degrees of it appearing. Just as when we talk about mana (conceit), there may be some understanding of mana when we find ourselves superior to others, but we begin to see more subtle shades appearing when we consider its nature more. And what we consider to be subtle shades of mana now will be seen as very gross shades when more wisdom has been accumulated! What about the mana when we get dressed in the morning or touch the keyboard before we even write anything? It darts in so quickly. In the same way with lobha, there are more and more subtle shades to be known. What about when we just look at a glass of water or has Rob once said, when we just look at a neutral coloured wall....lobha as soon as we open our eyes. > > If they were true as you adviced, you would have contradicted > yourself because you wrote the following: > > " any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly > understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference > between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental > states) at this moment." > > Your statement above clearly shows that there are certain other types > of people whose preoccupatins are other than sensuous ones. There are different moments, different cittas for us all. Even when there is lobha, its characteristic can be known (immediately following its arising to be technical) by sati (awareness) whether at the level of samatha or vipassana. At that moment of awareness, the citta is calm from lobha and akusala. It's a moment of samatha, different from the moment with lobha. Kom mentioned recently how difficult it is to be aware of dana (I think) and how seldom there is any understanding when we make an offering as to which moments are kusala and which are akusala (whether with mana or lobha or whatever). If there is no knowing what is skilful and what isn't skilful, samatha cannot begin to develop. This was my point. With understanding, it can begin (for anyone), but not at the moments of lobha. Just one moment of samatha, and then another later. That's the beginning, but it has to be with right understanding. Perhaps I'll just digress quickly to the yoga example which Erik wrote about. Like Erik, my friends who do yoga are sure they have many noble qualities which he mentioned while practising such as calmness, concentration, viriya (energy), mental pliancy. They even talk about generosity to themselves! For me, I practise daily because I enjoy it very much (lots of lobha), have a lot of attachment to the body, feel more energetic in my work afterwards (nothing kusala about this energy) and like the quiet, pleasant, calm feeling. Again, this is not calm as in samatha which must have one of the 40 objects. It is the pleasant feeling associated with lobha or unwholesome samadhi mostly. At this moment, if there isn't a citta of sila, dana or bhavana, it isn't wholesome. For example, when we read about kaya-lahuta (lightness of mental factors) and citta-lahuta (lightness of citta), people have an idea that these refer to feeling light and energetic in a conventional sense. In fact they have to refer to wholesome states of mind (even if one is on one's death-bed, they can arise). They're opposed to thina and middha (sloth and torpor) which we discussed sometime back as having nothing to do with conventional slugishness.Thina and middha refer to sluggishness with regard to skilful states of mind. Kaya-muduta (pliancy of cetasikas) and citta muduta (pliancy of citta) are also interesting. They are the opponents of wrong view and conceit. As the mana discussions have shown recently, when there is mana, there is mental rigidity or intolerance and comparing. So kaya muduta has nothing to do with the body or flexibility! Again Nina discusses all these mental factors in great detail in 'Cetasikas. None of this means there cannot be wholesome cittas whilst practising yoga or swimming (you didn't follow that suggestion, Erik!), or that it's wrong to follow these activities because we know there is bound to be a lot of lobha whatever we do. Just better, I'd say, to know 'oneself' better and better and begin to see a little more than before how often lobha arises even now while we're considering dhamma! Suan, please excuse me for rambling onto Erik's post....(I'll just wait for the 'NO NO SARAH, you're quite WRONG;-)) Suan, please keep up your helpful contributions and let me know if we're still on different tracks! Sarah 7602 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 7:08pm Subject: Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Suan (& Erik), > Perhaps I'll just digress quickly to the yoga example which Erik wrote about. > Like Erik, my friends who do yoga are sure they have many noble qualities which > he mentioned while practising such as calmness, concentration, viriya (energy), > mental pliancy. They even talk about generosity to themselves! This is very good to hear! I am happy to hear that yoga also engenders in others calm, concentration, energy, mental pliancy, and even the talk about generosity toward themselves (as I have been taught is the right place to begin--at least by my lamas and at Wat Mahatat--beginning all lovingkindness meditations with generating lovingkindness toward ourselves, and then after this extending lovingkindness out to others). > For me, I practise daily because I enjoy it very much (lots of lobha), have a > lot of attachment to the body, feel more energetic in my work afterwards > (nothing kusala about this energy) and like the quiet, pleasant, calm feeling. > Again, this is not calm as in samatha which must have one of the 40 objects. It > is the pleasant feeling associated with lobha or unwholesome samadhi mostly. You sound like you're being way too hard hard on yourself here, Sarah! :) Perhaps a little gentleness and generiostity toward your own kusala efforts is in order here! :) :) :) In keeping with the teaching on first extending lovingkindness toward ourselves, might you not be able to rejoice and simlpy be happy with yourself in practicing a wholesome activity like yoga, even if this practice isn't technically of the insight variety, even if there are moments of lobha, even if there is mana? I mean, who's perfect (besides a Buddha)? As you said to me about my nasty smoking habit, there's no sense being too hard on ourselves over the fact we have afflictions, right? :) We need to be aware of them and work with this reality, but ther's no point getting overly worried about having mana, nor about lobha, as this worry (kukucca) is a hindrance in & of itself! (Jeez, all this Middle Way business again!) > At this moment, if there isn't a citta of sila, dana or bhavana, it isn't > wholesome. For example, when we read about kaya-lahuta (lightness of mental > factors) and citta-lahuta (lightness of citta), people have an idea that these > refer to feeling light and energetic in a conventional sense. In fact they > have to refer to wholesome states of mind (even if one is on one's death-bed, > they can arise). They're opposed to thina and middha (sloth and torpor) which > we discussed sometime back as having nothing to do with conventional > slugishness.Thina and middha refer to sluggishness with regard to skilful > states of mind. > Kaya-muduta (pliancy of cetasikas) and citta muduta (pliancy of citta) are also > interesting. They are the opponents of wrong view and conceit. As the mana > discussions have shown recently, when there is mana, there is mental rigidity > or intolerance and comparing. So kaya muduta has nothing to do with the body or > flexibility! I would question this interpretation using only "cetasikas" (how do mental factorsrelate to the body, other than the mind & body being they are mutuality conditions for one another?), given it is specifically called as KAYA muduta. I am not suggesting this in the sense we can stretch into various contortions performing yoga asanas, but am referring to a sort of pliancy and suppleness to the body that can be experienced, for example, in seated meditation, when there is the development of samatha & absorption. There is a special "lightness & pliancy" which is one of the characteristics of effective samatha and jhana meditation, that carries out throughout the day even outsidfe of formal meditation practice one can experience. These factors are experienced directly by meditators once one's meditation begins to get traction. > None of this means there cannot be wholesome cittas whilst practising yoga or > swimming (you didn't follow that suggestion, Erik!), or that it's wrong to > follow these activities because we know there is bound to be a lot of lobha > whatever we do. Just better, I'd say, to know 'oneself' better and better and > begin to see a little more than before how often lobha arises even now while > we're considering dhamma! Great advice, Sarah! And appreciate your filling in some more details on these six yugalas! :) 7603 From: Herman Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 7:12pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness: Awareness Of Anger As Kusala Dear Suan, I read from your post that any mindfulness is kusala. Would it be true to say that any state where mindfulness was absent eg sleep, was therefore akusala? Thank you herman --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > Dear Herman > > How are you? > > You asked: > > "Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a > kusala moment?" > > Yes, if you are aware of anger in the sense of sati (recollection, > mindfulness), that would be a kusala moment. > > The supporting Pali in the words of the Buddha is as follows. > > "sadosam va cittam `sadosam cittan'ti pajanati" > > "Monks, how does the monk live as an observer of the mind in the > mind? .....Monks, here, the monk knows comprehensively the mind with > anger as the mind with anger..." > > The above quotation comes from Section 114, Cittanupassana, > Mahasatipatthana Suttam, Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya. > > You also asked: > > "Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger akusala, is all > dana kusala?" > > Yes,each of them should be considered as such because kusala and > akusala gives different results. But, awareness of akusala can bring > about kusala as a result. Even if one's anger has transformed one > into a kind individual later for various reasons such as regret, (even > if anger served as the cause of kindness) anger at the moment of > arising is akusala. Dana at the moment of arising is kusala even if > motivation for it was based on calculated selfishness. > > > With regards, > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7604 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 9:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Mana dear erik, this is what u said: > I have given this isseue much careful consideration, but still, this > mana business is TOUGH! It appears in so many guises. It's a real > shape-shifter, appearing at one moment as the conceited "king" > issuing his edicts; the next as the "humble" beggar playing oh-so > lowly, the next as comparing my progess with others; the next as the > conceit of appearing so open and honest about my mana! Ack! it is Tough and it is True, I think you are approaching the area of 'Cheating' nature of the mind. (May be a year or year and a half ago )we discussed it in the group. I did a search and found the posts. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3543 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3544 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3545 Basically, the akusala dhammas cheat disguising as kusalas.Exactly as the word you used ,'shape-shifter's. The path is tough, but 'knocking-out'ly interesting. regards gayan 7605 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Herman --- Herman wrote: > Jon, > > To be totally honest, I wouldn't know kusala or akusala if I fell > over them. Especially since joining this forum. This is not a > criticism of the forum, by the way. How on earth do I know the > difference between wrong view and kusala? Where is the yardstick that > tells me that? Could there not be a deception lurking near every > citta that suggests wholesomeness? These are all very valid and useful questions. It is easy I think to fall into the trap of thinking one knows by direct experience when actually one only knows by deduction from the surrounding circumstances eg. 'I am discussing dhamma it must be kusala', or 'I am helping someone it must be dana', or 'I am studying the moment it must be awareness' etc. This is in truth just a form of thinking. Knowing by direct experience refers to panna that knows the characteristic of the reality. Each reality has its own unique characteristic (seeing, visible object, feeling, aversion etc). In addition, the realities that are kusala share the characteristic of being kusala. There is no yardstick by which we can measure these characteristics, but there is abundant description of them in the teachings. That is why I think it is important to have an understanding of things at that level. As we have seen with the recent discussion on mana, there are many aspects to it that we probably have not been aware of, even if e have heard it before, and some of we may well have been taking for kusala. So knowing more about this can help us to begin to understand directly the different realities. The good thing is, we needn't feel we have to know one kind of reality sooner than or better than another. If the characteristic that is kusala does not appear directly, that is not a problem. The more we know about akusala and recognise it when it arises, the less likely we are to take it for kusala, which is what may be happening otherwise. So keep up the healthy scepticism! > What is the basis for a monks confidence that there was a wholesome > citta? I think knowing akusala well can be a good basis, because the difference when kusala arises and appears should then be more apparent. Jon 7606 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 1:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! op 19-08-2001 20:04 schreef Kom Tukovinit op Kom Tukovinit: Nina: as I explained in "Conditions", Ch 14, jhana-factors > can be taken in >> a wide sense and then, according to the Patthana, akusala jhana- > factors are >> related to the associated aggregates by jhana-condition. See also >> Dhammasangani, in the Summary, where jhana-factors are mentioned > arising >> with kusala citta which is unaccompanied by panna and also with > akusala >> citta (§147, and § 397 a) Without the jhana-factors good or evil > deeds >> cannot be performed. > Kom: . Do you by > any chance have further explanation about why Domanassa would assist > the citta to be fixed on the object (but not anger, for example)? I > think I can understand about how the rest of the factors assist the > citta in being fixed on the object, but I still don't see how > domanasa does this. Nina: In the Guide to Conditional Relations, by U Narada, Ch II, 17 Jhana Condition) it is explained that the jhanafactors make the associated states fix themselves formly to pleasant and unpleasant objects. We should see domanassa not in isolation, but associated with the other jhanafactors. He gives examples taking his material from the commentaries, but does not mention from which texts. It is stated that someone could not shoot birds and animals without the jhanafactors. He has to aim and concentrate on the animal he will shoot. Examples and analogies he gives are interesting. He says, "For even in the case of hate which offends, it is one-pointedness of mind that firmly fixes the mind on the unpleasant object although painful feeling is experienced with that object. We need the jhanafactors to pronounce one word correctly, he says. Also when there is lobha, desire for extraordinary experiences, jhanafactors can make the associated dhammas fix firmly on a pleasant object. Someone may take for real jhana what is not, he can be misled. You dealt again with another aspect, domanassa that can be pursued, as explained in the Co. This is actually similar to desire that should not be pursued and that could be pursued, in the 'Guide", the Netti, that Robert K. brought up some time ago. A delicate question, we studied the Pali commentary but are not finished with it. . I must run along now, preparing for a week of vacation next week. Nina. > > 7607 From: Joshua Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 4:36am Subject: Book recomendatons 1. We're All Doing Time, by Bo Lozoff 2. Wisdom of the Desert, by Thomas Merton These books are especially good for dogmatists & sectarians. I know they help me out with this every time I read them. Especially 'We're all doing time'. I cry (in my silent, tough-guy way) nearly every time I read the letters section. Recently, my mother got tested for breast cancer. We won't know if she has it or not for while, I think. It hasn't bothered me much, but I plan to ordain as a monk someday, and if she does have it and there's no one to take care of her, it wouldn't be very Buddhist to ordain, would it? She's been fretting a little over the idea of me becoming a monk. There's a local Wat here, but I don't think they have any monks who speak English, and in 1991 all the monks, a nun, a novice & attendent were all shot dead by (supposedly) 2 teenagers. Anyway, it will be 2 years before I can do it, and this gives me ample time to think it over (if my mother doesn't have cancer). Personally, Abhayagiri seems like a good place. Ajahn Chah goes in my Holy Trinity (along with Anders & Schopenhauer) of folks who clarified Buddhism for me, and this is in his "lineage", I suppose. 7608 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 6:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Ripka and Sarah, I was very happy to read this exchange. It seems in such a helpful and non-dogmatic spirit. Isn't it great if we can be compassionate and find ways to help ourselves as well as others? The path, not to complain, is so hard...... If there are wholesome ways of making it work for each of us, isn't that great? One of the things the Buddha was explicit about was that hardship and asceticism in and of themselves brought us no closer to realization. Wouldn't it be a form of 'fasting' to refrain from yoga, or to be unduly unhappy about it, if it supports your ability to progress, rather than distracting from it? That would be my main criterion. I was a yoga teacher for almost 15 years. I guess I still am, but have no one to teach at the moment, and not much time to do it as it is not my main line of work at the moment. One of my teachers became deeply involved with the long meditation retreats at the Insight center at Barre, Mass., in the U.S., and sat almost constantly there for three years, doing three month retreats. He apparently reached a deep level of insight during this time. One of the questions was whether or not it was okay for him to do yoga sessions inbetween sitting. The outcome was that he explained that for him to be able to not be distracted by physical symptoms that beset him when he didn't do yoga, it was necessary, and that was ultimately accepted. He could have just 'noted' the physical problems and not done anything to 'clear out' his body, but at his advanced stage of practice it was considered counter-productive to create unnecessary problems. And he did not over-'indulge' in the yoga, just did it the way he took his noon day meal or his walking meditations. Anyway, I thought your response to Sarah, Ripka, was very open and helpful. I hope we can all be compassionate to ourselves and find skillful means to make the path *work*, not make it harder than it already is. Another note: Can you imagine the Buddha being too stiff in the hips to assume the full lotus posture? Not really, but what about the rest of us? It is not unhelpful to work towards having a body that can cooperate with the best possible physical forms for our work. Robert ================================== --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Suan (& Erik), > > > Perhaps I'll just digress quickly to the yoga example which Erik > wrote about. > > Like Erik, my friends who do yoga are sure they have many noble > qualities which > > he mentioned while practising such as calmness, concentration, > viriya (energy), > > mental pliancy. They even talk about generosity to themselves! > > This is very good to hear! I am happy to hear that yoga also > engenders in others calm, concentration, energy, mental pliancy, and > even the talk about generosity toward themselves (as I have been > taught is the right place to begin--at least by my lamas and at Wat > Mahatat--beginning all lovingkindness meditations with generating > lovingkindness toward ourselves, and then after this extending > lovingkindness out to others). > > > For me, I practise daily because I enjoy it very much (lots of > lobha), have a > > lot of attachment to the body, feel more energetic in my work > afterwards > > (nothing kusala about this energy) and like the quiet, pleasant, > calm feeling. > > Again, this is not calm as in samatha which must have one of the 40 > objects. It > > is the pleasant feeling associated with lobha or unwholesome > samadhi mostly. > > You sound like you're being way too hard hard on yourself here, > Sarah! :) Perhaps a little gentleness and generiostity toward your > own kusala efforts is in order here! :) :) :) > > In keeping with the teaching on first extending lovingkindness toward > ourselves, might you not be able to rejoice and simlpy be happy with > yourself in practicing a wholesome activity like yoga, even if this > practice isn't technically of the insight variety, even if there are > moments of lobha, even if there is mana? > > I mean, who's perfect (besides a Buddha)? As you said to me about my > nasty smoking habit, there's no sense being too hard on ourselves > over the fact we have afflictions, right? :) We need to be aware of > them and work with this reality, but ther's no point getting overly > worried about having mana, nor about lobha, as this worry (kukucca) > is a hindrance in & of itself! (Jeez, all this Middle Way business > again!) > > > At this moment, if there isn't a citta of sila, dana or bhavana, it > isn't > > wholesome. For example, when we read about kaya-lahuta (lightness > of mental > > factors) and citta-lahuta (lightness of citta), people have an idea > that these > > refer to feeling light and energetic in a conventional sense. In > fact they > > have to refer to wholesome states of mind (even if one is on one's > death-bed, > > they can arise). They're opposed to thina and middha (sloth and > torpor) which > > we discussed sometime back as having nothing to do with conventional > > slugishness.Thina and middha refer to sluggishness with regard to > skilful > > states of mind. > > > Kaya-muduta (pliancy of cetasikas) and citta muduta (pliancy of > citta) are also > > interesting. They are the opponents of wrong view and conceit. As > the mana > > discussions have shown recently, when there is mana, there is > mental rigidity > > or intolerance and comparing. So kaya muduta has nothing to do with > the body or > > flexibility! > > I would question this interpretation using only "cetasikas" (how do > mental factorsrelate to the body, other than the mind & body being > they are mutuality conditions for one another?), given it is > specifically called as KAYA muduta. > > I am not suggesting this in the sense we can stretch into various > contortions performing yoga asanas, but am referring to a sort of > pliancy and suppleness to the body that can be experienced, for > example, in seated meditation, when there is the development of > samatha & absorption. There is a special "lightness & pliancy" which > is one of the characteristics of effective samatha and jhana > meditation, that carries out throughout the day even outsidfe of > formal meditation practice one can experience. These factors are > experienced directly by meditators once one's meditation begins to > get traction. > > > None of this means there cannot be wholesome cittas whilst > practising yoga or > > swimming (you didn't follow that suggestion, Erik!), or that it's > wrong to > > follow these activities because we know there is bound to be a lot > of lobha > > whatever we do. Just better, I'd say, to know 'oneself' better and > better and > > begin to see a little more than before how often lobha arises even > now while > > we're considering dhamma! > > Great advice, Sarah! And appreciate your filling in some more details > on these six yugalas! :) > > ===== 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" 7609 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: Book recomendatons --- Erik wrote: Hi Joshua, > Recently, my mother got tested for breast cancer. We won't know if she has it or not for while, I think. It hasn't bothered me much, but I plan to ordain as a monk someday, and if she does have it and there's no one to take care of her, it wouldn't be very Buddhist to ordain, would it? The Buddha taught that it very important to honor take care of our parents. My dear Dhamma-friend Amara asked me to find for her yesterday a wonderful Sutta with a passage addressing taking care of our parents (for a householder, not a monk): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn31.html#to-parents I don't know if this is any help to you with your present dillemma or not. To add a bit to this, I do recall being taught by my (Tibetan) teachers that even more precious than our lamas are our parents. That's almost shocking to hear if you understand how much one is enjoined to revere one's lamas in the Tibetan tradition. > She's been fretting a little over the idea of me becoming a monk. There's a local Wat here, but I don't think they have any monks who speak English, and in 1991 all the monks, a nun, a novice & attendent were all shot dead by (supposedly) 2 teenagers. Was this the Wat in Arizona where several Thai monks were killed a few years ago? > Anyway, it will be 2 years before I can do it, and this gives me ample time to think it over (if my mother doesn't have cancer). Personally, Abhayagiri seems like a good place. Ajahn Chah goes in my Holy Trinity (along with Anders & Schopenhauer) of folks who clarified Buddhism for me, and this is in his "lineage", I suppose. I just have HUGE happiness as regards Anders' amazing contributions here in DSG! And that has nothing to do with the fact he's a fellow Dane, either. He speaks simply some of the best Dhamma I've ever had the pleasure of hearing. Speaking of Schopenhauer, I too found him very helpful at one point in my development--in fact I recall reading him around the same time as I began my Zen practice, in The Will. While Schopenhauer may not have been a Buddhist, I nevertheless found his book "The Will" very helpful--and my favorite paraphrase of his to this day remains: "we're all on this same boat of suffering together, so why be mean to each another; why don't we all love each other instead?". In my case I found Neitzsche helpful as well ("Beyond Good and Evil"), while again, not Buddhist, served to help get me past the notions of absolute good vs. absolute evil and helped me see in a far less dogmatic fashion that I had been accustomed to seeing before, so I consider him one of my great teachers as well. And I think I mentioned Hans Christian Andersen yesterday, so no need to elaborate further on that. Om Shanti, Erik 7610 From: Joshua Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 11:55am Subject: Re: Book recomendatons > The Buddha taught that it very important to honor take care of our > parents. My dear Dhamma-friend Amara asked me to find for her > yesterday a wonderful Sutta with a passage addressing taking care of > our parents (for a householder, not a monk): > Oh, it wasn't really a big dilemma. I wouldn't go off and be a monk if she had cancer in any case. > > I don't know if this is any help to you with your present dillemma or > not. To add a bit to this, I do recall being taught by my (Tibetan) > teachers that even more precious than our lamas are our parents. > That's almost shocking to hear if you understand how much one is > enjoined to revere one's lamas in the Tibetan tradition. > Yep. Like I said, I wouldn't do it unless she was OK. > Was this the Wat in Arizona where several Thai monks were killed a > few years ago? > Same Wat. I can't imagine anything more horrifying than harming monks & nuns. Some of the corpses were supposedly seen with their hands still clasped in prayer. It's hard to feel metta towards such killers, but Lord knows I try. > I just have HUGE happiness as regards Anders' amazing contributions > here in DSG! And that has nothing to do with the fact he's a fellow > Dane, either. He speaks simply some of the best Dhamma I've ever had > the pleasure of hearing. > Words can't express how grateful I am to him. > While Schopenhauer may not have been a Buddhist, I nevertheless found > his book "The Will" very helpful--and my favorite paraphrase of his > to this day remains: "we're all on this same boat of suffering > together, so why be mean to each another; why don't we all love each > other instead?". Amen. In Dhamma Joshua 7611 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 0:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and > ceases to be > > with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the > Tathagata > > never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas > dissolve > > having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise > again? > > I am just re-reading this post again. I am pretty thrilled (I think beyond > the point of being appreciative---must be attachment in this case!) that > you understood both opposing arguments. Now, understanding both > arguments and the rationals for the arguments, you will have a chance for > yourself to find out (perhaps through reading the tipitakas and > commentaries?) what Buddha's explanation was. > > kom ah, I didn't think there was an easy way 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" 7612 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 0:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > The idea that the consciousness and mental factors can cognize the true > > characteristics of the object, yet *not necessarily penetrate deeply* as > you put > > it, is particularly interesting. > > Yes, only when the wisdom (panna) arises at the moment of cognition (of > realities) that the consciousness and its mental factors can begin to > cognize, remember, penetrate, concentrate on, know thoroughly the true > characteristics of the dhamma. Without panna, there is no way that the > characteristics of impermanence (anicca), dukkha, and non-self (anatta) > can be truly known (beyond the concept). I can understand a cognition that is 'pannic' or a cognition that is 'apannic', but I have trouble understanding 'panna' as something that arises separately from cognition and is added onto it. Perhaps this is just semantics? ...conditioned > consciousness, with panna co-arising, can thoroughly penetrate the > characteristics of other realities, including the unconditioned one. how does panna co-arise with conditioned consciousness? this doesn't make sense to me, probably because i don't understand the mechanics. I can again understand a pannic consciousness arising in a moment, rather than a conditioned one, but the co-arising I don't quite get. > > I think you would agree that there must be some measure of > > understanding that is reserved for the experience of Nibbana itself, and > that > > cannot be accessible to any prior state, however highly developed. > > Yes, only one who have attained successive degrees of vipassana wisdom > can eventually truly know nibbana. > > > So the question is in what way and to what extent Nibbana is > apprehended prior to > > being realized. > > As *concept* only, as far as I know. .......... > Thank you for all the reminders. Thank you for your helpful answers. Robert E. 7613 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 0:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > I would say that what we think of as Kom or Robert E. does not exist as > an actual > > 'thing'. Instead it is an accumulated impression of various > characteristics, > > actions, etc. You exist for me as certain impressions that I have of > you. Put > > together, they form a mind-image which I call "Kom". The fact that I > experience > > you through the internet or by having coffee with you every day for 20 > years is > > probably inconsequential to the result. Except in the case of knowing > you for a > > long time, I would have an even stronger presumption that I knew who > and what > > *you* were. > > Thank you for putting a close on this thread. Your explanation is clear > and helpful, and I am appreciative of your explanation that regardless of > how we meet, our impressions of each other are just concepts which are > only possible because of sense impressions. thanks, kom. It's a pleasure communicating with you. Maybe in a moment of meeting of minds conceptualization is transcended for a moment. Just a possibility. Best, 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" 7614 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 1:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Herman wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of > froth on > > > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution > of > > > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a > particular > > > sequence. > > > > I disagree, but have no scientific basis for doing so. Perhaps > this is because I > > believe that science can never prove anything other than what it > already > > establishes as a given. And thus sheds no light on the truth of > human experience, > > which is beyond presuppositions. > > > > Robert > > > > Did you read about the woman who recently gave birth naturally to a > baby after having been in a vegetative state since the first week of > pregnancy? > > I do not propose to project some truth of human experience onto this > woman, because I know nothing about her experience. But to have human > experience as the starting point for any truth statement sounds to > me like an invitation for a self to arise. Awareness identified with > is self. Solipsism if you will. > > The laws of physics and kamma would still be working if there were no > bodies to experience their effects. The laws of physics and kamma have no meaning without a body in action because of its given tendencies. Action is furthermore relative to the actions surrounding it, and thus has no quantifiable properties without a perceiver taking it in from a specific standpoint. The acknowledgment of subjectivity is the acknowledgment of sentience, a precondition for both ignorance and enlightenment. Buddhism, in my opinion, does not operate in a 'cold' environment but in the 'warm' atmosphere of subjectivity. Without a sentient being Buddhism is meaningless. Science can predict the movement of objects and bodies, but it knows precious little about the 'sentient' aspect of sentient beings. Studies of the brain have yielded only a beginner's knowledge of how experience takes place. An emphasis on experience does not invite solipsism. The self that may think is being invited to arise has already arisen, otherwise we would not be having this conversation. The question is not whether or not to invite it, but what to do with it. Buddha did emphasize that each person has to clear up his own doubts by direct understanding. This is because relization is indeed a subjective project, although the end result may be 'objective', in a sense that is beyond science. Science does not work this way -- the average person can learn it from a book. I would not want to confuse the path of realization with the intellectual truths of science. Science has transformed the world, but it cannot transform the individual. 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" 7615 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:05pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The laws of physics and kamma have no meaning without a body in action because of > its given tendencies. Action is furthermore relative to the actions surrounding > it, and thus has no quantifiable properties without a perceiver taking it in from > a specific standpoint. Excellent observations, Robert. In fact, even in physics this has been demonstrated to be the case! There no actual separation of "observer" from "observed" ultimately (which sounds suspiciously like the Buddha's teaching on Dependent Origination when understood from the ultimate perspective!). The way the combination of these things arises has been described in a number of ways, but in terms of what the Buddha taught, kamma is always a co-factor present in ALL experience (there may be other factors as well, such as consciousness, nutriment, and "heat" in some way of describing this, for example Vis XI.111). However, the most helpful presentation I've found so far is to understand that our experience of the world and its material objects arises in dependence on three primary factors: 1) In dependence on their parts (i.e. a car is a collection of wheels, axles, panels, windows, and engine) 2) In dependence on their conditions (i.e. the same car will have had many conditions for its arising, such as miners who mine iron ore, smelters, designers, assembly-line workers, and this includes the TIME dimension as well, since these process are not concurrent but unfold over time). 3) In dependence on the mind labeling this collection of parts arisen from all aforementioned causes and conditions as "car." If any of these three factors is absent there is no "car" to talk about. Absent any of these factors "car" is totally meaningless; undefined, therefore of no use whatsoever in terms of getting out of suffering. So in essence abesent these factors a "car" can't even be said to exist at all! How COULD it exist without all of these factors being present? Where would "it" be? > Without a sentient being Buddhism is meaningless. Science can predict the > movement of objects and bodies, but it knows precious little about the 'sentient' > aspect of sentient beings. Studies of the brain have yielded only a beginner's > knowledge of how experience takes place. Yet more excellent observations, Robert. > An emphasis on experience does not invite solipsism. Indeed, it does not. There's no reason why the necessity of the aforementioned three co-factors implies in any way there aren't also other subjective-experiencers out there at the same time. While in the ultimate analysis even these are non-truly-existent, conventionally we can use labels to denote that other sentient beings do exist--in dependence on the aforementioned parts (head, torso, arms, legs) and their conditions (mom & dad, food, time, etc.). But if we take three-part analysis on dependent origination above to its logical conclusion, it will serve to deconstruct all notions that there is any fixed, singular "entity" anywhere to be found in the triple-realm, apart from these three factors: parts, conditions, and cognizer applying labels to these parts. To suggest otherwise would be to suggest that there is a fixed, eternal, truly-existent entity--for example a "self." This self-view, when taken to its logical conclusion, entails the absurd consequence that there is an entity that has ALWAYS been and ALWAYS will be UNCHANGING, in other words PERMANENTLY EXISTENT EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW. To suggest such a thing exists would be to suggest that a lotus might magically appear in midair in front of us, for no reason at all! Could you imagine living in a world where things like this just "happened" without any preceding cause at all? The Buddha challanged this "eternalistic" view in so many ways. Often by asking a few simple questions as he did in the Anatta Lakkhana Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html > Buddha did emphasize that each person has to clear up his own doubts by > direct understanding. Indeed, vicikicca (doubt) is a fatal hindrance. Thankfully, Gayan has both translated and pointed out to us here the list of "near enemies" which can manifest in so many sutble ways. Vicikicca (doubt) is among the very worst of these enemies: "ubhayapakkha santhiranamukhena vicikicchang vangchethi--This dhamma is profound, and expands into large areas ie, merits/demerits, kamma, rebirth, world systems, beings, jhanas etc... This is initially 'too much' for an untrained mind, limited mind. (to see the micro- organisms use of a microscope is needed, can't do it with the naked eye). So there are more things to develop mentally and physically. One feels that 'I have to know all the reasons, all the scenarios, all the logic,...then I'll start going along the noble path' ... he mistakes this for the kusala dhamma ubhayapakkha santhirana, but its none other than the vicikiccha. His development stops, he starts to worry about things that will not lead to progress. Vicikiccha (in true appearence or in disguise) is unavoidable and a great obstacle. Beings have to develop more and more saddha to fight with and find out vicikiccha. (saddha indriya)" And one antidote to this vicikicca, for example: "attadhipateyyata patirupataya garunam anusasaniya appadakkhinaggahita vangceti--attadhipateyyata - Giving the due careful consideration for the facts spoken and taught by others., thereby taking the takable and leaving out the non-takable." The enemy, "garunam anusasaniya appadakkhinaggahita is not taking the advice of teachers. The 'know all' type. Associated with atimaana and thambha (non-flexibility). In refined form this may cheat as attadhipateyya." > I would not want to confuse the path of realization with the intellectual truths > of science. Science has transformed the world, but it cannot transform the > individual. I could not agree more wholeheartedly with you on this point, Robert! Thank you for pointing this out! :) 7616 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob E. > > Thanks for your many skilful and interesting posts to Kom and others. In one > you mentioned that you 'sometimes step off a limb on this list', using your > 'own logic and my knowledge of Buddhism...'. I'd just like to encourage you to > 'step off a limb' as much as you'd like and I hope you're finding the > discussions rewarding. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > Do I really exist? When I've tried to look into the 'non-existence of self' > > personally, in the past I was just confused. But lately when I've tried to > > investigate this, there has been more of a conviction that there is no "I" as > > a > > kind of internal entity, but that "Robert E." is a habitual convention of > > thought, > > feeling and belief. If I accept the fact that Robert E. does not really > > exist as > > such, there is a feeling of loneliness that arises. It is as if this system, > > this > > bodymind, is very sad without the thought of an ego inhabiting it. When it > > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series of arisings with no > > inhabitant > > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, almost of despair. > > > > There are many wise words here and you seem to be appreciating the core of the > Buddha's Teachings. it seems for many people that when understanding begins to > develop there are these times of despair, sadness or loneliness arising at > times. I think it's thinking with aversion (dosa) and of course it doesn't > last. Of course as we know, clinging (whether to a self or anything else) > brings aversion and sadness in its wake. > > Of course loneliness and living alone are very different. The first is a kind > of aversion but living alone at a moment of seeing or hearing without the > bondage of craving , whether we are in the city or forest is what the Buddha > encouraged us to do: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-063.html > > I've always found this particular sutta to be really inspiring. Instead of > being depressing or lonely, being aware of these realities as not self is > liberating and uplifting I think. > > Rob E, ....let me just encourage you to keep posting and sharing your > experiences. > > Sarah Thank you, Sarah, for both your acknowledgment and encouragement. I will read the Sutta you recommend as well. I think your comment about 'sadness' and 'loneliness' being in the mode of aversion to actually be very helpful. It means that while the realization of the non-existence of self may initially be stunning to the conditioned mind, it is a transitional response, and of course, ultimately, this realization is liberating and a cause for joy. There are many snares along the way. On the other hand, there may also be a 'legitimate' grieving for the loss of that which was a familiar sense of self or way of life, and perhaps in completing the grieving process, as one might do for someone else who had died, one may be able to go to the next phase with a clear path. Not to say that I'm ready to do that, but it's something to look forward to. 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" 7617 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Gayan, you wrote a few interesting comments below;-) --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > >Personally, I eat very > > little meat, > > Well, I a lot. We all have different preferences (and even physiological requirements) - no rule as lay people at all... > > Yeah, I know what you mean. People sometimes(but more often than we think) > get offended by these kind of stuff. > I am thankful for that experience. > I noted some people have hidden aversion towards other people's sila. > That's true...but I don't see how abstaining from meat eating (except Christine's examples given) has anything to do with sila? (BTW, Christine, great links. In parts of Korea and China dog meat is eaten and in Hong Kong snake soup is eaten...I wonder if this is just cultural in the exclusion area b/c of offence that might be caused to others? BTW, Num, K.Sujin has also written abook 'Did the Buddha Eat meat' in Thai...) > > > > With regard to the precepts and vows, we can see how these can be followed > for > > a very long time, but sooner or later when there are the right conditions > they > > will be broken if enough wisdom has not been accumulated. I've known monks > > who've kept excellent vinaya for long periods, but when they disrobe, the > same > > accumulations and tendencies are there. Even if one remains a monk for the > rest > > of this life, what about next life? > > yeah, but my study of texts suggests that those periods of excellent vinaya > are not useless at all. > They are great foundation stones. And these sila will provide one with > better surroundings and conditions to follow the path in future times. We had some discussion on this theme with Mike ages ago..I think you were around then. I certainly agree that if one becomes a monk, one should follow vinaya strictly to the best of one's ability, otherwise one just contributes to the downfall of the Buddha's Teachings. I also (from my little study of the vinaya) have a lot of confidence that there were very good reasons for each rule laid down by the Buddha with his far-sightedness and compassion. For this reason, If I am present with monks, I will do my best to observe these rules (e.g. not being alone as a woman with a monk, not offering money or similar etc etc.) I don't consider the rules to be old-fashioned or sexist at all...I would not like to aid the downfall of the Sangha or the Teachings in anyway. I realise some of my views expressed are controversial and am not intending to criticize others who have different attitudes in these areas! Having digressed (getting into Erik's habits;-)), I don't think the right reason to become a monk is in order to follow better sila than one is able to do as a lay-person. Unless the monk's life and lifestyle really comes naturally and it really is easy to sever links with family, friends and other attachments, I see no reason for it. One can follow just as many rules as one likes as a householder, develop satipatthana without any obstacles if one has the chance to listen and consider dhamma. Possibly, these days, the latter is even easier as a householder. > Without the right understanding the sila is less-powerful. Most of my sila > is based on Saddha which I have for what Buddha says, for the moment what I > can do is achieve what I can even though it is less-powerful rather than > waiting for a 'better' time. Gayan, i think this is the right attitude. We can make all kinds of resolutions, but like you say, it will depend on understanding and our accumulations and other conditions as to whether we follow them! > > Well the tendencies are still very much there. > Lot of booze and smoke and partying...full abuse of body and mind > Sometimes the thoughtlines go as 'wow..this is life..blah,blah' but I > internally laugh at such thoughts, I am aware of the internal mind cheating, > (vancaka etc), but for the moment I will keep on investigating for me. Gayan, at least you recognize the tendencies and the vancaka (cheating mind) and see that these are the problems rather than any external causes! (Btw, next time you have trouble trakking down your vancaka, they're saved under 'Cheating dhammas' under 'useful Posts';-)) > > I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about > things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , > marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, hey...see my > life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what you are > doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' We all slip up so many times a day..As Erik would say, no need to be too hard on yourself! Sometimes even when telling others these things, there can be awareness even in mid-sentence...anytime, any object, remember! Look forward to more. We'd all like to be the person with no bad habits, but doesn't this just show the clinging to self again? Have fun with sati!! Sarah 7618 From: Seylan Bank - DBD (Sumane Rathnasuriya) Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Jon, Herman & Sarah (o/a the little abhidhamma) Knowing akusala (or even kusala) will as I understand, not contribute to any kusala chetana or kamma. It may help you assess & count one's merits or update kusala a/c. Chetana will perfect with consciousness, the presence of mind thereon; its objective, intention/s etc. At the required instance the mindframe has to be constructed and executed (without any delay). If one is to be conscious about the merit or the level of merit, a chitta, chetana and/or deed would convey, then the 'quality' of kusala will deteriorate. Of conscious understanding, Sumane ---Original Message----- From: Jonothan Abbott Date: 21 August 2001 19:42 Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... >Herman > >--- Herman wrote: > Jon, >> >> To be totally honest, I wouldn't know kusala or akusala if I fell >> over them. Especially since joining this forum. This is not a >> criticism of the forum, by the way. How on earth do I know the >> difference between wrong view and kusala? Where is the yardstick that >> tells me that? Could there not be a deception lurking near every >> citta that suggests wholesomeness? > >These are all very valid and useful questions. It is easy I think to fall >into the trap of thinking one knows by direct experience when actually one >only knows by deduction from the surrounding circumstances eg. 'I am >discussing dhamma it must be kusala', or 'I am helping someone it must be >dana', or 'I am studying the moment it must be awareness' etc. This is in >truth just a form of thinking. > >Knowing by direct experience refers to panna that knows the characteristic >of the reality. Each reality has its own unique characteristic (seeing, >visible object, feeling, aversion etc). In addition, the realities that >are kusala share the characteristic of being kusala. There is no >yardstick by which we can measure these characteristics, but there is >abundant description of them in the teachings. That is why I think it is >important to have an understanding of things at that level. As we have >seen with the recent discussion on mana, there are many aspects to it that >we probably have not been aware of, even if e have heard it before, and >some of we may well have been taking for kusala. So knowing more about >this can help us to begin to understand directly the different realities. > >The good thing is, we needn't feel we have to know one kind of reality >sooner than or better than another. If the characteristic that is kusala >does not appear directly, that is not a problem. The more we know about >akusala and recognise it when it arises, the less likely we are to take it >for kusala, which is what may be happening otherwise. > >So keep up the healthy scepticism! > >> What is the basis for a monks confidence that there was a wholesome >> citta? > >I think knowing akusala well can be a good basis, because the difference >when kusala arises and appears should then be more apparent. > >Jon > > 7619 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob. E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Jon, > > When you say that the citta that experiences nibbana is 'supramundane', > > this means > > to me that it is a consciousness transcendent to worldy conditions. In > > other > > words, would supernatural be an equivalent term? > > Well I'm not aware of the term 'supernatural' being used to describe the > citta that experiences nibbana. And it is nibbana, not the citta that > experiences it, that is said to be the transcendent reality. > > The best I can do is give you following from the summarised commentary of > the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha (from the Bhikkhu Bodhi/Narada translation). > > It describes at p. 66 supramundane consciousness (lokuttaracitta) as the > consciousness that "pertains to the process of transcending (uttara) the > world (loka)". (This doesn't seem to me to be quite the same as saying > that the consciousness itself transcends the world.) > > It also explains (p. 31) that "world" in this context means not the world > of beings or the physical universe but rather "the world of formations > (sankharaloka), that is, all mundane phenomena included within the five > aggregates of clinging". It is because the consciousness directly > accomplishes the realisation of nibbana, which itself "transcends the > world of conditioned things" that it is called lokkutaracitta, > supramundane consciousness. > > > If the consciousness is beyond earthly conditions, it would certainly > > get me > > closer to understanding how it could apprehend Nibbana. > > Well it depends what you mean here by "earthly conditions". It really has > nothing to do with this world, except of course to the extent that it > arises in a being who inhabits this world. To borrow from another > context, in this world but not of it! > > Jon Thanks, Jon, for your helpful explanations. I appreciate it. 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" 7620 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > Dear Howard And Robert > > How are you? > > At first, I thought I would just follow your discussion. But, now, > I decided to enter the fray. > > Howard wrote: > > "But what seems most important here is the question of whether the > wisdom of a current citta is able to *directly* know what goes beyond > that citta." > > > " Okay, thanks. This strikes me as implying that wisdom can > *directly* observe a past event. Surprising, but, hey - maybe!;-)" > > Howard also wrote: > > " This is all fine. My only hesitance here is with regard to wisdom > *directly* knowing what no longer exists, as opposed to a memory of > it." > > > Here is my bit of discussion. > > When wisdom reaches the stage of awakening (bodhi, magga nyana, phala > nyana), it directly knows, penetrates, realizes and sees nibbana. > > If you can accept this capability of wisdom, you are ready to drop > yor resistance to accepting wisdom's direct knowledge of a past event. > > As you might know very well, nibbana is timeless, and outside the > three timeframes of past, present and future. > > Well, as wisdom directly knows nibbana, it directly knows > timelessness. In other words, wisdom can directly knows any > timeframe. Wisdom isn't bound by the time constraints. Hi. With respect, your point above assumes that time is real, and that past events still exist somewhere to be directly perceived. It is my understanding that there is no such thing as a past or future event, and that time itself is nothing but a concept, insofar as we speak of human events. For physics, time may be a dimension of objects, but I'm not sure how that pertains to human events. My understanding is that holding onto past events as if they were real is one of the impediments to understanding, and that bringing past assumptions and associations to present perception is one of the factors that 'clouds' present awareness and prevents Vipassana. If my assumptions above are wrong, I would be happy to be corrected as to what is the proper Theravadan viewpoint in the Suttas. But if I am correct, Wisdom, although timeless, would not perceive past events directly, because there is no such thing as past events to perceive, just as there is no 'self' to perceive. Robert E. 7621 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Mike, I'm late getting back to some of these posts, since this group is so prolific! , but I really appreciate your remarks below. As someone who has his personality criticized quite regularly for its flaws by those around me, I am also happy to note that one can make forward progress without attempting to clean up the myriad influences and tendencies carried by the cumulative self. Thanks again for your comments. Best, Robert E. ============================== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > I feel like I sometimes step off a limb on this > > list, because I am admittedly > > using my own logic and my knowledge of Buddhism, > > which has been consistent, but > > not thorough in the Pali Canon. I am a little more > > familiar with works and > > concepts of Ch'an Buddhism, but my interest in > > Theravada is sincere. > > Your posts continue to impress me (for what that's > worth) by their sincerity and insightfulness. I was a > Zen student myself for ten years or so and had lost > interest in it altogether until reading Tadao's > remarkable post at > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6125 > > I also admire your logic. I think students of > Dhammavinaya are meant to use logic in combination, of > course, with investigation of dhammas and study of the > teachings. > > > I know that at times people will have to tell me > > that at least as far as the Pali > > Canon and the Tripitaka are concerned, that I am way > > off, or not understanding the > > Buddha's intent. And I am prepared for that. It's > > part of my learning process. > > Same here. > > > At the same time, I can sometimes have a valid view > > and contribute something. > > Certainly. > > > I have been reading Thich Nath Hanh's translation of > > the SUTRA ON COMPLETE > > AWARENESS OF THE BREATH, and I am amazed at its > > simplicity and completeness. It > > spells out the Buddha's path in a way that anyone > > with an open mind can > > understand. The Theravadan Canon has this kind of > > clarity and structure to offer, > > and someone like myself, who has struggled with > > Ch'an and Zen methodology for a > > long time, can really appreciate the kind of > > grounding and surety of path that > > this can give me. > > I haven't read this translation but have been > impressed by his writing in the past. The clarity and > structure you mention in the Pali canon was a great > relief to me, too, after years of Ch'an/Zen practice. > > > We are all working with our tendencies and > > accumulations, in whatever form, and > > the fact that you accidentally sent your note to > > this group instead of as a > > private message should not be a cause for alarm or > > embarrassment. It was > > obviously meant to be here, and it opened up issues > > and topics that might not have > > been looked at otherwise. I consider every event in > > a group like this to be a > > good one, and I'm happy to rise to the occasion, and > > chew on what you have > > contributed. > > Tendencies and accumulations (what I think of as > sankharakhanda) are fertile ground for mindfulness > (dhammanusati(sp?)). Unfortunately they are the > continuous results of incomprehensibly vast numbers of > unimaginably complex condtions from the past--since we > can't change the past, we also can't change the > present manifestations of its conditions. > > Fortunately, on the other hand, tendencies and > accumulations CAN be understood as not-self--at that > moment, 'personality' can be seen for the > insignificant thing that it is. Having a rather > rotten personality myself, I find this reflection > quite liberating. (This isn't to say that kusala can't > or shouldn't be cultivated despite personality--it can > and should). > > In other words, I don't think personality-change is > the object of Dhammavinaya patipatti--just a > beneficial (and VERY gradual, usually) side-effect. > > I'm rambling--thanks again for the good words. > > mike > ===== 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" 7622 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:50pm Subject: Metta in Yoga Hi Erik, --- Erik wrote:> > This is very good to hear! I am happy to hear that yoga also > engenders in others calm, concentration, energy, mental pliancy, and > even the talk about generosity toward themselves (as I have been > taught is the right place to begin--at least by my lamas and at Wat > Mahatat--beginning all lovingkindness meditations with generating > lovingkindness toward ourselves, and then after this extending > lovingkindness out to others) Hmm....With regard to generosity and metta, my understanding is a little different (no surprise here;-)). I understand there can only be metta and generosity to others. When we think it's metta to oneself, it's lobha again! I know when we read in the Vism about starting with oneself, it seems like you understand it and this is a recurrent theme. What I understand (and makes sense from experience too) is that this passage is suggesting that we treat others like we, ourselves, would like to be treated. In other words, the concern in metta and dana has to be for the welfare of another being. > You sound like you're being way too hard hard on yourself here, > Sarah! :) Perhaps a little gentleness and generiostity toward your > own kusala efforts is in order here! :) :) :) Not hard at all.....just realistic! With more wisdom, it'll sound harder still, perhaps. Much better to recognize the kilesa than kid oneself that they don't exist at these times. Like Rob E. suggested for his friend, for me the yoga practice is rather like eating regular meals and getting enough sleep. It would be wrong view to think one shouldn't do these things because one knows there is a lot of lobha. Remember too, some of us don't have any idea of separate times for practice and wisdom (or even better times) so I don't expect to have more or less sati when doing yoga, swimming or teaching or any other activity, so they're not a condition for a guilt or worry. I have confidence that conditions are so complex that sati can arise at any time without wishing for it. Again, right understanding rather than the activity is the key here. > > In keeping with the teaching on first extending lovingkindness toward > ourselves, might you not be able to rejoice and simlpy be happy with > yourself in practicing a wholesome activity like yoga, even if this > practice isn't technically of the insight variety, even if there are > moments of lobha, even if there is mana? Just like when one services a car to keep it on the road, we need to service this body to keep it functioning for this life, so that we can hear dhamma and help others better in whatever ways we're able. I'm happy in particular to have the chance to keep fairly fit (without being at all obsessed as you or Rob E said) and in particular not to have any delusion that ultimately this fitness matters at all. Living in a high-rise apartment, having lots of office work to do, sitting (teaching) for a lot of time and of course all this computer sitting too means the stretching is pretty essential. I'm glad I encouraged you, Erik. > > I mean, who's perfect (besides a Buddha)? As you said to me about my > nasty smoking habit, there's no sense being too hard on ourselves > over the fact we have afflictions, right? :) We need to be aware of > them and work with this reality, but ther's no point getting overly > worried about having mana, nor about lobha, as this worry (kukucca) > is a hindrance in & of itself! (Jeez, all this Middle Way business > again!) Agreed! ...and understanding one of these realities (yes, NOW!!) is how I understand the Middle Way business! Ooops! out of time again....part 2 (on kaya lahuta and the rest) will have to be tomorrow or the next day. In the meantime, you could play the other side and read the relevant chapters on these cetasikas in Nina's book and look up the definitions in Nyantiloka's dictionary (on Binh's website I think) and report back;-))) Thanks Erik, for your kind (and moderate!!) comments...and well-wishing! Rob E, thanks also for your wise comments about your friend. I've also been appreciating your other recent posts. Hope you get back to your asanas too! Sarah 7623 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert E. > > No my my sadhu x 3 goes to you. > Great!!! > Much appreciation. > > mudita > > Cybele > > > > >Thanks. I knew I was avoiding something: more practice. > > > >Robert E. Thank you, Cybele! Regards, Robert E. 7624 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Hi Robert E. > > As I am the one the one who posted Ajahn Bramavamso, I would suggest you to > read more of his texts as well. > > Love > Cybele Thanks, Cybele. I appreciate your advice! And the little I have seen of A. Bramavamso, I love. Regards, Robert 7625 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 2:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- Joshua wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Forgive my ignorance, but what sutras would one specifically read to get the > > instructions outlined in this talk. > > > > What is the basic collection necessary for this. > > > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > > > > > > Best, > > Robert E. > > > > Ok, aside from the suttas dealing only with Satipatthana, I would say (roughly) > > Anguttara II.29 > Anguttara IX.63-64 (he mentions) > Majjhima 68 (he mentions) > Majjhima 107 > > The last one outlines step by step exactly how a monk should train himself in a > sequential manner. > > Hope that helps. Sorry I'm late getting to this post. I'm working slowly, and backwards at the moment. And, oh yes, that helps. Despite being overwhelmed, I will make a serious effort to read the above, particularly Majjhima 107. It will take me awhile, but I'll get back to you eventually. I assume I can find them all online? With gratitude, Robert E. 7626 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 3:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Metta in Yoga --- Sarah wrote: > Thanks Erik, for your kind (and moderate!!) comments...and well-wishing! > Rob E, thanks also for your wise comments about your friend. I've also been > appreciating your other recent posts. Hope you get back to your asanas too! > > Sarah Thanks, Sarah. I have started to do some stretches again, and realize how my thighs and hips have tightened up and become aggravated. Without being unduly obsessed, I think it is helpful to help this body out from time to time! Regards, Robert 7627 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 3:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Thank you for this message, Rikpa. I especially appreciate your three-point deconstruction of existent objects. Very clear. Best, Robert E. ======================= --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > The laws of physics and kamma have no meaning without a body in > action because of > > its given tendencies. Action is furthermore relative to the > actions surrounding > > it, and thus has no quantifiable properties without a perceiver > taking it in from > > a specific standpoint. > > Excellent observations, Robert. In fact, even in physics this has > been demonstrated to be the case! There no actual separation > of "observer" from "observed" ultimately (which sounds suspiciously > like the Buddha's teaching on Dependent Origination when understood > from the ultimate perspective!). > > The way the combination of these things arises has been described in > a number of ways, but in terms of what the Buddha taught, kamma is > always a co-factor present in ALL experience (there may be other > factors as well, such as consciousness, nutriment, and "heat" in some > way of describing this, for example Vis XI.111). > > However, the most helpful presentation I've found so far is to > understand that our experience of the world and its material objects > arises in dependence on three primary factors: > > 1) In dependence on their parts (i.e. a car is a collection of > wheels, axles, panels, windows, and engine) > > 2) In dependence on their conditions (i.e. the same car will have had > many conditions for its arising, such as miners who mine iron ore, > smelters, designers, assembly-line workers, and this includes the > TIME dimension as well, since these process are not concurrent but > unfold over time). > > 3) In dependence on the mind labeling this collection of parts arisen > from all aforementioned causes and conditions as "car." > > If any of these three factors is absent there is no "car" to talk > about. Absent any of these factors "car" is totally meaningless; > undefined, therefore of no use whatsoever in terms of getting out of > suffering. So in essence abesent these factors a "car" can't even be > said to exist at all! How COULD it exist without all of these factors > being present? Where would "it" be? > > > Without a sentient being Buddhism is meaningless. Science can > predict the > > movement of objects and bodies, but it knows precious little about > the 'sentient' > > aspect of sentient beings. Studies of the brain have yielded only > a beginner's > > knowledge of how experience takes place. > > Yet more excellent observations, Robert. > > > An emphasis on experience does not invite solipsism. > > Indeed, it does not. There's no reason why the necessity of > the aforementioned three co-factors implies in any way there aren't > also other subjective-experiencers out there at the same time. While > in the ultimate analysis even these are non-truly-existent, > conventionally we can use labels to denote that other sentient beings > do exist--in dependence on the aforementioned parts (head, torso, > arms, legs) and their conditions (mom & dad, food, time, etc.). > > But if we take three-part analysis on dependent origination above to > its logical conclusion, it will serve to deconstruct all notions that > there is any fixed, singular "entity" anywhere to be found in the > triple-realm, apart from these three factors: parts, conditions, and > cognizer applying labels to these parts. > > To suggest otherwise would be to suggest that there is a fixed, > eternal, truly-existent entity--for example a "self." This self-view, > when taken to its logical conclusion, entails the absurd consequence > that there is an entity that has ALWAYS been and ALWAYS will be > UNCHANGING, in other words PERMANENTLY EXISTENT EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW. > To suggest such a thing exists would be to suggest that a lotus might > magically appear in midair in front of us, for no reason at all! > Could you imagine living in a world where things like this > just "happened" without any preceding cause at all? > > The Buddha challanged this "eternalistic" view in so many ways. Often > by asking a few simple questions as he did in the Anatta Lakkhana > Sutta: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html > > > Buddha did emphasize that each person has to clear up his own > doubts by > > direct understanding. > > Indeed, vicikicca (doubt) is a fatal hindrance. Thankfully, Gayan has > both translated and pointed out to us here the list of "near enemies" > which can manifest in so many sutble ways. Vicikicca (doubt) is among > the very worst of these enemies: > > "ubhayapakkha santhiranamukhena vicikicchang vangchethi--This dhamma > is profound, and expands into large areas ie, merits/demerits, kamma, > rebirth, world systems, beings, jhanas etc... This is initially 'too > much' for an untrained mind, limited mind. (to see the micro- > organisms use of a microscope is needed, can't do it with the naked > eye). So there are more things to develop mentally and physically. > One feels that 'I have to know all the reasons, all the scenarios, > all the logic,...then I'll start going along the noble path' ... he > mistakes this for the kusala dhamma ubhayapakkha santhirana, but its > none other than the vicikiccha. His development stops, he starts to > worry about things that will not lead to progress. Vicikiccha (in > true appearence or in disguise) is unavoidable and a great obstacle. > Beings have to develop more and more saddha to fight with and find > out vicikiccha. (saddha indriya)" > > And one antidote to this vicikicca, for example: > > "attadhipateyyata patirupataya garunam anusasaniya appadakkhinaggahita > vangceti--attadhipateyyata - Giving the due careful consideration for > the facts spoken and taught by others., thereby taking the takable > and leaving out the non-takable." The enemy, "garunam anusasaniya > appadakkhinaggahita is not taking the advice of teachers. The 'know > all' type. Associated with atimaana and thambha (non-flexibility). In > refined form this may cheat as attadhipateyya." > > > I would not want to confuse the path of realization with the > intellectual truths > > of science. Science has transformed the world, but it cannot > transform the > > individual. > > I could not agree more wholeheartedly with you on this point, Robert! > Thank you for pointing this out! :) > ===== 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" 7628 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 5:26pm Subject: Lovingkindness --- Sarah wrote: Hi Sarah! > Hmm....With regard to generosity and metta, my understanding is a little > different (no surprise here;-)). I understand there can only be metta and > generosity to others. When we think it's metta to oneself, it's lobha again! I > know when we read in the Vism about starting with oneself, it seems like you > understand it and this is a recurrent theme. If it's a recurring theme, perhaps there's something to it then! :) To use these five khandas as an example. There used to be A LOT of self-hatred among them. That projection I can now see arose in dependence on a strong sense of "self" and the sense of "autonomy" and "will" that sense of "self" conditions. When this sense of "identity" (the "I"-entity ignorance sinks its teeth into :) came into contact with the conditions of a rigid and dogmatic and what some might call "abusive" upbringing, it served as a root condition for a whole lot of anger, sometimes even rage. For example, anger at feeling arbitrarily "controlled" by others' whims and unreasonable expectations and agendas and restraints and beatings. These experiences were of course all being forced on my by my past thoughs, words, and actions, and there's no one but me responsible for these experiences, and no one else responsible but me for how I responded to the feeling of being "beaten, humliated, and abused." So I accept this responsibility fully, nevertheless, I think this serves to illustrate a few points. This accumulated conditioning of self-hatred forced me to see enmity in nearly every face I saw, in addition to conditioning the nasty habit of seeing others as "inferior" and myself as "superior" (not to say that's fully eradicated because, of course, I'm neither an arahant or a Buddha, so there is still at minimum the conceit "I am" present in everything I see), this self-hatred (uh oh, there's that "self" again!) manifested itself in many extremely harmful ways. I would typically direct this self-hatred at myself, through activities like mentally beating myself ("self" again!) up over pointless concerns, such as not being handsome enough, not a good enough student, not from a wealthy-enough family, not good in this way, not good in that way, a miserable failure, an outcaste, lonely, afraid, abandoned, and so on. Since I felt it inconceivable to act in a physically harmful way toward other sentient beings (for some reason a deeply-ingrained tendency for as long as I can remember), that self-hatred found other forms of expression--for example, in the form of drinking alcohol to the point of heedlessness, primarily as a means to "shut off" this self-hatred for a brief while (which led to more addictive cycles of misery and even more self-hatred), and also as generally pervasive ill-will toward others; because I could see little, if anything positive in the world. I saw others sentient beings not as a friends, but as a potential enemies in some way--to be feared if they were stronger than I, or to be overpowered and defeated if they appeared in some way weaker. This tendency most typically manifested itself outwardly (apart action from the drinking alcohol to the point of heedlessness) through the speech-door as verbal harshness, which combind with a strong the tendency toward disputation ("self and other" and opinions and views generated thereby), led to me being forced to experience a constant succession of painful results, primarily in the form of painful encounters with other sentient beings, etc. In other words, suffering. And not only did I experience suffering, but I know that beacuse of my unskillful words I also served as a cause for others to experience suffering as well. Hopefully from this you are getting the general impression that this self-hatred didn't simply end with the collection of khandas labelled "Erik", but rather, that this tendency manifested itself in every thought I had, in every word I spoke, and in every deed I did. In other words, if one takes the teachings of dependent origination to the correct conclusion, there can be no true separation of self- and-other, therefore, any thought, word, or deed we committ will be an expression of our accumulated tendencies, and if those accumulated tendencies partake of things like ill-will, even towards ourselves, there is no other possibility than this MUST express itself in every thought, in every word, and in every deed we do, and by extension it will cause the khandas we conventionally designate ourselves to suffer, but will directly and immediately express itself in ways that serve as a condition for other sets of khandas to suffer as well! Now to pose a couple of quick intermediary questions (at your suggestion of taking up such a style): Which is more destructive of the two posions: intense grasping or intense aversion? In terms of words and deeds motivated by either of these two poisons, which endagers ourselves and others most? Which of these two poisons motivates the severest types of misdeeds, those misdeeds which lead not only to states of woe, but to the very most painful states of woe? To cite what I have heard well-spoken by the wise, Master Shantideva says in the "Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life" (Bodhicharyavatara): "There is no evil equal to hatred; and no virtue equal to forberance." This echoes the lines from the Visuddhimagga IX.2: "No higher rule, the Buddhas say, than patience, and no nibbana higher than forbearance". And since you and I are in comlpete agreemnet there is no other moment than now to work with our afflictions, and also that there is no other reality to work with than our present accumulated tendencies, it brings us directly to the point of "beginning where we are." Which is right here, right now, with exactly what we have; no more, no less. Which is why when the instructions in the Visuddhimagga (IX.8) say that "first of all, [lovingkindness] should be developed toward oneself, doing it repeatedly thus: 'May I be happy and free from suffering', or 'may I keep myself free from enmity, affliction, and anxiety and live happily'", this is not a random instruction. It firmly addresses the fact that we must begin exactly where we are. Love, as the saying goes, begins at home. It begins with the collection of khandas comprising what we mistakenly conceive of as ourselves. Because realistically, unless we're arahants or Buddhas, that's EXACTLY what we're seeing, and to try to pretend things are other than they are is to be unrealistic, and the Buddha's instructions were, if anything, the most utilitarian and realistic set of myths I've ever come across in this lifetime. They were designed to engage us at the most realistic level possible: where we are RIGHT NOW. Because as you say, and as I agree, there is no other moment than now; and there are no other accumulations than these, and consequently we must begin where we are, which is when we're working to eradicate the most dangerous poison of all, anger, we are enjoined to begin by applying lovingkindness to ourselves, FIRST. > What I understand (and makes sense > from experience too) is that this passage is suggesting that we treat others > like we, ourselves, would like to be treated. In other words, the concern in > metta and dana has to be for the welfare of another being. To put it question form: can the designation "other" arise without the implicit designation "self"? In other words, is there really any fundamental separation between the khandas we designate "me" and the khandas we designate "other"? Does this "me" exist in total separation from all other things, in a causal vacuum, as it were? > Like Rob E. suggested for his friend, for me the yoga practice is rather like > eating regular meals and getting enough sleep. It would be wrong view to think > one shouldn't do these things because one knows there is a lot of lobha. Agreed. Lobha is a condition we are all unfortunately subject to until at least the point of non-return, so, realistically, it is important to be aware of it, and the various guises it takes. > Remember too, some of us don't have any idea of separate times for practice and > wisdom (or even better times) so I don't expect to have more or less sati when > doing yoga, swimming or teaching or any other activity, so they're not a > condition for a guilt or worry. I have confidence that conditions are so > complex that sati can arise at any time without wishing for it. Again, right > understanding rather than the activity is the key here. Again, not to get back to the nutriment conditions the Buddha clearly enumerated in the passage a quoted before, but for sati to arise we need the appropriate conditions. Without the appropriate conditions there is no chance at all sati can arise! > Agreed! ...and understanding one of these realities (yes, NOW!!) is how I > understand the Middle Way business! There is quite a bit less to it than this, Sarah :) Simply focusing on the "now" withouth realistically recognizing that we are all enmeshed in thoughts and fabrications would be a form of leaning too far to the "wisdom" extreme and not thinking eralixstically about the present condition of accumulated tendenciwes, whjich is still, like it or not, engaged in the process of fabrications about past, persent, future, self, and other. We can't ignore this fact either, in addition to recognizing that true insight can only arise in the present moment. > Thanks Erik, for your kind (and moderate!!) comments...and well- wishing! Well, pretending to play "fierce debater" doesn't seem to fit all that well when the topic is cultivating lovingkindness toward ourselves and extending that lovingkindness toward all other beings (a reminder I always need and benefit from immensely, and believe me when I say I'm getting more from this than I suspect anyone reading ever could), so I figured it was the appropriate time to put the "wrathful" mask aside for a bit and pretend to put on the "gentle voiced" mask instead, for awhile--which will probably switch yet many times until our "exeunt" at final Act of the final Scene of this Midsummer Night's Dream: "If we shadows have offended, Think but this, and all is mended, That you have but slumber'd here While these visions did appear. And this weak and idle theme, No more yielding but a dream" 7629 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 7:41pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Robert, Some cutting and clipping and additions follow down below: --- Robert Epstein wrote:> bodies to experience their effects. > > The laws of physics and kamma have no meaning without a body in action because of > its given tendencies. Action is furthermore relative to the actions surrounding > it, and thus has no quantifiable properties without a perceiver taking it in from > a specific standpoint. Bodies, in quantum mechanics, have an unspecified existence, they may be there, but they are feasibly also not there. The thing worth noting is that even while they are not there, they are still predictable, therefore still subject to the laws of physics and kamma. A body is simply a snapshot at a given time unit of resolution. Look at this body in 500 year time slots, and it is not there at all, or only fractionally, depending on where in the cycle of this body the observation started. Look at this body in 1 second time frames, and it is there. Look at this body in 1 trillionth of a second time slices, and it may be there, or it may not be there. The arising and falling of rupa is not haphazard, it is knowable and predictable. There is no knower, but there is knowing. And this knowing is dependant on rupa. > > The acknowledgment of subjectivity is the acknowledgment of sentience, a > precondition for both ignorance and enlightenment. Buddhism, in my opinion, does > not operate in a 'cold' environment but in the 'warm' atmosphere of subjectivity. And what do you think this sentience is? What is the difference between a corpse and a ballerina in mid flight? Surely we can discriminate further than just saying, life element. > Without a sentient being Buddhism is meaningless. The ultimate message of Buddhism (and other methods of knowing) is that there are no sentient beings. There is sentience, there is knowing, there is form, there is colour, that's about it. Science can predict the > movement of objects and bodies, but it knows precious little about the 'sentient' > aspect of sentient beings. Studies of the brain have yielded only a beginner's > knowledge of how experience takes place. The studies I have read suggest that awareness is a post-hoc and selective snapshot of underlying processes that have already finished initiating other processes by the time the initial javana becomes known. > > An emphasis on experience does not invite solipsism. The self that may think is > being invited to arise has already arisen, otherwise we would not be having this > conversation. The question is not whether or not to invite it, but what to do > with it. Buddha did emphasize that each person has to clear up his own doubts by > direct understanding. This is because relization is indeed a subjective project, > although the end result may be 'objective', in a sense that is beyond science. > Science does not work this way -- the average person can learn it from a book. The average person "believes" they learn science from a book, as they do with with Buddhism. Relativity is as abstruse as the Dhamma. The interesting thing about "knowing" is that it is true at any level, no matter how false it is. That is because "knowing" is a state of mind, that does not necessarily have to correlate to any rupa formation, hence wrong view. Moments of insight and direct knowing are moments of insight and direct knowing. If you cannot repeat it at will than it was "knowing", not knowing. > > I would not want to confuse the path of realization with the intellectual truths > of science. Science has transformed the world, but it cannot transform the > individual. Very soon science will be creating individuals, some of whom no doubt will believe that they require transformation. Yet they will be an aggregation of 30 odd body parts, composed of cells, composed of molecules, composed of atoms, composed of particles that are there and yet not there, neither coming, nor going, not new nor a continuation of the old. Regards Herman 7630 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 7:52pm Subject: Erik's typing speed Hi all, This is a frivolous but well-intentioned post :-). By my calculations, Erik, who I respect greatly (that bit is not frivolous), must type at about 210 words per minute (which includes on-the-fly spell checking and thesaurising) This feat, combined with his insights into more subjects than you can poke a stick at, makes him the Michael Schumacher of egroups. And no mana will arise because of this post! :-) Regards to all and cheers to erik (and his child bride :-)) Herman 7631 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 8:21pm Subject: A brief appearance Walking to work this morning, I saw a bumper sticker that read: "The truly educated never graduate." True enough. But which dropout wouldn't be tempted to think the converse is also true: "Those who never graduate are truly educated"? Bhikkhu Bodhi has a short, poignant article on this idea in a contemporary Buddhist context at AccessToInsight: http://cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/lib/bps/news/essay5.html Dan 7632 From: m. nease Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 9:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Hi Robert, I do think that paññaa (like all the other cittas and cetasikas) can and must arise regardless of personality when conditions allow it. The indispensible precursors for those are, as I understand it, hearing and recollection of the Dhamma (including silaa, by the way), and satipatthaana. Each of these occurs in the present moment which, as you recently pointed out, is the only moment. Thanks for the thoughtful posts. mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > As someone who has his personality criticized quite > regularly for its flaws by > those around me, I am also happy to note that one > can make forward progress > without attempting to clean up the myriad influences > and tendencies carried by the > cumulative self. > > Thanks again for your comments. > > Best, > Robert E. 7633 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 9:51pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > --- "Anders Honore" > wrote: > I dunno, would it? Just yesterday I recall the Theravadin professor > (another teacher I was brought to by one of my Theravadin teachers > there) said the most curious thing to us--including the several > Theravadin monks in attendance: that we were all Buddhas! :) :) :) It's not really the knowledge itself that's particualrly harmful. I know a great deal about the various Zen schools, and I am also quite well-versed in the sudden/gradual debate, but the danger lies in the fact that most people, often in very subtle ways to themselves, use this knowledge to affirm or deny a particular view, and hence they are still stuck with a conceptual understanding. I remember an old Zen story (I think it was yang-shan), who was asked by his master if he had found the Tao, to which he answered "no, but at least I don't steal the words of others," To which the master replied "then you understand." > And my lamas have trained me to endeavor to see all sentient beings > as Buddhas as well. And that has really, truly helped my practice in > so many ways, to the point there have been times I have seen things > that might have otherwise appeared to be quite ordinary appear in the > most miraculous ways to these eyes. Yeah. It's funny you should mention that, because the exact same thing happened to me the other day, while I was watching a spider. That's also a Buddha-to-be. A great incentive for compassion! > Yes, and that was yet ANOTHER point emphasized by my teacher > yesterday in our little classroom at Wat Mahatat. One, I should add, > I could not agree more heartily about with both you and he. Which is > why my teacher was emphatic that we must "taste the fruit" by our > practice of the Dhamma, rather than merely intellectualize it away > with more layers of abstractions; that we must directly come to know > it in our own lives through the mindful application of Right Effort. > He particularly emphasized the uselessness of mere study for its own > sake, and that such an endeavour leads not to the fruits of the Noble > Path, but to further entanglement in views, and directly blocks the > very wisdom we are seeking, the very wisdom that arises to terminate > once and for all the sufferings of cyclic existence. Yeah. It's not that there's much wrong with concepts, as long as they are understood for what they are. Whenever you have concepts, you have concepts *about* something, you are not dealing with the real thing. You are still dependent on the formation of concepts in order to form a simple conversation though. > By "much support," where do you mean? Here in DSG? Or in the words of > the Buddha? Just here. > If it's support in terms of what the Buddha actually > taught, if you read the Pali Suttas, you will find support for this > everywhere! I have! But as with all else, the Pali Canon is subject to different interpretations, and if I don't agree, I have to respect them. > That view you will find no support for in the Buddha's > teachings: the idea that because all phenomena are empty and > ultimately beyond control, that there is no conventional possibility > of choices, such as choosing to train in sila, or "generating desire, > arousing persistence, endeavouring, upholding and exerting our > intent" for the abandoning of unskillful/unwholesome qualities and > the taking up of skillful/wholesome qualities. Yes, that's true. I would add that I don't think that the fact that all dhammas are empty and causal reactions neccesarily exclude the arousing of persistence and effort. > Not that we technically need any special places for meditation, as my > teacher there emphasized: we can be aware of all of these realities > RIGHT NOW in the midst of our daily activities--indeed we MUST! And > yet, practically speaking, for myself, I have found it of immense > benefit to follow the Buddha's advice in the Satipatthana Sutta in > terms of seeking out solitude and favorable conditions for > cultivating this all the same. Yes, that's the Samadhi aspect I also need to develop. Greater mindfulness in daily activities. It's funny how I've ntoiced that my practise has influenced my life immensely on a subconscious level though. > For a more average practitioner like me, I have found it to be an > enormous help to be freed from the distractions of daily life for a > little while, because I have found that this really, REALLY helps get > my mind unscattered and focused in just the right place, such that > when I return to daily life my mindfulness and concentration are that > much more developed and stable. But that's just this beginner on the > path. I am sure there are some great beings whose mindfulness and > concentration are so well-developed that this sort of effort and > practice in things like solitude and retreat is merely gilding on the > lotus. Yeah, I know a few people who are like that. I wonder how they manage... > Like you, I still hold Zen in great esteem, but, like you, have found > myself drawn to the Tibetan Dharma for the very reasons you mentioned > you find the Theravada appealing to you: that it emphasizes the more > mundane, foundational aspects, such as sila, which I found in my own > life were lacking to where I was unable to take any real slightest > advantage of the deep and sublime wisdom-aspect teachings I had > learned about therein (which as I noted, resulted in VERY LITTLE > progress for me on the path). Hmm, I would say that it was definitely beneficial to me. But I've reached a point where I need to develop other aspects of practise more. My own teacher, who lives in Singapore, is actually also a Dzogchen teacher (that's how I even learned of its existence) besides Zen. > To add to that, in the Tibetan teachings there are "Four Faults" to > recognizing our Buddha-nature, when we fail to recognize that the > nature of mind is: > > 1) too near > 2) too easy > 3) too subtle > 4) too excellent Kinda reminds me of the Buddhas simile of the musical instrument which must be stringed neither too tight nor too loose. > I look forward to much, much more reading of this excellent Sutra! > Many deep bows of thanks pointing this out to me, Anders! The Platform Sutra has certainly been my greatest influence in my daily practise. at one point, I read about once a week, and just reading it, while implementing its teachings in my daily life, served to deepen my understanding a great deal. I will always hold Huineng in the greatest steem. > > Haha, jeg vil hellere være ikke-positionalist! > > You appear to be in perfect agreement here with both > Nagarjuna: "emptiness is beyond taking any position," and Master > Chandrakirti: "any position breeds a counter-position, and neither is > valid in itself," both of whom are considered the key proponents of > the true Middle Way as expounded in my own Geluk school's "Madhyamika- > Prasangika" system of tenets. This has been wonderfully articulated > by the true Master Acharya Professor Richard Hayes (the "baddest of > the bad cops" for me and a true master of the Buddha's Dharma who > there mere though of causes tears of gratitude to well up in me): Yes, the Buddha mentioned it too many places. This particular sutta is my favourite on the subject (Paramatthaka Sutta): When dwelling on views as "supreme," a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, &, from that, calls all others inferior and so he's not free from disputes. When he sees his advantage in what's seen, heard, sensed, or in precepts & practices, seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. That, too, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that in dependence on which you regard another as inferior. So a monk shouldn't be dependent on what's seen, heard, or sensed, or on precepts & practices; nor should he conjure a view in the world in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; shouldn't think himself inferior or superlative. Abandoning what he had embraced, abandoning self, not clinging, he doesn't make himself dependent even in connection with knowledge; doesn't follow a faction among those who are split; doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. One who isn't inclined toward either side -- becoming or not-, here or beyond -- who has no entrenchment when considering what's grasped among doctrines, hasn't the least preconceived perception with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. By whom, with what, should he be pigeonholed here in the world? -- this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. They don't conjure, don't yearn, don't adhere even to doctrines. A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, gone to the beyond -- Such -- doesn't fall back. Again, I must say that I find this conversation deeply beneficial. Thank you! Anders 7634 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding > > hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's > > going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? > > Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. Hey hey, now. It's not like we have ice bears roaming the streets here. That's Finland :-) 7635 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A brief appearance Hi Dan, Nice surprise;-)) --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Walking to work this morning, I saw a bumper sticker that read: "The > truly educated never graduate." True enough. But which dropout > wouldn't be tempted to think the converse is also true: "Those who > never graduate are truly educated"? ;-)) > Bhikkhu Bodhi has a short, poignant article on this idea in a > contemporary Buddhist context at AccessToInsight: > http://cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/lib/bps/news/essay5.html A very well-written and useful article which I think most on dsg would agree with.... I've just skimmed through, but look forward to reading more carefully tomorrow. Many thanks. Hope your trip, move and new job have all gone well and that your wife and kids have been enjoying your company which we've missed;-) Good to know you're around from time to time at least. Speak soon, Sarah 7636 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 10:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Lovingkindness Dear Erik, Just a line to say I understand how you feel, the views you have and the pretty tough life you've had to date. I sincerely hope that with more and more understanding of dhamma it becomes easier and easier. Many of the points will be addressed in due course I'm sure. --- Erik wrote: > --- <> > Well, pretending to play "fierce debater" doesn't seem to fit all > that well when the topic is cultivating lovingkindness toward > ourselves and extending that lovingkindness toward all other beings > (a reminder I always need and benefit from immensely, and believe me > when I say I'm getting more from this than I suspect anyone reading > ever could), so I figured it was the appropriate time to put > the "wrathful" mask aside for a bit and pretend to put on the "gentle > voiced" mask instead, for awhile--which will probably switch yet many > times until our "exeunt" at final Act of the final Scene of this > Midsummer Night's Dream: Yes, let me encourage the "gentle voiced" mask.....and hopefully it will be less and less of a mask! > > "If we shadows have offended, > Think but this, and all is mended, > That you have but slumber'd here > While these visions did appear. > And this weak and idle theme, > No more yielding but a dream" > yes it's a little like a Midsummer's dream, not knowing what visions will appear here.... You've found many good friends here Erik, so just relax and know we understand your views and feelings and hurts and angers from the past. metta, Sarah 7637 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 11:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma dear sarah, > > That's true...but I don't see how abstaining from meat eating (except > Christine's examples given) has anything to do with sila? > well I wrote in the context of any sila. When one observes sila, he/she may be subjected to some other's aversion. > > We had some discussion on this theme with Mike ages ago..I think you were > around then. I certainly agree that if one becomes a monk, one should follow > vinaya strictly to the best of one's ability, otherwise one just contributes to > the downfall of the Buddha's Teachings. I also (from my little study of the > vinaya) have a lot of confidence that there were very good reasons for each > rule laid down by the Buddha with his far-sightedness and compassion. > > For this reason, If I am present with monks, I will do my best to observe these > rules (e.g. not being alone as a woman with a monk, not offering money or > similar etc etc.) I don't consider the rules to be old-fashioned or sexist at > all... not at all, buddha is never old fashioned. > I would not like to aid the downfall of the Sangha or the Teachings in > anyway. > > I realise some of my views expressed are controversial and am not intending to > criticize others who have different attitudes in these areas! > > Having digressed (getting into Erik's habits;-)), I don't think the right > reason to become a monk is in order to follow better sila than one is able to > do as a lay-person. Unless the monk's life and lifestyle really comes naturally > and it really is easy to sever links with family, friends and other > attachments, I see no reason for it. yes when things come naturally, one will have the opportunity to observe better and tough sila. > One can follow just as many rules as one > likes as a householder, develop satipatthana without any obstacles if one has > the chance to listen and consider dhamma. Possibly, these days, the latter is > even easier as a householder. yes , but householder life can be an obstacle when one has to earn the living...etc. For example, if one is in Marketing business, or Human Resources it is so hard to even observe the 4th precept. > > Gayan, i think this is the right attitude. We can make all kinds of > resolutions, but like you say, it will depend on understanding and our > accumulations and other conditions as to whether we follow them! > > > > Well the tendencies are still very much there. > > Lot of booze and smoke and partying...full abuse of body and mind > > Sometimes the thoughtlines go as 'wow..this is life..blah,blah' but I > > internally laugh at such thoughts, I am aware of the internal mind cheating, > > (vancaka etc), but for the moment I will keep on investigating for me. > > Gayan, at least you recognize the tendencies and the vancaka (cheating mind) > and see that these are the problems rather than any external causes! > > (Btw, next time you have trouble trakking down your vancaka, they're saved > under 'Cheating dhammas' under 'useful Posts';-)) > > > > I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about > > things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , > > marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, hey...see my > > life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what you are > > doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' > > We all slip up so many times a day..As Erik would say, no need to be too hard > on yourself! haha, yes, but I remember when buddha says that 'assault akusalas' like a strong man wrestles and pins a weak one. :o) >Sometimes even when telling others these things, there can be > awareness even in mid-sentence...anytime, any object, remember! > > Look forward to more. We'd all like to be the person with no bad habits, but > doesn't this just show the clinging to self again? > > Have fun with sati!! > yep, if I tell you a secret , I personally think that Buddha is a very Fun man. To me , he is like saying, " hey fools, thats not fun, what you pursue they are not fun at all, you'll be dissappointed again and again.., the real fun is This..etc " :o) rgds gayan 7638 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 5:11am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: Ho ho ho, Gayan! > When one observes sila, he/she may be subjected to some other's aversion. And one test of true sila is if one still continues to perform it even if subjected to another's aversion. > haha, yes, but I remember when buddha says that 'assault akusalas' like a > strong man wrestles and pins a weak one. Which is why I so love the wrathful dieties of the Tibetan pantheon (who are merely aspects of the benign deities, such as the Manjushri/Yamantaka dyad), whose function is to terminate these very akusala tendencies with extreme prejudice--in exactly the way a truly compassionate surgeon wields a scalpel. > yep, if I tell you a secret , I personally think that Buddha is a very Fun > man. > To me , he is like saying, " hey fools, thats not fun, what you pursue they > are not fun at all, you'll be dissappointed again and again.., > the real fun is This..etc " Perhaps this is why I so love seeing little images of Ho-tai wherever I go these days! :) Also, I came across a wonderful little essay on humor and the Dharma you may get a chuckle or two out of: http://pears2.lib.ohio-state.edu/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/hyers1.htm (And for the hard-core Abhidhammists, it even discusses the distinctions between sita, hasita, vihasita, upahasita, apahasita-- which is nearly the point I'm at right now just thinking of all of this! :) :) :) 7639 From: Joshua Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 7:21am Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > Sorry I'm late getting to this post. I'm working slowly, and backwards at the > moment. > > And, oh yes, that helps. > > Despite being overwhelmed, I will make a serious effort to read the above, > particularly Majjhima 107. It will take me awhile, but I'll get back to you > eventually. I assume I can find them all online? > > With gratitude, > Robert E. Hallo Rob't, Majjhima Nikaya 107 is the most important one, I think (as it pertains to what Abrahm was saying). Anguttara II.29, like the Majjhima 107, can be found at www.accesstoinsight.org The rest, I believe, cannot be found on accesstoinsight, but maybe on www.metta.lk in a few months. I also suggest you take a look at Thanissaro's essays, if you so wish. I believe he writes about just this topic (with suttic support). His books are good too, but more in line with the Thai Forest Tradition than traditional scholarship. You can read all about the Thai Forest Tradition there too. Ajahn Mun is a good starting place. He sort of woke me out of my 'dogmatic slumbers'. In Dhamma Joshua 7640 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 11:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness With respect, Herman, I think your view is radical empiricism, and I do not believe that the view of Buddha can be reduced to this. If all we are is kandhas, and awareness or sentience is only a by-product, then there is no need for Nirvana, no need for Realization. Why should consciousness go through all of this trouble to realize something that adds up to nothing? I cannot see in your view that suicide would not end the suffering of the being who was simply a conglomerate of elements. If he is not more than that, there would be no karmic force to cause 'him' to reincarnate and continue to suffering, and suicide would be a much more convenient path than the toil of realization. The reason why Buddha specified that sentient beings have Buddha-nature and are eligible for realization and Nirvana, is because they follow different laws than rocks and trees. Rocks and trees have no karma. They are subject to physics, not karma. Sentient beings are subject to karma. Karma and physics are not the same set of laws, although they both traffic in a form of cause and effect. Your view is deterministic. There is no moment of awakening, no possibility of Vipassana, as I read it. How can a collection of elements have insight? Only consciousness can develop insight. If it is merely mechanical, why practice mindfulness? It would be a redundancy, and Insight would come by itself as a kind of mechanical reflex when the karma had reached a certain point. This is not my understanding of the development of insight. My understanding is that karmic conditions may mitigate against the possibility of Insight, but even having reached a certain point on the path does not guarantee insight. There is an element of practicing mindfulness involved to produce this effect. It is a 'human' cause, not a mechanical one. Buddha's point was never that the individual did not exist as a unit striving towards realization. It was that there was not entity living within this individual to be served and survived. When the body and the kandhas complete their progression towards death, there is something left over, otherwise there would be nothing at all to reincarnate. Buddha refrained from saying that there was a 'self' that survived death. That would put him in with the eternalists and constitute the creation of a soul. But he also refrained from taking your view, that the self was annihilated with death, and was nothing but physical forms. That would put him in with the annihilationists [nihilists]. When we glibly assert that science is adequate to explain Buddhism, we have given up the birthright of Buddhism, that we can reach an attainment based on the sentient element to truly understand and realize our 'true nature'. Our 'true nature' is not that we are mere mechanisms in a cosmic clockwork. That is the part of our nature that Nirvana transcends. If you believe in pure mechanical nature and predestination based on pure cause and effect, you do not believe in Nirvana and Transcendence of these conditions through Realization. If that is the case, I believe you have taken the Buddhism out of Buddhism. Science is not the answer to the questions that Buddism raises. Buddhism is. Buddhism is not science. It is a metaphysical system, not a physical system. We are not the body, the personality or the concept of self. So what are we? The answer cannot be 'the body' because that is one of the things we are *not*. So it has to be something beyond the realm of science and physics, even beyond karma. I won't answer, because to imagine that I know the answer would be to form a concept of self. But to refrain from that does not mean that it is *not* a self. It means that we are neither a self nor not a self. That is the Buddha's answer, and what that is which is neither a self nor not a self is only discovered through realization, not through conceptualization, experimentation or induction. When you think you know it, you're off the path. Robert E. ============================== --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Some cutting and clipping and additions follow down below: > > --- Robert Epstein > wrote:> bodies to experience their effects. > > > > The laws of physics and kamma have no meaning without a body in > action because of > > its given tendencies. Action is furthermore relative to the > actions surrounding > > it, and thus has no quantifiable properties without a perceiver > taking it in from > > a specific standpoint. > > > Bodies, in quantum mechanics, have an unspecified existence, they may > be there, but they are feasibly also not there. The thing worth > noting is that even while they are not there, they are still > predictable, therefore still subject to the laws of physics and kamma. > > A body is simply a snapshot at a given time unit of resolution. Look > at this body in 500 year time slots, and it is not there at all, or > only fractionally, depending on where in the cycle of this body the > observation started. Look at this body in 1 second time frames, and > it is there. Look at this body in 1 trillionth of a second time > slices, and it may be there, or it may not be there. > > The arising and falling of rupa is not haphazard, it is knowable and > predictable. There is no knower, but there is knowing. And this > knowing is dependant on rupa. > > > > > The acknowledgment of subjectivity is the acknowledgment of > sentience, a > > precondition for both ignorance and enlightenment. Buddhism, in my > opinion, does > > not operate in a 'cold' environment but in the 'warm' atmosphere of > subjectivity. > > And what do you think this sentience is? What is the difference > between a corpse and a ballerina in mid flight? Surely we can > discriminate further than just saying, life element. > > > Without a sentient being Buddhism is meaningless. > > The ultimate message of Buddhism (and other methods of knowing) is > that there are no sentient beings. There is sentience, there is > knowing, there is form, there is colour, that's about it. > > Science can predict the > > movement of objects and bodies, but it knows precious little about > the 'sentient' > > aspect of sentient beings. Studies of the brain have yielded only > a beginner's > > knowledge of how experience takes place. > > The studies I have read suggest that awareness is a post-hoc and > selective snapshot of underlying processes that have already finished > initiating other processes by the time the initial javana becomes > known. > > > > > An emphasis on experience does not invite solipsism. The self that > may think is > > being invited to arise has already arisen, otherwise we would not > be having this > > conversation. The question is not whether or not to invite it, but > what to do > > with it. > Buddha did emphasize that each person has to clear up his own doubts > by > > direct understanding. This is because relization is indeed a > subjective project, > > although the end result may be 'objective', in a sense that is > beyond science. > > Science does not work this way -- the average person can learn it > from a book. > > The average person "believes" they learn science from a book, as they > do with with Buddhism. Relativity is as abstruse as the Dhamma. The > interesting thing about "knowing" is that it is true at any level, no > matter how false it is. That is because "knowing" is a state of mind, > that does not necessarily have to correlate to any rupa formation, > hence wrong view. Moments of insight and direct knowing are moments > of insight and direct knowing. If you cannot repeat it at will than > it was "knowing", not knowing. > > > > > I would not want to confuse the path of realization with the > intellectual truths > > of science. Science has transformed the world, but it cannot > transform the > > individual. > > Very soon science will be creating individuals, some of whom no doubt > will believe that they require transformation. Yet they will be an > aggregation of 30 odd body parts, composed of cells, composed of > molecules, composed of atoms, composed of particles that are there > and yet not there, neither coming, nor going, not new nor a > continuation of the old. > > Regards > > > Herman > > > > 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" 7641 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 0:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Nice to talk to you Mike. Robert E. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Robert, > > I do think that paññaa (like all the other cittas and > cetasikas) can and must arise regardless of > personality when conditions allow it. The > indispensible precursors for those are, as I > understand it, hearing and recollection of the Dhamma > (including silaa, by the way), and satipatthaana. > Each of these occurs in the present moment which, as > you recently pointed out, is the only moment. > > Thanks for the thoughtful posts. > > mike > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > As someone who has his personality criticized quite > > regularly for its flaws by > > those around me, I am also happy to note that one > > can make forward progress > > without attempting to clean up the myriad influences > > and tendencies carried by the > > cumulative self. > > > > Thanks again for your comments. > > > > 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" 7642 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 0:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Thanks, Joshua. Robert E. ============ --- Joshua wrote: > > Sorry I'm late getting to this post. I'm working slowly, and backwards at > the > > moment. > > > > And, oh yes, that helps. > > > > Despite being overwhelmed, I will make a serious effort to read the above, > > particularly Majjhima 107. It will take me awhile, but I'll get back to you > > eventually. I assume I can find them all online? > > > > With gratitude, > > Robert E. > > Hallo Rob't, > > Majjhima Nikaya 107 is the most important one, I think (as it pertains to what > Abrahm was saying). > > Anguttara II.29, like the Majjhima 107, can be found at www.accesstoinsight.org > > The rest, I believe, cannot be found on accesstoinsight, but maybe on > www.metta.lk in a few months. > > I also suggest you take a look at Thanissaro's essays, if you so wish. I believe > he writes about just this topic (with suttic support). His books are good too, > but more in line with the Thai Forest Tradition than traditional scholarship. > You can read all about the Thai Forest Tradition there too. Ajahn Mun is a good > starting place. He sort of woke me out of my 'dogmatic slumbers'. > > In Dhamma > Joshua > > > > ===== 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" 7643 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action Sukin Thanks for coming in on this (and my apologies as usual, to you and others, for being so far behind with replies) --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be > descriptive > but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. Yesterday I came across an example of just this sort of thing, in a compilation I was browsing of translations from the texts. It gives the sutta from Anguttara Nikaya (IV, 197) where the Buddha explains to Queen Mallika about the kinds of past conduct that result in people (in this case, women) experiencing different levels of wealth, beauty and social position in their lives. Each particular attribute has its cause in a different kind of conduct in the past (Queen Mallika herself was, by her own description, wealthy and of high social position but ugly). The title given in the compilation for this extract was 'How to obtain Wealth, Beauty and Social Position'. One can see the spin that has been put on the sutta: the Buddha said, 'The reason someone is like X is because of Y in the past' [this is descriptive], whereas the spin is, 'If you want to be like X, then do Y' [this is a path of action]. It may not be wholly wrong, but it is surely not the message that the Buddha was wishing to convey in the sutta. Not a big deal in this case, but important when we get to suttas dealing with aspects of 'the practice' (itself not a term that the Buddha tended to use). The suttas are subtle in their meaning, and should be read carefully, with an open mind and with an understanding of the context of the teachings as a whole. Thanks again for your comments. Jon 7644 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 23, 2001 10:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Howard I was touched by your moving description of your cancer 'scare'. It must have been a very trying time for your whole family. Your own response was such that it helped you see things in a way you had not seen them before. It is true that such crises can condition useful reflection. [Note for Erik: it is, however, not the experience itself but the reflection on it that is the key--even though anyone would say that this level of reflection would not have occurred absent this particular experience. So no need to try this one!]. Howard, in response to the example I raised of 'spontaneous' kusala (wholesomeness) you said the explanation was-- > Previous cultivation. This is undoubtedly true, I think. But even at such moments, kusala effort/energy must be present. It arises with the citta, and performs its function. Without it, no kusala whether spontaneous or not. The texts talk of 2 kinds of kusala moments--prompted and unprompted. The unprompted ones include those spontaneous moments. Kusala is prompted when it arises after a reminder of some kind, whether by oneself or another (for example, being inspired by another's good example, restraint after reflecting on the dangers of akusala, etc). However, although in conventional terms the difference may sometimes be seen in terms of effort, in dhamma terms both require wholesome effort/energy co-arising at the moment of kusala. Indeed, I believe it is true to say that the energy factor is stronger in the spontaneous kind of kusala than in the prompted kind. This I think highlights the difference between conventional effort and effort/energy as a wholesome factor. When one reads the suttas it is useful to keep in mind this kind of background knowledge. Although the suttas are given in conventional language, they are often describing terms or situations that are not conventional. > Current "efforts" towards kindness can only > affect our current *action*, not our current mental state. I was a little puzzled by this. Surely the quality of the action is determined by the accompanying mental states? If we do something that is (ie. appears to be) a 'good' deed but the mental state is not wholesome, there is no kusala of any kind. > We cannot *make* > ourselves feel warmth and kindness at the moment. But a lifetime or > lifetimes > of cultivation can transform the mind into one which typically is > loving. It's worth bearing in mind, I think, that we have accumulations of varying degrees for all kinds of kusala, including even awareness and understanding presumably (otherwise there would certainly be no hope for us). Because of this, any kind of kusala can and does arise spontaneously in our lives, when the conditions for its arising are present. If at such moments there is any level of awareness of the kusala nature of the moment, this would certainly be the further development of that kusala. Jon --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 8/14/01 11:21:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Jonothan Abbott writes: > > > > In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of > > 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in > your > > own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your > 'Paradox' > > post - move forward.) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'll try to answer this in a few ways. An example of conventional > > right effort during meditation is to initiate mindfulness and focus on > the > meditation subject, to further these when already present, and to return > to > these when the mind has wandered. When not meditating, a general example > is > to let go of akusala thoughts when these are present, to initiate kusala > > thoughts when not present, and to further kusala thoughts when already > present. > A somewhat dramatic application of right effort in daily life > occurred > about 5 years ago to me. I had gone through a year of extreme tiredness, > > discomfort in the lower-left abdomen, and a constant low-grade fever. My > > doctor threw every test in the book at me except the right one. Finally > I saw > a gastroenterologist who arranged for me to get a colonoscopy in the > hospital. After only five minutes into it, the procedure was stopped. > The > doctor couldn't get any further than the sigmoid colon because of an > impassable blockage! They immediately arranged for surgery for later the > same > day. When they showed my wife and me the full-color glossies taken > during the > colonoscopy, it was obvious that the situation was a bad one, and the > doctors > didn't mince any words in describing the possibilities. > That afternoon I had a colon resection done during which they > removed > several feet of colon. Afterwards, the doctors spoke to me. They said > that it > would take 6 days for the biopsy results to be returned. Meanwhile they > talked to me about the use of radioative seeding vs radiation! From the > way > the gastroenterologist and the surgeon were talking, I considered it > likely > that I had colon cancer, and that I might very well die from it. (The > doctors > had ordered a catscan to check on the status of the liver!) At that > point, in > the depths of my non-existant soul ;-)), I made a decision. The decision > was > that I *would* not hope! I *would* not desire that things be "okay". I > decided to be openly accepting of however things were and of however > events > would unfold. I *knew* that without hoping for things to be "a certain > way", > there would be no suffering. This decision of mine was deep, > thoroughgoing, > and *real*. For the next six days, while my wife was terribly distraught > and > my doctors were upset, I was truly and completely at peace. At the end > of the > six days, my gastroenterologist bounced into the room, positively > beaming! > Grinning ear to ear, he said that despite the surgeon's certainty of > cancer > when he held the huge mass of abscessed colon tissue in his hands, there > was > no malignancy at all, just a severe case of diverticulits (quite > dangerous in > itself, but now no problem). And my reaction, unspoken, was not one of > great > joy, but rather a completely calm one, which, if voiced, would be: "Oh, > so > it's that way, and not the other." Craving, I had learned first hand, > was > suffering. And lack of craving is peace. But a decision was required, an > > instance of the exercise of conventional right effort. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 7645 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 2:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action Dear Jon, Serious seekers are going to look at the end goal to interpret the Buddha's intentions. Those who have other interests, such as 'Buddha's tips for wealth and beauty' [!] will find excuses to interpret it that way, whether it's clearly the opposite or not. Those who want to understand the interesting analysis you described of how certain actions lead to certain results, will take the information to gain a better understanding of karmic mechanics. Those who think they can still manipulate the world of manifestation to gain happiness will always try to do so, and eventually they will realize that those hopes are always dashed. I think it is intention that causes the interpretation, rather than confusion. Ultimately people will do that which serves their real purpose at any given time. For those of us who are at least trying to sincerely follow the path to liberation, such clarifications can be very helpful though. Best, Robert E. ============================ --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Sukin > > Thanks for coming in on this (and my apologies as usual, to you and > others, for being so far behind with replies) > > --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > > Dear Jonothan, > > > Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be > > descriptive > > but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. > > Yesterday I came across an example of just this sort of thing, in a > compilation I was browsing of translations from the texts. It gives the > sutta from Anguttara Nikaya (IV, 197) where the Buddha explains to Queen > Mallika about the kinds of past conduct that result in people (in this > case, women) experiencing different levels of wealth, beauty and social > position in their lives. Each particular attribute has its cause in a > different kind of conduct in the past (Queen Mallika herself was, by her > own description, wealthy and of high social position but ugly). > > The title given in the compilation for this extract was 'How to obtain > Wealth, Beauty and Social Position'. One can see the spin that has been > put on the sutta: the Buddha said, 'The reason someone is like X is > because of Y in the past' [this is descriptive], whereas the spin is, 'If > you want to be like X, then do Y' [this is a path of action]. It may not > be wholly wrong, but it is surely not the message that the Buddha was > wishing to convey in the sutta. Not a big deal in this case, but > important when we get to suttas dealing with aspects of 'the practice' > (itself not a term that the Buddha tended to use). > > The suttas are subtle in their meaning, and should be read carefully, with > an open mind and with an understanding of the context of the teachings as > a whole. > > Thanks again for your comments. > > 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" 7646 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 3:40am Subject: Re: Descriptive vs. path of action > wishing to convey in the sutta. Not a big deal in this case, but > important when we get to suttas dealing with aspects of 'the practice' > (itself not a term that the Buddha tended to use). 'Discipline' is the word he used very frequently. How does 'discipline' differ from 'practice'? 7647 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 3:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah Dear Anders, When I re-read the first paragraph (see below) of my last post to you (without students about to arrive this time, so no excuse;-)), it sounded rather terse and dismissive which wasn't intended. I sincerely apologise for this and would like to give your same comments another try;-) > --- Anders Honore wrote: > > A:> > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > > S: > > > If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is > > > always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! > > A:> > I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, > > but I'm too lazy. > A: I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, but I'm too lazy. Instead, I will turn to my own favourite, Huineng, who writes in one of his gathas (I've inluded some non-relevant parts here too, simply because I think they're great): S: I'm very reluctant still to make any comments about Mahayana texts, but you have asked me (more than once) to do so from my understanding of Theravada/Tipitaka texts and very sincerely, so here goes: A (quoting Huineng): Erroneous views keep us in defilement While right views remove us from it, But when we are in a position to discard both of them We are then absolutely pure. S: As long as there is no idea of a 'we' to do anything and no idea of a 'we' to be pure......For the arahat, right views are not discarded, but rather not clung to at all. A: Bodhi is immanent in our Essence of Mind, An attempt to look for it elsewhere is erroneous. S: I see no support for these ideas in Theravada texts. A: Within our impure mind the pure one is to be found, And once our mind is set right, we are free from the three kinds of beclouding (hatred, lust and illusion). S: Just for a moment and then the 'impure one' again. Again, the arahat has no more of the '3 kinds', but still no lasting state or mind, pure or otherwise. A: If we are treading the Path of Enlightenment We need not be worried by stumbling-blocks. Provided we keep a constant eye on our own faults We cannot go astray from the right path. S: With respect, my mother as a Christian would say the same. 'Keeping a constant eye on our own faults' is not the same as understanding all realities now, not just the 'faults', as anatta. A: Since every species of life has its own way of salvation They will not interfere with or be antagonistic to one another. But if we leave our own path and seek some other way of salvation We shall not find it, And though we plod on till death overtakes us We shall find only penitence in the end. If you wish to find the true way Right action will lead you to it directly; But if you do not strive for Buddhahood You will grope in the dark and never find it. S: I haven't come across any reference in the Theravada Tipitaka urging us to 'strive for Buddhahood'. I also understand right understanding rather than wishing and right action (whatever is understood by this) to be the key to following 'my' path. A: He who treads the Path in earnest Sees not the mistakes of the world; If we find fault with others We ourselves are also in the wrong. When other people are in the wrong, we should ignore it, For it is wrong for us to find fault. By getting rid of the habit of fault-finding We cut off a source of defilement. S: Very wise and a good reminder. Like when Cybele and others were talking about mana, I was reflecting how it doesn't help at all to speculate about the others' mana or 'faults' when actually it's only 'one's own' mana that can ever be known directly. A: When neither hatred nor love disturb our mind Serenely we sleep. S: yes, the good night's sleep in the MN sutta quoted recently. When we do no harm to others in anyway, we sleep well. A: Those who intend to be the teachers of others Should themselves be skilled in the various expedients which lead others to enlightenment. When the disciple is free from all doubts It indicates that his Essence of Mind has been found. S: Perhaps we can say that the most helpful way for ourselves and others is to develop all kinds of wholesome states of mind and in particular to develop satipatthana which alone will bring about the understanding of anatta and the path to nibbana. A: The Kingdom of Buddha is in this world, Within which enlightenment is to be sought. To seek enlightenment by separating from this world Is as absurd as to search for a rabbit's horn. S: I like it! A: Right views are called 'transcendental'; Erroneous views are called 'worldly'. When all views, right or erroneous, are discarded Then the essence of Bodhi appears. S: OK, we'd say understanding of paramatha dhammas is understanding of absoluute truths, understanding of sammuti sacca is conventional truth which many be right or wrong conventionally or worldly. When we say 'this is a cup', 'worldly' speaking, it may be right or wrong, but it's never right absolutely or 'transcendentally' speaking. (BTW, Erik, I've been meaning to say that no one that I know of on dsg has said that there isn't a self who can direct actions in a conventional sense as you've suggested. We've all been talking about absolute realities..just for the record;-)) What I'd also add is that samma ditthi or right view/understanding is not a view in the sense of any opinion, but direct panna (wisdom) into the characteristic of a reality. As I said earlier, all (conditioned) realities, including panna are impermanent and not worthy of beng clung to. I'm not sure if this is what is meant by 'discarded'. Again no 'Bodhi' to appear in the Buddha's original Teachings as I understand them. Anders, I've gone through this Gatha for reasons I explained and I hope it's of interest to you. My comments in no way are to suggest criticism or any understanding of Huineng, but merely as I read these lines with my limited understanding of Theravada texts. As I rather tersely suggested last time, the scope of readings, teachings and texts for discussion is limitless, so I'd rather in future set a good example and stick to Theravada texts and commentaries which will keep us busy for a few lifetimes in themselves! This isn't meant to suggest that it's not helpful to read other texts or teachings or any other writings that anyone finds useful and I fully appreciate that we've all come from very different 'backgrounds' in this regard. Apologies again and look forward to hearing from you as always! Sarah ************************************************************* --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Anders, > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > > > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > > > > > If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is > > > always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! > > > > I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, > > but I'm too lazy. > > Anders, I'm really not making any comments about Mahyana texts. My comment > above is in regard to any comment on the Theravada Tipitaka interpreted in > this > way. Originally we were discussing Tipitaka suttas mentioned by you, and I'd > prefer to stick to this, partly because I have no knowledge of Mahayana > texts, > but mainly because this is a forum for the study of dhamma according to the > Theravada texts and ancient commentaries:-)) I'm sure you have several other > forums for discussing Zen and other Mahayana teachings.... > 7648 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 3:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Nina, Your comments and also Kom's are very interesting. this is a very busy week for me (end of my summer course of teaching), but next week when i have time I look forward to checking U Narada's Guide, Patthana and your other references. --- Nina van Gorkom Kom: . Do you by > > any chance have further explanation about why Domanassa would assist > > the citta to be fixed on the object (but not anger, for example)? I > > think I can understand about how the rest of the factors assist the > > citta in being fixed on the object, but I still don't see how > > domanasa does this. > > Nina: In the Guide to Conditional Relations, by U Narada, Ch II, 17 Jhana > Condition) it is explained that the jhanafactors make the associated states > fix themselves formly to pleasant and unpleasant objects. We should see > domanassa not in isolation, but associated with the other jhanafactors. He > gives examples taking his material from the commentaries, but does not > mention from which texts. It is stated that someone could not shoot birds > and animals without the jhanafactors. He has to aim and concentrate on the > animal he will shoot. Examples and analogies he gives are interesting. He > says, "For even in the case of hate which offends, it is one-pointedness of > mind that firmly fixes the mind on the unpleasant object although painful > feeling is experienced with that object. We need the jhanafactors to > pronounce one word correctly, he says. > Also when there is lobha, desire for extraordinary experiences, jhanafactors > can make the associated dhammas fix firmly on a pleasant object. Someone may > take for real jhana what is not, he can be misled. Yes, these are important points and the reason we stress the importance of knowing kusala cittas and akusala cittas.....The concentration can be very strong and very pleasant and be asisted by jhana factors, but this doesn't make it skilful and as you suggest can lead to taking unwholesome states for jhana. > You dealt again with another aspect, domanassa that can be pursued, as > explained in the Co. > This is actually similar to desire that should not be pursued and that could > be pursued, in the 'Guide", the Netti, that Robert K. brought up some time > ago. A delicate question, we studied the Pali commentary but are not > finished with it. . Yes, there are similarities with the tanha to be pursued and not be pursued in the Netti passage. When we understand that tanha and domanassa always accompany unwholesome cittas (well, as I do), then even when we read suttas which suggest they should be pursued, we have confidence that it is in this light they need to be read. I'll also discuss it more with K.Sujin in Bkk if I have a chance, but she also encouraged me to understand the Netti passage in the light of understanding the akusala tanha to be pursued. Hopefully we ( or you and the Pali experts!)' will get a little further with the Pali commentary, because to say it's my understanding or KS's understanding doesn't have much validity on dsg! Thank you again for your comments on the verse, which is another example of a verse which read literally has little bearing on its real meaning . > I must run along now, preparing for a week of vacation next week. Sounds like Num's running is catching and Num, last night I needed a change of scene, so we were prompted by your example to go next door to see Rush Hour 2. Lots of fun and it captured Hong Kong very well....even the details such as the taxi-driver and chicken lady and the Cantonese were very accurate. Thanks! Nina, have a good vacation from us all. Sarah 7649 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 5:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike and Jon, > > Mike, I don't have many comments on your response as I am still trying > to > understand the sutta meaning. Jon, I have some questions for you. Uh-oh, here’s trouble. > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Mike > > > > > The question remaining to me is, if the Buddha taught > > > 'only dukkha and the way out of dukkha', then why did > > > he teach kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana? > > > Off-hand I'm inclined to think that, kusala that > > > doesn't lead to nibbana mayabe leads to kusala that > > > DOES lead to nibbana. Maybe. > > > > Another answer, and this may sound trite but it's not, is that the > Buddha > > taught *all* realities, including even the akusala ones. Whatever the > > reality, he taught how it can be known for what it is, and he taught > how > > it conditions, or is conditioned by, other realities. > > The sutta definitely mentioned akusala realities. However, the Buddha > explicitly divided each of the right (kusala) factor into two: one > accompanying by taints, and one without. Although it is apparent (to > me) > that each kusala one without taint is mentioned to be supramundane as a > factor of the path, do you interpret satipatthana to be one with or > without > taints? Yes, the term used in the translation at Mike’s link is kusala that is “without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path”. Your question I think is this: is a moment of satipatthana, which is not supramundane, a moment of ‘with fermentations’ kusala, or is it, as a 5-fold path-moment, without fermentations even though it is not supramundane? In understanding what is meant here by “without fermentations (taints/asavas)”, we probably need to bear in mind that only the arahant is totally without asavas. So even those attaining to the earlier stages of enlightenment, when the kusala is certainly supramundane and a path-factor, are still with asavas. My guess is that “without fermentations” here probably refers to kusala that does not conduce to continuation in samsara, ie. that is path-factor kusala, so this would include a moment of satipatthana (mundane 5-fold path consciousness) as well as the supramundane path moments at the various stages of enlightenment. But this could only be confirmed by checking the commentaries (which are not available to me). > > > Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > > > through the discourses and the discipline, the > > > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > > > skilful reflections. Do you think there is a link > > > between this sort of reflection and the > > > path-factors-with-aasavas? > > > > I'm sure there is a link. Unless and until the kusala qualities have > been > > developed to a high degree, they cannot perform the function of > subduing > > the defilements. Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, > even > > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. > > I have also heard that the supramundane path factors will not rise > unless > one has developed the 10 perfections (parami) to the appropriate degree. > > If you look at the 10 parami, it is all (obviously!) about subduing > defilements. However, even the paramis are subtle (do you expect > othewise?). For example, I have heard that only dana for the explicit > purpose of relieving defilements (attachment, stinginess, etc.) can be > considered parami. Dana for the purpose of having a good rebirth or > the > 5-sensualities is not a parami. In the Visuddhimagga it explains the many ways of classifying virtue, one of which is virtue as being inferior, medium or superior (Vis I, 33). By this classification, virtue is-- - inferior, if it is motivated by craving, and its purpose is to enjoy continued existence [eg. a happy rebirth?] - medium, if it is practised for the purpose of one’s own deliverance [with satipatthana?] - superior, in the case of the virtue of the perfections practised for the deliverance of all beings [the parami of a bodhisatta?]. This seems to put the perfections in a class above your example of dana for the explicit purpose of relieving defilements, which would fall within the ‘medium’ category under this classification. But there are no doubt different ways of considering the perfections also, and I have no references handy. Nina may be able to help here, or you could check her writing on the paramis (Letters from Sri Lanka?) Best I can do. Please don't be too tough in your reply! Jon 7650 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive words vs. paths of action Erik --- Erik wrote: > > Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be > descriptive > > but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. > > I find this comment most unusual, and certainly not in accord with > anything I've heard taught by Lord Buddha (or taught to me by my > teachers, who have an uncanny knack for restating the Buddha's > teachings as they do). Sukin and I were discussing how in some cases a sutta that should be read as giving information for our consideration (eg. if a person does X, Y will be the result), is taken as a direction of how we should act or, more seriously still, 'practice' (eg. you should do X, so that you can achieve Y). This is not a matter of mere quibbles. It has very important ramifications for our understanding of the teachings. Let's take the sutta passage you quote below. > For example, how, in light of this notion that "it is a mistake to > think the Buddha taught paths of action" would you explain, for > example, the following passage? > [AN X.176 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-176.html]? > > "Now, Cunda, there are three ways in which one is made pure by bodily > action, four ways in which one is made pure by verbal action, and > three ways in which one is made pure by mental action. > > "And how is one made impure in three ways by bodily...verbal...mental > action? [...] And how is one made pure in three ways by > bodily...verbal...mental action? [...] > > ***"These, Cunda, are the ten courses of skillful action."*** [my > emphasis] > > > Sukinderpal, if you read the actual words Lord Buddha reputedly spoke > to his disciples, what he says sounds an awful lot to me like > ***paths of action***! (the word "courses" is, after all, a synonym > for the word path!--and just to reiterate Howar'd wise reminder from > another post, we're not talking about "courses of ***expectations of > results***" here, just to be clear, which is a rather nasty form of > grasping in & of itself) :) At first glance it might appear, as you seem to think Erik, that we are being told to develop these 10 courses of wholesome action by which 'one is made pure'. But a closer look shows that in the same sutta the Buddha spoke in exactly the same terms about the 10 courses of *unwholesome* action by which 'one is made impure'. So if both kusala and akusala are spoken of in exactly the same terms, it would surely be wrong to take either as being a direction/path of action to be followed. OK, so in this case it's easy to get the real picture, because both kusala and akusala are mentioned in the same sutta. But that is not always the case. > Then again, perhaps the the Buddha was just a horribly confused > individual (all those years wandering around naked, eating a single > grain of rice a day, etc., aren't exactly what many people would > associate with sanity, after all; not to mention sitting like a > catatonic schiziphrenic under a tree for days on end, unmoving...but > I digress) and couldn't properly express himself in any meaningful > way. > > Perhaps the Buddha was just goofing around and babbling things to > confuse us all, for chuckles or something. I don't know about you, > but I would consider anyone who articulated their intended meaning so > poorly, who spoke words having nothing to do with their > understanding, to be either a liar, a fool, or completely insane. Erik, the suttas are not as simple to read as you might think. Furthermore, mistaken reading of the suttas can easily lead to wrong views about the practice. Jon 7651 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 9:55pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Anders --- Anders Honoré wrote: > ----- > > When you talk about meditation on breath, do you mean breath as object > of > > the development of samatha or of vipassana? ('Meditation' is such a > vague > > term, don't you find?) > > Samatha. That's what I feel I need to develop right now. You may like to keep in mind that although the Buddha spoke often about samatha, but he never advised its development to the exclusion of vipassana. Jon 7652 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 24, 2001 10:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Anders > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold > Path. > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a > definition > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. My understanding (apparently in the minority on this list!) is that the Eightfold Path properly so called refers to the factors accompanying the supramundane moment of attainment to one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. In 'A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' (translation of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha) it explains at Ch VII, Guide to #38 [The Four Noble Truths]-- 'The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths.' While there is no mundane Eightfold Path as such, there is a mundane 5-fold path. This is a moment of satipatthana, such moments being accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors. I don't know if you saw my recent post to Mike where I summarised in rather technical language my understanding of how references in the suttas to the Eightfold Path should be read. I have pasted a copy of this below in case it is of interest. Jon Just to clarify, because I may not have been clear or consistent throughout, here is a summary in purely 'technical' terms of what I have been trying to say-- 1. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as the Fourth Noble Truth means a moment of consciousness when all 8 path-factors arise together. This occurs only at a moment of magga-citta (path-consciousness), ie. at one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. It is a moment of supramundane consciousness, with Nibbana as its object. 2. There is a mundane version of the path, which is a moment when 5 (or sometimes 6) of the factors of the eightfold path (in their 'mundane version') arise. This refers to a moment of satipatthana (or 'mundane path-consciousness'). Its object will be any presently appearing reality. It may arise at any time, given the right understanding and other conditions. 3. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as one of the 37 requisites of enlightenment means, at any time before actual enlightenment, a moment of mundane (5-fold) path-consciousness and, at or subsequent to the first stage of enlightenment, the supramundane 8-fold path consciousness. 7653 From: Binh A Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 8:19am Subject: Samatha-Vipassana --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > You may like to keep in mind that although the Buddha spoke often about > samatha, but he never advised its development to the exclusion of > vipassana. -------------------------------------------------------- BA: As I understand, in simple terms, the Buddha spoke of "samatha as a base to develop vipassana". So, the issue here (as well as in many other Buddhist forum and Buddhist circles) is not about "samatha versus vipassana" but: -Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? Some says it is, some says it is not. Metta, Binh 7654 From: Larry Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 11:40am Subject: Re: Samatha, Vipassana Binh Anson wrote: >-Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? -------------------------------------------- I would say samatha is necessary for sati and sati is necessary for jhana to develop. Vipassana seems to arise at any time throughout the day and night, more so when one is studying. My guess is that the insight that arises after jhana is more profound. Larry 7655 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 11:42am Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Jon, Thank you, as always, for the reply. Obviously, I have more questions! --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Yes, the term used in the translation at Mike's link is kusala that is > "without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path". Your > question I think is this: is a moment of satipatthana, which is not > supramundane, a moment of `with fermentations' kusala, or is it, as a > 5-fold path-moment, without fermentations even though it is not > supramundane? Yes. > In understanding what is meant here by "without fermentations > (taints/asavas)", we probably need to bear in mind that only the arahant > is totally without asavas. So even those attaining to the earlier stages > of enlightenment, when the kusala is certainly supramundane and a > path-factor, are still with asavas. Yes. If I remember the commentaries to this sutta correctly, I think this is in in accordance with the commentary, i.e, that Satipathanna (non-arahat) is considered to be with Asava. > My guess is that "without fermentations" here probably refers to kusala > that does not conduce to continuation in samsara, ie. that is path-factor > kusala, so this would include a moment of satipatthana (mundane 5-fold > path consciousness) as well as the supramundane path moments at the > various stages of enlightenment. Although this is also my interpretation of the sutta, I think this is somewhat at odds with the commentaries (like I mentioned earlier). The reason why I am asking you this kind of question is that I am trying to understand if the 8-fold paths, as taught in the tipitakas, exclusively mean satipatthana or does it mean satipatthana *AND* other levels of kusala. My understanding of TA Sujin's interpretation of the tipitaka and the commentaries is that it doesn't include other kinds of kusalas. However, I also understand that without the appropriate other kusalas, magga citta cannot arise. Also, the suttas often talk about the 8-fold paths in a way that it sometimes seem to point to non-satipatthana, e.g., right view=belief in kamma, belief that there is brahma who knows for themselves the existence of last world, this world, etc., right concentration=jhana. If the supramundane 8-fold path means satipatthana, and the mundane 5- fold (or 6-fold) path means both satipatthana and other kind of kusalas, understanding the sutta would be less problematic for me. However, if it strictly means satipatthana (and all the vipassana nanna), then how the 8- fold paths is explained doesn't make sense to me in all the contexts. kom 7656 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 1:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana --- Binh A wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > You may like to keep in mind that although the Buddha spoke often > about > > samatha, but he never advised its development to the exclusion of > > vipassana. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > BA: As I understand, in simple terms, the Buddha spoke of "samatha as > a base to develop vipassana". > > So, the issue here (as well as in many other Buddhist forum and > Buddhist circles) is not about "samatha versus vipassana" but: > > -Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? > > Some says it is, some says it is not. > > Metta, > Binh Dear Binh, As I often emphasize, especially around here where many posters have really done their homework extensively, I am no expert on Buddhism, and I am less of an expert in Theravadin Buddhism, despite my strong interest in the issues this group is interested in. However, if I may give my unschooled opinion, it would seem to me to be a fair statement to say that samatha is the sensible precondition of vipassana, rather than the "necessary" one. That way, if someone happens to have insight based on karmic conditions or a strong propensity for mindfulness, that we do not discard that possibility, even without prior strong development of samatha. I think it is fair to say that it has sometimes happened that Vipassana has been experienced without the strong foundation of samatha. I think is is also fair to say that a strong foundation in samatha increases the chances of Vipassana taking place, and more importantly, of the person who experiences Vipassana to be able to integrate and develop this experience, even if it is possible to have Vipassana without samatha. From my own scattered meditation experience: I have more of a propensity for contemplation and Vipassana, than for samatha. I have a creative and intellectual type of personality and I tend to regard stillness and peacefulness as somewhat boring. In other words, I crave interesting experiences, and I think it's fair to say that Vipassana is more exciting than Samatha. In my meditations, though I would always focus on the breathing, I would tend to crave insight and awakening experiences. If someone told me 'by following Buddhist practice you can become free of suffering and be calm and peaceful without cravings' I probably would never have gotten involved. What interests me is the promise of enlightenment, and the higher states of consciousness. You can see why I might be attracted to Zen, which in some ways seems to promise a straight road to Vipassana without a lot of boring preparation. In actual practice, Zen monasteries are full of monks doing an incredible amount of sitting and focussing on the breath, and not much crazy behavior. I was on vacation the last two weeks, in the woods with my family, and did a little sitting when I had the chance. During my last meditation I had what I think was a genuine experience of samatha, and it gave me a new appreciation for this quality. I started focussing on the breath, and found that, instead of my usual restlessness, I could focus on the breath without much thought and without any nervousness arising. Instead, I started to settle deeper and deeper into a very awake but relaxed appreciation of the breath. For me, the result was fantastic. Instead of being interested in the 'nature of reality and self' or whatever my mind would usually crave, my mind pretty much subsided, my body became very still and I could just enjoy the gentle focus on the breathing. It seemed that I understood the moment a lot better in this mode, because it was so much easier to *be*. In other words, I found that samatha, when experienced, really gives Vipassana in a certain kind of way. It invites mindfulness, because there discomfort, craving and distraction subside, allowing the luminous experience of awareness to shine forth. Anyway, I emerged from this session very relaxed with clear perception and was just sort of calmly 'happy' for a while afterwards. And I felt that this was a 'real' meditation in a sense, because I really wasn't 'after' anything. It just was. Anyway, please let me know if I am misunderstanding the proper use of 'samatha' and 'vipassana'. But this is how it struck me with my understanding. Regards, Robert E. 7657 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 5:40pm Subject: Rt speech in the office Dear Gayan, --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote > > > One can follow just as many rules as one > > likes as a householder, develop satipatthana without any obstacles if one > has > > the chance to listen and consider dhamma. Possibly, these days, the latter > is > > even easier as a householder. > > yes , but householder life can be an obstacle when one has to earn the > living...etc. > For example, if one is in Marketing business, or Human Resources it is so > hard to even observe the 4th precept. I've heard many people say this. It's true there are many opportunities in a day to break the 4th precept of telling lies or for other forms of unwholesome speech such as exagerration, sarcasm, deceit and the rest. However, I really believe the obstacle is one's accumulated kilesa rather than the livelihood. I've been running a business for 15 years (with marketing and the rest) and Jon's been working as a lawyer, including several years as a crown prosecutor. I know there's ever been any need for either of us to ever tell a lie. The more confidence one has in the 'kusala way' the fewer dilemmas in this regard there are. I once had a Head of Dept who used to tell me to tell students he was in a meeting, when he didn't feel like seeing them. I'd simply say 'Dr X asked me to tell you that he was in a meeting'. my experience has always been that everyone prefers to deal with someone trustworthy and reliable and it's never hurt business at all. This doesn't mean (by a very long shot) that my speech is blameless at all. Far from it! > > yep, if I tell you a secret , I personally think that Buddha is a very Fun > man. > To me , he is like saying, " hey fools, thats not fun, what you pursue they > are not fun at all, you'll be dissappointed again and again.., > the real fun is This..etc " Well, I certainly think that we are encouraged to live our lives naturally rather than trying to copy others and the accumulations appearing now are what need to be known..not some idealised ones. Thanks for the chance to reflect for a few moments on useful speech at work.....I always appreciate reminders in this area as little exagerrations or misleading comments can come out very quickly when one's talking a lot as I have to do. It's easy to make excuses, but it really comes down to a lack of awareness, hiri, ottappa, vaci-duccarita virati ( abstinence from wrong speech) and other wholesome factors at that moment. Let me know what you think, Sarah 7658 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 9:31pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Thanks, Jon, yes it does clarify what you are trying to say. I tend to > think that > particularly for Theravada, that purification of the vehicle would be > part of the > path. I am interested to see that you feel strongly that it is not, and > that > rather than trying to make the vehicle more receptive, one simply sees > it as > not-self and focusses on the matter of what there is to be mindful of. I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the idea of 'purification of the vehicle'. Does it refer to sila (virtue), perhaps? The Buddha did not teach that purification of any kind was necessary as a precondition to beginning the development of the path. So lack of sila/purity need not be seen as an obstacle in that sense. Better sila comes with the development of awareness and understanding. Sila and understanding are mutually supportive; the 2 can develop in tandem. > This actually makes sense to me. I assume, however, that you would try > to resist > acting on impure tendencies, such as being promiscuous, etc., which > would create > further obscurations? Since my wife is also on this list, I have no choice but to say 'of course'! Seriously though, I don't think we should regard any of our multitudinous impure tendencies as leading to further obscuration, since if we did there would be no getting on with the job of developing understanding. There is no way that we can ensure that even the severest and most 'uncharacteristic' lapse of sila does not occur in the future, so I suggest there is no point in placing store on any level of 'purification' we might, in our conceit, think we have achieved. Understanding more about the kilesa and their danger can of course be a condition for abstaining from unwholesome deeds on occasions, but no-one can say on what occasion or to what extent this will happen. Jon 7659 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The traditional teachings Herman --- Herman wrote: > > > > I agree the suttas, vinaya, abhidhamma and commentaries are there for > us to read. But the cetasikas that accompanied the writing of this > material are gone forever. > > As a simile, in the seventies/eighties there was a movement that > attempted to recreate how Baroque music must have sounded in it's > day. Instruments were made according to baroque specifications, > performance techniques of the day were researched to the hilt, the > settings in which the music was originally played were recreated etc > etc. All good and well, there was only one thing missing, the > mindstates of the composer and his/her original audience. > > Do you accept the importance of this component ie the mindstate of > the author and projected audience in determining meaning ,and it's > irretrievably lost state in the case of the Dhamma? To take your analogy of a concert, even at the premier performance of a new work the composer's mindstate (at time of completing the composition) is no longer present. But the analogy you have chosen is not without its shortcomings. Whereas music is very time- and culture-bound, realities (paramattha dhammas) are not. Seeing and visible object, attachment and aversion, these are the same now as then. Of course, some of the metaphors used in the suttas are lost to us, but this does not apply to nearly the same degree when it comes to reading the abhidhamma. Besides, when reading the teachings we are looking beyond the words themselves to the underlying message, and we have a very large body of work from which to deduce this. Having said all this, lapse of time does inevitably result in loss of meaning to some degree. With better vipaka, we would be born when the dhamma is more complete and better understood! Jon 7660 From: Larry Date: Sat Aug 25, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: Samatha, Vipassana Binh Anson wrote: >-Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? ----------------------------------------- Aha! I just had an insight. One could say, in a slightly esoteric way, that samatha is the necessary condition for anything to develop. yours in the way, Larry 7661 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 1:04am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Jon, 'The vehicle' was just my own reference to the bodymind, or physical body, personality, etc. I'm still a little unsure what role sila plays in one's development, according to Theravada doctrine, and whether one should 'work on' one's impurities or just leave them alone. Or is the idea to just treat everything with mindfulness and let things work themselves out. Another way of putting it would be: does one just follow the path and ignore karmic tendencies, or does one try to interact with them in some way? Best, Robert E. ====================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Thanks, Jon, yes it does clarify what you are trying to say. I tend to > > think that > > particularly for Theravada, that purification of the vehicle would be > > part of the > > path. I am interested to see that you feel strongly that it is not, and > > that > > rather than trying to make the vehicle more receptive, one simply sees > > it as > > not-self and focusses on the matter of what there is to be mindful of. > > I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the idea of 'purification of the > vehicle'. Does it refer to sila (virtue), perhaps? > > The Buddha did not teach that purification of any kind was necessary as a > precondition to beginning the development of the path. So lack of > sila/purity need not be seen as an obstacle in that sense. Better sila > comes with the development of awareness and understanding. Sila and > understanding are mutually supportive; the 2 can develop in tandem. > > > This actually makes sense to me. I assume, however, that you would try > > to resist > > acting on impure tendencies, such as being promiscuous, etc., which > > would create > > further obscurations? > > Since my wife is also on this list, I have no choice but to say 'of > course'! Seriously though, I don't think we should regard any of our > multitudinous impure tendencies as leading to further obscuration, since > if we did there would be no getting on with the job of developing > understanding. There is no way that we can ensure that even the severest > and most 'uncharacteristic' lapse of sila does not occur in the future, so > I suggest there is no point in placing store on any level of > 'purification' we might, in our conceit, think we have achieved. > > Understanding more about the kilesa and their danger can of course be a > condition for abstaining from unwholesome deeds on occasions, but no-one > can say on what occasion or to what extent this will happen. > > 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" 7662 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Another note: Can you imagine the Buddha being too stiff in the hips to > assume > the full lotus posture? Not really, but what about the rest of us? It > is not > unhelpful to work towards having a body that can cooperate with the best > possible > physical forms for our work. Rob E You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff hips or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;--)) ;--)) Jon 7663 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 5:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Sumane Welcome to the list from me, and thanks for coming in on this point. --- "Seylan Bank - DBD (Sumane Rathnasuriya)" wrote: > Jon, Herman & Sarah (o/a the little abhidhamma) (I'm not sure that Herman would be too pleased to be included in the same group as me!) > Knowing akusala (or even kusala) will as I understand, not contribute to > any > kusala chetana or kamma. It may help you assess & count one's merits or > update kusala a/c. There are different ways of knowing kusala and akusala. 'Counting one's merit' is, if I have understood you correctly, a recollection of the meritorious deeds we have performed. This is one kind of 'knowing'--knowing by recollecting previous moments, ie. something that has already happened. There is also the knowing at the moment of doing a kusala deed that 'I am doing something wholesome'. This is another kind of knowing. Then there is the knowing that knows by direct experience the wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of the present mental state. Finally, there is the knowing that experiences directly the true nature of the citta arising at the present moment. The first 2 kinds of knowing can themselves be either wholesome or unwholesome, and if unwholesome then, as you say, would not contribute to any kusala cetana. > Chetana will perfect with consciousness, the presence of mind thereon; > its > objective, intention/s etc. At the required instance the mindframe has > to > be constructed and executed (without any delay). I think you are saying that the cetana is of the same quality (kusala or akusala) as the moment of consciousness it accompanies. I would agree with this. > If one is to be conscious about the merit or the level of merit, a > chitta, > chetana and/or deed would convey, then the 'quality' of kusala will > deteriorate. Yes, thinking about the level of 'merit' one is accumulating in doing something kusala is no doubt unwholesome, and so detracts from the overall level of purity of the action being performed. I dare say that most of our 'wholesome actions' are, like in this example, a mixture of kusala and akusala mental states. Are we able to distinguish which moments are kusala and which akusala? > Of conscious understanding, > Sumane Thanks again for your comments. Jon 7664 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 7:21pm Subject: Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff hips > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;-- )) > ;--)) Fortunately, no, though it makes things a bit more difficult. Seriously, it is possible to meditate effectively even without getting 100% into the right position. It's just more difficult. For example, I have often and still often use a backrest when I meditate, and I have never been able to sit full lotus (Burmese is the closest I can do)--though I try to ensure that my back is properly aligned. There are physiological reasons why sitting in lotus posture (and in particular keeping your spine like a "drawn bow") exist--because the flow of prana/chi that results from this posture makes meditation quite a lot easier--once the body learns to adjust to it. It increases mental clarity end energy, for example, and enables quicker settling of the mind. But again, it is not absolutely necessary, though it is best if one can train to sit properly one does so--since concentrating & unifying the mind in jhana needs as many favorable conditions as possible (including samatha), and I may just be one of the lucky ones in figuring a way around this that only works for these khandas. :) I have also noticed (again for these khandas) that is is helpful to abstain from eating after noon if I plan on meditating in the evening- -which led me once to speculate if this wasn't one of the reasons monks abstain from eating after noon. I have found this helps get rid of mental fogginess and makes it easier to sustain concentration. Another thing I have found useful is yoga, as I believe I've mentioned, because it increases the pleasant bodily feeling that helps me sit still for the periods of time needed to concentrate & unify the mind, and it energizes the body and mind as well which also helps with this. Another thing I traditionally do is chant mantras beforehand. I find this calms the mind, much as samatha meditation does. I have found chanting few hundred "om mane pema hungs" for cultiavting lovingkindness a very effective way to remind myself what this is about as well as help settle the mind before beginning watching the breath. But again, this is only what I've found works for me. Your mileage (and others') may vary. 7665 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nature of citta (was Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Howard Welcome back. I hope you and your wife had a happy anniversary and a pleasant holiday. In a recent post to Robert you gve this description of citta as an 'act of discernment'. --- Howard wrote: > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Thank you very much for emphasizing this! I fear I was falling > into a > substantialist way of thinking, viewing a citta as a "thing" existing > for a > period of time, with the accompanying cetasikas as features of that > thing!! > Instead, of course, a citta is merely an act of discernment, a > function/operation, and the accompanying cetasikas are different > functions > associated with the same object as that discernment. Your making this > point > is very helpful to me! > ----------------------------------------------------------- I subsequently came across this passage in Bhikkhu Bodhi's 'A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' (translation of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha plus summary of commentaries) in my browsing and was reminded of your description (which was very much spot on)-- "Citta is fundamentally an activity or process of cognizing or knowing an object." The passage explains that there are 3 ways of defining citta: as agent (that which cognizes an object), as instrument (that by means of which the accompanying mental factors cognize the object) and as activity (ie. the definition given by you). Of the 3, the third definition, in terms of sheer activity, is regarded as the most adequate. Even as agent or instrument, citta should not be thought of as an agent or instrument possessing actual being in itself apart from the activity of cognizing. Citta has the characteristic of knowing an object, and the function of being a "forerunner" of the mental factors in that it presides over them and is always accompanied by them. [CMA Ch 1, Guide ot #3] I think this is helpful in reminding us of the non-substantiality of citta. Jon 7666 From: Herman Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 8:27pm Subject: Time out Dear Friends, I am going to be otherwise occupied for the next few weeks . I apologise to those who may be waiting for a reply of some sort, unfortunately it will have to wait for a few weeks. I hope the ski slopes of the South Island of New Zealand and my knees will develop a kind of synergy. I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the members of this forum, for the grace, patience, lovingkindness and wisdom extended to those who knock on the door. Groups like this reinforce in me a belief in the underlying benevolence of all that is known and unknown and all the other stuff that description misses. Ciao for now Herman 7667 From: frank kuan Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 10:41pm Subject: role of diet, eating times in meditation Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Hi Erik and others: --- Erik wrote: > I have also noticed (again for these khandas) that > is is helpful to > abstain from eating after noon if I plan on > meditating in the evening- > -which led me once to speculate if this wasn't one > of the reasons > monks abstain from eating after noon. I have found > this helps get rid > of mental fogginess and makes it easier to sustain > concentration. I completely agree, and in the pali suttas the buddha implies the same thing, but not so specifically. I believe he says something like "not eating after noon is of great benefit to your health and practice". Here's what I'm wondering though. I experimented some with eating just one meal a day, and did feel the benefits that the buddha and other cultivators describe, but I'm wondering if the way I eat now is better. Let me explain. I eat a mostly raw vegan food (veggies/fruit) diet, about 90%, with the remaining 10% being minimally steamed sprouted legumes/grains. I don't use salt, oil, dairy, spices, or any condiments. What I found is that the more non-processed/non-refined the food is, i.e. the closest it is to it's natural state, it's much easier for my body to assimilate the nutrients without the negative side effects of getting "food coma", i.e. drowsy or mentally foggy even after larger meals. I also don't overeat fatty raw foods like avocado, coconut, seeds/nuts, which can be a little hard to digest, and still case a little drowsiness if not eaten in the right proportion. So the question I propose is this: For the monks subsisting on lay people's offerings, which consists of greasy, rich, spicy, flavored foods, I would definitely not eat after noon, since your body has to work harder to digest all that. But with the food I eat, I find that instead of eating one super huge meal (have you ever seen the SIZE of the bowls monks use?), I eat my largest meal at noon, fruit for breakfost and small portion of fruit for dinner, I find it's better because I avoid the over-filling at lunch to compensate for having to pack all my daily caloric needs into one meal. Maybe my meditation hasn't gotten refined and subtle enough that I can feel an impact from digesting very light foods, but I have to say that eating a mostly raw vegan diet, my bowel movents are probabably twice as fast (from ingesting to elimination) as eating the healthiest vegetarian retaurant food. I've sat in meditation just 1 hour after eating a light dinner of fruit without feeling uncomfortable or drowsy at all. I'm curious to hear what the advanced cultivators have to say on this issue. I should mention that I'm still striving to one day only eat one LIGHT meal at lunch, but it will probably take me 4-8 years before I can seriously experiement with that. -fk > Another thing I have found useful is yoga, as I > believe I've > mentioned, because it increases the pleasant bodily > feeling that > helps me sit still for the periods of time needed to > concentrate & > unify the mind, and it energizes the body and mind > as well which also > helps with this. YES! this is a topic of great interest to me that I will respond to a a couple of weeks when I have more time. -fk 7668 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Deep Sleep As Having Sati: Re: The limits of awareness: Dear Herman How are you? You asked: "I read from your post that any mindfulness is kusala. Would it be true to say that any state where mindfulness was absent eg sleep, was therefore akusala?" What I am about to answer is very counter-intuitive. The answer is the result of my recent readings of Dhammasangani, Atthasalini and Abhidhammatthasangaha. First, the answer is No to your question "Would it be true to say that any state where mindfulness was absent eg sleep, was therefore akusala?" According to sections 431, 455,469 in Dhammasangani, there are rootless kusala resultant minds (ahetuka kusala vipaka cittani). They lack sati (recollection, mindfullness), but they are kusala, nonetheless. Now, a very counter-intuitive answer follows. Deep sleep has sati (recollection, mindfullness). It is unbelievable, indeed, but true according to abhidhamma. To elaborate a little further on this answer, all normal human beings on this planet or any other planets in all the countless universes were born as the result of sensuous healthy minds. Please see section 498 in Dhammasangani and Atthasalini. Bluntly speaking, we are what abhidhamma calls one of the eight great sensuous healthy resultant minds (attha maha kusalavipaka cittani). If our minds do not interact with the stimuli, we go back to the state of the healthy resultant minds. An example of the healthy resultant minds is our familier nightly deep sleep. Now, we turn to the participation of sati. The eight great sensuous healthy minds (attha maha kusala cittani) come with sati. Please see section 1 in Dhammasangani. Similarly, the resultant minds as the results of the eight great healthy minds also come with sati. Please see section 498 in Dhammasangani. Therefore, deep sleep being a state of one of the eight great healthy resultant minds ( attha maha kusala vipaka cittani) has recollection or mindfullness. Of course, while we are in deep sleep, our sati does not deal with stimuli of the waking world, but sati in deep sleep is in readiness to interact with them. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Herman wrote: > Dear Suan, > > I read from your post that any mindfulness is kusala. Would it be > true to say that any state where mindfulness was absent eg sleep, was > therefore akusala? > > Thank you > > herman > > --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Herman > > > > How are you? > > > > You asked: > > > > "Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a > > kusala moment?" > > > > Yes, if you are aware of anger in the sense of sati (recollection, > > mindfulness), that would be a kusala moment. > > > > The supporting Pali in the words of the Buddha is as follows. > > > > "sadosam va cittam `sadosam cittan'ti pajanati" > > > > "Monks, how does the monk live as an observer of the mind in the > > mind? .....Monks, here, the monk knows comprehensively the mind > with > > anger as the mind with anger..." > > > > The above quotation comes from Section 114, Cittanupassana, > > Mahasatipatthana Suttam, Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya. > > > > You also asked: > > > > "Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger akusala, is > all > > dana kusala?" > > > > Yes,each of them should be considered as such because kusala and > > akusala gives different results. But, awareness of akusala can > bring > > about kusala as a result. Even if one's anger has transformed one > > into a kind individual later for various reasons such as regret, > (even > > if anger served as the cause of kindness) anger at the moment of > > arising is akusala. Dana at the moment of arising is kusala even if > > motivation for it was based on calculated selfishness. > > > > > > With regards, > > > > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7669 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 26, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya --- Herman wrote: > Dear Anders, > > --- "Anders Honore" > > > Haha, it looks like it! I'll buy the Samyutta once I have 150 > dollars > > to spare. Right now, those money are earmarked for a unforseen trip > > to Rome in September. > > I have a sneaking suspicion that you are about to change the course > of history. For the sake of the inhabitants of Abenraa and Halsingor, > please buy the Samyutta and leave Rome to the Romans :-) Haha, I'm not sure if I'm supposed to take that negatively or positively. :-) Actually, a Dhamma friend of mine from the states is getting rid of his copy because he feels it's not useful to him now, and he has promised to send it to me for free! Who would have thought.... Still grateful Anders 7670 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 0:00am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Anders, > > When I re-read the first paragraph (see below) of my last post to you (without > students about to arrive this time, so no excuse;-)), it sounded rather terse > and dismissive which wasn't intended. I sincerely apologise for this and would > like to give your same comments another try;-) Thanks. > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > > > > S: I'm very reluctant still to make any comments about Mahayana texts, but you > have asked me (more than once) to do so from my understanding of > Theravada/Tipitaka texts and very sincerely, so here goes: > > A (quoting Huineng): Erroneous views keep us in defilement While right views > remove us > from it, But when we are in a position to discard both of them We are > then absolutely pure. > > S: As long as there is no idea of a 'we' to do anything and no idea of a 'we' > to be pure......For the arahat, right views are not discarded, but rather not > clung to at all. Yes, I think he's saying the same thing. > A: Within our impure mind the pure one is to be found, > And once our mind is set right, we are free from the three kinds of > beclouding (hatred, lust and illusion). > > S: Just for a moment and then the 'impure one' again. Again, the arahat has no > more of the '3 kinds', but still no lasting state or mind, pure or otherwise. When he speaks of the 'pure' mind in this case, he refers to the Nirvanic Buddha-nature (Essence of Mind). > A: If we are treading the Path of Enlightenment We need not be worried > by stumbling-blocks. > Provided we keep a constant eye on our own faults We cannot go astray > from the right path. > > S: With respect, my mother as a Christian would say the same. 'Keeping a > constant eye on our own faults' is not the same as understanding all realities > now, not just the 'faults', as anatta. I think this is just a reference to plain Sila. I've seen a lot of people who think they know, and go around telling people just how wrong they are, yet they aren't really cultivating for themselves. > A: Since every species of life has its own way of salvation They will > not interfere with or be antagonistic to one another. > But if we leave our own path and seek some other way of salvation We > shall not find it, And though we plod on till death overtakes us We > shall find only penitence in the end. > If you wish to find the true way Right action will lead you to it > directly; But if you do not strive for Buddhahood You will grope in > the dark and never find it. > > S: I haven't come across any reference in the Theravada Tipitaka urging us to > 'strive for Buddhahood'. "Buddhahood" has a different meaning in this context. In this case, it just means final liberation. In other cases, it might mean initial awakening. > S: Perhaps we can say that the most helpful way for ourselves and others is to > develop all kinds of wholesome states of mind and in particular to develop > satipatthana which alone will bring about the understanding of anatta and the > path to nibbana. Yes. I think that what he is basically saying is that if you haven't been to Singapore, you are hardly qualified to give detailed explanations of the sites to see there and how to find them. ;-) > Again no 'Bodhi' to appear in the > Buddha's original Teachings as I understand them. Stream-entry? > Anders, I've gone through this Gatha for reasons I explained and I hope it's of > interest to you. My comments in no way are to suggest criticism or any > understanding of Huineng, but merely as I read these lines with my limited > understanding of Theravada texts. Understood. > As I rather tersely suggested last time, the scope of readings, teachings and > texts for discussion is limitless, so I'd rather in future set a good example > and stick to Theravada texts and commentaries which will keep us busy for a few > lifetimes in themselves! This isn't meant to suggest that it's not helpful to > read other texts or teachings or any other writings that anyone finds useful > and I fully appreciate that we've all come from very different 'backgrounds' in > this regard. Sure. It's not a trend I intend to keep up. I was just trying to show the broadness of understandings within Buddhism (Theravada and Mahayana both). > Apologies again and look forward to hearing from you as always! Well, no apology needed, as I never took offense. Regards Anders 7671 From: Fen Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 0:08am Subject: role of diet, eating times in meditation Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Frank, Regarding eating light meal for breakfast and dinner, and one full meal for lunch, I'd like to know how you sustain your body need of calory. Is eating that little enough for your body? I've been wondering all this while. A monk might not need so much food, since they don't have to do rigorous work, they don't have to think hard (that's just my perception; correct me if I'm wrong), but as lay people, I still can't manage eating even twice a day. I do eat twice a day, on Sundays, because that's the day when my activities are least. But on usual day (Mondays through Saturdays), I usually eat thrice a day. I've ever tried to eat twice a day everyday; breakfast and dinner. But since I started to do so, my stomach never stopped give me problem( I got flatulence everyday). Subsequently I resorted to eating three time a day again. I'd like to practice eating less (twice a day) if possible, but don't really know the right way to do it. Since you've already applied it in your life, I'd like to know how you manage it. Gassho, Fen --- frank kuan wrote: > Hi Erik and others: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > I have also noticed (again for these khandas) that > > is is helpful to > > abstain from eating after noon if I plan on > > meditating in the evening- > > -which led me once to speculate if this wasn't one > > of the reasons > > monks abstain from eating after noon. I have found > > this helps get rid > > of mental fogginess and makes it easier to sustain > > concentration. > > > I completely agree, and in the pali suttas the > buddha implies the same thing, but not so > specifically. I believe he says something like "not > eating after noon is of great benefit to your health > and practice". > Here's what I'm wondering though. I experimented > some with eating just one meal a day, and did feel the > benefits that the buddha and other cultivators > describe, but I'm wondering if the way I eat now is > better. Let me explain. > I eat a mostly raw vegan food (veggies/fruit) diet, > about 90%, with the remaining 10% being minimally > steamed sprouted legumes/grains. I don't use salt, > oil, dairy, spices, or any condiments. What I found is > that the more non-processed/non-refined the food is, > i.e. the closest it is to it's natural state, it's > much easier for my body to assimilate the nutrients > without the negative side effects of getting "food > coma", i.e. drowsy or mentally foggy even after larger > meals. I also don't overeat fatty raw foods like > avocado, coconut, seeds/nuts, which can be a little > hard to digest, and still case a little drowsiness if > not eaten in the right proportion. > So the question I propose is this: For the monks > subsisting on lay people's offerings, which consists > of greasy, rich, spicy, flavored foods, I would > definitely not eat after noon, since your body has to > work harder to digest all that. But with the food I > eat, I find that instead of eating one super huge meal > (have you ever seen the SIZE of the bowls monks use?), > I eat my largest meal at noon, fruit for breakfost and > small portion of fruit for dinner, I find it's better > because I avoid the over-filling at lunch to > compensate for having to pack all my daily caloric > needs into one meal. > Maybe my meditation hasn't gotten refined and subtle > enough that I can feel an impact from digesting very > light foods, but I have to say that eating a mostly > raw vegan diet, my bowel movents are probabably twice > as fast (from ingesting to elimination) as eating the > healthiest vegetarian retaurant food. I've sat in > meditation just 1 hour after eating a light dinner of > fruit without feeling uncomfortable or drowsy at all. > I'm curious to hear what the advanced cultivators have > to say on this issue. > I should mention that I'm still striving to one day > only eat one LIGHT meal at lunch, but it will probably > take me 4-8 years before I can seriously experiement > with that. > > > -fk > > > > > > > Another thing I have found useful is yoga, as I > > believe I've > > mentioned, because it increases the pleasant bodily > > feeling that > > helps me sit still for the periods of time needed to > > concentrate & > > unify the mind, and it energizes the body and mind > > as well which also > > helps with this. > > YES! this is a topic of great interest to me that I > will respond to a a couple of weeks when I have more > time. > > -fk > > 7672 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 0:16am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > > > ********************************************************* > > I quote people like Chah and Mun to "stretch" the boundaries of > > understanding "Theravada." These people are 100% Theravada (not > > mention some of the most acclaimed teachers of this century), yet > > they present a different view of Theravada than you (I feel tempted > > to say: "Than your abidhammic school). I'll birefly requote a small > > passage by Mun: > > I'm not sure what it means to be 100%Theravada (but that's another 'debate') Haha, true. > > All that remains is the primal mind, > > true & unchanging. > > Sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.... There's a point to my little query here. I'm not trying to say: "This view of Nirvana is correct or incorrect" or anything like that. Rather, I'm trying instigate an investigative response: So this doesn't accord with your own understanding of Theravada. Why is that? Obviously, someone isn't really enlightened since these two views are so contradictory, but who is it? Mun & Chah (and Mahayanists too) or the Abdhidhamma (which I assume, is where what you are saying is stated) and some of the commentators? How will one know which one is correct or not? Is it really beneficial to believe either is correct, if one doesn't know for himself? Will clinging to one view obstruct eventual realisation of Nibbana? What if its the "wrong" one that one takes to be true? Will that obstruct realisation of Nibbana? Will the right one? If you read the kalama sutta in this context, I think you'll find that it opens up a world of investigation in regards to conceptual thinking and views, as this sutta really just explains how these views can arise. Where does your views of Nibbana come from? Where does mine? Are any of them beneficial to the path? > Actually I don't know. Are you saying that if the commentaries written by the > arahats who helped preserve the Tipitaka don't support your interpretation that > they should be taken with a 'pinch of salt'?? No, but it struck me that this is how it might seem :-) All the "commentaries" (including Mahayana, Chah & Mun, Abhid´hamma and the commentators) should be taken with a grain of salt, if you want my opinion, as I explained above. > May I also remind you that the way I understood the literal translation (before > having looked at the Pali or commentary notes) was a little different from > yours...... Yes. > May I be a 'tad strong' to coin a Howard expression here? I think the 'problem' > is when people like yourself have read a lot of Mahayana teachings and then try > to make it all 'fit' into the 'original' Tipitaka.....It reminds me a little > when I first came to study abhidhamma having trained as a psychologist....it > took a while before I could read and consider what was in front of me as a new > 'subject' or explanation of realities without trying to make it all fit > together with my ealrlier studies. Anders, just a 'tad strong' view for your > consideration only;-)) A good point. I'm not sure if its relevant though (could be). I don't think I am trying to make it 'fit' in any way, because I rarely ever make such comparisons (actually it's only at dsg I do it!) nor do I feel the neccesity for that. I just read them, and I think the main difference is that you read them in the light of the Abidhamma, and I read them in a different light. Wrong? > Glad to hear this....keep up your school studies.....maybe a Professor of > Religions would suit you better than being a doctor - either way, keep working > hard! Actually, I don't think I'd have any interest in becoming a Professor of Religions! I am not interested in the semantics or various doctrines. Just the Dhamma-truth that it's all pointing at. > Thanks for considering my comments so carefully and in real appreciation of > your fine interest in dhamma. This post is a little rushed as I'm expecting a > group of giggling girls at my door any moment! Well, I see you made up for it in a later post. Always a great pleasure talking with you, Sarah! Anders 7673 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 0:33am Subject: Re: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Anders > > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold > > Path. > > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a > > definition > > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. > > My understanding (apparently in the minority on this list!) Haha, keep trying! If its worth it ;-) >is that the > Eightfold Path properly so called refers to the factors accompanying the > supramundane moment of attainment to one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. Well, that's news to me... > In 'A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' (translation of the > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha) it explains at Ch VII, Guide to #38 [The Four > Noble Truths]-- > > 'The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths.' > > While there is no mundane Eightfold Path as such, there is a mundane > 5-fold path. This is a moment of satipatthana, such moments being > accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors. Hmm, my own understanding of the Eightfold Path (in its "mundane form") is a daily practise to be carried out which, as illustrated in the simile of the Raft and the sea, are the expedient means to reach enlightenment. How do you relate this understanding to the passage in the Dhammapada where the Buddha praises the eightfold path as the first and foremost of all paths and practises? > 1. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as the Fourth Noble > Truth means a moment of consciousness when all 8 path-factors arise > together. This occurs only at a moment of magga-citta > (path-consciousness), ie. at one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. It is > a moment of supramundane consciousness, with Nibbana as its object. Hmm, I gather that terms like "moments of path-consciousness" achieved only at the moment one becomes a stream-entrant, once- retunrer etc. are Abhidhammic conventions. I haven'tseeen any reference of them in the Sutta Pitaka myself. > 2. There is a mundane version of the path, which is a moment when 5 (or > sometimes 6) of the factors of the eightfold path (in their 'mundane > version') arise. This refers to a moment of satipatthana (or 'mundane > path-consciousness'). Its object will be any presently appearing reality. > It may arise at any time, given the right understanding and other > conditions. > > 3. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as one of the 37 > requisites of enlightenment means, at any time before actual > enlightenment, a moment of mundane (5-fold) path-consciousness and, at or > subsequent to the first stage of enlightenment, the supramundane 8- fold > path consciousness. Thanks Jon! Certainly an entrielt different exposition of the eightfold than what I've seen before! How does your explanation of the eightfold path as a moment of consciousness realte to the sutta definition of the eightfold path (this one from the Mahasatipathhana sutta): "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. "And what is right resolve? Aspiring to renunciation, to freedom from ill will, to harmlessness: This is called right resolve. "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech. "And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from stealing, & from sexual intercourse. This is called right action. "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a noble disciple, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood. "And what is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called right effort. "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness. "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 & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which 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. 7674 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 1:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Another note: Can you imagine the Buddha being too stiff in the hips to > > assume > > the full lotus posture? Not really, but what about the rest of us? It > > is not > > unhelpful to work towards having a body that can cooperate with the best > > possible > > physical forms for our work. > > Rob E > > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff hips > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;--)) > ;--)) My immediate response is 'no' and then my secondary response is 'yes'. I think it's 'no' in the sense that no physical obstacle should be sufficient to bar someone from exercising mindfulness. On the other hand, I can't say that meditating lying down is going to have the same effect as meditating sitting up, or that slumping over is going to have the same effect as sitting up straight, or that sitting with tension in body and breathing is going to have the same effect as sitting with gentle uprightness. I am not aware of what the Buddha said on posture and position, but I know that if I sit cross-legged on the floor and watch the breath it is a very different experience in some ways than what happens if I lie down [which I do when falling asleep] and watch the breath. And if I sit and am uncomfortable with jangled nerves and tight muscles, this will be a different experience than sitting with body released, flexible and relaxed. For me, if I meditate after doing anywhere from a few minutes to a half hour of yoga stretches, my meditation seems much more balanced and easy and it is easier to be mindful. So I guess I would say that physical problems are an obstacle, although not an absolute obstacle. They make it harder, and it's already hard enough. Robert E. 7675 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 1:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: Yes, thinking about the level of 'merit' one is accumulating in doing > something kusala is no doubt unwholesome, and so detracts from the overall > level of purity of the action being performed. I dare say that most of > our 'wholesome actions' are, like in this example, a mixture of kusala and > akusala mental states. ... I wonder if it would be wholesome to be aware that one is doing a meritorious deed, but rather than feeling good about the merit, enjoying a feeling of 'giving' or gratitude, happiness for the other person who receives the gift, etc.? 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" 7676 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 1:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Rikpa, I accord very much with all your comments. You helped me recall how useful chanting 'Om' has been for me in the past, accompanied by yoga. The state of mind and body brought about by this combination is very conducive to meditation. It occured to me that physical difficulties with sitting might represent past karma, and that dealing with these physical obstacles might be a kind of visceral contact with knots in the person's makeup. Yoga looks at the body as a roadmap of the person's actions, results and tendencies, which I think is interesting. We can imagine how someone shy might develop a rounded back and hunched shoulders from looking down and away, as one easy example. As physical obstacles are worked through, parts of the body and nervous system are released, 'freed' if you will. This is also conducive to progress in meditation. I appreciated your mention of the flow of prana/chi in the sitting position as an aid to meditation. I agree. I think the Buddha was aware of all of these factors but perhaps didn't directly identify all of them? I mentioned to Anders on another list that I thought Buddha might have been influenced by the yoga of his day, and then adapted it from the standpoint of his own realization. For instance, the Ashtanga [eightfold] path of Patanjali, who wrote the Yoga Sutras, and the Eightfold Path of Buddha might have something in common. Anders seemed to think that Buddha's methods were completely original and not influenced by Yoga. I wonder if any of the scholars here have any knowledge of this? Best, Robert E. ===================================== --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with > stiff hips > > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;-- > )) > > ;--)) > > Fortunately, no, though it makes things a bit more difficult. > Seriously, it is possible to meditate effectively even without > getting 100% into the right position. It's just more difficult. For > example, I have often and still often use a backrest when I meditate, > and I have never been able to sit full lotus (Burmese is the closest > I can do)--though I try to ensure that my back is properly aligned. > > There are physiological reasons why sitting in lotus posture (and in > particular keeping your spine like a "drawn bow") exist--because the > flow of prana/chi that results from this posture makes meditation > quite a lot easier--once the body learns to adjust to it. > > It increases mental clarity end energy, for example, and enables > quicker settling of the mind. But again, it is not absolutely > necessary, though it is best if one can train to sit properly one > does so--since concentrating & unifying the mind in jhana needs as > many favorable conditions as possible (including samatha), and I may > just be one of the lucky ones in figuring a way around this that only > works for these khandas. :) > > I have also noticed (again for these khandas) that is is helpful to > abstain from eating after noon if I plan on meditating in the evening- > -which led me once to speculate if this wasn't one of the reasons > monks abstain from eating after noon. I have found this helps get rid > of mental fogginess and makes it easier to sustain concentration. > > Another thing I have found useful is yoga, as I believe I've > mentioned, because it increases the pleasant bodily feeling that > helps me sit still for the periods of time needed to concentrate & > unify the mind, and it energizes the body and mind as well which also > helps with this. > > Another thing I traditionally do is chant mantras beforehand. I find > this calms the mind, much as samatha meditation does. I have found > chanting few hundred "om mane pema hungs" for cultiavting > lovingkindness a very effective way to remind myself what this is > about as well as help settle the mind before beginning watching the > breath. > > But again, this is only what I've found works for me. Your mileage > (and others') may vary. > > ===== 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" 7677 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 1:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Anders, Thanks for quoting the description of the eightfold path, particularly the concise description of the four jhanas, which I found very useful. Robert E. ======================== --- Anders Honore wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Anders > > > > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane > Eightfold > > > Path. > > > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a > > > definition > > > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. > > > > My understanding (apparently in the minority on this list!) > > Haha, keep trying! If its worth it ;-) > > >is that the > > Eightfold Path properly so called refers to the factors > accompanying the > > supramundane moment of attainment to one of the 4 stages of > enlightenment. > > Well, that's news to me... > > > In 'A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' (translation of the > > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha) it explains at Ch VII, Guide to #38 [The > Four > > Noble Truths]-- > > > > 'The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the > Noble > > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path > factors > > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths.' > > > > While there is no mundane Eightfold Path as such, there is a mundane > > 5-fold path. This is a moment of satipatthana, such moments being > > accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors. > > Hmm, my own understanding of the Eightfold Path (in its "mundane > form") is a daily practise to be carried out which, as illustrated in > the simile of the Raft and the sea, are the expedient means to reach > enlightenment. > How do you relate this understanding to the passage in the Dhammapada > where the Buddha praises the eightfold path as the first and foremost > of all paths and practises? > > > 1. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as the Fourth > Noble > > Truth means a moment of consciousness when all 8 path-factors arise > > together. This occurs only at a moment of magga-citta > > (path-consciousness), ie. at one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. > It is > > a moment of supramundane consciousness, with Nibbana as its object. > > Hmm, I gather that terms like "moments of path-consciousness" > achieved only at the moment one becomes a stream-entrant, once- > retunrer etc. are Abhidhammic conventions. I haven'tseeen any > reference of them in the Sutta Pitaka myself. > > > 2. There is a mundane version of the path, which is a moment when > 5 (or > > sometimes 6) of the factors of the eightfold path (in their 'mundane > > version') arise. This refers to a moment of satipatthana > (or 'mundane > > path-consciousness'). Its object will be any presently appearing > reality. > > It may arise at any time, given the right understanding and other > > conditions. > > > > 3. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as one of the 37 > > requisites of enlightenment means, at any time before actual > > enlightenment, a moment of mundane (5-fold) path-consciousness and, > at or > > subsequent to the first stage of enlightenment, the supramundane 8- > fold > > path consciousness. > > Thanks Jon! Certainly an entrielt different exposition of the > eightfold than what I've seen before! > How does your explanation of the eightfold path as a moment of > consciousness realte to the sutta definition of the eightfold path > (this one from the Mahasatipathhana sutta): > > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge > with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice > leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. > > "And what is right resolve? Aspiring to renunciation, to freedom from > ill will, to harmlessness: This is called right resolve. > > "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive > speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called > right speech. > > "And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from > stealing, & from sexual intercourse. This is called right action. > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a noble > disciple, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going > with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood. > > "And what is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates > desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent > for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, > unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising > of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the > maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & > culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called > right effort. > > "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk > remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & > mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the > world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind > in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, > alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to > the world. This is called right mindfulness. > > "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 & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He > enters & remains in the third jhana, of which 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. > ===== 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" 7678 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 2:10am Subject: Abhidhamma Dear Friends, I found what, to me, was a very useful summary of the Abhidhamma. I thought I would give the URL for those interested. http://tunglinkok.ca/passissue/9710/sources/teach42.htm Best, Robert E. 7679 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/23/01 10:36:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > I was touched by your moving description of your cancer 'scare'. It must > have been a very trying time for your whole family. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It was a terrible time for them. ---------------------------------------------------- > such that it helped you see things in a way you had > not seen them before. > It is true that such crises can condition useful reflection. [Note for > Erik: it is, however, not the experience itself but the reflection on it > that is the key--even though anyone would say that this level of > reflection would not have occurred absent this particular experience. So > no need to try this one!]. > > Howard, in response to the example I raised of 'spontaneous' kusala > (wholesomeness) you said the explanation was-- > > > Previous cultivation. > > This is undoubtedly true, I think. But even at such moments, kusala > effort/energy must be present. It arises with the citta, and performs its > function. Without it, no kusala whether spontaneous or not. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, hmm. I agree with respect to the 'energy' translation of 'viriya' in this case, but less so with the 'effort' translation if it is carrying a sense of intention/volition. --------------------------------------------------------------- > The texts talk of 2 kinds of kusala moments--prompted and unprompted. The > unprompted ones include those spontaneous moments. Kusala is prompted > when it arises after a reminder of some kind, whether by oneself or > another (for example, being inspired by another's good example, restraint > after reflecting on the dangers of akusala, etc). However, although in > conventional terms the difference may sometimes be seen in terms of > effort, in dhamma terms both require wholesome effort/energy co-arising at > the moment of kusala. Indeed, I believe it is true to say that the energy > factor is stronger in the spontaneous kind of kusala than in the prompted > kind. This I think highlights the difference between conventional effort > and effort/energy as a wholesome factor. > > When one reads the suttas it is useful to keep in mind this kind of > background knowledge. Although the suttas are given in conventional > language, they are often describing terms or situations that are not > conventional. > > > Current "efforts" towards kindness can only > > affect our current *action*, not our current mental state. > > I was a little puzzled by this. Surely the quality of the action is > determined by the accompanying mental states? If we do something that is > (ie. appears to be) a 'good' deed but the mental state is not wholesome, > there is no kusala of any kind. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What I meant by this is covered by what I said next, quoted below by you. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > We cannot *make* > > ourselves feel warmth and kindness at the moment. But a lifetime or > > lifetimes > > of cultivation can transform the mind into one which typically is > > loving. > > It's worth bearing in mind, I think, that we have accumulations of varying > degrees for all kinds of kusala, including even awareness and > understanding presumably (otherwise there would certainly be no hope for > us). Because of this, any kind of kusala can and does arise spontaneously > in our lives, when the conditions for its arising are present. If at such > moments there is any level of awareness of the kusala nature of the > moment, this would certainly be the further development of that kusala. > > Jon > ================================ Thanks for writing, 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) 7680 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 1:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nature of citta (was Abhidhamma and Cognitive Scie... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/26/01 8:22:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > Welcome back. I hope you and your wife had a happy anniversary and a > pleasant holiday. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks! Yes - to both! ------------------------------------------------------ > > In a recent post to Robert you gve this description of citta as an 'act of > discernment'. > > --- Howard wrote: > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Thank you very much for emphasizing this! I fear I was falling > > into a > > substantialist way of thinking, viewing a citta as a "thing" existing > > for a > > period of time, with the accompanying cetasikas as features of that > > thing!! > > Instead, of course, a citta is merely an act of discernment, a > > function/operation, and the accompanying cetasikas are different > > functions > > associated with the same object as that discernment. Your making this > > point > > is very helpful to me! > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > I subsequently came across this passage in Bhikkhu Bodhi's 'A > Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' (translation of the > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha plus summary of commentaries) in my browsing and > was reminded of your description (which was very much spot on)-- > > "Citta is fundamentally an activity or process of cognizing or knowing an > object." > > The passage explains that there are 3 ways of defining citta: as agent > (that which cognizes an object), as instrument (that by means of which the > accompanying mental factors cognize the object) and as activity (ie. the > definition given by you). Of the 3, the third definition, in terms of > sheer activity, is regarded as the most adequate. > > Even as agent or instrument, citta should not be thought of as an agent or > instrument possessing actual being in itself apart from the activity of > cognizing. > > Citta has the characteristic of knowing an object, and the function of > being a "forerunner" of the mental factors in that it presides over them > and is always accompanied by them. > [CMA Ch 1, Guide ot #3] > > I think this is helpful in reminding us of the non-substantiality of > citta. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you very much for this useful follow-up information! -------------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 7681 From: Larry Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 5:11am Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana Binh Anson wrote: .-Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? -------------------------------------------- Insight, insight, what is insight? Taking a cue from VM Matara Sri Nanarama's "The Seven Stages of Purification and The Insight Knowledges" BPS, insight is noting. Noting a breath, noting a thought, noting a feeling etc, etc. In this very noting is clear seeing of impermanence, suffering, and not self. This raises the question does insight interfere with jhana? It seems to be present in the first jhana, but dropped in subsequent jhanas. I wonder if the use of a kasina as meditation object is more conducive to higher jhana because there isn't any movement in a kasina and therefore less reminder of impermanence. The Visuddhimagga says for meditation objects the 10 kasinas and mindfulness of breathing bring absorption in all four jhanas. Perhaps other meditation objects are too interesting. Has anyone had experience using kasinas? Larry fn: a kasina is a very simple visual object similar to a mandala, see Visuddhimagga, "The Path Of Purification" BPS. ps: please feel free to jump in with corrections. I realize this discussion somewhat farfetched. L 7682 From: m. nease Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 5:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Hello, Larry, Thanks for the interesting post. --- Larry wrote: > Binh Anson wrote: > .-Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to > develop vipassana? > -------------------------------------------- > Insight, insight, what is insight? Taking a cue from > VM Matara Sri > Nanarama's "The Seven Stages of Purification and The > Insight Knowledges" > BPS, insight is noting. Noting a breath, noting a > thought, noting a > feeling etc, etc. In this very noting is clear > seeing of impermanence, > suffering, and not self. By this do you mean a kind of comprehension of 'breath', 'thought', feeling' etc.? What I mean to ask is, are the objects of 'noting' paramattha dhammas (i.e. citta, cetasika, rupa--I assume we can exclude nibbana) or are they concepts? Breath, for example, is a concept, as I understand it, analyizable into paramattha dhammas. If I understand this correctly, unless the aarammana is a paramattha dhamma, vipassanaa cannot result, even though a conceptual kind of insight can. I do personally think that conceptual insight (as opposed to sati-paññaa) is not only valuable but indispensible. Still I do think it's important to distinguish between the two. > This raises the question does insight interfere with > jhana? It seems to > be present in the first jhana, but dropped in > subsequent jhanas. I don't understand either sati or jhana very well, but I think that what's dropped after the first jhana is initial and sustained thought (vitakka vicaara). I don't think that vipassanaa (insight) is mentioned as a factor of any of the jhanas. So what I'm wondering is, could the 'noting' you refer to actually be vitakka vicaara, rather than vipassanaa? > I > wonder if the use of a kasina as meditation object > is more conducive to > higher jhana because there isn't any movement in a > kasina and therefore > less reminder of impermanence. The Visuddhimagga > says for meditation > objects the 10 kasinas and mindfulness of breathing > bring absorption in > all four jhanas. Perhaps other meditation objects > are too interesting. > Has anyone had experience using kasinas? I've often wondered about this myself. I've run across very brief, oblique references to kasina meditation in the suttas but have never seen any instructions as to their use. I had an impression a long time ago (I can't remember the source) that kasina meditation may have been commonplace among yogis before the Buddhasasana. Thanks in advance and my apologies if I've misunderstood any of your comments. mike > Larry > fn: a kasina is a very simple visual object similar > to a mandala, see > Visuddhimagga, "The Path Of Purification" BPS. > > ps: please feel free to jump in with corrections. I > realize this > discussion somewhat farfetched. > L 7683 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 6:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Hi Mike and Larry, This discussion is very interesting, and a little beyond my competence, but I wanted to make a note on one point: Mike, when you say 'breath' is a concept, I don't think this is true in terms of breath as a meditation object. Certainly the word 'breath' is a concept and to look at breath as 'breath' conceptualizes and would have to break down to more specific experiences. But when breath is used as meditation object, I was taught to use the sensation of the belly rising and falling or some other part of the body having the actual sensation of breathing, not the concept of breathing. The rising and falling of the belly or chest is the 'object' of meditation, not breath as a whole, thus it is an actual experience that is being noted, not a concept. I note 'rising/falling', not breathing out/breathing in. On another level, rising/falling may also be considered concepts if the words are taken as an object, but if noting occurs some word must be used and again, the word/concept is not the object. It is just a way of engaging the mind on the actual object, the sensation of the breath/movement in a specific area. Do I misunderstand? Robert ===================== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hello, Larry, > > Thanks for the interesting post. > > --- Larry wrote: > > > Binh Anson wrote: > > .-Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to > > develop vipassana? > > -------------------------------------------- > > > Insight, insight, what is insight? Taking a cue from > > VM Matara Sri > > Nanarama's "The Seven Stages of Purification and The > > Insight Knowledges" > > BPS, insight is noting. Noting a breath, noting a > > thought, noting a > > feeling etc, etc. In this very noting is clear > > seeing of impermanence, > > suffering, and not self. > > By this do you mean a kind of comprehension of > 'breath', 'thought', feeling' etc.? What I mean to > ask is, are the objects of 'noting' paramattha dhammas > (i.e. citta, cetasika, rupa--I assume we can exclude > nibbana) or are they concepts? Breath, for example, > is a concept, as I understand it, analyizable into > paramattha dhammas. If I understand this correctly, > unless the aarammana is a paramattha dhamma, > vipassanaa cannot result, even though a conceptual > kind of insight can. I do personally think that > conceptual insight (as opposed to sati-paññaa) is not > only valuable but indispensible. Still I do think > it's important to distinguish between the two. > > > This raises the question does insight interfere with > > jhana? It seems to > > be present in the first jhana, but dropped in > > subsequent jhanas. > > I don't understand either sati or jhana very well, but > I think that what's dropped after the first jhana is > initial and sustained thought (vitakka vicaara). I > don't think that vipassanaa (insight) is mentioned as > a factor of any of the jhanas. So what I'm wondering > is, could the 'noting' you refer to actually be > vitakka vicaara, rather than vipassanaa? > > > I > > wonder if the use of a kasina as meditation object > > is more conducive to > > higher jhana because there isn't any movement in a > > kasina and therefore > > less reminder of impermanence. The Visuddhimagga > > says for meditation > > objects the 10 kasinas and mindfulness of breathing > > bring absorption in > > all four jhanas. Perhaps other meditation objects > > are too interesting. > > Has anyone had experience using kasinas? > > I've often wondered about this myself. I've run > across very brief, oblique references to kasina > meditation in the suttas but have never seen any > instructions as to their use. I had an impression a > long time ago (I can't remember the source) that > kasina meditation may have been commonplace among > yogis before the Buddhasasana. > > Thanks in advance and my apologies if I've > misunderstood any of your comments. > > mike > > > Larry > > fn: a kasina is a very simple visual object similar > > to a mandala, see > > Visuddhimagga, "The Path Of Purification" BPS. > > > > ps: please feel free to jump in with corrections. I > > realize this > > discussion somewhat farfetched. > > L > ===== 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" 7684 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 7:32am Subject: How vipassana sees -Howard Dear Howard, I have this unpublished extract of a conversation between But Sawong, a Cambodian vipassana teacher and A. Sujin that might have some bearing on your questions about how panna knows the characteristic of dhammas. Dhamma Discussion in the Sam Paothong Temple But Sawong: For people who develop satipatthåna it is natural that sometimes the sense-door process is hidden by the mind-door process and that one therefore cannot see realities as they are. How does that happen? I ask this to help people not to go the wrong way. Sujin: At this moment realities are appearing, such as seeing arising in the eye-door process. However, people do not know the true nature of what appears, they take what they see for people and things. Therefore, the thinking on account of what was seen, thus, the thinking of people and things, hides the truth. In reality dhammas appear for an extremely short moment, they arise and then fall away immediately. Thus, the thinking in a mind-door process is hiding the sense-door processes. At this moment it is not evident that what appears through the eyes falls away. It seems that one sees all the time, but in reality there are cittas of a mind-door process arising and falling away in succession in between the citta that sees and the citta that hears, and these cittas arise each in a different sense-door process. When we speak about the eye-door, people understand, because they are seeing. When we speak about the ear-door, people understand because they are hearing. When we smell the fragrant odour of a flower, there is an experience through the nose-door. A delicious or an unsavoury flavour is a rúpa that appears through the tongue-door. At this moment heat, cold, softness or hardness appear through the bodysense. However, one does not know that when each of these sense-door processes has fallen away, a mind-door process has to succeed that sense-door process immediately, after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between 1 . Thus, at this moment it seems that there is seeing and then immediately hearing, and one does not know when the mind-door process arises. There are different sense-door processes arising and falling away one after the other, and this can be known because there is a mind-door process in between. However, that does not mean that one realizes the characteristic of the mind-door process. One may merely know that when a sense-door process does not arise and there are only cittas which are thinking, that there must be cittas arising in a mind-door process. But Sawong: Can satipatthåna arise in a sense-door process? Sujin: Let us speak about the different processes. At this moment there are an eye-door process and an ear-door process. Can sati arise? When sati of satipaììhåna arises, of what characteristic of reality is it aware? But Sawong: I would like to ask whether satipatthåna can occur during the kusala javana-cittas of the eye-door process or the ear-door process? 2 Sujin: I would like to explain that if there is paññå that understands the dhammas appearing at this moment, it can realize that, when there is seeing, there is visible object that appears, and that the citta which sees at this moment is a reality that experiences. Can satipatthåna arise? At this moment I do not speak about the theory, I speak about the characteristics that really appear and that can be understood. If someone would ask whether satipatthåna could arise in a sense-door process, he should understand, while seeing now, that seeing arises in a sense-door process. It is the same in the case of hearing, or the experience of softness, hardness, cold or heat through the bodysense at this moment. These experiences arise in sense-door processes. Can satipatthåna arise? We should carefully consider and investigate the Dhamma we have heard. It is not sufficient to just listen and to agree with what one has heard. We must investigate whether it is the truth we have heard or not. If satipaììhåna arises now of what is it aware? If satipatthåna does not arise, the nåma and rúpa of just a moment ago have fallen away, but people did not derive any benefit from them since they did not realize the true nature of those dhammas. If satipatthåna does arise, it is not aware of anything else but the characteristic of the reality that is appearing at this moment through whatever doorway. When satipatthåna arising with mahå-kusala citta 2 in a mind-door process knows a characteristic of a reality appearing through one of the six doorways, it does not arise in the same process as that reality. When satipaììhåna arising in a mind-door process investigates a characteristic of rúpa, it realizes rúpa that appears through one of the sensedoors. If satipatthåna is aware of a nåma dhamma, it knows a nåma that arose and fell away. That nåma arose and fell away, but that characteristic still appears, so that it can be studied and correctly understood as a characteristic of nåma dhamma, different from rúpa dhamma. The arising and falling away of realities is extremely rapid. Is there anybody who can, while there is seeing, discern the eye-door process that has fallen away, the bhavanga-cittas that arise in between sense-door process and mind-door process, and the mind-door process cittas that experience what appeared through the eye-door? Is there anybody who can distinguish between the sense-door process and the mind-door process? When softness or hardness is appearing, and sati is aware of the characteristic that appears, can anybody tell through which doorway that characteristic appears? The paññå that can distinguish the difference between the mind-door and the sense-door must be insight-knowledge, vipassanå ñåna 3. If one asks a person who studies the Dhamma in which kinds of processes mahå-kusala citta can arise, the answer is in the sense-door processes and in the mind-door process. It can be known when mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå arises in a sense-door process, because at that moment paññå knows a characteristic of rúpa. When satipaììhåna arises in a mind-door process it can arise alternately in a sense-door process 4 . Paññå that accompanies kusala citta arising in a mind-door process can gradually have more understanding of realities, and it can also penetrate the true nature of rúpa. Footnotes 1. Seeing , hearing and the other sense-cognitions arise in a series or process of cittas that each perform their own function. There are sense-door processes and mind-door processes. When a sense-door process has fallen away it is followed by a mind-door process of cittas that experience the sense object which was experienced by cittas arising in that sense-door process and which has just fallen away. Visible object, for example, that is experienced by cittas arising in the eye-door process, is also experienced by cittas arising in the following process, which is the mind-door process. These cittas just experience the visible object, they do not think about it. Thinking of shape and form, of concepts of people and things can arise later on, in other mind-door processes. 2. In the sense-door processes and in the mind-door process there are, in the case of non-arahats, seven javana-cittas, kusala cittas or akusala cittas that experience the object in a wholesome way or in an unwholesome way. The term mahå-kusala citta is used for kusala citta of the sense sphere. Mahå-kusala citta can be accompanied by paññå or unaccompanied by paññå. When there are conditions, mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå can arise also in a sense-door process. 3. There are several stages of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa. The first stage is distinguishing the difference between nåma and rúpa and this arises in a mind-door process. Rúpa can be known through a sense-door and through the mind-door, and nåma can only be known through the mind-door. Thus, the difference between nåma and rúpa is known through the mind-door. Now, at this moment, the mind-door is covered up by the sense-doors, but at that stage of insight knowledge it is understood what the mind-door is. Acharn Sujin explains in ³A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas², Part V, Ch 2, The Stages of Insight: ³The rúpas which are sense-objects are experienced through the corresponding sense-doors and after each sense-door process the object is experienced through the mind-door. However, when there is no vipassanå ñåùa, insight knowledge, the mind-door process does not appear, it is as it were hidden by the sense objects experienced in the sense-door processes. At the moments of vipassanå ñåùa, rúpas appear very clearly through the mind-door, and at that moment the mind-door hides as it were the sense-doors. Then the situation is opposite to the moments when there is no vipassanå ñåùa.² 4. The different processes arise one after the other extremely rapidly. 5. A reality does not come from anywhere when it arises, it does not exist before its arising. Therefore one can say: it is not. . 7685 From: m. nease Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 8:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Dear Robert, Thanks very much for this response. I'm not at all sure of my ground here and really welcome the opportunity to investigate it a little more. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Mike, when you say 'breath' is a concept, I don't > think this is true in terms of > breath as a meditation object. Certainly the word > 'breath' is a concept and to > look at breath as 'breath' conceptualizes and would > have to break down to more > specific experiences. This is exactly to the point (please see below). > But when breath is used as meditation object, I was > taught to use the sensation of > the belly rising and falling or some other part of > the body having the actual > sensation of breathing, not the concept of > breathing. The rising and falling of > the belly or chest is the 'object' of meditation, > not breath as a whole, thus it > is an actual experience that is being noted, not a > concept. This is just as I was taught and practiced for many years. So the question to my mind is, were we taught correctly? I believe this distinction between paramattha dhammas and other dhammas (that is that only the former can be the foundations of satipatthaana) is the crux of the difference between the Buddhadhamma with and without abhidhamma. As well as I understand it, this has to do with the very specific meaning of anicca according to the abhidhamma--that is that it's easy to understand conceptually that everything is impermanent--but that the extreme brevity of all dhammas as elucidated by the abhidhamma has very different implications from those of the ordinary idea of impermanence. > I note 'rising/falling', not breathing out/breathing > in. On another level, > rising/falling may also be considered concepts if > the words are taken as an > object, but if noting occurs some word must be used > and again, the word/concept is > not the object. It is just a way of engaging the > mind on the actual object, the > sensation of the breath/movement in a specific area. Unless I'm mistaken (as is usually the case), the practically countless numbers of cittas (arising and subsiding at the body-sense-door and the mind-door) that constitute the experience of a single in-breath or out-breath have arisen and subsided long before the conditions for the arising of the word 'rising' or 'falling' can occur. If this is true, then 'notings' of in-breath, out-breath, feeling etc. occur retropectively and with concepts (recollections) as the aarammanas rather than the paramattha dhammas, the recollection of which (in part) condition the arising of the concepts. If this also is true, then insights arising from these retrospections can only be conceptual and can surely contribute to conceptual understanding of the Dhamma but not (directly) to liberation. So, as a way of engaging the mind (citta) on the object (aarammana) how can 'noting' be accomplished before the instant of experience has vanished forever? > Do I misunderstand? I don't know if I understand, myself. I don't know the answers, but I do thank you for your patience and for the opportunity to discuss these crucial questions. mike > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Hello, Larry, > > > > Thanks for the interesting post. > > > > --- Larry wrote: > > > > > Binh Anson wrote: > > > .-Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition > to > > > develop vipassana? > > > -------------------------------------------- > > > > > Insight, insight, what is insight? Taking a cue > from > > > VM Matara Sri > > > Nanarama's "The Seven Stages of Purification and > The > > > Insight Knowledges" > > > BPS, insight is noting. Noting a breath, noting > a > > > thought, noting a > > > feeling etc, etc. In this very noting is clear > > > seeing of impermanence, > > > suffering, and not self. > > > > By this do you mean a kind of comprehension of > > 'breath', 'thought', feeling' etc.? What I mean > to > > ask is, are the objects of 'noting' paramattha > dhammas > > (i.e. citta, cetasika, rupa--I assume we can > exclude > > nibbana) or are they concepts? Breath, for > example, > > is a concept, as I understand it, analyizable into > > paramattha dhammas. If I understand this > correctly, > > unless the aarammana is a paramattha dhamma, > > vipassanaa cannot result, even though a conceptual > > kind of insight can. I do personally think that > > conceptual insight (as opposed to sati-paññaa) is > not > > only valuable but indispensible. Still I do think > > it's important to distinguish between the two. > > > > > This raises the question does insight interfere > with > > > jhana? It seems to > > > be present in the first jhana, but dropped in > > > subsequent jhanas. > > > > I don't understand either sati or jhana very well, > but > > I think that what's dropped after the first jhana > is > > initial and sustained thought (vitakka vicaara). > I > > don't think that vipassanaa (insight) is mentioned > as > > a factor of any of the jhanas. So what I'm > wondering > > is, could the 'noting' you refer to actually be > > vitakka vicaara, rather than vipassanaa? > > > > > I > > > wonder if the use of a kasina as meditation > object > > > is more conducive to > > > higher jhana because there isn't any movement in > a > > > kasina and therefore > > > less reminder of impermanence. The Visuddhimagga > > > says for meditation > > > objects the 10 kasinas and mindfulness of > breathing > > > bring absorption in > > > all four jhanas. Perhaps other meditation > objects > > > are too interesting. > > > Has anyone had experience using kasinas? > > > > I've often wondered about this myself. I've run > > across very brief, oblique references to kasina > > meditation in the suttas but have never seen any > > instructions as to their use. I had an impression > a > > long time ago (I can't remember the source) that > > kasina meditation may have been commonplace among > > yogis before the Buddhasasana. > > > > Thanks in advance and my apologies if I've > > misunderstood any of your comments. > > > > mike > > > > > Larry > > > fn: a kasina is a very simple visual object > similar > > > to a mandala, see > > > Visuddhimagga, "The Path Of Purification" BPS. > > > > > > ps: please feel free to jump in with > corrections. I > > > realize this > > > discussion somewhat farfetched. > > > L 7686 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 10:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Dear Mike, I also love these sorts of detailed investigations. We may not know exactly what we're doing, but hopefully through making sensible distinctions, we can progress in understanding. One of the instructions I had from my one and only Vipassana meditation teacher [who studied extensively at the Barre, Mass. Vipassana Center and whose view I trust very strongly in any case] was to 'rub the object', and my recollection was that this meant to 'touch' the rising and falling with the breath and also with the noting so that it was not a noting at a different moment than the breath, but went through the experience of the rising/falling. The noting would get more and more gentle and integrated with the experience of the breathing, so that the mind would become more and more attentive to the experience. In this way the noting was not only meant to occupy the mind and give basic concentration of the mind onto the breathing, but also to engage the mind more and more specifically with the experience of the breathing. I believe that as this concentration increased, the breathing experience *would* break down into smaller and smaller units and gradually approach more refined levels of mindfulness. \ I think a mistake we can make is to put undo attention on the verbal aspect of 'noting', which I believe is meant to eventually disappear into the experience of mindfulness as the attention gets fully fixed on the infinitely minute experience of the breathing. Then the verbal noting might continue, but it is the pointer rather than the object and doesn't have to be attended when it is in good working order. I could go on, but I would risk confusing myself! Best, Robert ============================= --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thanks very much for this response. I'm not at all > sure of my ground here and really welcome the > opportunity to investigate it a little more. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Mike, when you say 'breath' is a concept, I don't > > think this is true in terms of > > breath as a meditation object. Certainly the word > > 'breath' is a concept and to > > look at breath as 'breath' conceptualizes and would > > have to break down to more > > specific experiences. > > This is exactly to the point (please see below). > > > But when breath is used as meditation object, I was > > taught to use the sensation of > > the belly rising and falling or some other part of > > the body having the actual > > sensation of breathing, not the concept of > > breathing. The rising and falling of > > the belly or chest is the 'object' of meditation, > > not breath as a whole, thus it > > is an actual experience that is being noted, not a > > concept. > > This is just as I was taught and practiced for many > years. So the question to my mind is, were we taught > correctly? > > I believe this distinction between paramattha dhammas > and other dhammas (that is that only the former can be > the foundations of satipatthaana) is the crux of the > difference between the Buddhadhamma with and without > abhidhamma. As well as I understand it, this has to > do with the very specific meaning of anicca according > to the abhidhamma--that is that it's easy to > understand conceptually that everything is > impermanent--but that the extreme brevity of all > dhammas as elucidated by the abhidhamma has very > different implications from those of the ordinary idea > of impermanence. > > > I note 'rising/falling', not breathing out/breathing > > in. On another level, > > rising/falling may also be considered concepts if > > the words are taken as an > > object, but if noting occurs some word must be used > > and again, the word/concept is > > not the object. It is just a way of engaging the > > mind on the actual object, the > > sensation of the breath/movement in a specific area. > > Unless I'm mistaken (as is usually the case), the > practically countless numbers of cittas (arising and > subsiding at the body-sense-door and the mind-door) > that constitute the experience of a single in-breath > or out-breath have arisen and subsided long before the > conditions for the arising of the word 'rising' or > 'falling' can occur. If this is true, then 'notings' > of in-breath, out-breath, feeling etc. occur > retropectively and with concepts (recollections) as > the aarammanas rather than the paramattha dhammas, the > recollection of which (in part) condition the arising > of the concepts. If this also is true, then insights > arising from these retrospections can only be > conceptual and can surely contribute to conceptual > understanding of the Dhamma but not (directly) to > liberation. > > So, as a way of engaging the mind (citta) on the > object (aarammana) how can 'noting' be accomplished > before the instant of experience has vanished forever? > > > Do I misunderstand? > > I don't know if I understand, myself. I don't know > the answers, but I do thank you for your patience and > for the opportunity to discuss these crucial > questions. > > mike > ===== 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" 7687 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 11:13am Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana --- "m. nease" wrote: > > But when breath is used as meditation object, I was > > taught to use the sensation of > > the belly rising and falling or some other part of > > the body having the actual > > sensation of breathing, not the concept of > > breathing. The rising and falling of > > the belly or chest is the 'object' of meditation, > > not breath as a whole, thus it > > is an actual experience that is being noted, not a > > concept. > > This is just as I was taught and practiced for many > years. So the question to my mind is, were we taught > correctly? You may wish to check the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta for references. If by the word "correct" you mean according to the Buddha's actual teachings, it would appear so. What did you notice with this practice? Did knowledge & remembrance increase or decrease? > I believe this distinction between paramattha dhammas > and other dhammas (that is that only the former can be > the foundations of satipatthaana) is the crux of the > difference between the Buddhadhamma with and without > abhidhamma. At the conceptual level, yes. At the level of Satipatthana, I am not familiar with where the Buddha spoke about it in these terms. The Buddha pointed out objects one can usefully concentrate on as a way of establishing mindfulness, which is, after all, "knowledge & remembrance." For example, "mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance." The body is not, as far as I can tell, a paramattha dhamma. > As well as I understand it, this has to > do with the very specific meaning of anicca according > to the abhidhamma--that is that it's easy to > understand conceptually that everything is > impermanent--but that the extreme brevity of all > dhammas as elucidated by the abhidhamma has very > different implications from those of the ordinary idea > of impermanence. Indeed, and the problem is that by merely thinking about anicca, or merely thinking about paramattha dhammas, doesn't seem to be a very conducive way to realize them directly. At least not to me. There seems to be a need to work with more realistic objects, such as the breath, before mindfulness is established to where one has the concentration where one can directly see these very subtle things. The Buddha speaks of the five hindrances, the five aggregates, the ayatanas, etc. For example "how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no further appearance in the future of a fetter that has been abandoned." Here the Buddha speaks of the "fetters" dependent on these forms arising from the eyesense. There is no mention of "paramattha dhammas" here, as far as I can tell. What I see being pointed at is to observe what is being provoked in the mind by whatever comes in through the sense-doors. For example, if a beatiful woman appears to you (or whatever you prefer), to note: "'there is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, [you] discern that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' [You] discern how there is the arising of unarisen sensual desire. And [you] discern how there is the abandoning of sensual desire once it has arisen. And [you] discern how there is no further appearance in the future of sensual desire that has been abandoned." Likewise, if there is a nice smell, to note the arising and passing away of the fetter that arises in dependence on that, etc. The Buddha continues: "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the four noble truths. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the four noble truths? There is the case where he discerns, as it is actually present, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress.'" This seems pretty conceptual to me. In fact, I am not sure how it is possible to perform mindfulness meditation without concepts being present at least initially. There has to be some object of focus to sink your teewth into at first. Otherwise, how could sati possibly arise? Where would the focus be without an object you're directing the mind to? Where would you get "traction" without at least initially focusing on a coarser object until the mind settles into a state of non-distractedness? For example, if one were to simply attempt to observe arising and passing away of sensory stimuli, without any focus at all, that sounds suspiciously to me like it is suggesting "remaing UNfocused," which would appear to me to be the opposite of the instructions in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta where the Buddha begins each of the Four Frames of Reference with "remaining focused." And the "remaining focused" part is the key to establishing mindfulness. It is the act of focusing on an object that enables one to establish Right Mindfulness. This serves then as the basis for Right Concentration to arise. If there is no object of focus then it seems rather improbable that either Right Mindfulness could have cause to arise, not to mention Right Concentration! "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness. > Unless I'm mistaken (as is usually the case), the > practically countless numbers of cittas (arising and > subsiding at the body-sense-door and the mind-door) > that constitute the experience of a single in-breath > or out-breath have arisen and subsided long before the > conditions for the arising of the word 'rising' or > 'falling' can occur. If this is true, then 'notings' > of in-breath, out-breath, feeling etc. occur > retropectively and with concepts (recollections) as > the aarammanas rather than the paramattha dhammas, the > recollection of which (in part) condition the arising > of the concepts. If this also is true, then insights > arising from these retrospections can only be > conceptual and can surely contribute to conceptual > understanding of the Dhamma but not (directly) to > liberation. It is helpful to remember that the purpose of mindfulness is a form of training the mind to remain focused, without wandering, on an object. Until this sort of focus is established, there is no mindfulness. To think mindfulness can arise without this sort of focus seems rather unrealistic. How can there be "knowledge & remembrance" without an object of focus? What is known & remembered? For example, it would seem rather difficult to remain focused on a barrage of sensory stimuli appearing through the sense-doors and have any degree of mindfulness at all. How can there be "remembrance" in such a case? What is there to be mindful of, when there are millions of cittas arising and passing away? If it is impossible to directly know a single moment of citta, then it seems equally impossible that one could remember that single moment of citta. Remembrance cannot occur without knowing something in the first place! But the proof of the pudding is in the tasting, as it were. It is truly fortunate that it is possible to put into practice the teachings the Buddha taught on "remaining focused" on these objects of meditation as the Buddha instructed in the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, and thus test these instructions out directly, and see if they do in fact lead to establishing "knowledge & remembrance"--to a noticeable degree. One can likewise compare this to what happens when remaining "unfocused" and compare the results of that in terms of knowledge & remembrance (sati). If knowledge & remembrance noticeably increase with a given practice, then there is the development of sati, and the more one's focus is esatblished (non-distractedness), the subtler the things that become visible, because the mind is undistracted--"tied to the post of mindfulness"--which is necessary for Right Concentration to arise. If knowledge & remembrance (sati) are not observed to increase with a given practice, then that would appear not to be a practice conducive to Rigtht Mindfulness. 7688 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 10:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How vipassana sees -Howard Robert, This material is absolutely fantastic. Thank you for sharing it. How the sensory experience of rupa is succeeded and carried forward by a mind-door process and the intervening mental factors, is getting down to the real nuts and bolts of both experience and vipassana. Anyone who has insight into how to track the transitions from one process to the next, as outlined in the talk below, it would be greatly appreciated and a great topic for further explication. This is practical and concrete advice which can give the practitioner hope of eventually seeing the mechanism by which realities are constructed by the mind. Best, Robert E. ================================ --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Howard, > I have this unpublished extract of a conversation between But > Sawong, a Cambodian vipassana teacher and A. Sujin that might > have some bearing on your questions about how panna knows the > characteristic of dhammas. > Dhamma Discussion in the Sam Paothong Temple > > But Sawong: For people who develop satipatthåna it is natural > that sometimes the sense-door process is hidden by the > mind-door process and that one therefore cannot see realities as > they are. How does that happen? I ask this to help people not to > go the wrong way. > > Sujin: At this moment realities are appearing, such as seeing > arising in the eye-door process. However, people do not know the > true nature of what appears, they take what they see for people > and things. Therefore, the thinking on account of what was seen, > thus, the thinking of people and things, hides the truth. In > reality dhammas appear for an extremely short moment, they arise > and then fall away immediately. Thus, the thinking in a > mind-door process is hiding the sense-door processes. At this > moment it is not evident that what appears through the eyes > falls away. It seems that one sees all the time, but in reality > there are cittas of a mind-door process arising and falling away > in succession in between the citta that sees and the citta that > hears, and these cittas arise each in a different sense-door > process. > > When we speak about the eye-door, people understand, because > they are seeing. When we speak about the ear-door, people > understand because they are hearing. When we smell the fragrant > odour of a flower, there is an experience through the nose-door. > A delicious or an unsavoury flavour is a rúpa that appears > through the tongue-door. At this moment heat, cold, softness or > hardness appear through the bodysense. However, one does not > know that when each of these sense-door processes has fallen > away, a mind-door process has to succeed that sense-door process > immediately, after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between 1 > . Thus, at this moment it seems that there is seeing and then > immediately hearing, and one does not know when the mind-door > process arises. There are different sense-door processes arising > and falling away one after the other, and this can be known > because there is a mind-door process in between. However, that > does not mean that one realizes the characteristic of the > mind-door process. One may merely know that when a sense-door > process does not arise and there are only cittas which are > thinking, that there must be cittas arising in a mind-door > process. > > But Sawong: Can satipatthåna arise in a sense-door process? > > Sujin: Let us speak about the different processes. At this > moment there are an eye-door process and an ear-door process. > Can sati arise? When sati of satipaììhåna arises, of what > characteristic of reality is it aware? > > But Sawong: I would like to ask whether satipatthåna can occur > during the kusala javana-cittas of the eye-door process or the > ear-door process? 2 > > Sujin: I would like to explain that if there is paññå that > understands the dhammas appearing at this moment, it can realize > that, when there is seeing, there is visible object that > appears, and that the citta which sees at this moment is a > reality that experiences. Can satipatthåna arise? At this moment > I do not speak about the theory, I speak about the > characteristics that really appear and that can be understood. > If someone would ask whether satipatthåna could arise in a > sense-door process, he should understand, while seeing now, that > seeing arises in a sense-door process. It is the same in the > case of hearing, or the experience of softness, hardness, cold > or heat through the bodysense at this moment. These experiences > arise in sense-door processes. Can satipatthåna arise? We should > carefully consider and investigate the Dhamma we have heard. It > is not sufficient to just listen and to agree with what one has > heard. We must investigate whether it is the truth we have heard > or not. If satipaììhåna arises now of what is it aware? > > If satipatthåna does not arise, the nåma and rúpa of just a > moment ago have fallen away, but people did not derive any > benefit from them since they did not realize the true nature of > those dhammas. If satipatthåna does arise, it is not aware of > anything else but the characteristic of the reality that is > appearing at this moment through whatever doorway. When > satipatthåna arising with mahå-kusala citta 2 in a mind-door > process knows a characteristic of a reality appearing through > one of the six doorways, it does not arise in the same process > as that reality. When satipaììhåna arising in a mind-door > process investigates a characteristic of rúpa, it realizes rúpa > that appears through one of the sensedoors. If satipatthåna is > aware of a nåma dhamma, it knows a nåma that arose and fell > away. That nåma arose and fell away, but that characteristic > still appears, so that it can be studied and correctly > understood as a characteristic of nåma dhamma, different from > rúpa dhamma. The arising and falling away of realities is > extremely rapid. > > Is there anybody who can, while there is seeing, discern the > eye-door process that has fallen away, the bhavanga-cittas that > arise in between sense-door process and mind-door process, and > the mind-door process cittas that experience what appeared > through the eye-door? Is there anybody who can distinguish > between the sense-door process and the mind-door process? When > softness or hardness is appearing, and sati is aware of the > characteristic that appears, can anybody tell through which > doorway that characteristic appears? The paññå that can > distinguish the difference between the mind-door and the > sense-door must be insight-knowledge, vipassanå ñåna 3. > > If one asks a person who studies the Dhamma in which kinds of > processes mahå-kusala citta can arise, the answer is in the > sense-door processes and in the mind-door process. It can be > known when mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå arises in a > sense-door process, because at that moment paññå knows a > characteristic of rúpa. When satipaììhåna arises in a mind-door > process it can arise alternately in a sense-door process 4 . > Paññå that accompanies kusala citta arising in a mind-door > process can gradually have more understanding of realities, and > it can also penetrate the true nature of rúpa. > > > > > > > > > Footnotes > > 1. Seeing , hearing and the other sense-cognitions arise in a > series or process of cittas that each perform their own > function. There are sense-door processes and mind-door > processes. When a sense-door process has fallen away it is > followed by a mind-door process of cittas that experience the > sense object which was experienced by cittas arising in that > sense-door process and which has just fallen away. Visible > object, for example, that is experienced by cittas arising in > the eye-door process, is also experienced by cittas arising in > the following process, which is the mind-door process. These > cittas just experience the visible object, they do not think > about it. Thinking of shape and form, of concepts of people and > things can arise later on, in other mind-door processes. > 2. In the sense-door processes and in the mind-door process > there are, in the case of non-arahats, seven javana-cittas, > kusala cittas or akusala cittas that experience the object in a > wholesome way or in an unwholesome way. The term mahå-kusala > citta is used for kusala citta of the sense sphere. Mahå-kusala > citta can be accompanied by paññå or unaccompanied by paññå. > When there are conditions, mahå-kusala citta accompanied by > paññå can arise also in a sense-door process. > 3. There are several stages of insight knowledge, vipassanå > ñåùa. The first stage is distinguishing the difference between > nåma and rúpa and this arises in a mind-door process. Rúpa can > be known through a sense-door and through the mind-door, and > nåma can only be known through the mind-door. Thus, the > difference between nåma and rúpa is known through the mind-door. > Now, at this moment, the mind-door is covered up by the > sense-doors, but at that stage of insight knowledge it is > understood what the mind-door is. > Acharn Sujin explains in 3A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas2, Part > V, Ch 2, The Stages of Insight: 3The rúpas which are > sense-objects are experienced through the corresponding > sense-doors and after each sense-door process the object is > experienced through the mind-door. However, when there is no > vipassanå ñåùa, insight knowledge, the mind-door process does > not appear, it is as it were hidden by the sense objects > experienced in the sense-door processes. At the moments of > vipassanå ñåùa, rúpas appear very clearly through the mind-door, > and at that moment the mind-door hides as it were the > sense-doors. Then the situation is opposite to the moments when > there is no vipassanå ñåùa.2 > 4. The different processes arise one after the other extremely > rapidly. > 5. A reality does not come from anywhere when it arises, it does > not exist before its arising. Therefore one can say: it is not. > . > ===== 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" 7689 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 9:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How vipassana sees -Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/26/01 7:33:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > Dear Howard, > I have this unpublished extract of a conversation between But > Sawong, a Cambodian vipassana teacher and A. Sujin that might > have some bearing on your questions about how panna knows the > characteristic of dhammas. > ====================== Thank you for this. It is interesting, but I don't see how it answers the question of how sati/pa~n~na, or, for that matter, a mind-gate process subsequent to a sense-gate process followed by bhavanga cittas, examines an object which has already fallen away other than as a (fresh) memory. Also, the constant mentioning of how quickly one process follows another doesn't seem to add much from my perspective. (There is also the question: "Quickly as compared to what?") 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) 7690 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 1:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Time out Dear Herman & Tori, --- Herman wrote: > Dear Friends, > > I am going to be otherwise occupied for the next few weeks . I > apologise to those who may be waiting for a reply of some sort, > unfortunately it will have to wait for a few weeks. I hope the ski > slopes of the South Island of New Zealand and my knees will develop a > kind of synergy. Very best wishes from us all for the special occasion and please have a really good holiday/honeymoon on the slopes! > > I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the members of this forum, > for the grace, patience, lovingkindness and wisdom extended to those > who knock on the door. It takes many members to make a forum....thank you for your lively questions and comments, healthy scepticism and Down Under wit! Just walk straight in anytime you have the chance to look in on us...no need to knock (and we're not fussy about the condition of the knees either)! > > Groups like this reinforce in me a belief in the underlying > benevolence of all that is known and unknown and all the other stuff > that description misses. Herman, thanks from us all.....see ya soon! Sarah p.s Just how many boys do you have? When you come back will do! Also interested in the ex-Christian pastor bit....no wonder you don't just swallow what you're given here;-))) 7691 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 2:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Thanks for the further discussion. Best, Robert E. --- Erik wrote: > But the proof of the pudding is in the tasting, as it were. It is > truly fortunate that it is possible to put into practice the > teachings the Buddha taught on "remaining focused" on these objects > of meditation as the Buddha instructed in the Maha-Satipatthana > Sutta, and thus test these instructions out directly, and see if they > do in fact lead to establishing "knowledge & remembrance"--to a > noticeable degree. > > One can likewise compare this to what happens when > remaining "unfocused" and compare the results of that in terms of > knowledge & remembrance (sati). If knowledge & remembrance noticeably > increase with a given practice, then there is the development of > sati, and the more one's focus is esatblished (non-distractedness), > the subtler the things that become visible, because the mind is > undistracted--"tied to the post of mindfulness"--which is necessary > for Right Concentration to arise. If knowledge & remembrance (sati) > are not observed to increase with a given practice, then that would > appear not to be a practice conducive to Rigtht Mindfulness. ===== 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" 7692 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 2:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Lovingkindness Dear Erik, As always, there are so many aspects to your post which I'd enjoy responding to, but I'll try to limit this to 'Lovingkindness' (metta). To prevent a really long post, I've just extracted small portions of your post;-) Erik wrote: > > This accumulated conditioning of self-hatred forced me to see enmity > in nearly every face I saw, in addition to conditioning the nasty > habit of seeing others as "inferior" and myself as "superior" (not to > say that's fully eradicated because, of course, I'm neither an > arahant or a Buddha, so there is still at minimum the conceit "I am" > present in everything I see), this self-hatred (uh oh, there's > that "self" again!) manifested itself in many extremely harmful ways. Yes, this is interesting, especially as we've been discussing conceit (mana). Mana prevents metta from arising. As we know, when there is mana, we find ourselves important. At these times there is 'Flaunting a Flag' and we are not concerned about the well-being of others. There is no friendship for others or gentleness. In the Atthasalani (11, bk111, 395) it descibes humbleness of heart: 'by the absence of conceit this person's heart is humble; the state of such a person is humbleness of heart'. Sariputta is usually spoken of as the example of humility, comparing himself with a dustrag, uaffected by others' harsh words or deeds. > Since I felt it inconceivable to act in a physically harmful way > toward other sentient beings (for some reason a deeply-ingrained > tendency for as long as I can remember), that self-hatred found other > forms of expression--for example, in the form of drinking alcohol to > the point of heedlessness, primarily as a means to "shut off" this > self-hatred for a brief while (which led to more addictive cycles of > misery and even more self-hatred), and also as generally pervasive > ill-will toward others; because I could see little, if anything > positive in the world. I saw others sentient beings not as a friends, > but as a potential enemies in some way--to be feared if they were > stronger than I, or to be overpowered and defeated if they appeared > in some way weaker. Yes, when there is dosa (aversion) there is no kindness and no patience with others or any objects appearing through the sense doors either. I'd like to quote from 'Cetasikas' to be found on: http://www.dhammastudy.com/ 'Adosa can be translated as non-aversion or non-hate, but there are many forms and degrees of it, loving kindness, metta, is a form of adosa which is directed towards living beings. Adosa can also be non-aversion with regard to an object which is not a being and then it can be described as patience. There can be non-aversion or patience with regard to heat, cold, bodily pain or other unpleasant objects. The Atthasalini (I, Book I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 127) defines non-aversion, adosa, as follows: '... Absence of hate has the characteristic of freedom from churlishness or resentment, like an agreeable friend; the function of destroying vexation, or dispelling distress, like sandalwood: the manifestation of being pleasing, like the full moon...' The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 143) gives a similar definition (1 See also Dhammasangani 33). Non-aversion has the characteristic of freedom from savagery or violence, it is gentle like a good friend, ..' (end quote) Adosa (like alobha -non,attachment) acompanies each kusala citta (wholesome consciousness), but of course this doesn't mean that whenever there isn't dosa (aversion) there is adosa. Kusala cittas still don't arise often! > Now to pose a couple of quick intermediary questions (at your > suggestion of taking up such a style): > > Which is more destructive of the two posions: intense grasping or > intense aversion? In terms of words and deeds motivated by either of > these two poisons, which endagers ourselves and others most? Which of > these two poisons motivates the severest types of misdeeds, those > misdeeds which lead not only to states of woe, but to the very most > painful states of woe? I suspect these are rhetorical questions, Erik! Of course we dislike aversion much more and see its danger more because it is always accompanied by unpleasant feeling. It's not hard to see the khandhas on fire when there is intense aversion. My question to you is this: If there weren't intense grasping, would there be intense aversion? > > To cite what I have heard well-spoken by the wise, Master Shantideva > says in the "Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life" > (Bodhicharyavatara): "There is no evil equal to hatred; and no virtue > equal to forberance." This echoes the lines from the Visuddhimagga > IX.2: "No higher rule, the Buddhas say, than patience, and no nibbana > higher than forbearance". Yes, good quotes. Let me add another one from 'Cetasikas' too: 'The function of non-aversion is the removing of annoyance or vexation and non-aversion is compared to sandalwood which has a very agreeable odour and is said to cure fever. When there is aversion we are vexed and annoyed; we burn with the fever of hate and we may become uncontrolled, we may not know what we are doing. Aversion is like a fire, it is hard to extinguish. However, when non-aversion arises we are cured of the fever of aversion, all annoyance has gone. Both aversion and non-aversion influence our bodily disposition. We read in the Atthasalini (I, Book I, Part IV, Chapter I, 129) : ... Absence of hate is the cause of youthfulness, for the man of no hate, not being burnt by the fire of hate, which brings wrinkles and grey hairs, remains young for a long time... The Atthasalini states that the manifestation of non-aversion is agreeableness like the full moon.' (end quote) Well, I have a lot of wrinkles and grey hair....so we can see what a beginner I am in this regard! By the way, i like to remember that while ill-will is the far enemy of metta 'like a foe ensconced in a rock wilderness', greed is the near enemy 'since both share in seeing virtues. Greed behaves like a foe who keeps close by a man, and it easily finds an opportunity. So lovingkindness should be well protected from it' (Vis 1X, 980 > And since you and I are in comlpete agreemnet there is no other > moment than now to work with our afflictions, and also that there is > no other reality to work with than our present accumulated > tendencies, it brings us directly to the point of "beginning where we > are." Which is right here, right now, with exactly what we have; no > more, no less. Erik, I'm pleased to read this;-)) (I'd just add to 'present accumulated tendencies' and other realities appearing now) > Which is why when the instructions in the Visuddhimagga (IX.8) say > that "first of all, [lovingkindness] should be developed toward > oneself, doing it repeatedly thus: 'May I be happy and free from > suffering', or 'may I keep myself free from enmity, affliction, and > anxiety and live happily'", this is not a random instruction. It > firmly addresses the fact that we must begin exactly where we are. > S: > > What I understand (and makes sense > > from experience too) is that this passage is suggesting that we > treat others > > like we, ourselves, would like to be treated. In other words, the > concern in > > metta and dana has to be for the welfare of another being. Following the passage you quote in the Vism. above, it explains that by using oneself as an example, ''I am happy. Just as I want to be happy and dread pain, as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings, too'. Later (1X, 92) it explains that metta 'comes about with respect to a friend (mitta), or it is behaviour towards a friend, thus it is lovingkindness (metta). When there is suffering in OTHERS (my caps) it causes (karoti) good people's hearts to be moved (kampana), thus it is compassion (karuna).......' I know this causes confusion, but all the 4 brahmaviharas should be understood as directed to other beings. As I mentioned, there can be other kinds of adosa (non-aversion) which are not to other beings and it's common for metta and adosa to be mixed up, but i find it helpful to consider these details and realities a little more precisely, even though it's not the label that is our concern! > To put it question form: can the designation "other" arise without > the implicit designation "self"? In other words, is there really any > fundamental separation between the khandas we designate "me" and the > khandas we designate "other"? Does this "me" exist in total > separation from all other things, in a causal vacuum, as it were? There can be metta with or without right understanding of realities. Those who have reached stages of enlightenment have no wrong view of self and yet are more likely to have metta. When there is awareness of realities, there can still be thinking of beings. Thinking can be with metta or dosa still. Actually, if there is no idea of it being 'my metta' it will be purer and more likely to arise I think. Btw, having said there isn't metta (or unlikely to be) when doing one's yoga practice, I was reflecting on how many opportunities there were during a yoga class I went to last week such as when I helped someone else with an asana (posture), let someone have my place or spoke kindly to the teacher. In my own practice in the gym, there was a good chance today whenever another member of attendant came near. Sometimes I felt disturbed with dosa and sometimes there was metta. Thanks for the reminders! > > There is quite a bit less to it than this, Sarah :) Simply focusing > on the "now" withouth realistically recognizing that we are all > enmeshed in thoughts and fabrications would be a form of leaning too > far to the "wisdom" extreme and not thinking eralixstically about the > present condition of accumulated tendenciwes, whjich is still, like > it or not, engaged in the process of fabrications about past, > persent, future, self, and other. We can't ignore this fact either, > in addition to recognizing that true insight can only arise in the > present moment. To give an example, with more direct understanding now of defilements such as conceit, craving and hatred and by realising that what we take for self and others are only namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) , true insight will occur. We'll also learn to be 'an understanding person' and show genuine friendship. Metta will develop more and we'll be less likely to judge others, knowing these defilements (in others) are conditioned anyway. Finally, Rob wrote a very nice post on metta which you may not have seen, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5913 Erik, I hope some point here is a condition for metta for you as it has been for me! With metta, Sarah 7695 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 9:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action Rob E Thanks for your comments on this point. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > Serious seekers are going to look at the end goal to interpret the > Buddha's > intentions. Those who have other interests, such as 'Buddha's tips for > wealth and > beauty' [!] will find excuses to interpret it that way, whether it's > clearly the > opposite or not. Those who want to understand the interesting analysis > you > described of how certain actions lead to certain results, will take the > information to gain a better understanding of karmic mechanics. Those > who think > they can still manipulate the world of manifestation to gain happiness > will always > try to do so, and eventually they will realize that those hopes are > always dashed. > > I think it is intention that causes the interpretation, rather than > confusion. > Ultimately people will do that which serves their real purpose at any > given time. I pretty much agree with what you say about the diverse interpretations that will be given to the teachings. However, what you describe as 'intention' I would see as 'views' or 'understanding'. This to me is particularly apparent in the last instance you give ('Those who think they can still manipulate the world of manifestation to gain happiness'), but applies also to the other examples also--people will read the teachings in a way consistent with what they find important in their lives. Jon 7696 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Descriptive vs. path of action Dan Welcome back after what seems like a long absence! --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > > wishing to convey in the sutta. Not a big deal in this case, but > > important when we get to suttas dealing with aspects of 'the > practice' > > (itself not a term that the Buddha tended to use). > > 'Discipline' is the word he used very frequently. How does > 'discipline' differ from 'practice'? 'Discipline' is I believe a translation of the Pali term 'vinaya'. I am familiar with this term in the following contexts-- - 'Vinaya pitaka', one of the 3 baskets of the teachings, dealing with the life of monks - 'Dhamma-vinaya', a term used by the Buddha to refer to his dispensation generally (I seem to recall reference to a person 'living under this dhamma-vinaya') Neither of these uses would carry a meaning similar to that of 'practice' as that term is commonly used. Sorry, but I don't think this really touches on your question Dan. Good to hear from you again. Jon 7697 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 9:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Binh --- Binh A wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > You may like to keep in mind that although the Buddha spoke often > about > > samatha, but he never advised its development to the exclusion of > > vipassana. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > BA: As I understand, in simple terms, the Buddha spoke of "samatha as > a base to develop vipassana". > > So, the issue here (as well as in many other Buddhist forum and > Buddhist circles) is not about "samatha versus vipassana" but: > > -Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? > > Some says it is, some says it is not. I agree there is this question ("is samatha/jhana necessary?"), which has been the subject of much discussion on this list. Actually, I did not mean to raise that issue directly here. I was trying to make the point that, whatever one's view about the need for the development of samatha, nowhere is it suggested that the development of samatha should take precedence over that of vipassana. But since you raise the question, let me mention one or two points for consideration. Yes, there are a number of suttas which describe the attainment of enlightenment following the attainment of the jhanas, but equally it is clear that not all those who attained enlightenment did so in that way. In 'Ways to Arahantship' (AN IV, 165), the Buddha states that enlightenment is attained in one of only 4 ways-- 1. After developing samatha 2. Before developing samatha 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha 4. By overcoming the corruptions (ie without any part being played by samatha) Notice that only in ways (1) and (3) is there any attainment of the higher levels of samatha before enlightenment. In the second of the 4 ways, samatha is developed *after* enlightenment is attained, and in the fourth way there is no mention of any development of samatha at all. I think I'm right in saying that only in the 3rd way is samatha regarded as a 'base' for the attainment of enlightenment. This is only a superficial look a this sutta, but I think its implications are quite clear. I have copied an extract from the Nyanaponika Thera/Bhikkhu Bodhi translation of the sutta below. Jon AN IV, 165 Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' 83. Ways to Arahantship "Friends, whatever monks or nuns declare before me that they have attained the final knowledge of arahantship, all these do so in one of four ways. What four? "Here friends, a monk develops insight preceded by tranquillity. While he thus develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path arises in him. He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies eliminated. "Or again, friends, a monk develops tranquillity preceded by insight. While he thus develops … "Or again, friends, a monk develops tranquillity and insight joined in pairs. While he thus develops … "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by higher states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies eliminated." 7698 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 5:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Jon (and Binh) - This is an interesting sutta you quote below, particularly the last paragraph, apparently indicating a jhana-less approach to arahantship: ******************************************************** AN IV, 165 Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' 83. Ways to Arahantship "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by higher states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies eliminated." ************************************************* The questions that occur to me are the following: 1) What is meant by "higher states of mind"? 2) What sort of agitation would arise as a result of them? 3) Exactly what is the state wherein one's "mind becomes internally steadied, composed, unified and concentrated"? It sounds like it *could* be access concentration or khanika samadhi (moment-to-moment concentration). That would be interesting. This would, indeed, suggest an approach to complete enlightenment, one out of four, that does not have jhanic attainment as a requirement at all, though it still requires a strong and rather stable one-pointedness of mind. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/27/01 9:34:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > > Hi, Binh > > --- Binh A wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > You may like to keep in mind that although the Buddha spoke often > > about > > > samatha, but he never advised its development to the exclusion of > > > vipassana. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > > BA: As I understand, in simple terms, the Buddha spoke of "samatha as > > a base to develop vipassana". > > > > So, the issue here (as well as in many other Buddhist forum and > > Buddhist circles) is not about "samatha versus vipassana" but: > > > > -Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? > > > > Some says it is, some says it is not. > > I agree there is this question ("is samatha/jhana necessary?"), which has > been the subject of much discussion on this list. Actually, I did not > mean to raise that issue directly here. I was trying to make the point > that, whatever one's view about the need for the development of samatha, > nowhere is it suggested that the development of samatha should take > precedence over that of vipassana. > > But since you raise the question, let me mention one or two points for > consideration. > > Yes, there are a number of suttas which describe the attainment of > enlightenment following the attainment of the jhanas, but equally it is > clear that not all those who attained enlightenment did so in that way. > > In 'Ways to Arahantship' (AN IV, 165), the Buddha states that > enlightenment is attained in one of only 4 ways-- > > 1. After developing samatha > 2. Before developing samatha > 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha > 4. By overcoming the corruptions (ie without any part being played by > samatha) > > Notice that only in ways (1) and (3) is there any attainment of the higher > levels of samatha before enlightenment. In the second of the 4 ways, > samatha is developed *after* enlightenment is attained, and in the fourth > way there is no mention of any development of samatha at all. > > I think I'm right in saying that only in the 3rd way is samatha regarded > as a 'base' for the attainment of enlightenment. > > This is only a superficial look a this sutta, but I think its implications > are quite clear. > > I have copied an extract from the Nyanaponika Thera/Bhikkhu Bodhi > translation of the sutta below. > > Jon > > AN IV, 165 > Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' > 83. Ways to Arahantship > > "Friends, whatever monks or nuns declare before me that they have attained > the final knowledge of arahantship, all these do so in one of four ways. > What four? > > "Here friends, a monk develops insight preceded by tranquillity. While he > thus develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path arises in him. > He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is doing > so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies eliminated. > > "Or again, friends, a monk develops tranquillity preceded by insight. > While he thus develops … > > "Or again, friends, a monk develops tranquillity and insight joined in > pairs. While he thus develops … > > "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by higher > states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in > him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is > doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies > eliminated." > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 7699 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 11:25pm Subject: Deep Sleep As Having Sati: Updated Version Re: The limits of awareness: Dear Dhammastudy Friends How are you? I would like to post the following updated version of my message 7668. I am not satisfied with the last statement of that message. So I have modified that last statement in this message. Also, I included an additional textual reference in this updated message. Apology for any inconvenience! Suan ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Herman How are you? You asked: "I read from your post that any mindfulness is kusala. Would it be true to say that any state where mindfulness was absent eg sleep, was therefore akusala?" What I am about to answer is very counter-intuitive. The answer is the result of my recent readings of Dhammasangani, Atthasalini, Abhidhammatthasangaha and Parajikatthakatha. First, the answer is No to your question "Would it be true to say that any state where mindfulness was absent eg sleep, was therefore akusala?" According to sections 431, 455,469 in Dhammasangani, there are rootless kusala resultant minds (ahetuka kusala vipaka cittani). They lack sati (recollection, mindfullness), but they are kusala, nonetheless. Now, a very counter-intuitive answer follows. Deep sleep has sati (recollection, mindfullness). It is unbelievable, indeed, but true according to abhidhamma. To elaborate a little further on this answer, all normal human beings on this planet or any other planets in all the countless universes were born as the result of sensuous healthy minds. Please see section 498 in Dhammasangani and Atthasalini. Bluntly speaking, we are what abhidhamma calls one of the eight great sensuous healthy resultant minds (attha maha kusalavipaka cittani). If our minds do not interact with the stimuli, we go back to the state of the healthy resultant minds. An example of the healthy resultant minds is our familier nightly deep sleep. Reference for this is Section 236-237 in Parajikatthakatha Vol 2. Now, we turn to the participation of sati. The eight great sensuous healthy minds (attha maha kusala cittani) come with sati. Please see section 1 in Dhammasangani. Similarly, the resultant minds as the results of the eight great healthy minds also come with sati. Please see section 498 in Dhammasangani. Therefore, deep sleep being a state of one of the eight great healthy resultant minds ( attha maha kusala vipaka cittani) has recollection or mindfullness. Of course, while we are in deep sleep, our sati does not deal with stimuli of the waking world, but sati in deep sleep serves as a blueprint for sati in healthy minds (kusala cittani) to remember, or to be mindful of, stimuli in waking moments. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7700 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 11:23pm Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > In 'Ways to Arahantship' (AN IV, 165), the Buddha states that > enlightenment is attained in one of only 4 ways-- This is from AN IV.170; it is V. Ananda addressing the Bikkhus. The numerical discourses as translated by Nyonaponika Thera and B. Bodhi lists the reference number after the sutta, and not before. The translation on access to insights is: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-170.html kom 7701 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 11:36pm Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana Hi Howard, Let's see if I recall correctly the commentary on these questions correctly... > ************************************************* > The questions that occur to me are the following: > > 1) What is meant by "higher states of mind"? The various vipassana-ñana discussed in Vism. XX, i.e. the direct insights into various realities. > 2) What sort of agitation would arise as a result of them? The agitation these insights engender are things like: "Cool! I just experienced this great insight! Wow! I'm getting pretty wise now..." The insights may hit like a lightning flash and immediately follows a reaction. Then, comes papañca. Someone who's studied Dhamma may think that they are not supposed to have this "Wow, cool" reaction, so after the insight, they may convince themselves that they really didn't. It takes a very high degree of internal steadiness with composed, unified, and concentrated mind not to be afflicted with such corruption of insight. But fully developed jhana? No. Access concentration? Yes. > 3) Exactly what is the state wherein one's "mind becomes internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated"? It sounds like it *could* be > access concentration or khanika samadhi (moment-to-moment concentration). > That would be interesting. This would, indeed, suggest an approach to > complete enlightenment, one out of four, that does not have jhanic attainment > as a requirement at all, though it still requires a strong and rather stable > one-pointedness of mind. Yup. Dan 7702 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 11:41pm Subject: Re: Descriptive vs. path of action Hi Jon, > Welcome back after what seems like a long absence! Thanks for the welcome. I really do not intend to be 'back', though, for a few months. > > 'Discipline' is the word he used very frequently. How does > > 'discipline' differ from 'practice'? > > - 'Dhamma-vinaya', a term used by the Buddha to refer to his dispensation > generally (I seem to recall reference to a person 'living under this > dhamma-vinaya') > > Neither of these uses would carry a meaning similar to that of 'practice' > as that term is commonly used. I would think that dhamma-vinaya would include the notion of a 'practice'. If we are not careful, we might fall into the trap that the practice is viewed as something external, i.e. a formula of "Do this practice. Get that result." Buddha mentions such formulas often, but not so much in the context of a particular Thing-to-Do. Dan 7703 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Aug 27, 2001 11:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] role of diet, eating times in meditation Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Hi Fen, --- Fen wrote: > Dear Frank, > Regarding eating light meal for breakfast and > dinner, and one full > meal for lunch, I'd like to know how you sustain > your body need of > calory. Is eating that little enough for your body? How do you know I eat too little if I didn't say what I eat and how much? :-) My typical breakfast consists of a banana smoothie: 2-4 bananas, depending on size of banana, handful of walnuts (about 1oz weight), water, all blended together. Depending on season, if strawberries are good, or kiwi, I might throw in a couple for variety. It's light, easy to digest, doesn't make me drowsy, yet filling enough to keep me from going hungry for at least 3 hours. I list what I eat as an example, not as a definitive guide as to what the proper amount is. Obviously Shaquile Oneal (7ft, 320lb man) is probably going to need a larger portion. The key is to figure how how much to eat that will sustain your body for spiritual practice without being too full. > I've been wondering all this while. A monk might > not need so much > food, since they don't have to do rigorous work, > they don't have to > think hard (that's just my perception; correct me if > I'm wrong), This is an interesting aspect that I could spend pages talking about. The bottom line is all kinds of activity that we normally don't think of as rigorous can have large energy expenditures and need to replenish. For example, if I do deep thinking when I program at work, I will need to eat a larger portion of food for dinner. > but > as lay people, I still can't manage eating even > twice a day. I do eat > twice a day, on Sundays, because that's the day when > my activities > are least. The important goal to keep in mind is to figure out the optimal way to get adequate nutrition to sustain your body for spiritual practice and not focus so much on how many meals and snacks are required to fulfill that. I started out eating 3 large meals, snacking 2 or 3 times a day. But as I did more yoga, more meditation, I found that I needed to eat less. So just let it happen naturally, work on it little by little. > But on usual day (Mondays through > Saturdays), I usually > eat thrice a day. I've ever tried to eat twice a day > everyday; > breakfast and dinner. But since I started to do so, > my stomach never > stopped give me problem( I got flatulence everyday). > Subsequently I > resorted to eating three time a day again. I'd like > to practice > eating less (twice a day) if possible, but don't > really know the > right way to do it. Since you've already applied it > in your life, I'd > like to know how you manage it. > I tried forcing myself to follow a strict regimen a few times, and that always ended in failure. Now the way I eat is natural, relaxed, enjoyable. Others look at what I eat and think I am practicing some strict austerity and using some amazing self-control. But it really isn't the case. My diet slowly evolved into a more healthy meal that it is today. When I first became vegetarian 13 years ago, it was the unhealthiest phase of my life. I gained 20 lbs within a few months from eating lots of italian food loaded with dairy (cheese pizza, lasagna, etc). The food I eat now, I couldn't gain weight if I want to. If you overeat very healthy food, you'll just take a bigger dump :-) I found that the only way I can gain weight is if I do resistive weight training, lifting weights and fatiguing muscles so they rebuild and gain mass. The weight I gain from this is muscle, but I don't really want to overdo it. People who do too much weight lifting expend too much energy in a completely useless way. It requires eating more, sleeping more, to build more mass. How pointless. It's like having a huge army that you have to pay a large salary, clothe and feed in a time of peace. My fitness goal is all spiritually oriented. I want the flexibility to sit in full lotus for hours at a time, I want to be able to sleep only 3-4 hours a day, I want to get healthy enough to eat only 1 meal a day, I want my body to have a strong guardian qi where I don't sweat when it's too hot, and I can meditate in the snow naked and still be warm. These goals are achievable, I've seen people who can do it, so it inspires me to move in that direction. Metta, -fk 7704 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach: To Robert E Dear Robert How are you? You wrote: "I am not aware of what the Buddha said on posture and position, but I know that if I sit cross-legged on the floor and watch the breath it is a very different experience in some ways than what happens if I lie down [which I do when falling asleep] and watch the breath." The Buddha did instruct how to sit when we do recollection practice of inhalation and exhalation. The Buddha instructed as follows in Section 107 in Mahasatipatthana Suttam, Mulapannasa, Majjimanikayo, " nisidati, pallankam abhujitva, ujum kayam patidhaya" "(the monk) sits by crossing his legs fully and by keeping the (upper) body straight." "Pallankam abhujitva" depicts the images of Buddha's cross-legged sitting posture. However, sections 108 and 109 have instructions for those who use any body postures as the objects for their recollection. That is to say, if one cannot sit in lotus posture, there are alternative postures for practising vipassana. It is entirely up to individual practitioners which posture they choose. If they chose recollection of inhalation and exhalation, the Buddha instructed them to sit in lotus posture as he himself has adopted it. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Another note: Can you imagine the Buddha being too stiff in the hips to > > > assume > > > the full lotus posture? Not really, but what about the rest of us? It > > > is not > > > unhelpful to work towards having a body that can cooperate with the best > > > possible > > > physical forms for our work. > > > > Rob E > > > > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff hips > > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;- -)) > > ;--)) > > My immediate response is 'no' and then my secondary response is 'yes'. I think > it's 'no' in the sense that no physical obstacle should be sufficient to bar > someone from exercising mindfulness. On the other hand, I can't say that > meditating lying down is going to have the same effect as meditating sitting up, > or that slumping over is going to have the same effect as sitting up straight, or > that sitting with tension in body and breathing is going to have the same effect > as sitting with gentle uprightness. > > I am not aware of what the Buddha said on posture and position, but I know that if > I sit cross-legged on the floor and watch the breath it is a very different > experience in some ways than what happens if I lie down [which I do when falling > asleep] and watch the breath. > > And if I sit and am uncomfortable with jangled nerves and tight muscles, this will > be a different experience than sitting with body released, flexible and relaxed. > > For me, if I meditate after doing anywhere from a few minutes to a half hour of > yoga stretches, my meditation seems much more balanced and easy and it is easier > to be mindful. > > So I guess I would say that physical problems are an obstacle, although not an > absolute obstacle. They make it harder, and it's already hard enough. > > Robert E. > 7705 From: Fen Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 9:04am Subject: role of diet, eating times in meditation Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear FK, You said," . I want the flexibility to sit in full lotus for hours at a time, I want to be able to sleep only 3-4 hours a day, I want to get healthy enough to eat only 1 meal a day, I want my body to have a strong guardian qi where I don't sweat when it's too hot, and I can meditate in the snow naked and still be warm. These goals are achievable, I've seen people who can do it, so it inspires me to move in that direction." Very interesting. Could you please elaborate more on how those are achievable? Have you managed to achieve it? How long does it take you? Who do you consult with? Who is your guidance? Really curious, Fen --- frank kuan wrote: > Hi Fen, > > --- <> wrote: > > Dear Frank, > > Regarding eating light meal for breakfast and > > dinner, and one full > > meal for lunch, I'd like to know how you sustain > > your body need of > > calory. Is eating that little enough for your body? > > How do you know I eat too little if I didn't say > what I eat and how much? :-) My typical breakfast > consists of a banana smoothie: 2-4 bananas, depending > on size of banana, handful of walnuts (about 1oz > weight), water, all blended together. Depending on > season, if strawberries are good, or kiwi, I might > throw in a couple for variety. It's light, easy to > digest, doesn't make me drowsy, yet filling enough to > keep me from going hungry for at least 3 hours. I list > what I eat as an example, not as a definitive guide as > to what the proper amount is. Obviously Shaquile Oneal > (7ft, 320lb man) is probably going to need a larger > portion. The key is to figure how how much to eat that > will sustain your body for spiritual practice without > being too full. > > > I've been wondering all this while. A monk might > > not need so much > > food, since they don't have to do rigorous work, > > they don't have to > > think hard (that's just my perception; correct me if > > I'm wrong), > > This is an interesting aspect that I could spend > pages talking about. The bottom line is all kinds of > activity that we normally don't think of as rigorous > can have large energy expenditures and need to > replenish. For example, if I do deep thinking when I > program at work, I will need to eat a larger portion > of food for dinner. > > > but > > as lay people, I still can't manage eating even > > twice a day. I do eat > > twice a day, on Sundays, because that's the day when > > my activities > > are least. > > The important goal to keep in mind is to figure out > the optimal way to get adequate nutrition to sustain > your body for spiritual practice and not focus so much > on how many meals and snacks are required to fulfill > that. I started out eating 3 large meals, snacking 2 > or 3 times a day. But as I did more yoga, more > meditation, I found that I needed to eat less. So just > let it happen naturally, work on it little by little. > > > > > But on usual day (Mondays through > > Saturdays), I usually > > eat thrice a day. I've ever tried to eat twice a day > > everyday; > > breakfast and dinner. But since I started to do so, > > my stomach never > > stopped give me problem( I got flatulence everyday). > > Subsequently I > > resorted to eating three time a day again. I'd like > > to practice > > eating less (twice a day) if possible, but don't > > really know the > > right way to do it. Since you've already applied it > > in your life, I'd > > like to know how you manage it. > > > > I tried forcing myself to follow a strict regimen a > few times, and that always ended in failure. Now the > way I eat is natural, relaxed, enjoyable. Others look > at what I eat and think I am practicing some strict > austerity and using some amazing self-control. But it > really isn't the case. My diet slowly evolved into a > more healthy meal that it is today. When I first > became vegetarian 13 years ago, it was the > unhealthiest phase of my life. I gained 20 lbs within > a few months from eating lots of italian food loaded > with dairy (cheese pizza, lasagna, etc). The food I > eat now, I couldn't gain weight if I want to. If you > overeat very healthy food, you'll just take a bigger > dump :-) I found that the only way I can gain weight > is if I do resistive weight training, lifting weights > and fatiguing muscles so they rebuild and gain mass. > The weight I gain from this is muscle, but I don't > really want to overdo it. People who do too much > weight lifting expend too much energy in a completely > useless way. It requires eating more, sleeping more, > to build more mass. How pointless. It's like having a > huge army that you have to pay a large salary, clothe > and feed in a time of peace. My fitness goal is all > spiritually oriented. I want the flexibility to sit in > full lotus for hours at a time, I want to be able to > sleep only 3-4 hours a day, I want to get healthy > enough to eat only 1 meal a day, I want my body to > have a strong guardian qi where I don't sweat when > it's too hot, and I can meditate in the snow naked and > still be warm. These goals are achievable, I've seen > people who can do it, so it inspires me to move in > that direction. > > > Metta, > -fk > 7706 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 5:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Dan - In a message dated 8/27/01 11:55:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > Hi Howard, > > Let's see if I recall correctly the commentary on these questions > correctly... > ===================== Thanks. The answer is helpful. 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) 7707 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 11:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > Thanks for your comments on this point. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Serious seekers are going to look at the end goal to interpret the > > Buddha's > > intentions. Those who have other interests, such as 'Buddha's tips for > > wealth and > > beauty' [!] will find excuses to interpret it that way, whether it's > > clearly the > > opposite or not. Those who want to understand the interesting analysis > > you > > described of how certain actions lead to certain results, will take the > > information to gain a better understanding of karmic mechanics. Those > > who think > > they can still manipulate the world of manifestation to gain happiness > > will always > > try to do so, and eventually they will realize that those hopes are > > always dashed. > > > > I think it is intention that causes the interpretation, rather than > > confusion. > > Ultimately people will do that which serves their real purpose at any > > given time. > > I pretty much agree with what you say about the diverse interpretations > that will be given to the teachings. However, what you describe as > 'intention' I would see as 'views' or 'understanding'. This to me is > particularly apparent in the last instance you give ('Those who think they > can still manipulate the world of manifestation to gain happiness'), but > applies also to the other examples also--people will read the teachings in > a way consistent with what they find important in their lives. > > Jon I think that what I am calling 'intention' would be the 'active' form of a 'view'. If I think the world is all about money and power, my intention will be to get money and power, etc. I understand the desire to use 'view' in terms of Right View and the other views that are stuck in one or another concept of reality. I think 'intention' is probably just another aspect of the same thing. Robert E. 7708 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 11:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Jon, I appreciate the quote below, not only for its clarification of the role of samatha in attainment of enlightenment, but for its clear description of samatha itself. Very helpful. Robert E. ======== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Binh > > --- Binh A wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > You may like to keep in mind that although the Buddha spoke often > > about > > > samatha, but he never advised its development to the exclusion of > > > vipassana. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > > BA: As I understand, in simple terms, the Buddha spoke of "samatha as > > a base to develop vipassana". > > > > So, the issue here (as well as in many other Buddhist forum and > > Buddhist circles) is not about "samatha versus vipassana" but: > > > > -Is samatha (jhana) the "necessary" condition to develop vipassana? > > > > Some says it is, some says it is not. > > I agree there is this question ("is samatha/jhana necessary?"), which has > been the subject of much discussion on this list. Actually, I did not > mean to raise that issue directly here. I was trying to make the point > that, whatever one's view about the need for the development of samatha, > nowhere is it suggested that the development of samatha should take > precedence over that of vipassana. > > But since you raise the question, let me mention one or two points for > consideration. > > Yes, there are a number of suttas which describe the attainment of > enlightenment following the attainment of the jhanas, but equally it is > clear that not all those who attained enlightenment did so in that way. > > In 'Ways to Arahantship' (AN IV, 165), the Buddha states that > enlightenment is attained in one of only 4 ways-- > > 1. After developing samatha > 2. Before developing samatha > 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha > 4. By overcoming the corruptions (ie without any part being played by > samatha) > > Notice that only in ways (1) and (3) is there any attainment of the higher > levels of samatha before enlightenment. In the second of the 4 ways, > samatha is developed *after* enlightenment is attained, and in the fourth > way there is no mention of any development of samatha at all. > > I think I'm right in saying that only in the 3rd way is samatha regarded > as a 'base' for the attainment of enlightenment. > > This is only a superficial look a this sutta, but I think its implications > are quite clear. > > I have copied an extract from the Nyanaponika Thera/Bhikkhu Bodhi > translation of the sutta below. > > Jon > > AN IV, 165 > Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' > 83. Ways to Arahantship > > "Friends, whatever monks or nuns declare before me that they have attained > the final knowledge of arahantship, all these do so in one of four ways. > What four? > > "Here friends, a monk develops insight preceded by tranquillity. While he > thus develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path arises in him. > He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is doing > so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies eliminated. > > "Or again, friends, a monk develops tranquillity preceded by insight. > While he thus develops … > > "Or again, friends, a monk develops tranquillity and insight joined in > pairs. While he thus develops … > > "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by higher > states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in > him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he is > doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies > eliminated." > ===== 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" 7709 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 11:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Great post, Dan. thanks for your insight and clarity. Very helpful and interesting. Robert E. ================= --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Hi Howard, > > Let's see if I recall correctly the commentary on these questions > correctly... > > ************************************************* > > The questions that occur to me are the following: > > > > 1) What is meant by "higher states of mind"? > > The various vipassana-ñana discussed in Vism. XX, i.e. the direct > insights into various realities. > > > 2) What sort of agitation would arise as a result of them? > > The agitation these insights engender are things like: "Cool! I just > experienced this great insight! Wow! I'm getting pretty wise now..." > The insights may hit like a lightning flash and immediately follows > a reaction. Then, comes papañca. Someone who's studied Dhamma may > think that they are not supposed to have this "Wow, cool" reaction, so > after the insight, they may convince themselves that they really > didn't. It takes a very high degree of internal steadiness with > composed, unified, and concentrated mind not to be afflicted with such > corruption of insight. But fully developed jhana? No. Access > concentration? Yes. > > > 3) Exactly what is the state wherein one's "mind becomes > internally > > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated"? It sounds like it > *could* be > > access concentration or khanika samadhi (moment-to-moment > concentration). > > That would be interesting. This would, indeed, suggest an approach > to > > complete enlightenment, one out of four, that does not have jhanic > attainment > > as a requirement at all, though it still requires a strong and > rather stable > > one-pointedness of mind. > > Yup. > > Dan > > ===== 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" 7710 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 11:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] role of diet, eating times in meditation Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Wow. Robert E. ============= --- frank kuan wrote: My fitness goal is all > spiritually oriented. I want the flexibility to sit in > full lotus for hours at a time, I want to be able to > sleep only 3-4 hours a day, I want to get healthy > enough to eat only 1 meal a day, I want my body to > have a strong guardian qi where I don't sweat when > it's too hot, and I can meditate in the snow naked and > still be warm. These goals are achievable, I've seen > people who can do it, so it inspires me to move in > that direction. 7711 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 11:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach: To Robert E Thanks, Suan. Regards, Robert E. ================= --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: ...if one cannot sit in lotus posture, there are > alternative postures for practising vipassana. > > It is entirely up to individual practitioners which posture they > choose. > > If they chose recollection of inhalation and exhalation, the Buddha > instructed them to sit in lotus posture as he himself has adopted it. ===== 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" 7712 From: Larry Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 11:50am Subject: Re: Samatha-Vipassana LBIDD wrote: Insight, insight, what is insight? Taking a cue from VM Matara Sri Nanarama's "The Seven Stages of Purification and The Insight Knowledges" BPS, insight is noting. Noting a breath, noting a thought, noting a feeling etc, etc. In this very noting is clear seeing of impermanence, suffering, and not self. mnease replied: By this do you mean a kind of comprehension of 'breath', 'thought', feeling' etc.? -------------------------------------- Hi Mike, thanks for your response. There's been so much discussion on this topic I thought I would just elaborate on this one point. Basically what I was getting at is what is the insight in insight meditation? I'm assuming there's a difference between insight and the random bright idea. The technique I was given is "follow the out breath and label the thinking as thinking." Labelling seems to amount to the same thing as Venerable Nanarama's "noting." Unfortunately, virtually every thought I think, I cling to and identify with. But when I recognize a thought as a thought, then in that same instant it is seen as impermanent, dukkha (unworthy), and not me. Not a big deal at all, but nevertheless a definite break in the seemingly continuous fabric of clinging. The same thing occurs with feeling, particularly emotional feeling. Admittedly this doesn't occur with the noting of a breath, but I'm wondering if maybe we do identify with the breath, only on a deeper, unconscious level. It's conceivable that we identify with everything in our experience without realizing it. This would certainly add another dimension to anatta. If nothing else, maybe it's a little more encouragement to practice and contemplate. enjoyed the discussion, Larry 7713 From: frank kuan Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 1:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] role of diet, eating times in meditation Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Hi Fen, I wrote: > [snip]I want the flexibility to sit in > full lotus for hours at a time, I want to be able to > sleep only 3-4 hours a day, I want to get healthy > enough to eat only 1 meal a day, I want my body to > have a strong guardian qi where I don't sweat when > it's too hot, and I can meditate in the snow naked > and > still be warm. These goals are achievable, I've seen > people who can do it, so it inspires me to move in > that direction." [fen]: > Very interesting. Could you please elaborate > more on how those are > achievable? Have you managed to achieve it? How long > does it take > you? Who > do you consult with? Who is your guidance? Unfortunately, these qualities I strive for are not conveniently all bundled up into one super-teacher who I follow. They are spread out over many people. My primary nutritional guide is Jeff Novick, who has posted numerous articles on the web. I've met many lamas, taoists, chinese mahayanists who exhibit the kind of qualities that I talked about above. For right view, I rely on the Majjhima Nikaya, Samyutta Nikaya, and the Visuddhimagga as my primary guides. I've talked to and personally observed cultivators from different spiritual traditions who can eat very little, sleep very little, have strong muscular bodies, impervious to extreme weather, great immune system, never get sick, etc. For virtue, my father is a great role model. I also have some other role models that you might not expect. I look up to the fictional Reverend Beebe from the movie "Room with a view" for a shining example on how to transcend social stratification and warmly communicate with people with any background. As far as what I have personally attained, it's an ongoing adventure, who knows how it will end? After a good yoga session, my body is pliable and relaxed, and I can sit between 1 and two hours in full lotus without my legs going numb or tingly. On days when I work 8-10 hours and have to think deeply, I usually need 6-7 hours of sleep. If I spend the whole day just doing yoga, walking meditation, sitting meditation, then I need only about 4 hours sleep, maybe a 30-45 minute nap in the middle of the day. I usually wake up by 5am, sometimes 3 or 4am and I'll do some extra meditation. I usually eat 1 big meal, two light meals, and one or two small snacks in between as needed. I usually like to have at least 12-16 hours per day though where I don't eat. Immune system wise, and my physical vitality is in my opinion pathetic, but it is relative and I'm comparing it to VERY healthy people, not the average worlding. Increasing my dosage of buddhist meditation will address some of these problems gradually, but I can give it a big boost if I practice some taoist internal kung fu exercises targeting specific needs. There are many competent masters out there, and if you are dedicated and are putting forth a genuine effort to achieve your goals, it seems to work out that you run into opportunites to learn from them. If I were to rate the importance of diet, exercise, meditation and assign their weight in contributing to optimal health: 50%: Proper/Right view in the buddhist sense - leads to happy, calm, relaxed, joyful mind and body 30%: meditation and proper breathing (relaxed, slow, deep) - smooth out the flow of blood, lymph, bioelectric energy fields/chi channels, build a large reserve energy in the 8 chi vessels to facilitate spiritual growth, jhanic absorptions 15%: proper exercise: yoga, external/internal qi-gong, tai-chi. Most western excercises are fun but expend more energy than they build. Don't overdo non-optimal forms of exercise 5%: proper diet. Caveat: an improper or severely unhealthy diet could change the weighting of this optimal health equation. For example, if you eat at mcdonalds 3 times a day, it doesn't matter how much qi-gong and meditation and right view you have, you're going to die prematurely. -fk 7714 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 3:36pm Subject: 6 Pairs -calm, lightness, pliancy, wieldiness, proficiency, uprightness Dear Erik, I’ve been pulling out lots of texts to supplement my poor recollection about the 6 Pairs (Yugalakaani). As you said earlier, the term yugala (as in Sk) means acouple or pair and the Latin & Greek forms suggest yoking. Ven. Nyanaponika discusses the Pairs in ‘Abhidhamma Studies’ (which is probably the book you had in New York).: ‘The twelve factors, beginninning with ‘tranquillity of mental concomitants’(kaya-passaddhi’ always arise together. They occur only in good consciousness and are common to all types of it (sobhana -sadharana). In the Athasalani they are sometimes called ‘the six pairs’ (cha yugalakani) for short.’ Now let me list them and quote from ‘Cetasikas’ by Nina Van Gorkom: ‘ Summarizing the six pairs of sobhana cetasikas, they are: calm of cetasikas, kaya-passaddhi . calm of citta, citta-passaddhi lightness of cetasikas, kaya-lahuta lightness of citta, citta-lahuta pliancy of cetasikas, kaya-muduta pliancy of citta, citta-muduta wieldiness of cetasikas, kaya-kammannata wieldiness of citta, dtra-kammannata proficiency of cetasikas, kaya-pagunnata proficiency of citta, citya-pagunnata uprightness of cetasikas, kaya-ujukata uprightness of citta, citta-ujukata These six pairs accompany all sobhana cittas. They are necessairy for each kind of kusala, be it generosity (dana), morality (sila), the development of calm (samatha) or insight (vipassana). They assist the kusala citta and its accompanying cetasikas, so that wholesomeness can be performed in an efficient way. They are counteractive to the hindrances of sensuous desire, ill-will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and regret, and doubt. when the six pairs are present the hindrances do not arise; citta and cetasikas are healthy and skilful in performing their functions. Right understanding is the factor which conditions most of all the development of all the wholesome qualities represented by the six pairs. In the arahat they have reached perfection. ‘ Sarah:>>For example, when we read about kaya-lahuta (lightness > of mental > > factors) and citta-lahuta (lightness of citta), people have an idea > that these > > refer to feeling light and energetic in a conventional sense. In > fact they > > have to refer to wholesome states of mind (even if one is on one's > death-bed, > > they can arise). They're opposed to thina and middha (sloth and > torpor) which > > we discussed sometime back as having nothing to do with conventional > > slugishness.Thina and middha refer to sluggishness with regard to > skilful > > states of mind. > > > Kaya-muduta (pliancy of cetasikas) and citta muduta (pliancy of > citta) are also > > interesting. They are the opponents of wrong view and conceit. As > the mana > > discussions have shown recently, when there is mana, there is > mental rigidity > > or intolerance and comparing. So kaya muduta has nothing to do with > the body or > > flexibility! > Erik: > I would question this interpretation using only "cetasikas" (how do > mental factorsrelate to the body, other than the mind & body being > they are mutuality conditions for one another?), given it is > specifically called as KAYA muduta. Erik, you sent me back to the 'drawing board' to double check these details. KAYA means body, as you say, but it can also stand for ‘mental body’. There are 3 kinds of muduta (rupa, kaya and citta muduta) referring to plaincy of corporeality, mental factors and consciousness respectively. Rupassa lahuta (physical agility) and upassa muduta (physical elasticity) are both rupas as suggested. They are of course connected with the pliancy and suppleness of the body you mention below. These (along with all other rupas) are quite different from the 'lightness and pliancy' referred to as mental factors in samatha and vipassana development. To quote from the Vism (X1V, 144): ‘the tranquillizing of the body is tranquillity of the body. The tranquillizing of consciousness is tranquillity of consciousness. And here body means the three (mental) aggregates, feeling, (perception and formations) (see Dhs.40).’ This is an important point to understand, otherwise one may read all the other references to kaya or body when talking about these cetasikas to refer to physical body. So in this next extract from Vism (XX, 116), again it is referring to these same 6 pairs with regard to their influence on the cittas and cetasikas; ‘Tranquillity is tranquillity due to insight. As he is sitting at that time in his night or day quarters perhaps there is no fatigue or heaviness or rigidity or unwieldines or sickness or crookedness in his body and his mind, but rather his body and mind are tranquillized, light, malleable, wieldy, quite sharp and straight. ‘ To give just one more example of how easily they can be confused, I’ll just digress a little to refer to the last pair (translated in the Vism quote as ‘straight’) which I found it useful to consider. I’ll use Nina’s quotes here from ‘Cetasikas’: uprightness of cerasika, kaya-ujukata uprightness of citta, citta-ujukata ‘According to the Dhammasangani (50, 51) this pair of cetasikas consists in straightness and rectitude, being without deflection, twist or crookedness. The Atrhasalini (I, Book I, Parr IV, Chapter I, 131) explains that uprightness of cetasikas and of citta crush crookedness and that they are the opponents of the corruptions, such as deception and craftiness, which cause crookedness in mental factors and consciousness (1 See also the Visuddhimagga , XIV , 149) . Uprightness is the opponent of deception and craftiness. There may be moments that one's behaviour is insincere. We read in the Visudahimagga (I, 60-84) about the behaviour of the monk who tries to obtain the requisites by hypocrisy, by hinting, flattery, indirect talk, grimaces and. gestures. He pretends to be better than he in reality is in order to be admired. We read (I, 70) : Here someone of evil wishes, a prey to wishes, eager to be admired, (thinking) "Thus people will admire me", composes his way of walking, composes his way of lying down; he walks studied, stands studiedly, sits studiedly, lies down studiedly; he walks as though concentrated, stands, sits, lies down as though concentrated: and he is one who meditates in public...’ We all want to be admred and therefore we may pretend to be better than we really are. Even when it seems that we are generous there tend to be selfish motives for our actions. We may expect something in return, we want to be praised, to be popular. Speech which seems pleasing may be directed towards selfish gain. Uprightness crushes such insincerity. It assists each kusala citta. There are many degrees of uprightness. To the extent that right understanding develops also uprightness develops. The ariyan is called the person who is on the straight, true and proper way (ujupatipanno, Vis. VII, 90-92) .’ (end quote). Ven Nyanaponika refers to the Sutta-Nipata (v250) which mentions‘delighted in straightness linked to gentleness’ (ajjava-maddave rato) and to the Metta Sutta (v.143): ‘Let him be capable and upright, truly upright Easily admonished, gentle ande not haughty.’ These aren’t references to a straight back or strong knee! > I am not suggesting this in the sense we can stretch into various > contortions performing yoga asanas, but am referring to a sort of > pliancy and suppleness to the body that can be experienced, for > example, in seated meditation, when there is the development of > samatha & absorption. There is a special "lightness & pliancy" which > is one of the characteristics of effective samatha and jhana > meditation, that carries out throughout the day even outsidfe of > formal meditation practice one can experience. These factors are > experienced directly by meditators once one's meditation begins to > get traction. Erik, I think you’ll find all these references refer to the cetasikas mentioned. Ven Nyanaponika mentions several more suttas in this regard. This one is short: ‘With consciousness thus purified and cleansed, without blemish and stain, pliant and workable, steady and unshakable, he turns his mind to the extinction of the taints (MN1 182,347) Erik, I’ve found it very helpful to consider these ‘Pairs’ in more detail and to re-read the chapter in Nina’s book. As you know, none of this is to suggest that I don’t highly recommend yoga practices, healthy diets and the rest. I am also not suggesting that for high levels of samatha and jhana practice that there aren’t specific conditions mentioned. However for the development of vipassana and samatha in daily life, it helps to know that stiff knees and crooked backs should not be seen as an impediment! Best wishes and see you soon! Sarah p.s (I'll leave my 'Cradle Raider' comments til then!!) 7715 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 9:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Time out Herman Many thanks for your kind words, and please know that we have all benefited from your challenging questions, astute observations and well-chosen comments. We look forward to seeing you back again before not too long. My very best wishes for everything coming up over the next period. Jon --- Herman wrote: > Dear Friends, > > I am going to be otherwise occupied for the next few weeks . I > apologise to those who may be waiting for a reply of some sort, > unfortunately it will have to wait for a few weeks. I hope the ski > slopes of the South Island of New Zealand and my knees will develop a > kind of synergy. > > I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the members of this forum, > for the grace, patience, lovingkindness and wisdom extended to those > who knock on the door. > > Groups like this reinforce in me a belief in the underlying > benevolence of all that is known and unknown and all the other stuff > that description misses. > > Ciao for now > > Herman > > 7716 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha-Vipassana Thanks for this correction, Kom, and my apologies to all for the careless mistakes. This sutta is in fact the same as one previously posted by one or two members under the title 'Yuganaddha Sutta - In Tandem'. Thanks also for the link. I post that translation below for ease of reference. Jon Anguttara Nikaya IV.170 Yuganaddha Sutta In Tandem Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > In 'Ways to Arahantship' (AN IV, 165), the Buddha states that > > enlightenment is attained in one of only 4 ways-- > > This is from AN IV.170; it is V. Ananda addressing the Bikkhus. The > numerical discourses as translated by Nyonaponika Thera and B. Bodhi > lists the reference number after the sutta, and not before. > > The translation on access to insights is: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-170.html > > kom 7717 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 4:41pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Frank, --- frank kuan wrote: Frank: The six sets of six is my favorite sutta of all time (mn 148? one forty something anyways). Sometimes when talking about 5 aggregates it can seem abstract and disconnected from our normal moment to moment experience, but when the Buddha goes through the six sense organs, the sense objects, contact, craving associated through each of the six doors, etc, and show that they are impermanent, that if a abiding soul were to exist they would also arise and pass away continuously, which would be an untenable position, it really seems so clear when explained this way. It's just such a practical and clear way that outlines the whole buddhist path. ................................................................... Sarah: I’m returning to your posts as promised. I couldn’t agree more with your comments here. I also find that this sutta (Chachakka Sutta (The Six Sets of Six), MN 148, contains the essence of the Buddha’s teachings and it is a good example of the abhidhamma and suttana in perfect accord. It also contains the heart of satipatthana; what else is to be known other than seeing, visible object, contact, feeling, attachment and the other realities discussed, all as anatta: ‘Seeing thus, bhikkhus, a well-taught noble disciple becomes disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, disenchanted with eye-consciousness, disenchanted witheye-contact, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with craving.........Being disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion (his mind) is liberated....’ ................................................................... Frank: People have to want to learn on their own initiative. But I digress. Many other suttas in the MN I am very fond of, but I am short an time and will have to talk about them another time. ................................................................ Sarah: Frank, I look forward to it;-) ................................................................. Frank: Already I have wasted too much of my precious life doing meaningless things. I've resolved to retire from the rat race next year, about 5 years short of my original timetable to devote full time to dhamma practice. ....................................................................... Sarah: As I understand the sutta, these same realities appearing through the 6 doorways are just as real in the rat race as out of it! I wonder, having seen the value in this sutta, why you separate your dhamma practice from daily life as it is? Even when we do ‘meaningless things’, awareness and understanding can surely develop? (These comments don’t mean I don’t also often wish to have more time for dhamma study and less work, but it is only wishing;-) ............................................................................. Frank: I may ordain in the future, I may not. I may live in a dhamma community somwehre in the world with other serious cultivators, or maybe I'll live secluded in a forest for 20 years with only animals as my company walking around naked subsisting on nuts, seeds, mangos, young coconuts. ........................................................................... Sarah: Yes, we can dream and plan what would be best for dhamma purposes and other less noble aims, but they are just dreams and plans, mostly following lobha. Still, even at these times there can be awareness of thinking, another conditioned reality and any of those experiences through the sense doors. Seeing is just as real in the computerized office as in the forest! ............................................................................. Frank: now I just want to drop it all and return to nature. I'm heavily into yoga (taoist, indian, tibetan), health, nutrition. .................................................................................. Sarah: I share many of your preferences and lifestyle choices (even in a busy city!), but I recognize them as preferences and objects of lobha or at least common-sense mechanisms for keeping these khandhas ‘on the road’! .................................................................................... Frank: About a year and a half ago, I had a major insight, one of those "a-ha", lightbulbs turn on, devas are singing kind of moments where a simple truth that has been intellectually obvious for my whole lifetime suddenly crystalizes and becomes part of my moment to moment awareness. If I were to ask anyone, if you had a choice, would you abide in a pleasant state or unpleasant state? Without question, everyone would answer "a pleasant state." It doesn't matter what kind of twist I throw in, I could stipulate, what if you're asleep, what if you're in a different country, what if I wave my hands in front of your face and try to distract you, everyone would pick (a) and never (b) (unpleasant state). So if that's the case, why would anyone ever choose to be angry? That was my light bulb moment, and anger really loosened and became easy to let go of after that. ......................................................................... We may think there’s no more anger for now, but what about all the little uneasy feelings, minor irritations, petty resentments and all. Maybe now we’re not really being tested, but what about when life doesn’t go our way such as when we’re sick and in pain. The tests are when it’s hard. I’m thinking of the Dhammapada story when the maidservant turned up later and later to test her mistress’ good humour (perhaps someone can supply the details or reference?).Don’t we all have our limits? ...................................................................... Frank: What else about me? Let's see. I like to rock climb, surf, hike, bike, I spend lots of time walking/jogging on the beach. ...................................................................... Sarah: These all, along with the dhamma study and writing, are Jon’s idea of a dream retirement and the reason he ‘fought’ to keep his leg a couple of years ago when he went through the tumour experience. .................................................................... Frank: I hardly ever socialize. I'm voluntarily celibate (strict - to the point where I don't tolerate lustful thoughts for more than a few seconds). My idea of a good time is spending friday or saturday night reading the MN or SN or visudhimagga, and discussing insights in dhamma with other serious cultivators. That's me in a nutshell, probably more than most of you wanted to know :-) ................................................................... Our Friday and Saturday nights are pretty similar to yours - a walk in the nearby hills followed by similar texts, early bed and early rise, not much socializing..;-)) .................................................................. Frank: I'll probably be lurking on this list most of the time, but occasionally I'll pop in with some left field comment that just makes everyone wonder what planet I'm from. .................................................................. Sarah: I think we’ve had a few of these already;-) I don’t get the impression you’re a lurker, Frank! Frank, from your later posts, I fully understand what you’re saying about diet and kinds of exercise, moving chi and the rest...and follow many similar principles in mild doses myself. In fact. I was just reminded as i was writing about the story when King Pasenadi Kosala visited the Buddha having over-indulged in food. The Buddha admonished him on the evils of over-eating in a couple of stanzas (in the Dhammapada) which the King couldn't remember. So the King's nephew had to memorize them and repeat them to the king at meal times! However, where we differ is that for you, the purpose of the diet and exercise is so that you can sit in a lotus pose for several hours a day to ‘practice’, I think. With such confidence as you have in ‘nitty-gritty dhamma’ as exemplified in the Six Sets of Six, I wonder why you wish to sit for several hours like this or why you feel that this is the way to understand the Teachings? Look forward to many more interesting posts from you, Sarah 7718 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 6:07pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation --- Sarah wrote: > However, where we differ is that for you, the purpose of the diet and exercise > is so that you can sit in a lotus pose for several hours a day to `practice', I > think. With such confidence as you have in `nitty-gritty dhamma' as exemplified > in the Six Sets of Six, I wonder why you wish to sit for several hours like > this or why you feel that this is the way to understand the Teachings? Given the Buddha enjoined those practicing Satipatthana to seek out seclusion, sit cross-legged, spine erect, I think the question should go the other way: why do you think we can glibly ignore the Buddha's advice on such practices? If this practice were not conducive to coming to a realization of the Dhamma, do you believe the Buddha would have taught this practice in the first place? In my experience it is far more helpful to begin with mindfulness in a more controlled setting, such as sitting, than it is to think it's possible to have mindfulness in daily activities withouth having had this sort fo training. Without mindfulness cultivated in more controlled setting there is in all likelihood no mindfulness to speak of in daily activities. There may be the belief there is mindfulness, but true mindfulness is remaining focused undistractedly, and if the mind scatters or becomes distracted for even a few moments, then you cannot reasonably call it Right Mindfulness. If you can maintain awareness on a single object of focus going about your daily activities for longer than ten seconds without having cultivated mindfulness in sitting or another controlled setting, more power to you. But how many can honestly say they have this ability? If there isn't the degree of unbroken mindfulness to be able to remain focused on an object for more than ten seconds (at least), then there is no sati to speak of. The most basic mindfulness instructions begin with maintaining mindfulness on the breath unbroken for at least ten outbreaths, without a lapse--ten breaths without the monkey-mind seizing control and wandering to and fro. When true sati is established, the mind can remain focused on a single object undistractedly for a long enough time until absorption arises. Hopefully you're not also imlpying cultivating the jhanas (Right Concentration) in this fashion is unnecessary or unhelpful. I do not know of a single Sutta where Right Concentration is mentioned apart from the discussion of the four (or five) jhanas. 7719 From: Dan Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 7:20pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Erik: > but true mindfulness is remaining focused undistractedly, and if the > mind scatters or becomes distracted for even a few moments, then you > cannot reasonably call it Right Mindfulness. Dan: This sounds more like 'concentration' to me. How does concentration (ekaggata or samadhi, take your pick) differ from mindfulness (sati)? And sati from samma-sati? And samma-sati from pañña? 7720 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:51pm Subject: Buddha's teachings - Dhamma Theory I thought of sharing... Enjoy! Cybele The Dhamma Theory >"(...) >The system that the Abhidhamma Pitaka articulates is >simultaneously a philosophy, a psychology, and an >ethics, all integrated into the framework of a program >for liberation. The Abhidhamma may be described as a >philosophy because it proposes an ontology, a >perspective on the nature of the real. This >perspective has been designated the "dhamma theory" >(dhammavada). Briefly, the dhamma theory maintains >that ultimate reality consists of a multiplicity of >elementary constituents called dhammas. The dhammas >are not noumena hidden behind phenomena, not "things >in themselves" as opposed to "mere appearances," but >the fundamental components of actuality. The dhammas >fall into two broad classes: the unconditioned >dhamma, which is solely Nibbana, and the conditioned >dhammas, which are the momentary mental and material >phenomena that constitute the process of experience. >The familiar world of substantial objects and enduring >persons is, according to the dhamma theory, a >conceptual construct fashioned by the mind out of the >raw data provided by the dhammas. The entities of our >everyday frame of reference possess merely a >consensual reality derivative upon the foundational >stratum of the dhammas. It is the dhammas alone that >possess ultimate reality: determinate existence "from >their own side" (sarupato) independent of the mind's >conceptual processing of the data. Such a >conception of the nature of the real seems to be >already implicit in the Sutta Pitaka, particularly in >the Buddha's disquisitions on the aggregates, sense >bases, elements, dependent arising, etc., but it >remains there tacitly in the background as the >underpinning to the more pragmatically formulated >teachings of the Suttas. Even in the Abhidhamma >Pitaka itself the dhamma theory is not yet expressed >as an explicit philosophical tenet; this comes only >later, in the Commentaries. Nevertheless, though as >yet implicit, the theory still comes into focus in its >role as the regulating principle behind the >Abhidhamma's more evident task, the project of >systemization. > >This project starts from the premise that to attain >the wisdom that knows things "as they really are," a >sharp wedge must be driven between those types of >entities that possess ontological ultimacy, that is, >the dhammas, and those types of entities that exist >only as conceptual constructs but are mistakenly >grasped as ultimately real. Proceeding from this >distinction, the Abhidhamma posits a fixed number of >dhammas as the building blocks of actuality, most of >which are drawn from the Suttas. It then sets out to >define all the doctrinal terms used in the Suttas in >ways that reveal their identity with the ontological >ultimates recognized by the system. On the basis of >these definitions, it exhaustively classifies the >dhammas into a net of pre-determined categories and >modes of relatedness which highlight their place >within the system's structure. And since the system >is held to be a true reflection of actuality, this >means that the classification pinpoints the place of >each dhamma within the overall structure of actuality. > The Abhidhamma's attempt to comprehend the nature of >reality, contrary to that of classical science in the >West, does not proceed from the standpoint of a >neutral observer looking outwards towards the external >world. The primary concern of the Abhidhamma is to >understand the nature of experience, and thus the >reality on which it focuses is conscious reality, the >world as given in experience, comprising both >knowledge and the known in the widest sense. For this >reason the philosophical enterprise of the Abhidhamma >shades off into a phenomenological psychology. To >facilitate the understanding of experienced reality, >the Abhidhamma embarks upon an elaborate analysis of >the mind as it presents itself to intospective >meditation. It classifies consciousness into a >variety of types, specifies the factors and function >of each type, correlates them with their objects and >physiological bases, and shows how the different types >of consciousness link up with each other and with >material phenomena to constitute the ongoing process >of experience. > >This analysis of mind is not motivated by theoretical >curiosity but by the overriding practical aim of the >Buddha's teaching, the attainment of deliverance from >suffering. Since the Buddha traces suffering to our >tainted attitudes- a mental orientation rooted in >greed, hatred, and delusion- the Abhidhamma's >phenomenological psychology also takes on the >character of a psychological ethics, understanding the >term "ethics" not in the narrow sense of a code of >morality but as a complete guide to noble living and >mental purification. Accordingly we find that the >Abhidhamma distinguishes states of mind principally on >the basis of ethical criteria: the wholesome and the >unwholesome, the beautiful factors and the >defilements. Its schematization of consciousness >follows a hierarchical plan that corresponds to the >successive stages of purity to which the Buddhist >disciple attains by practice of the Buddha's path. >This plan traces the refinement of the mind through >the progression of meditative absorptions, the >fine-material-sphere and immaterial-sphere jhanas, >then through the stages of insight and the wisdom of >the supramundane paths and fruits. Finally, it shows >the whole scale of ethical development to culminate in >the perfection of purity attained with the mind's >irreversible emancipation from all defilements. > >All three dimensions of the Abhidhamma - the >philosophical, the psychological, and the ethical- >derive their final justification from the cornerstone >of the Buddha's teaching, the program of liberation >announced by the Four Noble Truths. The ontological >survey of dhammas stems from the Buddha's injunction >that the noble truth of suffering, identified with the >world of conditioned phenomena as a whole, must be >fully understood (parinneyya). The prominence of >mental defilements and requisites of enlightenment in >its schemes of categories, indicative of it's >psychological and ethical concerns, connects the >Abhidhamma to the second and forth noble truths, the >origin of suffering and the way leading to its end. >And the entire taxonomy of dhammas elaborated by the >system reaches its consummation in the "unconditioned >element" (asankhata dhatu), which is Nibbana, the >third noble truth, that of the cessation of >suffering. (...)" > >From Bhikkhu Bodhi's introduction to Mahathera >Narada's translation of Acariya Anuruddha's >'Abhidhammattha Sangaha - A Comprehensive Manual of >Abhidhamma- the Philosophical Psychology of Buddhism' 7721 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:10pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > Erik: > > but true mindfulness is remaining focused undistractedly, and if > the > > mind scatters or becomes distracted for even a few moments, then > you > > cannot reasonably call it Right Mindfulness. > > Dan: > This sounds more like 'concentration' to me. How does concentration > (ekaggata or samadhi, take your pick) differ from mindfulness (sati)? > And sati from samma-sati? And samma-sati from pañña? Hi Dan, Right Concentration to me means: "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 & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which 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." This differs from Right Mindfulness in that Right Mindfulness is: "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness." (cf. the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta) Right mindfulness by itself doesn't have the characteristic of absorption in the jhanas (rapture, etc.), nor of "unification" of the mind, which is a characteristic of Right Concentration. Nevertheless these two work together (with other factors) to bring about the discernment that frees: "And how are the seven factors of awakening developed & pursued so as to bring clear knowing & release to their culmination? There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening ... persistence as a factor of awakening ... rapture as a factor of awakening ... serenity as a factor of awakening... concentration as a factor of awakening ... equanimity as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. This is how the seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." Wisdom and discernment knows the difference between the skillful and the unskillful; it knows that all phenomena are devoid of self- nature, and that all composed phenomena are impermanent and painful; it also knows the arising and passing away of things with reference to the Four Noble Truths, for example formations: "And what are formations, what is the origin of formations, what is the cessation of formations, what is the way leading to the cessation of formations? There are these three kinds of formations: the bodily formation, the verbal formation, the mental formation. With the arising of ignorance there is the arising of formations. With the cessation of ignorance there is the cessation of formations. The way leading to the cessation of formations is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view...right concentration." At least as far as I've heard. ;) 7722 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Anders > Thanks Jon! Certainly an entirely different exposition of the > eightfold than what I've seen before! > How does your explanation of the eightfold path as a moment of > consciousness relate to the sutta definition of the eightfold path > (this one from the Mahasatipathhana sutta): Thanks for this question, Anders (a question that I believe others would like to see answered too). I will try to explain. The Noble Eightfold Path is given to us as the Fourth Noble Truth. The Four Noble Truths are, as we all know, truths that were realised by the Buddha at his enlightenment. They were subsequently passed on by the Buddha in his discourses, in passages that go something like this: 'There are these truths, (i) the truth of suffering, [and so on for truths (ii) - (iv)]. (i) And what is the truth of suffering? Birth is suffering etc [and so on for truths (ii) - (iv)]. This context is important. A truth (eg. 'Birth is suffering') is something to be understood, to be realized. It cannot be a path of action (or to use a neat Howard term, a thing-to-do). The truths are, for want of a better term, descriptive in nature. Coming to the 4th Noble Truth, this is the truth of the *path leading to complete cessation*. 'Complete cessation' here means arahatship, the last of the 4 stages of enlightenment. In the suttas this path, the path that leads to arahatship, is taken as beginning with the first stage of enlightenment. Only then has one entered the path, or stream, that leads inevitably to full enlightenment (hence, 'stream-enterer'). One has become, in the words of the suttas, a 'trainer'. Anyone who has not attained to the first stage of enlightenment is an 'uninstructed worldling'. So the Noble Eightfold Path is the path that begins at stream-entry and ends at arahatship. It is supramundane. It has eight factors, and these factors are quite inseparable; if any one factor were not present it would no longer be the eightfold path. Now just as the Fourth Noble Truth itself is 'descriptive' in nature, rather than a 'thing-to-do', so also is the description of the factors of that path. This description tells us exactly what happens at a path moment (ie. a moment of enlightenment). More specifically, the descriptions of the various individual factors spell out the function or manifestation of each of the 8 mental factors that arise together at the moment of path consciousness. For example: - the factor of mindfulness (sati cetasika) performs the function of calling to mind the object (nibbana) and being established on it (a function that is elsewhere described as the 4 foundations, or establishments, of mindfulness) - the factor of energy (viriya cetasika) performs the 4-fold function of preventing unarisen unwholesome states from arising, etc. (elsewhere described as the 4 right endeavours) - the factor of concentration (samadhi cetasika) performs its function of being absorbed in the object with an intensity equivalent to that of one of the levels of mundane jhana. and so on for the other factors. This is how I understand the sutta description of the factors of the Eightfold Path. So if the Eightfold Path is purely supramundane, what then is the development that leads to that Path? Well to my understanding, this is what the Satipatthana Sutta is all about -- mundane insight (ie. the mundane 5-fold path). So to summarise, my understanding from the Tipitaka and commentaries is as follows: Noble Eightfold Path = supramundane moment of consciousness (enlightenment). Mundane insight/path = 5-fold path consciousness = satipatthana. Anders, I hope you find this interesting. You might like to consider this interpretation when you are next looking at a sutta. Jon > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge > with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice > leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. > > "And what is right resolve? Aspiring to renunciation, to freedom from > ill will, to harmlessness: This is called right resolve. > > "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive > speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called > right speech. > > "And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from > stealing, & from sexual intercourse. This is called right action. > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a noble > disciple, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going > with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood. > > "And what is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates > desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent > for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, > unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising > of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the > maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & > culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called > right effort. > > "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk > remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & > mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the > world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind > in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, > alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to > the world. This is called right mindfulness. > > "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 & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He > enters & remains in the third jhana, of which 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. > 7723 From: frank kuan Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:51pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Sarah, (and hello Erik) It is my turn to have to take a raincheck on answering your email :-) I have a deadline coming up in a week, a pretty major one. I take little breaks to scan my mail and lists, do my yoga, eat and sleep, and that's about it. But I promise to get back to you later. Really, I am trying to be a lurker :-) Even with my closest friends, I sometimes have to clarify what I mean, how much more so talking to people on lists who don't know me? It's such an enormous amount of resources required for communication in any medium. Talk to you in about a week. Metta, -fk 7724 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Anders --- Anders Honore wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > In 'A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' (translation of the > > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha) it explains at Ch VII, Guide to #38 [The > Four > > Noble Truths]-- > > > > 'The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the > Noble > > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path > factors > > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths.' > > > > While there is no mundane Eightfold Path as such, there is a mundane > > 5-fold path. This is a moment of satipatthana, such moments being > > accompanied by 5 of the 8 path factors. .... > How do you relate this understanding to the passage in the Dhammapada > where the Buddha praises the eightfold path as the first and foremost > of all paths and practises? I'm not familiar with that one off-hand. If you give me a reference I'll have a look at it. > > 1. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as the Fourth > Noble > > Truth means a moment of consciousness when all 8 path-factors arise > > together. This occurs only at a moment of magga-citta > > (path-consciousness), ie. at one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. > It is > > a moment of supramundane consciousness, with Nibbana as its object. > > Hmm, I gather that terms like "moments of path-consciousness" > achieved only at the moment one becomes a stream-entrant, once- > retunrer etc. are Abhidhammic conventions. I haven'tseeen any > reference of them in the Sutta Pitaka myself. As to whether the term 'magga citta' appears in the suttas, i'd have to check it out. However, the 'clues' are there throughout the suttas, and are fleshed out in the commentaries. I'll keep my eyes open and see if I notice anything (others may be able to come in on this). Jon > > 2. There is a mundane version of the path, which is a moment when > 5 (or > > sometimes 6) of the factors of the eightfold path (in their 'mundane > > version') arise. This refers to a moment of satipatthana > (or 'mundane > > path-consciousness'). Its object will be any presently appearing > reality. > > It may arise at any time, given the right understanding and other > > conditions. > > > > 3. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as one of the 37 > > requisites of enlightenment means, at any time before actual > > enlightenment, a moment of mundane (5-fold) path-consciousness and, > at or > > subsequent to the first stage of enlightenment, the supramundane 8- > fold > > path consciousness. 7725 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > The reason why I am asking you this kind of question is that I am trying > to > understand if the 8-fold paths, as taught in the tipitakas, exclusively > mean > satipatthana or does it mean satipatthana *AND* other levels of kusala. > > My understanding of TA Sujin's interpretation of the tipitaka and the > commentaries is that it doesn't include other kinds of kusalas. > However, I > also understand that without the appropriate other kusalas, magga citta > cannot arise. Also, the suttas often talk about the 8-fold paths in a > way > that it sometimes seem to point to non-satipatthana, e.g., right > view=belief in kamma, belief that there is brahma who knows for > themselves the existence of last world, this world, etc., right > concentration=jhana. I hope that what I have just written in reply to Anders' post has pretty well covered this aspect too. By the way, the Visuddhimagga (XXII, 39-40) has some interesting observations about the differences between moments of mundane insight (ie satipatthana, or 5-fold path moment) and a moment of supramundane (8-fold) path consciousness, which I think may throw some light on your question too. It explains that at moments of mundane insight, only 1 of the 4 foundations of mindfulness is said to occur, depending on whether the object of that moment is body, feeling, mind, or mental object, and likewise only 1 one or other of the 4 efforts/endeavours, depending on the nature of the effort. However, at any of the moments of 8-fold path consciousness, "it is the one kind of mindfulness whose object is nibbana that is called the 'four foundations of mindfulness' because it accomplishes the function of abandoning the four perceptions of beauty, etc., in the four things beginning with the body. And also the one kind of energy is called 'four right endeavours' because it accomplishes the four functions beginning with preventing the arising of the unarisen unprofitable." A difficult area, this one. I hope this makes some sense for you. Jon 7726 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 7:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/29/01 10:55:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > > For example: > - the factor of mindfulness (sati cetasika) performs the function of > calling to mind the object (nibbana) and being established on it (a > function that is elsewhere described as the 4 foundations, or > establishments, of mindfulness) > - the factor of energy (viriya cetasika) performs the 4-fold function of > preventing unarisen unwholesome states from arising, etc. (elsewhere > described as the 4 right endeavours) > - the factor of concentration (samadhi cetasika) performs its function of > being absorbed in the object with an intensity equivalent to that of one > of the levels of mundane jhana. > and so on for the other factors. > > This is how I understand the sutta description of the factors of the > Eightfold Path. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What you wrote in this post is very interesting to me, and I certainly do accept that there is a "supermundane" path. But I also have some serious reservations about your interpretation of the Noble Eightfold Path. The examples you choose above, plus right view and possibly right intention are ones I would have chosen as well to make your point. However, other choices such as right speech, action, and livelihood are far more problematical. Also, if one looks over the 8 limbs of the path as described below, for the most part they do not read like facets of a transcendent mind state, but rather as conventional descriptions of patterns of behavior over time (even including right effort, and including that part of right view which is " knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress"). ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge > > with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to > > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice > > leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. > > > > "And what is right resolve? Aspiring to renunciation, to freedom from > > ill will, to harmlessness: This is called right resolve. > > > > "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive > > speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called > > right speech. > > > > "And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from > > stealing, & from sexual intercourse. This is called right action. > > > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a noble > > disciple, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going > > with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood. > > > > "And what is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates > > desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent > > for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > > have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, > > unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising > > of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the > > maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & > > culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called > > right effort. > > > > "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk > > remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & > > mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the > > world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind > > in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, > > alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to > > the world. This is called right mindfulness. > > > > "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 & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He > > enters & remains in the third jhana, of which 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. > > > ================================ 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) 7727 From: wynn Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 0:10am Subject: No feeling? Hi, Can you explain this to me? Does it means that Arahants do not have feeling/sensation? === Regarding the experience of the arahant, the Suttanipata states that by the destruction of all feelings/sensations a monk lives desireless and at peace. [1] Once Sariputta was asked what happiness there can be when there is no feeling/sensation.[2] He explained that the absence of feeling/sensation itself is happiness. [3] 1. Vedananam khaya bhikkhu nicchato parinibbuto: Sn 739 2. Kim pan'ettha n'atthi vedayitan ti: A IV 415 3. Etad eva khv'ettha sukham yad ettha n'atthi vedayitam === Thank you, Wynn 7728 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 0:26am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Nice quotes, Erik. But I was hoping you'd tackle my questions--the ones I asked. Direct answers. From your understanding. > > Erik: > > > but true mindfulness is remaining focused undistractedly, and if > > the > > > mind scatters or becomes distracted for even a few moments, then > > you > > > cannot reasonably call it Right Mindfulness. > > > > Dan: > > This sounds more like 'concentration' to me. How does concentration > > (ekaggata or samadhi, take your pick) differ from mindfulness > (sati)? > > And sati from samma-sati? And samma-sati from pañña? > > Hi Dan, > > Right Concentration to me means: > > "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 & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He > enters & remains in the third jhana, of which 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." > > This differs from Right Mindfulness in that Right Mindfulness is: > > "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk > remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & > mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the > world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind > in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, > alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to > the world. This is called right mindfulness." > (cf. the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta) > > Right mindfulness by itself doesn't have the characteristic of > absorption in the jhanas (rapture, etc.), nor of "unification" of the > mind, which is a characteristic of Right Concentration. > > Nevertheless these two work together (with other factors) to bring > about the discernment that frees: "And how are the seven factors of > awakening developed & pursued so as to bring clear knowing & release > to their culmination? There is the case where a monk develops > mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... > dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops > analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening ... persistence as a > factor of awakening ... rapture as a factor of awakening ... serenity > as a factor of awakening... concentration as a factor of > awakening ... equanimity as a factor of awakening dependent on > seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. > This is how the seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, > bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." > > Wisdom and discernment knows the difference between the skillful and > the unskillful; it knows that all phenomena are devoid of self- > nature, and that all composed phenomena are impermanent and painful; > it also knows the arising and passing away of things with reference > to the Four Noble Truths, for example formations: > > "And what are formations, what is the origin of formations, what is > the cessation of formations, what is the way leading to the cessation > of formations? There are these three kinds of formations: the bodily > formation, the verbal formation, the mental formation. With the > arising of ignorance there is the arising of formations. With the > cessation of ignorance there is the cessation of formations. The way > leading to the cessation of formations is just this Noble Eightfold > Path; that is, right view...right concentration." > > At least as far as I've heard. ;) 7729 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 0:43am Subject: Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Hi Howard and Jon et al., Do you see a distinction between "eightfold path" and "Noble eightfold path"? "Noble" is often used in the sense of "supramundane". Of course, there is the "mundane" eightfold path, or satipatthana with mundane object--development of wisdom. The moments of mundane path may be few and far between, but these are precious moments because they are a basis for panya. Then, there is the conventional path--strictly the everyday, run-of-the mill meanings of the words. This conventional meaning is there and makes sense (I think Jon disagrees with me here . Whatever are we going to do with him!), but this meaning is superficial and not liberating. One of the beauties of the Dhamma and Buddha's exposition is that it so often has many levels of meaning. Jon's role is to keep prompting us to think about things one step deeper than we are accustomed. (Is this a role that you aspiring to, O Jon? Or does it just work out that way sometimes?) Dan 7730 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 0:50am Subject: Re: No feeling? > Can you explain this to me? > Does it means that Arahants do not have feeling/sensation? No. But arahant after death (parinibbana) has no feeling/sensation. > Regarding the experience of the arahant, the Suttanipata states that by the > destruction of all feelings/sensations a monk lives desireless and at peace. An analogy: by destruction of the heart, a monk dies. Also: by destruction of the brain, a monk dies. The extinction of vedana is not necessary for living desireless and at peace. All that is necessary is the destruction of craving. 7731 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 1:43am Subject: Re: Buddha's teachings - Dhamma Theory Dear Cybele, Thanks! kom --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > I thought of sharing... > Enjoy! > > Cybele > > > The Dhamma Theory > > >"(...) > >The system that the Abhidhamma Pitaka articulates is > >simultaneously a philosophy, a psychology, and an > >ethics, all integrated into the framework of a program > >for liberation. The Abhidhamma may be described as a > >philosophy because it proposes an ontology, a 7732 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 1:52am Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Jon, Yes, your answer to Ander's does clarify what the commentaries say about the 8-fold path, even though it doesn't answer this nagging questions about why certain suttas are presented in a certain way. Thank you for the answer in Vissuddhimagga; it is very interesting information. I have started reading that recently, although I am still on the Sila section... kom --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Kom > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > > > I hope that what I have just written in reply to Anders' post has pretty > well covered this aspect too. > 7733 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 2:01am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Frank, > ......................................................................... > We may think there's no more anger for now, but what about all the little > uneasy feelings, minor irritations, petty resentments and all. Maybe now we're > not really being tested, but what about when life doesn't go our way such as > when we're sick and in pain. The tests are when it's hard. I'm thinking of the > Dhammapada story when the maidservant turned up later and later to test her > mistress' good humour (perhaps someone can supply the details or > reference?).Don't we all have our limits? In Majjhima Nikaya 21 Kakacupama Sutta The Simile of the Saw http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn021.html#vedehika It is a good reminder that anger doesn't arise now only because there is no condition for it. As long as we are not an anagami, there is sure to be anger. kom 7734 From: Ken Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 8:56am Subject: Re: toeing the party line....;-) --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Ken, > > We followed up this point with Bruce in Bkk and this reminded me of your post > here: > > > Sarah > > p.s Cybele and friends, there's no party-line to toe here....;-))) What would there be to discuss if we all agreed on every point? > > Hello Sarah After a brief flurry of activity, I seem to have reverted to my lurking ways. This doesn't mean my interest in dsg has waned; to the contrary, in my enthusiasm for what I am learning here, I am still inclined to see the issues in black and white -- one side right, one side wrong etc. Unfortunately, we zealots are the last ones to understand the `party line' we are pushing. I wonder how many times I've seen the explanation that there is no self who controls, there is no self who is controlled, and that dhammas arise only when the conditions for their arising are present. In the post to which you refer, I claimed to understand this, but immediately embarked on a theory which proved only that I didn't. Each time I read your reply and other excellent explanations of satipatthana, I think I am on the right track again but, with amazing speed, I slip back into conventional ways thinking. I have just seen a reference to the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta. Apparently it begins with the story of Bhikkhu Sati who taught a wrong theory on the nature of consciousness, and mistakenly attributed it to the Buddha. The lecture he received began with; "To whomever, you stupid one, have you heard me expounding the doctrine in this manner? Haven't I, in many ways explained consciousness as arising out of conditions; that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions . . ." This would seem to be an example of how we worldlings not only fail to have right understanding at the level of satipatthana, but also get it wrong at the intellectual level. But to think that this conventional lesson actually forms part of the Dhamma would be a mistake, would it not? Even references to conventional wisdom are to be seen in terms of absolute realities. Another good quote, which I found in the same book was, "I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all things." (M III (PTS),p19) I like this so much, I have been treating it as a kind of mantra. (!) Kind regards Ken "I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all things." (M III (PTS),p19) :-) 7735 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 8:59am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > Nice quotes, Erik. But I was hoping you'd tackle my questions--the > ones I asked. Direct answers. From your understanding. I answered your questions directly. What's your motivation for importuning so rudely, I'd like to know. 7736 From: Howard Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: toeing the party line....;-) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/29/01 9:01:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Ken writes: > Another good quote, which I found in the same book was, "I have > taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all > things." (M III (PTS),p19) I like this so much, I have been > treating it as a kind of mantra. (!) > > ========================= I don't blame you. This *is* a great quote! 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) 7737 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 9:40am Subject: Re: toeing the party line....;-) Thanks for this Ken. The fact that you clearly realise the profundity of what the Buddha taught - and the consequent difficulty of comprehending it-is itself a indication of development. robert--- > --- Sarah Procter Abbott > wrote: > > Dear Ken, > > > > We followed up this point with Bruce in Bkk and this reminded me of > your post > > here: > > > > > > > > > Sarah > > > > p.s Cybele and friends, there's no party-line to toe here....;- ))) > What would there be to discuss if we all agreed on every point? > > > > > > Hello Sarah > > After a brief flurry of activity, I seem to have reverted to my > lurking ways. This doesn't mean my interest in dsg has waned; to > the contrary, in my enthusiasm for what I am learning here, I am > still inclined to see the issues in black and white -- one side right, > one side wrong etc. > > Unfortunately, we zealots are the last ones to understand the > `party line' we are pushing. I wonder how many times > I've seen the > explanation that there is no self who controls, there is no self who > is controlled, and that dhammas arise only when the conditions for > their arising are present. In the post to which you refer, I claimed > to understand this, but immediately embarked on a theory which > proved only that I didn't. > > Each time I read your reply and other excellent explanations of > satipatthana, I think I am on the right track again but, with amazing > speed, I slip back into conventional ways thinking. > > I have just seen a reference to the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta. > Apparently it begins with the story of Bhikkhu Sati who taught a > wrong theory on the nature of consciousness, and mistakenly > attributed it to the Buddha. The lecture he received began with; > > "To whomever, you stupid one, have you heard me expounding the > doctrine in this manner? Haven't I, in many ways explained > consciousness as arising out of conditions; that there is no arising > of consciousness without conditions . . ." > > This would seem to be an example of how we worldlings not only > fail to have right understanding at the level of satipatthana, but > also get it wrong at the intellectual level. But to think that this > conventional lesson actually forms part of the Dhamma would be a > mistake, would it not? Even references to conventional wisdom are > to be seen in terms of absolute realities. > > Another good quote, which I found in the same book was, "I have > taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all > things." (M III (PTS),p19) I like this so much, I have been > treating it as a kind of mantra. (!) > > Kind regards > Ken > > "I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere > in all things." (M III (PTS),p19) :-) > 7738 From: m. nease Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 0:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: toeing the party line....;-) Ken, Great post. These rebukes of the Buddha are always bracingly instructive. I've read this one before, (though I think the translation was 'you foolish man'), but forget the source--can you cite it? Thanks, mn --- Ken wrote: "To whomever, you stupid one, have you heard me expounding the doctrine in this manner? Haven't I, in many ways explained consciousness as arising out of conditions; that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions . . ." 7739 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 2:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: toeing the party line....;-) Thanks, Ken. Your honesty about your own patterns of thought can help us all to look at our own tendencies. It's a very familiar pattern which we probably all share: thinking we understand, finding out that our thinking is conventional and that we don't really get it, having a kind of despair at not understanding, and then refocussing on the truth. To me, that sounds like a positive learning process for humans, and probably the only way we grow and develop. It's when we hold onto wrong views and defend them with hard heads and hard hearts, that we don't grow, and fail to set an example for others, as you have here. I found your discussion interesting and encouraging. Robert E. =============================== --- Ken wrote: > Unfortunately, we zealots are the last ones to understand the > `party line' we are pushing. I wonder how many times > I've seen the > explanation that there is no self who controls, there is no self who > is controlled, and that dhammas arise only when the conditions for > their arising are present. In the post to which you refer, I claimed > to understand this, but immediately embarked on a theory which > proved only that I didn't. > > Each time I read your reply and other excellent explanations of > satipatthana, I think I am on the right track again but, with amazing > speed, I slip back into conventional ways thinking. > > I have just seen a reference to the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta. > Apparently it begins with the story of Bhikkhu Sati who taught a > wrong theory on the nature of consciousness, and mistakenly > attributed it to the Buddha. The lecture he received began with; > > "To whomever, you stupid one, have you heard me expounding the > doctrine in this manner? Haven't I, in many ways explained > consciousness as arising out of conditions; that there is no arising > of consciousness without conditions . . ." > > This would seem to be an example of how we worldlings not only > fail to have right understanding at the level of satipatthana, but > also get it wrong at the intellectual level. ... ===== 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" 7740 From: Sarah Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 4:30pm Subject: Catching Up - Robert E Dear Robert E, I've been appreciating all your well-considered posts to this list very much. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Thank you, Sarah, for both your acknowledgment and encouragement. I will > read the > Sutta you recommend as well. I think your comment about 'sadness' and > 'loneliness' being in the mode of aversion to actually be very helpful. It > means > that while the realization of the non-existence of self may initially be > stunning > to the conditioned mind, it is a transitional response, and of course, > ultimately, > this realization is liberating and a cause for joy. There are many snares > along > the way. On the other hand, there may also be a 'legitimate' grieving for > the > loss of that which was a familiar sense of self or way of life, and perhaps > in > completing the grieving process, as one might do for someone else who had > died, > one may be able to go to the next phase with a clear path. > > Not to say that I'm ready to do that, but it's something to look forward to. These are very valid comments too. Of course, there's no sadness or grieving at actual moments of awareness or wisdom, but they so easily slip in at other times and as you suggest there can be grieving for the loss of anything or anyone 'we' are attached to, including the good 'self' or a wrong view. Still, isn't it better to recognize and understand these moments? This can be a condition straight away to 'cut' the story! Robert, I also really appreciated your comments about science and Buddhism to Herman which I thought were very well put. this was just one of many examples: "Perhaps this is because I believe that science can never prove anything other than what it already establishes as a given..." Thank you also for posting the link to the magazine 'Buddhist Door' and its abhidhamma section. I was really interested to see their useful summary and reference to Abhidammattha Sangaha. It seems this was the last issue which is a shame. I was also glad to read that you appreciated the complex conversation with Khun Sujin that Rob posted yesterday (I think). I'm very impressed that you're reading all the details so carefully. Btw, I'm a little familiar with Patanjali from yoga circles, but can't help you with any of the historical information. Of course there were many cultural and religious influences and literary contexts which the Buddha's Teachings should be understood in, but no understanding of anatta at all in Patanjali or any ofther Teachings at the time. In this sense, the Buddha's Teachings and 8fold path are completely original (as Anders suggested), even thought there may be some superficial or cultural resemblance, I'd think. Anyway, i'll have to leave it here..Just to say I enjoy your pleasant posts and style (even when I don't agree with all the points;-). Look forward to more, Sarah 7741 From: Dan Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 7:38pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Oh Erik, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you are full of surprises! I thought you were one who liked direct, no-nonsense, challenging questions and comments. I still think you are, but I am surprised you were offended. That being said, my imputations were indeed rude, and I apologize. It was a misunderstanding on my part.I will try to be more diplomatic in the future. My questions were: How does concentration ... differ from mindfulness (sati)? And sati from samma-sati? And samma-sati from pañña? I think you answered "What is Right Concentration? What is Right Mindfulness? What is wisdom?" Dan > > Nice quotes, Erik. But I was hoping you'd tackle my questions-- the > > ones I asked. Direct answers. From your understanding. > > I answered your questions directly. What's your motivation for > importuning so rudely, I'd like to know. 7742 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Jon, > I'm still a little unsure what role sila plays in one's development, > according to > Theravada doctrine, and whether one should 'work on' one's impurities or > just > leave them alone. Or is the idea to just treat everything with > mindfulness and > let things work themselves out. > > Another way of putting it would be: does one just follow the path and > ignore > karmic tendencies, or does one try to interact with them in some way? Kusala can be classified as dana, sila and bhavana (the last comprising samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana). The kusala that is sila refers to restraint through body, speech and mind. All kinds of kusala were encouraged by the Buddha, and are to be developed. However, we should not confuse the value of developing kusala with an idea of a need to 'work on' one's impurities. This is likely to be just 'us' wanting to have less akusala, or to be a more 'pure' person. It is apparent from the Satipatthana Sutta that akusala per se is not an obstacle to the development of awareness/insight. In the section on Contemplation on Mental Objects (the Five Hindrances), it states that one's impurities can themselves be the object of awareness. The text says-- "Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances. "How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances? "Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I have sensuality,' or when sensuality is not present, he knows with understanding: 'I have no sensuality.'" Note that the text here dealing with akusala is in exactly the same terms as the text dealing with kusala, for example in the section on the factors of enlightenment-- "Here, when the enlightenment factor of mindfulness is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I have the enlightenment factor of mindfulness'; or when the enlightenment factor of mindfulness is absent, he knows with understanding: 'I have not the enlightenment factor of mindfulness'". So it is not a matter of 'doing anything special' when it comes to akusala tendencies. As the commentary to this part of the sutta points out, the hindrances are 'knocked out' by right reflection on an object. 'Right reflection' (yoniso manasikara) here refers I believe to momentary awareness. However, this should not be taken as meaning that one can use awareness to 'deal with' akusala--that would be the 'us' thing again. So the short answer, I think, is to just develop kusala! Jon 7743 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 9:24pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > Oh Erik, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you are full of > surprises! Expect the unexpected! :) > I still think you are, but I am surprised you were offended. Indeed you should be surprised if I were to be offended by something so trivial. In truth I was a tad impatient (I know, I still have to work on the paramita of patience) at what seemed a rather strong demand to repeat myself when I thought I replied clearly already--and I apologize if I directed that impatience at you. I was (and still am) though curious of your motivation for pressing for my take in particular and not doing the investigation yourself. Parato ghoso is only one of the factors in this equation. What is even more important is direct investigation of the Suttas as compared to meditative experience--true dhamma-vicaya. No one can give you those answers but yourself. > That being said, my imputations were indeed rude, and I apologize. Accepted. > My questions were: How does concentration ... differ from mindfulness > (sati)? See the original post. > And sati from samma-sati? Samma sati vs. sati to me would be clear knowledge & remembrance on anything that leads to discernment into the true nature of things. Samma Sati should eventually lead to this type of discernment (wisdom). It also overlaps with dhamma-vicaya. Samma sati can begin at a coarse level ("when breathing in long noting 'breathing in long'") and evolve to a more subtle & refined level as it develops, until it eventually becomes the wisdom that sees things as they are-- which is free from all elaborations and non-conceptual. Other than that see the original post. :) 7744 From: m. nease Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 10:19pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Hello, Jon, Thanks for a clear, concise, balanced and well-cited answer to the deceptively simple question. In this context I think satipatthaana could be called the middle path between 'dealing with akusala' and ignoring it. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Jon, > > > I'm still a little unsure what role sila plays in > one's development, > > according to > > Theravada doctrine, and whether one should 'work > on' one's impurities or > > just > > leave them alone. Or is the idea to just treat > everything with > > mindfulness and > > let things work themselves out. > > > > Another way of putting it would be: does one just > follow the path and > > ignore > > karmic tendencies, or does one try to interact > with them in some way? > > Kusala can be classified as dana, sila and bhavana > (the last comprising > samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana). The kusala > that is sila refers to > restraint through body, speech and mind. > > All kinds of kusala were encouraged by the Buddha, > and are to be > developed. > > However, we should not confuse the value of > developing kusala with an idea > of a need to 'work on' one's impurities. This is > likely to be just 'us' > wanting to have less akusala, or to be a more 'pure' > person. > > It is apparent from the Satipatthana Sutta that > akusala per se is not an > obstacle to the development of awareness/insight. > In the section on > Contemplation on Mental Objects (the Five > Hindrances), it states that > one's impurities can themselves be the object of > awareness. The text > says-- > > "Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental > objects in the mental > objects of the five hindrances. > "How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental > objects in the mental > objects of the five hindrances? > "Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows > with understanding: 'I > have sensuality,' or when sensuality is not present, > he knows with > understanding: 'I have no sensuality.'" > > Note that the text here dealing with akusala is in > exactly the same terms > as the text dealing with kusala, for example in the > section on the factors > of enlightenment-- > > "Here, when the enlightenment factor of mindfulness > is present, a bhikkhu > knows with understanding: 'I have the enlightenment > factor of > mindfulness'; or when the enlightenment factor of > mindfulness is absent, > he knows with understanding: 'I have not the > enlightenment factor of > mindfulness'". > > So it is not a matter of 'doing anything special' > when it comes to akusala > tendencies. > > As the commentary to this part of the sutta points > out, the hindrances are > 'knocked out' by right reflection on an object. > 'Right reflection' > (yoniso manasikara) here refers I believe to > momentary awareness. > However, this should not be taken as meaning that > one can use awareness to > 'deal with' akusala--that would be the 'us' thing > again. > > So the short answer, I think, is to just develop > kusala! > > Jon 7745 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 10:45pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > I apologize if I directed that impatience at you. I was (and still > am) though curious of your motivation for pressing for my take in > particular and not doing the investigation yourself. I always find these questions interesting and helpful to think about and investigate. I thought you might too. In addition, I was looking forward to some sharp insights that you might share with us. I find that the same set of about 20 questions keep popping up and popping up, and just when I think I'm beginning to understand them, they reveal themselves in a new and unexpected context. In practice, it is very easy to confuse sati and samadhi, and to confuse sati with samma-sati, and to confuse samma-sati with panya, so I find it helpful to reflect on the differences. > > My questions were: How does concentration ... differ from > mindfulness > > (sati)? I do see the original post, but I still don't see these questions addressed. Never mind! > > > And sati from samma-sati? > > Samma sati vs. sati to me would be clear knowledge & remembrance > on anything that leads to discernment into the true nature of > things. Samma Sati should eventually lead to this type of discernment > (wisdom). It also overlaps with dhamma-vicaya. Samma sati can begin > at a coarse level ("when breathing in long noting 'breathing in > long'") and evolve to a more subtle & refined level as it develops, > until it eventually becomes the wisdom that sees things as they are-- > which is free from all elaborations and non-conceptual. Fine. Dan 7746 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 10:57pm Subject: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Jon: > > It is apparent from the Satipatthana Sutta that > > akusala per se is not an > > obstacle to the development of awareness/insight. > > In the section on > > Contemplation on Mental Objects (the Five > > Hindrances), it states that > > one's impurities can themselves be the object of > > awareness. Dan: I like your post, and it is clear that the idea "I need to deal with akusala" is rooted in moha and can lead to generation of even more akusala. (However, when there is a good degree of moha, then one of the two ideas "I need to deal with akusala because it's akusala" or "I don't need to deal with akusala because it isn't harmful" is often likely to arise. While not pure, I find the first far less unwholesome than the second. But that's another story.) I'm concerned about your logic that simply because impurities can be the object of awareness that they are not obstacles to the development of insight. must run. The text > > says-- > > > > "Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental > > objects in the mental > > objects of the five hindrances. > > "How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental > > objects in the mental > > objects of the five hindrances? > > "Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows > > with understanding: 'I > > have sensuality,' or when sensuality is not present, > > he knows with > > understanding: 'I have no sensuality.'" > > > > Note that the text here dealing with akusala is in > > exactly the same terms > > as the text dealing with kusala, for example in the > > section on the factors > > of enlightenment-- > > > > "Here, when the enlightenment factor of mindfulness > > is present, a bhikkhu > > knows with understanding: 'I have the enlightenment > > factor of > > mindfulness'; or when the enlightenment factor of > > mindfulness is absent, > > he knows with understanding: 'I have not the > > enlightenment factor of > > mindfulness'". > > > > So it is not a matter of 'doing anything special' > > when it comes to akusala > > tendencies. > > > > As the commentary to this part of the sutta points > > out, the hindrances are > > 'knocked out' by right reflection on an object. > > 'Right reflection' > > (yoniso manasikara) here refers I believe to > > momentary awareness. > > However, this should not be taken as meaning that > > one can use awareness to > > 'deal with' akusala--that would be the 'us' thing > > again. > > > > So the short answer, I think, is to just develop > > kusala! > > > > Jon > 7747 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > > > My questions were: How does concentration ... differ from > > mindfulness > > > (sati)? > > I do see the original post, but I still don't see these questions > addressed. Never mind! Try jhana meditation! Seriously, there's a point where words stop being helpful and start getting in the way. Again the difference-- from the original post--is that samma sati doesn't have absorption and unification of the mind as characteristics. But words alone aren't helpful here at all, other than if you're coming from the perspective of already knowing the experience jhana to begin with and use these terms to differentiate with that as a basis. Then they make a lot of sense. Otherwise, they're not all that helpful, as I see it. 7748 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 0:01am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory concentration with insight, calm with insight, access concentration with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry with stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration with fruits of insight, etc. I find that being "sure" of the differences is no real assurance at all. I've been so sure of so many things about Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an Arahant several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness always seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual structures I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. The surety itself becomes a hindrance because what I thought was confidence in Buddha-dhamma (saddha) was really confidence in Self (moha and mana)! It is indeed useful to think about the differences between sammasamadhi and sammasati, but it is also useful to think about the difference between ekaggata and sati. It is so easy to underestimate the power of special experiences to confuse and lead astray; it can take years or decades to even get an inkling that a practice is generating more mana and lobha than panya. > Try jhana meditation! Seriously, there's a point where words stop > being helpful and start getting in the way. Again the difference-- > from the original post--is that samma sati doesn't have absorption > and unification of the mind as characteristics. But words alone > aren't helpful here at all, other than if you're coming from the > perspective of already knowing the experience jhana to begin with and > use these terms to differentiate with that as a basis. Then they make > a lot of sense. Otherwise, they're not all that helpful, as I see it. 7749 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 0:32am Subject: Insights: real or imaginary? Hi Dan, Fascinating post. Can you give an example or two or more that illustrate how you thought a particular type of insight turned out to not be, or of a different type? -fk --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with > jhana, > preparatory concentration with access concentration, > preparatory > concentration with insight, calm with insight, > access concentration > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, > jhana with > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of > jhana-entry with > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of > concentration with > fruits of insight, etc. I find that being "sure" of > the differences is > no real assurance at all. I've been so sure of so > many things about > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to > have been an Arahant > several times over by now. The only problem is that > my sureness always > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these > conceptual structures > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come > crashing down. The > surety itself becomes a hindrance because what I > thought was > confidence in Buddha-dhamma (saddha) was really > confidence in Self > (moha and mana)! > > It is indeed useful to think about the differences > between > sammasamadhi and sammasati, but it is also useful to > think about the > difference between ekaggata and sati. It is so easy > to underestimate > the power of special experiences to confuse and lead > astray; it can > take years or decades to even get an inkling that a > practice is > generating more mana and lobha than panya. > > > Try jhana meditation! Seriously, there's a point > where words stop > > being helpful and start getting in the way. Again > the difference-- > > from the original post--is that samma sati doesn't > have absorption > > and unification of the mind as characteristics. > But words alone > > aren't helpful here at all, other than if you're > coming from the > > perspective of already knowing the experience > jhana to begin with > and > > use these terms to differentiate with that as a > basis. Then they > make > > a lot of sense. Otherwise, they're not all that > helpful, as I see > it. 7750 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:18am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, > preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory > concentration with insight, calm with insight, access concentration > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry with > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration with > fruits of insight, etc. Dan, you sound terribly confused by all these labels! Have you considered putting your categories down for awhile and taking a few deep breaths? :) > I find that being "sure" of the differences is > no real assurance at all. That's why it's indispensible to have qualified teachers who can see our blind spots. It is the "whole of the holy life" after all. > I've been so sure of so many things about > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an Arahant > several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness always > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual structures > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. Watching all those conceptual elaborations come crashing down can only be good thing. There's nothing worse in terms of understanding the oh-so-simple Dhamma (a direct pointing at the heart) than a "hardening of the categories." What I'm curious to know is how it's believed such conceptual structures provide any solid footing at all! The whole point is to tear them down! > It is indeed useful to think about the differences between > sammasamadhi and sammasati, but it is also useful to think about the > difference between ekaggata and sati. It is so easy to underestimate > the power of special experiences to confuse and lead astray; it can > take years or decades to even get an inkling that a practice is > generating more mana and lobha than panya. Conversely, it can take practically notime to awaken to the deathless with a dose of humility and the right teachers. I had many problems like the ones you indicate before I found the right teachers, thought I knew it all, etc. Fortunately they saw through my ego's multilayered defense mechanism and skillfully got me into the right place, though it did take several hard whacks and a lot of whining from my ego to accomplish. 7751 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 2:09am Subject: (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Hi Sarah, this is a question from Mike, a friend of mine on another list. Anyone wanting to respond can just respond on this group, I will forward it back to mike later. -fk Note: forwarded message attached. 7752 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 3:52am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, > > preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory > > concentration with insight, calm with insight, access concentration > > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with > > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry with > > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration > with > > fruits of insight, etc. > > Dan, you sound terribly confused by all these labels! Have you > considered putting your categories down for awhile and taking a few > deep breaths? :) Hmmm... I don't feel confused or befuddled by the labels. I wonder what went wrong in the transition from my experience, to my understanding, to my interpretation, to my writing, to your eyes, to your brain, to your conceiving, to your writing, to my seeing, to my interpretation, to my conceiving, because it seems like you are attributing comments to my terrible confusion. Or are you? > > I find that being "sure" of the differences is > > no real assurance at all. > > That's why it's indispensible to have qualified teachers who can see > our blind spots. It is the "whole of the holy life" after all. Yup. > > I've been so sure of so many things about > > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an > Arahant > > several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness > always > > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual > structures > > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. > > Watching all those conceptual elaborations come crashing down can > only be good thing. There's nothing worse in terms of understanding > the oh-so-simple Dhamma (a direct pointing at the heart) than > a "hardening of the categories." What I'm curious to know is how it's > believed such conceptual structures provide any solid footing at all! > The whole point is to tear them down! The building up of conceptual structures is a process that is going to happen in the non-arahant regardless of how much you don't want it to, or think that it shouldn't. How is it believed that conceptual structures provide solid footing? Ignorance. Ignorance -> conceptual structures; and ignorance -> perception of conceptual structures as real -> perception of conceptual structures as solid footing. Belief that conceptual structures provide solid footing? I don't know what belief has to do with it: the clinging to conceptual structures as solid footing continues unabated, whether you believe that they do or not, whether you want them to or not, whether you think they do or not. I don't "believe" that concepts provide solid footing, but that does not prevent my concept building. Desire to not cling to concept does not prevent clinging to concept; and even strong desire to not cling to concept does not prevent clinging to concept. The whole point is to tear down conceptual structures? No. The point is to develop wisdom. As the development proceeds, clinging to concept lessens naturally, of its own accord. "Tear down conceptual structures" sounds like a recipe for dosa! > Conversely, it can take practically notime to awaken to the deathless > with a dose of humility and the right teachers. I had many problems > like the ones you indicate before I found the right teachers, thought > I knew it all, etc. Fortunately they saw through my ego's > multilayered defense mechanism and skillfully got me into the right > place, though it did take several hard whacks and a lot of whining > from my ego to accomplish. "...with a dose of humility..." -- I can always use one of those! One good place for that is the suttas. One that comes particularly to mind right now is the Mulapariyaya sutta (MN 1). Wonderful sutta! Very humbling! Another great source of humility is discernment of dhammas. But that isn't always there, even though I would like it to be. Dan 7753 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 4:42am Subject: Re: Insights: real or imaginary? > Fascinating post. Can you give an example or two or > more that illustrate how you thought a particular type > of insight turned out to not be, or of a different > type? Good question, fk. In my first extended, intensive meditation retreat in Thailand a number of years ago (1988), my teacher often emphasized how important it was to learn how to distinguish the difference between sati and samadhi. "Yeah, yeah. I know. It's obvious now that you've made it so clear." By the end of my stay, I had experienced deep calm and peacefulness unlike anything I'd ever experienced before. Another monk questioned me after my retreat was over: "So, what did you learn?" I replied: "I feel very clear." I had mistaken pleasant sensation with wisdom. He gently pointed this out to me, and said the feeling would pass soon. I responded with irritation! I was insulted: "I know the difference between calm and insight. Who does he think he his, lecturing me on something so basic as that." Later, after the feeling of clarity had passed, I began to think more about some of the "insight" experiences I had during the retreat--the clear, almost disarming recognition of the sound of a bird singing being distinct from my perception of the sound of the singing, the hasty retreat of discursive conceiving when the mind recognized the discoursing, the stunning perception of toothbrush, hand, and brushing motion as clearly distinct from the conception of the person doing the brushing, etc. These experiences began to take on more importance in my mind than the calm feelings, the lightness, the perception of this light or that image, etc. "Oh, so NOW I understand the distinction between what is path and what is not path. These lights and calm feelings are not path, and the little insights are path." After I was back in the states, someone asked what happens in a retreat like that, why it has to be so long (two weeks). So wise was I, I confidently told them that it takes about two weeks to get to a breakthough in the meditation, that it really takes a full two weeks to get established in udayabbaya-ñana (knowledge of arising and passing away). "For some people it takes longer, but many people get established in the technique in two weeks." I was so confident about my attainment because my meditation experiences matched so closely those experiences that wise people said accompany certain insights (e.g. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html). Of course, I was not at all "established in udayabbaya-ñana". In fact the very idea of "being established in udayabbaya-ñana" is nonsense, but I didn't realize that for several years. Yet, there's a grain of truth to the misperceptions and misconceptions, but that grain is rarely what I think it is at the time. That was the just the beginning! I look back at myself and how naive I was then and just laugh. And then I look at myself now, and I laugh again at how naive I still am! After many more intensive, extended retreats and after years and years of daily "formal practice" and years of study, the same sorts of delusions arise almost uninterruptedly. That tendency for delusion is reborn every minute. The object of the delusion changes and shifts and perhaps gets more subtle, but by God it is extradinarily persistent. And it is there whether I want it to be or not, and even whether I think it is there or not. The path is indeed long, despite the impression I sometimes get from special experiences. Dan 7754 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opini... Hi, Erik (and Dan) - In a message dated 8/30/01 1:56:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > > > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, > > preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory > > concentration with insight, calm with insight, access concentration > > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with > > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry with > > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration > with > > fruits of insight, etc. > > Dan, you sound terribly confused by all these labels! Have you > considered putting your categories down for awhile and taking a few > deep breaths? :) > > > I find that being "sure" of the differences is > > no real assurance at all. > > That's why it's indispensible to have qualified teachers who can see > our blind spots. It is the "whole of the holy life" after all. > > > I've been so sure of so many things about > > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an > Arahant > > several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness > always > > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual > structures > > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. > > Watching all those conceptual elaborations come crashing down can > only be good thing. There's nothing worse in terms of understanding > the oh-so-simple Dhamma (a direct pointing at the heart) than > a "hardening of the categories." What I'm curious to know is how it's > believed such conceptual structures provide any solid footing at all! > The whole point is to tear them down! > > > It is indeed useful to think about the differences between > > sammasamadhi and sammasati, but it is also useful to think about > the > > difference between ekaggata and sati. It is so easy to > underestimate > > the power of special experiences to confuse and lead astray; it can > > take years or decades to even get an inkling that a practice is > > generating more mana and lobha than panya. > > Conversely, it can take practically notime to awaken to the deathless > with a dose of humility and the right teachers. I had many problems > like the ones you indicate before I found the right teachers, thought > I knew it all, etc. Fortunately they saw through my ego's > multilayered defense mechanism and skillfully got me into the right > place, though it did take several hard whacks and a lot of whining > from my ego to accomplish. > > > ============================ Excellent post, Erik (in my opinion). Humans are so perverse that we will even take a doctrine which includes the non-clinging to all dhammas, including concepts and systems of thought, and harden that doctrine into a fixed, unyielding mass of granite-like concepts, so that we end up confusing the map for the territory, and being unable to see the realities for the concepts! BTW, Dan, I don't mean to imply that you are any more likely to be stuck in a web of concepts and views than the rest of us. In fact, you are probably less so, since your post shows how much attention you pay to what is really what. My comments are just general ones on the sorry state of all of us worldlings! ;-)) 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) 7755 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Hi, Frank - > Hi Sarah, this is a question from Mike, a friend of > mine on another list. Anyone wanting to respond can > just respond on this group, I will forward it back to > mike later. > > -fk > ================================ I suspect that attachments won't work on the Yahoo lists. 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) 7756 From: m. nease Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 5:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Insights: real or imaginary? Bravo! --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > > Fascinating post. Can you give an example or > two or > > more that illustrate how you thought a particular > type > > of insight turned out to not be, or of a different > > type? > > Good question, fk. In my first extended, intensive > meditation retreat > in Thailand a number of years ago (1988), my teacher > often emphasized > how important it was to learn how to distinguish the > difference > between sati and samadhi. "Yeah, yeah. I know. It's > obvious now that > you've made it so clear." By the end of my stay, I > had experienced > deep calm and peacefulness unlike anything I'd ever > experienced > before. Another monk questioned me after my retreat > was over: "So, > what did you learn?" I replied: "I feel very clear." > I had mistaken > pleasant sensation with wisdom. He gently pointed > this out to me, and > said the feeling would pass soon. I responded with > irritation! I was > insulted: "I know the difference between calm and > insight. Who does he > think he his, lecturing me on something so basic as > that." > > Later, after the feeling of clarity had passed, I > began to think more > about some of the "insight" experiences I had during > the retreat--the > clear, almost disarming recognition of the sound of > a bird singing > being distinct from my perception of the sound of > the singing, the > hasty retreat of discursive conceiving when the mind > recognized the > discoursing, the stunning perception of toothbrush, > hand, and brushing > motion as clearly distinct from the conception of > the person doing the > brushing, etc. These experiences began to take on > more importance in > my mind than the calm feelings, the lightness, the > perception of this > light or that image, etc. "Oh, so NOW I understand > the distinction > between what is path and what is not path. These > lights and calm > feelings are not path, and the little insights are > path." After I was > back in the states, someone asked what happens in a > retreat like > that, why it has to be so long (two weeks). So wise > was I, I > confidently told them that it takes about two weeks > to get to a > breakthough in the meditation, that it really takes > a full two weeks > to get established in udayabbaya-ñana (knowledge of > arising and > passing away). "For some people it takes longer, but > many people get > established in the technique in two weeks." I was so > confident about > my attainment because my meditation experiences > matched so closely > those experiences that wise people said accompany > certain insights > (e.g. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html). > Of > course, I was not at all "established in > udayabbaya-ñana". In fact the > very idea of "being established in udayabbaya-ñana" > is nonsense, but I > didn't realize that for several years. Yet, there's > a grain of truth > to the misperceptions and misconceptions, but that > grain is rarely > what I think it is at the time. > > That was the just the beginning! I look back at > myself and how naive I > was then and just laugh. And then I look at myself > now, and I laugh > again at how naive I still am! After many more > intensive, extended > retreats and after years and years of daily "formal > practice" and > years of study, the same sorts of delusions arise > almost > uninterruptedly. That tendency for delusion is > reborn every minute. > The object of the delusion changes and shifts and > perhaps gets more > subtle, but by God it is extradinarily persistent. > And it is there > whether I want it to be or not, and even whether I > think it is there > or not. The path is indeed long, despite the > impression I sometimes > get from special experiences. > > Dan 7757 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:28am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation --- Thanks Dan, Very useful. robert "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > > > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, > > > preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory > > > concentration with insight, calm with insight, access > concentration > > > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with > > > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry > with > > > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration > > with > > > fruits of insight, etc. > > > > Dan, you sound terribly confused by all these labels! Have you > > considered putting your categories down for awhile and taking a few > > deep breaths? :) > > Hmmm... I don't feel confused or befuddled by the labels. I wonder > what went wrong in the transition from my experience, to my > understanding, to my interpretation, to my writing, to your eyes, to > your brain, to your conceiving, to your writing, to my seeing, to my > interpretation, to my conceiving, because it seems like you are > attributing comments to my terrible confusion. Or are you? > > > > I find that being "sure" of the differences is > > > no real assurance at all. > > > > That's why it's indispensible to have qualified teachers who can see > > our blind spots. It is the "whole of the holy life" after all. > > Yup. > > > > I've been so sure of so many things about > > > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an > > Arahant > > > several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness > > always > > > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual > > structures > > > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. > > > > Watching all those conceptual elaborations come crashing down can > > only be good thing. There's nothing worse in terms of understanding > > the oh-so-simple Dhamma (a direct pointing at the heart) than > > a "hardening of the categories." What I'm curious to know is how > it's > > believed such conceptual structures provide any solid footing at > all! > > The whole point is to tear them down! > > The building up of conceptual structures is a process that is going to > happen in the non-arahant regardless of how much you don't want it to, > or think that it shouldn't. How is it believed that conceptual > structures provide solid footing? Ignorance. Ignorance -> conceptual > structures; and ignorance -> perception of conceptual structures as > real -> perception of conceptual structures as solid footing. Belief > that conceptual structures provide solid footing? I don't know what > belief has to do with it: the clinging to conceptual structures as > solid footing continues unabated, whether you believe that they do or > not, whether you want them to or not, whether you think they do or > not. I don't "believe" that concepts provide solid footing, but that > does not prevent my concept building. Desire to not cling to concept > does not prevent clinging to concept; and even strong desire to not > cling to concept does not prevent clinging to concept. > > The whole point is to tear down conceptual structures? No. The point > is to develop wisdom. As the development proceeds, clinging to concept > lessens naturally, of its own accord. "Tear down conceptual > structures" sounds like a recipe for dosa! > > > Conversely, it can take practically notime to awaken to the > deathless > > with a dose of humility and the right teachers. I had many problems > > like the ones you indicate before I found the right teachers, > thought > > I knew it all, etc. Fortunately they saw through my ego's > > multilayered defense mechanism and skillfully got me into the right > > place, though it did take several hard whacks and a lot of whining > > from my ego to accomplish. > > "...with a dose of humility..." -- I can always use one of those! One > good place for that is the suttas. One that comes particularly to mind > right now is the Mulapariyaya sutta (MN 1). Wonderful sutta! Very > humbling! Another great source of humility is discernment of dhammas. > But that isn't always there, even though I would like it to be. > > Dan 7758 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Thanks for bringing that to my attention Sarah and Howard (attachments don't work across lists with it blocked). Mike, if you want to subscribe to dhammastudygroup, you can do it at this location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup Mike's question follows. -fk From: Michael Chu < Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting meditation Dear Sara and all, Sara: With such confidence as you have in `nitty-gritty dhamma' as exemplifiedin the Six Sets of Six, I wonder why you wish to sit for several hours like this or why you feel that this is the way to understand the Teachings? Look forward to many more interesting posts from you, I am very lazy at my practice of meditation. I average about fifteen minutes of meditation every other day. Comparing myself to my fellow cultivator friends, namely Frank and William, who do at least one hour of sitting meditation each day continuously for several years, I have noticed their ability to be mindful and serene far exceed mine. I personally noticed that lacking the mindfulness of cultivation from meditation, I am having a much more difficult time progressing in the Noble Eightfold Path compare to my peers. On the concentration group, I can only sporadically address my present moment with the right effort, mindfulness, and concentration. Without the appropriate concentration, I find myself to have further difficulty achieving the right speech and action. My progress of having the right understanding, thought, and speech is also hindered. By lacking the right understanding, I find myself making poor plans for my livelihood. My clarity of mind is always compromised. I also noticed lacking the ability to be mindful even hinders the right breathing and induces undesirable states like sluggishness, impatience, restlessness, and anger. I can only so far only be able to do a limited form of damage control on these undesirable states when I occasionally remember to stay away from them. Another thing I noticed is that these undesirable statements can be quickly terminated if I catch them on their early stages. To be able to catch the arising of these undesirable states, we need to be mindful. Sara: We may think there's no more anger for now, but what about all the little uneasy feelings, minor irritations, petty resentments and all. Maybe now we're not really being tested, but what about when life doesn't go our way such as when we're sick and in pain. The tests are when it's hard. I'm thinking of the Dhammapada story when the maidservant turned up later and later to test her mistress' good humour (perhaps someone can supply the details or reference?).Don't we all have our limits? The very reason why we should apply appropriate mindfulness and catch the arising anger before it gets any bigger and out of control. So far the best way to achieve mindfulness that I know of is through practicing proper meditation. If you have any suggestion that we can better achieve mindfulness, I would love to know. Much Metta, Mike 7759 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:47am Subject: Re: Insights: real or imaginary? Dear group, As Dan has explained; without an understanding of what the characteristic of sati of the eightfold path is there is bound to be the mistaking of samadhi (which can be either kusala or akusala) for sati. For so long there has been clinging to the idea of self that most of the time we are not even aware of it. Hence one sits down, concentrates , feels much calmer than usual daily life and believes that this is now sati of the eightfold path. If unusual experiences occur this adds more certainly. The commentary to the satipatthana sutta notes that true awareness (of satipatthana) is nothing like the usual meaning of awareness. "From the sort of mere awareness.. proceeds the idea of a soul, the perverted perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an experiencer. One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non- opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative practice cannot be called one who develops anything like a subject of meditation."" Endquote. We think 'I' am having insight. No, not so. If it is real insight it is simply a kusala citta(momentary consciousness) associated with panna cetasika (mental factor of wisdom) that takes a paramattha dhamma as object and sees some aspect of it correctly. Panna cetasika doesn't try to know this, it doesn't even want to know this. But its kicca(function) is to understand. On the other hand if it is imitation insight then it is akusala citta arising with a subtle type of avijja that misunderstands, that is mistaking concept for something real. Avijja has no wish to distort but its function is to obscure, that is what it does. It is also not self. Not your avijja, or mine. An example of imitation insight. One feels the subtle sensations and vibrations in the body and assumes this is now direct insight. But there can still be a deep-rooted idea that these are particles. That they have some type of lasting existence, that they have time to "vibrate" or do something. If so there is not yet insight into paramattha. In this case citta and sanna are present - they know the object but they don't know it in the way that panna does. Avijja is still running among concepts - even if there is no thinking in words. True insight slowly understands the characteristic, cause, and function of rupas as well as other dhammas. It will distinguish between concept and reality. "We" can't know the difference - but if the right conditions are nurtured then panna must develop and see. The problem, of course, is that there are powerful conditions for avijja to arise. It has been arising, almost without break, ever since we took birth. That is just this life - there is no beginning to the round of samsara, and avijja is the cause of it all. Panna - of the level of satipatthana - arises due to hearing and considering Dhamma. But in its infancy it can't firmly cognise dhammas. Much patience, a parami, is needed I think. Can we be patient and still see the urgency of the task? Can we understand that it is not us being patient. robert 7760 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 5:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Insights: real or imaginary? Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/30/01 6:48:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Dear group, > As Dan has explained; without an understanding of what the > characteristic of sati of the eightfold path is there is bound > to be the mistaking of samadhi (which can be either kusala or > akusala) for sati. For so long there has been clinging to the > idea of self that most of the time we are not even aware of it. > Hence one sits down, concentrates , feels much calmer than usual > daily life and believes that this is now sati of the eightfold > path. If unusual experiences occur this adds more certainly. > The commentary to the satipatthana sutta notes that true > awareness (of satipatthana) is nothing like the usual meaning of > awareness. > "From the sort of mere awareness.. proceeds the idea of a soul, > the perverted > perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an > experiencer. > One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to > non- > opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative > practice cannot be called one who develops anything like a > subject of > meditation."" Endquote. > > We think 'I' am having insight. No, not so. If it is real > insight it is simply a kusala citta(momentary consciousness) > associated with panna cetasika (mental factor of wisdom) that > takes a paramattha dhamma as object and sees some aspect of it > correctly. Panna cetasika doesn't try to know this, it doesn't > even want to know this. But its kicca(function) is to > understand. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes! When the conditions are in place for wisdom's arising, it arises and does what it does. Without the conditions, all the "trying" in the world will be fruitless. This touches a bit, I think, on the notion of "uncontrollability", a notion which we worldlings always try to resist. For the Zen-type folks on the list, the following analogy occurs to me: I just came home from a t'ai chi class in which we were doing a push-hands exercise; if one tries to "attack" one's partner when the conditions for it are not in place, the attempt will be futile and may only lead to making oneself vulnerable, but when the conditions *are* in place, mainly that your partner is "off his/her root", adding the one additional condition of the very slightest properly directed push is enough to defeat the "adversary". The critical condition in *our* practice, as I see it, is being wisely, consistently, and patiently attentive. Being *wisely* attentive comes from having studied the Buddhadhamma. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- On the other hand if it is imitation insight then it > is akusala citta arising with a subtle type of avijja that > misunderstands, that is mistaking concept for something real. > Avijja has no wish to distort but its function is to obscure, > that is what it does. It is also not self. Not your avijja, or > mine. > An example of imitation insight. One feels the subtle sensations > and vibrations in the body and assumes this is now direct > insight. But there can still be a deep-rooted idea that these > are particles. That they have some type of lasting existence, > that they have time to "vibrate" or do something. If so there is > not > yet insight into paramattha. In this case citta and sanna are > present - they know the object but they don't know it in the way > that panna does. Avijja is still running among > concepts - even if there is no thinking in words. > True insight slowly understands the characteristic, cause, and > function of rupas as well as other dhammas. It will distinguish > between concept and reality. "We" can't know the difference - > but if the right conditions are nurtured then panna must develop > and see. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Excellent!! This is so relevant for those of us who have been trained in the Sayagi U Ba Khin/Goenka style of meditation! It is, indeed, quite possible to clearly, and in full detail, witness pulses of energy throughout the body, a very dramatic and fascinating phenomenon, yet without clearly seeing their emptiness, their merely dependent status. Their impermanence *is* hard to miss, but, even so, there is the tendency, rooted in ignorance, to cognize the pulses as independent particles, as self-existent - though fleeting - *things*. And without seeing their emptiness, their non-thingness, wisdom is still weak. ------------------------------------------------------------ > The problem, of course, is that there are powerful conditions > for avijja to arise. It has been arising, almost without break, > ever since we took birth. That is just this life - there is no > beginning to the round of samsara, and avijja is the cause of it > all. Panna - of the level of satipatthana - arises due to > hearing and considering Dhamma. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, in part. The other part is constant practice, constant cultivation. -------------------------------------------------------- But in its infancy it can't > firmly cognise > dhammas. Much patience, a parami, is needed I think. > Can we be patient and still see the urgency of the task? Can we > understand that it is not us being patient. > 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) 7761 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 10:59am Subject: Re: Insights: real or imaginary? --- Howard wrote: > Howard: > Yes! When the conditions are in place for wisdom's arising, it arises > and does what it does. Without the conditions, all the "trying" in the world > will be fruitless. Ah, those pesky "conditions" again! :) > > The problem, of course, is that there are powerful conditions > > for avijja to arise. It has been arising, almost without break, > > ever since we took birth. That is just this life - there is no > > beginning to the round of samsara, and avijja is the cause of it > > all. Panna - of the level of satipatthana - arises due to > > hearing and considering Dhamma. > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, in part. The other part is constant practice, constant > cultivation. Perhaps one of the most helpful pieces of advice from one of my teachers is that to do the Dhamma justice one should practice with the sort of dedication one would have if practicing for a Carnegie Hall recital. Meaning, several hours per day. That need not all be sitting, of course, but the general idea holds. Needless to say, if something as mundane and trivial as a Carnegie Hall recital is worth this sort of practice, how much moreso the Dhamma! 7762 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Catching Up - Robert E --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Robert E, > > I've been appreciating all your well-considered posts to this list very much. Thanks, Sarah. > ...Of course, there's no sadness or grieving at > actual moments of awareness or wisdom, good point > but they so easily slip in at other > times and as you suggest there can be grieving for the loss of anything or > anyone 'we' are attached to, including the good 'self' or a wrong view. Still, > isn't it better to recognize and understand these moments? This can be a > condition straight away to 'cut' the story! Oh, definitely, Sarah. I think that sometimes it may be appropriate to kiss some part of your life goodbye with a tear in your eye, not to indulge but to acknowledge the moment, but that is not to say you can't use the moment to look into the nature of what is taking place and unattach. > Robert, I also really appreciated your comments about science and Buddhism to > Herman which I thought were very well put. this was just one of many examples: > > "Perhaps this is because I believe that science can never prove anything other > than what it already establishes as a given..." I'm glad. I have noticed a sort of movement in the U.S., perhaps elsewhere, to look at Buddhism as a form of empiricism. That what Buddhism adds up to is simply seeing the basic perception of the natural physical world without any clouding conditions, thoughts and emotions. I see this as a kind of lobotomy rather than a nirvanic transcendence. I can't imagine that Buddha would have gone to the immense trouble of dealing with every issue under the sun, and giving such a rigorous path to understanding, if he merely meant for us to see life the way a camera does. You can see I have a tendency to rant on this sort of topic, even if it's just mentioned, so I'll subside. > Thank you also for posting the link to the magazine 'Buddhist Door' and its > abhidhamma section. I was really interested to see their useful summary and > reference to Abhidammattha Sangaha. It seems this was the last issue which is a > shame. I was also glad to read that you appreciated the complex conversation > with Khun Sujin that Rob posted yesterday (I think). I'm very impressed that > you're reading all the details so carefully. Trying. The eightfold path discussion is somewhat mind-boggling. > Btw, I'm a little familiar with Patanjali from yoga circles, but can't help you > with any of the historical information. Of course there were many cultural and > religious influences and literary contexts which the Buddha's Teachings should > be understood in, but no understanding of anatta at all in Patanjali or any > ofther Teachings at the time. This is a good point and very true. I would be the first to acknowledge that Buddha's own contributions to the spiritual path are unique and brilliant. Certainly, the idea of no-self or not-self is a clear break with Hinduism, Yoga included, at least in approach. In this sense, the Buddha's Teachings and 8fold > path are completely original (as Anders suggested), even thought there may be > some superficial or cultural resemblance, I'd think. > Anyway, i'll have to leave it here..Just to say I enjoy your pleasant posts and > style (even when I don't agree with all the points;-). > > Look forward to more, > > Sarah Well, thanks so much for all that you've said and for your helpful points here as well. I certainly feel welcomed here, and even though I am coming from a slightly different standpoint, I have felt comfortable to speak my mind and also listen, and so I've both been learning a lot, and becoming more aware of what an overwhelming expanse Buddha's teachings really are. With appreciation, Robert E. 7763 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:33pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > As the commentary to this part of the sutta points out, the hindrances are > 'knocked out' by right reflection on an object. 'Right reflection' > (yoniso manasikara) here refers I believe to momentary awareness. > However, this should not be taken as meaning that one can use awareness to > 'deal with' akusala--that would be the 'us' thing again. > > So the short answer, I think, is to just develop kusala! Well, I think I'm getting the idea. This is interesting to me because how one deals with their tendencies is such a gigantic issue in all cultures and religions. Christianity, I believe, would ask the believer to suppress and abolish the akusala by main force. Psychotherapy would have the akusala accepted, worked through and 'corrected' by analyzing and grappling with it. What you are saying, it seems to me, is that mindfulness *is* an antidote to akusula in the moment, and I recall another quote from a recent post in which the bhikku goes through a process of seeing the hindrance, becomes fully aware of it, and becomes aware that the hindrance has been abolished and will not return. I can't remember the exact wording. But you caution that this is not 'oneself' 'dealing' with the akusala, because that makes it a cause to feed the notion of self, and will create more problems, rather than abolishing the ones at hand. Am I reading you correctly? Thanks for the good clarifications, Robert E. 7764 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:40pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: I'm concerned about your > logic that simply because impurities can be the object of awareness > that they are not obstacles to the development of insight. What I got out of it, Dan, was not that there was a causal connection between making the akusala the object of awareness and it not being an obstacle to vipassana, but simply that it was not an obstacle to vipassana, and it also can be treated with mindfulness like any other momentary experience. The idea that impurities in and of themselves are not an obstacle to insight seems to me to be another exciting and surprising innovation of the Buddha's. Almost any other spiritual philosophy would say that they *were* an obstacle. Buddhism seems to be so much rooted in becoming aware of the truth of existence that the content is always secondary to the strength of awareness of the practitioner. At least, that's the idea I'm getting here, and to me that's very hopeful, since it has been pointed out many times that akusala is a fact of life and is here to stay for a while. 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" 7765 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Dan, I think I am being presumptuous in speaking to your sincere issues here, because I am not a greatly consistent meditator, or an expert in the distinctions you are talking about. But I have two ideas about what you are saying and I will offer them with the understanding that I may be off the mark. 1. What I hear you expressing is a lot of doubt. So what I would do is look at it and acknowledge it as doubt, rather than getting involved with all the doubts. If you go through the inventory below, you are talking about the inability to tell different types of experience from each other, the possibility for going for years on the wrong path -- these are all the opposite of discrimination which allows you to distinguish one thing from the other. Doubt is the opposite of discrimination, so rather than believe that your thoughts are 'true', I would see them as doubt and treat them with mindfulness. 2. I don't think we can avoid the obstacles on the path, such as wrong view, wrong knowledge, etc. That's everyone's condition. But it seems to me that the Buddha's promise is that all of this treated with sincere determination and continued efforts to concentrate awareness will yield fruit either sooner or later. In other words, that the properties of right effort and mindfulness are actually stronger in the long run than delusion and weakness. So if that is the case you cannot be on the wrong path for 30 years. You can be on a difficult path for 30 years, but the effort to be on the right path is the path. It may take thousands of years to get through all the obstacles we have and wind up in the full flower of enlightenment, but the path is still the path. Since you know where you want to be and are supposed to be, you're actually lucky and the time of confusion and doubt is relatively short compared to those who are truly lost in the confusion that this life is ultimately real and that they are separate independent beings. Mistakes are okay, as long as you keep going. If that weren't true, imagine what sad shape we'd all be in. Robert E. ================================ --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, > preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory > concentration with insight, calm with insight, access concentration > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry with > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration with > fruits of insight, etc. I find that being "sure" of the differences is > no real assurance at all. I've been so sure of so many things about > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an Arahant > several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness always > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual structures > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. The > surety itself becomes a hindrance because what I thought was > confidence in Buddha-dhamma (saddha) was really confidence in Self > (moha and mana)! > > It is indeed useful to think about the differences between > sammasamadhi and sammasati, but it is also useful to think about the > difference between ekaggata and sati. It is so easy to underestimate > the power of special experiences to confuse and lead astray; it can > take years or decades to even get an inkling that a practice is > generating more mana and lobha than panya. > > > Try jhana meditation! Seriously, there's a point where words stop > > being helpful and start getting in the way. Again the difference-- > > from the original post--is that samma sati doesn't have absorption > > and unification of the mind as characteristics. But words alone > > aren't helpful here at all, other than if you're coming from the > > perspective of already knowing the experience jhana to begin with > and > > use these terms to differentiate with that as a basis. Then they > make > > a lot of sense. Otherwise, they're not all that helpful, as I see > it. ===== 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" 7766 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 2:14pm Subject: Re: Catching Up - Robert E --- --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > I have noticed a sort of movement in the U.S., perhaps elsewhere, to look at > Buddhism as a form of empiricism. That what Buddhism adds up to is simply seeing > the basic perception of the natural physical world without any clouding > conditions, thoughts and emotions. I see this as a kind of lobotomy rather than a > nirvanic transcendence. I can't imagine that Buddha would have gone to the > immense trouble of dealing with every issue under the sun, and giving such a > rigorous path to understanding, if he merely meant for us to see life the way a > camera does. > ________ Very good point, Robert. I think Howard alluded to this when he said that being wisely attentive (yoniso manisikara) comes from having studied the Buddha's teaching. We might hear phrases like 'bare attention' or 'seeing things as they are' and assume that simply because there is no obvious clinging one is now understanding reality directly. However, citta and sanna (perception) arise and experience realities too. What makes the difference - as to whether there is true insight - is the factor of panna (wisdom). And that, at the level of satipatthana, is dependent on correct understanding of the Dhamma. robert 7767 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 9:35pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] Howard: > Excellent post, Erik (in my opinion). Humans are so perverse that we > will even take a doctrine which includes the non-clinging to all dhammas, > including concepts and systems of thought, and harden that doctrine into a > fixed, unyielding mass of granite-like concepts, so that we end up confusing > the map for the territory, and being unable to see the realities for the > concepts! Dan: This hardening of concepts is certainly a problem when it manifests itself as a rigid dogmatism. But it is also a problem in less obvious ways. You mentioned the perception of subtle sensations that are associated with Goenka-style training and that it is easy to perceive the anicca of these sensations. Much more difficult to see is the clinging to the view of an "observer" of these sensations, an experiencer. Avijja attaches the concept of a Self experiencing these sensations. The attachment to the Self concept is even so strong that when samadhi is developed enough so that the perception of craving for the sensations fades, there is still a craving for a self to experience the pleasant, subtle sensations. When samadhi is deepened even further, the tendency for the mind to wander fades and eventually is totally suppressed and replaced by just the experiencing. But even still, the clinging to the notion of a someone experiencing is going just as strong, and the craving for a self to experience the pleasant sensations continues in full force, long after the craving for the sensations themselves has subsided. There is an almost unbelievably strong craving for being that is utterly untouched by samatha. That craving for being is rooted in avijja, the mind's penchant for creating concepts. That tendency to create concepts, that clinging to the mother of all concepts --- the "I", the experiencer of the sensations --- goes on just as strong as ever, even when concentration is developed to a high degree. The hardening of concepts continues! Yet, we usually only think of it in very gross terms, like ideological dogmatism. We recognize the dangers in dogmatism, so we set about the task of tearing down conceptual structures, not recognizing that this desire to "tear down" is rooted in and arises from a very strong craving, a craving for being or annihilation, a craving that is so personal and familiar that it is very difficult to see. Very difficult. We can easily see craving for gross objects when it arises. With enough practice, we can see the craving for the subtle sensations that pop to mind in meditation. With more practice, we can see the craving for being associated with a sensation or being not associated with a sensation. But seeing the craving for being is difficult. Recognizing it, we see its enormity and realize that the path is longer than we thought. The realization is not discouraging. It only SOUNDS discouraging when we are stuck in a notion of a "being" making "progress" toward a "goal". > BTW, Dan, I don't mean to imply that you are any more likely to be > stuck in a web of concepts and views than the rest of us. In fact, you are > probably less so, since your post shows how much attention you pay to what is > really what. I am certainly no less likely to stuck in a web of concepts and views than the rest of dsg. Every moment of every day I am continually stuck in a web of concepts and views. Some moments it FEELS like I'm less stuck in the web than others. But really, this is just an indication that I'm being too superficial. Some moments I RECOGNIZE that I am deeply stuck in the web. But really, escape is very distant. No sense in fooling myself about that! 7768 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 9:44pm Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Robert E] Thanks for the helpful comments, Robert E. I appreciate your attention. Recognizing doubt as doubt when it arises is very important. I like your idea of doubt masquerading as surety. Whenever we feel most certain about some piece of Dhamma, it could be just a tricky manifestation of doubt. I don't doubt it! > 2. I don't think we can avoid the obstacles on the path, such as wrong view, > wrong knowledge, etc. That's everyone's condition. Although I can only speak for myself, I think that's probably right. > Mistakes are okay, as long as you keep going. If that weren't true, imagine what > sad shape we'd all be in. Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu. Dan 7769 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 11:20pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > Dan: > This hardening of concepts is certainly a problem when it manifests > itself as a rigid dogmatism. But it is also a problem in less obvious > ways. [much snipped] When I was taught meditation by my teachers it was presented much more simply than this. If I had heard this long list of potential dangers I think I'd have become totally paralyzed by worry and doubt, such that meditation would have been impossible. "Wisdom is to see the truth of the various manifestations of body and mind. When we use our trained and concentrated minds to examine the five khandhas (material form, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness), we will see clearly that both body and mind are impermanent, unsatisfactory and not self. In seeing all compounded things with wisdom we do not cling or grasp. Whatever we receive, we receive mindfully. We are not exessively happy. When things of ours break up or disappear, we are not unhappy and do not suffer painful feelings - for we see clearly the impermanent nature of all things. When we encounter illness and pain of any sort, we equanimity because our minds have been well trained. The true refuge is the trained mind. "All of this is known as wisdom which knows the true characteristics of things as they arise. Wisdom arises from mindfulness and concentration. Concentration arises from a base of morality or virtue. All these things, morality, concentration and wisdom, are so inter-related that it is not really possible to separate them. In practice it can be looked at in this way: First there is the arising of morality. When mindfulness of breathing is practised continuously until the mind is quiet, this is the arising of concentration. Then examination showing the breath as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not- self, and the subsequent non-attachment, is the arising of wisdom. Thus the practice of mindfulness of breathing can be said to be the course for all development of morality, concentration and wisdom. They all come together. We can say this practice reaches the Buddha- Dhamma truly and precisely. "The practice of meditation must be pursued as continouosly as possible in order for it to bear fruit. Don't meditate for a short time one day and then in one or two weeks, or even a month. Meditate again, this will bring results. The Buddha taught us to practise often, to practise diligently, that is, to be as continuous as we can in the practice of mental training. To practise meditation we should also find a suitable quite place free from distractions. In gardens or under shady trees in our back yards, or in places where we can be alone are suitable environments." > But really, escape is very distant. No sense in > fooling myself about that! By placing it "far away" many would say you are fooling yourself. The Tibetan schools list "four faults" to recognizing our innate wisdom: not recognizing it's 1) too near 2) too easy 3) too profound and 4) too excellent. 7770 From: Dan Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 2:12am Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] > > Dan: > > This hardening of concepts is certainly a problem when it manifests > > itself as a rigid dogmatism. But it is also a problem in less > obvious > > ways. [much snipped] Erik: > When I was taught meditation by my teachers it was presented much > more simply than this. If I had heard this long list of potential > dangers I think I'd have become totally paralyzed by worry and doubt, > such that meditation would have been impossible. Dan: I'm not trying to teach meditation to beginning meditators. I'm just describing some of the ways that I see the mental processes described in Mulapariyaya sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn001.html) manifested in everyday life. It is very easy to underestimate the impact and influence of wrong view from moment to moment and from day to day. > > But really, escape is very distant. No sense in > > fooling myself about that! > > By placing it "far away" many would say you are fooling yourself. I just see kilesa arising virtually without interruption, beyond my immediate control. That stream of kilesa is rooted in a craving that is much deeper from superficial cravings for any particular sensations, whether it is for something coarse like cigarettes or sex or listening to the radio or something subtler like the pleasant sensations arising with samadhi in meditation. You may not agree or may not like to think about it very much, but sometimes it's easy to overlook the grip that craving has on our living. 7771 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 6:41am Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic-Kom Dear Kom, This was exactly the sutta I was thinking of and mistakenly looking for in Dhp com. Many thanks indeed....I've always found it a good reminder and like the image of the calm, kind mistress whacking with the rolling pin when sufficiently provoked.....;-)) There are also many good reminders about speech. many thanks! Sarah --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Frank, > > ......................................................................... > > We may think there's no more anger for now, but what about all the > little > > uneasy feelings, minor irritations, petty resentments and all. Maybe > now we're > > not really being tested, but what about when life doesn't go our way > such as > > when we're sick and in pain. The tests are when it's hard. I'm thinking > of the > > Dhammapada story when the maidservant turned up later and later to > test her > > mistress' good humour (perhaps someone can supply the details or > > reference?).Don't we all have our limits? > > In > > Majjhima Nikaya 21 > Kakacupama Sutta > The Simile of the Saw > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn021.html#vedehika > > It is a good reminder that anger doesn't arise now only because there is > no condition for it. As long as we are not an anagami, there is sure to > be anger. > > kom > 7772 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 6:41am Subject: (Not) Catching Up Lately, since school started, I have found it very difficult to keep up with the amount of posts here, and I have basically only been reading those which were direct responses to me as well as a select other few. I am afraid that I will have to take a break from dsg for a while, until I find the time to properly attend this group. I'll probably stop by a few time sover the next week or so to check for any replies to posts I've made and wrap things up, but otherwise, I don't think I'll be posting here for a while. It's been fun. Anders 7773 From: frank kuan Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 7:09am Subject: Simile of saw, evil/kind mistress, right speech Hello Sarah, Kom, others, > > Majjhima Nikaya 21 > > Kakacupama Sutta > > The Simile of the Saw > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn021.html#vedehika Rereading that sutta, two of the similes really struck me this time. Just not the two you might think. The saw simile always kind of annoyed me because it's like, get real, who can really focus their mind in the moment on metta when they're in that much pain? Even an arhat committed suicide when they had overpowering physical pain, and the Buddha condoned it as a blameless action (another MN sutta). The simile with the servant getting beaten by the kind mistress also really annoys me, for many reasons. I can just see some obnoxious dhamma email list members posting inflammatory material and then using this sutta to justify their public service in "testing" people's defilements. The two similes that really made an impact on me are the ones with the ganges river and the formless space. The saw simile is like asking limited humans who have enough of a hard time trying to do the impossible, whereas the ganges simile somehow feels more attainable to me. -fk sutta excerpt: Suppose that a man were to come along carrying a burning grass torch and saying, 'With this burning grass torch I will heat up the river Ganges and make it boil.' Now, what do you think -- would he, with that burning grass torch, heat up the river Ganges and make it boil?" "No, lord. Why is that? Because the river Ganges is deep & enormous. It's not easy to heat it up and make it boil with a burning grass torch. The man would reap only a share of weariness & disappointment." "In the same way, monks, there are these five aspects of speech by which others may address you: timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of good-will or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely way or an untimely way. They may address you with what is true or what is false. They may address you in an affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may address you with a mind of good-will or with inner hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person's welfare, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with him, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will equal to the river Ganges -- abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves. 7774 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 9:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Yes, thinking about the level of 'merit' one is accumulating in doing > > something kusala is no doubt unwholesome, and so detracts from the > overall > > level of purity of the action being performed. I dare say that most > of > > our 'wholesome actions' are, like in this example, a mixture of kusala > and > > akusala mental states. ... > > I wonder if it would be wholesome to be aware that one is doing a > meritorious > deed, but rather than feeling good about the merit, enjoying a feeling > of 'giving' > or gratitude, happiness for the other person who receives the gift, > etc.? > > Robert E. Yes, there is a level of kusala that, at the moment of performing kusala, knows and appreciates that kusala is being performed. And there also is a form of kusala that rejoices in another's good fortune (this is mudita, one of the 4 brahma-vihara's--but be alert to the near and far enemies!). Jon 7775 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 9:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > Howard, in response to the example I raised of 'spontaneous' kusala > > (wholesomeness) you said the explanation was-- > > > > > Previous cultivation. > > > > This is undoubtedly true, I think. But even at such moments, kusala > > effort/energy must be present. It arises with the citta, and performs > its > > function. Without it, no kusala whether spontaneous or not. > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Mmm, hmm. I agree with respect to the 'energy' translation of > 'viriya' > in this case, but less so with the 'effort' translation if it is > carrying a > sense of intention/volition. > --------------------------------------------------------------- I agree that in conventional speech 'effort' tends to carry the implication of intention. However, as a translation of viriya cetasika/samma vayama/the 4 padhanas (endeavours) it has a very specific function and characteristic, which is not at all like conventional effort, and is of course separate and distinct from the function and characteristic of cetana cetasika (usually translated as ‘intention’). This is why I feel that when the Buddha talks about putting forth effort we should be wary of taking him to mean effort of the conventional 'intentional' kind. Jon 7776 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 9:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Descriptive vs. path of action Dan --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Hi Jon, > I would think that dhamma-vinaya would include the notion of a > 'practice'. If we are not careful, we might fall into the trap that > the practice is viewed as something external, i.e. a formula of "Do > this practice. Get that result." Buddha mentions such formulas often, > but not so much in the context of a particular Thing-to-Do. Yes, the Buddha’s formulas come in many variations, each with its own shade of meaning. The pattern may be, for example— - This being done, that ensues - This situation results from that having been done. - A person does this, then that, then the other. - Having done this, a person does that. and so on. Quite often the 'this' part of the sequence is a reference to the situation of the particular audience being addressed, that is, the listeners are already in the habit of doing the 'this' and are being shown how they can instead/also be achieving the 'that'. In this situation, a reading along the lines "If one happens to be doing the 'this'..." would be closer to the mark than "One should first do the 'this'...". As you say, the teachings are only rarely given in the sense of a particular 'Thing-to-do', but in our eagerness to gain advancement on the path we tend to grab them and run with them! Jon PS My apologies for crediting someone else with your neat 'Thing-to-do' expression! 7777 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 9:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > I think that what I am calling 'intention' would be the 'active' form of > a 'view'. > If I think the world is all about money and power, my intention will be > to get > money and power, etc. I understand the desire to use 'view' in terms of > Right > View and the other views that are stuck in one or another concept of > reality. I > think 'intention' is probably just another aspect of the same thing. > > Robert E. Agreed. And I would only add that the intention (ie. in your example, to get money) has its roots in the wrong thinking (ie. that the world is all about money and power), so that as long as the latter remains the former must continue to manifest in some guise or another. Jon 7778 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 10:00am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Dan --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Hi Howard and Jon et al., > > Do you see a distinction between "eightfold path" and "Noble eightfold > path"? "Noble" is often used in the sense of "supramundane". Of > course, there is the "mundane" eightfold path, or satipatthana with > mundane object--development of wisdom. The moments of mundane path may > be few and far between, but these are precious moments because they > are a basis for panya. Agreed, except that, on a technical point Mr Speaker, the mundane path is not actually 'Eightfold', since it arises with only 5 (or sometimes 6) path factors. As the mundane version of the (supramundane) Eightfold Path, it is more correctly refered to as the mundane 5-fold path or, as found in the texts, ‘mundane insight’ (and such moments are in *in fact* panna). Then, there is the conventional path--strictly > the everyday, run-of-the mill meanings of the words. This conventional > meaning is there and makes sense (I think Jon disagrees with me here > . Whatever are we going to do with him!), but this meaning is > superficial and not liberating. Agreed--I am a real pain. One of the beauties of the Dhamma and > Buddha's exposition is that it so often has many levels of meaning. > Jon's role is to keep prompting us to think about things one step > deeper than we are accustomed. (Is this a role that you aspiring to, O > Jon? Or does it just work out that way sometimes?) > > Dan I suppose I just prefer to talk about the 'deeper' levels (speaking purely relatively, of course) because I see the opportunities for doing so being so extremely limited, as to compared to the countless lifetimes ahead when the purely conventional level will be the best we have access to. And for this opportunity and stimulation I am exceedingly grateful to everyone on this list! With heartfelt thanks Jon 7779 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 10:02am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment Mike This is a great way of putting it. Satipatthana is indeed the 'middle way'. Glad you foound the post useful. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hello, Jon, > > Thanks for a clear, concise, balanced and well-cited > answer to the deceptively simple question. In this > context I think satipatthaana could be called the > middle path between 'dealing with akusala' and > ignoring it. > > mike 7780 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 10:09am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (Dan) Dan --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Jon: > > > It is apparent from the Satipatthana Sutta that > > > akusala per se is not an > > > obstacle to the development of awareness/insight. > > > In the section on > > > Contemplation on Mental Objects (the Five > > > Hindrances), it states that > > > one's impurities can themselves be the object of > > > awareness. > > Dan: > I like your post, and it is clear that the idea "I need to deal with > akusala" is rooted in moha and can lead to generation of even more > akusala. (However, when there is a good degree of moha, then one of > the two ideas "I need to deal with akusala because it's akusala" or "I > don't need to deal with akusala because it isn't harmful" is often > likely to arise. While not pure, I find the first far less unwholesome > than the second. But that's another story.) I'm concerned about your > logic that simply because impurities can be the object of awareness > that they are not obstacles to the development of insight. Thanks Dan. It was not meant to be a matter of logic, but an illustration showing how at the moment of actual awareness the hindrances are manifestly not obstacles. The point is that we need not think of the hindrances as being *necessarily* (which I should have had in there) an obstacle to the development of insight, with all the implications that that particular mindset entails (eg. they must be abandoned, jhana must be developed first, awareness is not possible until I have done such and such, I cannot possibly begin the development of awareness, etc). Thanks for the opportunity to clarify. Jon 7781 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 10:14am Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank (Dan) --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > > > It is easy to confuse preparatory concentration with jhana, > > > preparatory concentration with access concentration, preparatory > > > concentration with insight, calm with insight, access > concentration > > > with insight, trivial insight with profound insight, jhana with > > > profound insight (e.g. compare the descriptions of jhana-entry > with > > > stream-entry in Abhidhammattha sangaha), fruits of concentration > > with > > > fruits of insight, etc. > > > > Dan, you sound terribly confused by all these labels! Have you > > considered putting your categories down for awhile and taking a few > > deep breaths? :) > > Hmmm... I don't feel confused or befuddled by the labels. I wonder > what went wrong in the transition from my experience, to my > understanding, to my interpretation, to my writing, to your eyes, to > your brain, to your conceiving, to your writing, to my seeing, to my > interpretation, to my conceiving, because it seems like you are > attributing comments to my terrible confusion. Or are you? > > > > I find that being "sure" of the differences is > > > no real assurance at all. > > > > That's why it's indispensible to have qualified teachers who can see > > our blind spots. It is the "whole of the holy life" after all. > > Yup. > > > > I've been so sure of so many things about > > > Dhamma at so many times, that I figure I ought to have been an > > Arahant > > > several times over by now. The only problem is that my sureness > > always > > > seems to stand on shaky ground. Then, all these conceptual > > structures > > > I build up from the outlines given in Tipitaka come crashing down. > > > > Watching all those conceptual elaborations come crashing down can > > only be good thing. There's nothing worse in terms of understanding > > the oh-so-simple Dhamma (a direct pointing at the heart) than > > a "hardening of the categories." What I'm curious to know is how > it's > > believed such conceptual structures provide any solid footing at > all! > > The whole point is to tear them down! > > The building up of conceptual structures is a process that is going to > happen in the non-arahant regardless of how much you don't want it to, > or think that it shouldn't. How is it believed that conceptual > structures provide solid footing? Ignorance. Ignorance -> conceptual > structures; and ignorance -> perception of conceptual structures as > real -> perception of conceptual structures as solid footing. Belief > that conceptual structures provide solid footing? I don't know what > belief has to do with it: the clinging to conceptual structures as > solid footing continues unabated, whether you believe that they do or > not, whether you want them to or not, whether you think they do or > not. I don't "believe" that concepts provide solid footing, but that > does not prevent my concept building. Desire to not cling to concept > does not prevent clinging to concept; and even strong desire to not > cling to concept does not prevent clinging to concept. > > The whole point is to tear down conceptual structures? No. The point > is to develop wisdom. As the development proceeds, clinging to concept > lessens naturally, of its own accord. "Tear down conceptual > structures" sounds like a recipe for dosa! Dan I believe there's a world of difference between (a) being confused or in doubt about what the task is, and (b) knowing that what one has previously taken for understanding was not in fact understanding (or, put simply, knowing that we don't know, when previously we thought we did). The former is stultifying and discouraging, the latter is liberating and something to take heart from. What I am hearing from your recent posts is the latter rather than the former. You have obviously been doing some careful considering lately! Jon 7782 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 10:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up Anders --- Anders Honore wrote: > Lately, since school started, I have found it very difficult to keep > up with the amount of posts here, and I have basically only been > reading those which were direct responses to me as well as a select > other few. > > I am afraid that I will have to take a break from dsg for a while, > until I find the time to properly attend this group. > > I'll probably stop by a few time sover the next week or so to check > for any replies to posts I've made and wrap things up, but otherwise, > I don't think I'll be posting here for a while. > > It's been fun. And it's been good having you. Look forward to having you back again when you feel the time is right. Good luck with the studies in the meantime. Jon 7783 From: Erik Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > This is why I feel that when the Buddha talks about putting forth effort > we should be wary of taking him to mean effort of the conventional > 'intentional' kind. Indeed. Why listen to the Buddha's very simple words, for example: "generating desire, arousing persistence, upholding and exerting one's intent for the abandoning of unskillful qualities that have already arisen" when personal interpretations of commentaries and subcomentaries are so much more helpful? Being the simpleton that I am, prefer the elementary stuff like the Suttas and the clear teachings on mindfulness I've been taught by my kind teachers here at Wat Mahatat. On that note I will, like Anders, be taking a break from DSG, and intentionally place my efforts in a more fruitful direction like applied meditation--keeping my eye on the Far Shore and my hand gently on the tiller of my storm-tested little raft; and leave this dry-docked state-of-the-art battleship of the Abhidhamma to those who find it neceessary to have a Ph.D. in nuclear physics before setting sail. 7784 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 11:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Catching Up - Robert E --- Erik wrote: > --- --- Robert Epstein > wrote: > > > > > > I have noticed a sort of movement in the U.S., perhaps elsewhere, > to look at > > Buddhism as a form of empiricism. That what Buddhism adds up to is > simply seeing > > the basic perception of the natural physical world without any > clouding > > conditions, thoughts and emotions. I see this as a kind of > lobotomy rather than a > > nirvanic transcendence. I can't imagine that Buddha would have > gone to the > > immense trouble of dealing with every issue under the sun, and > giving such a > > rigorous path to understanding, if he merely meant for us to see > life the way a > > camera does. > > > ________ > Very good point, Robert. I think Howard alluded to this when he said > that being wisely attentive (yoniso manisikara) comes from having > studied the Buddha's teaching. We might hear phrases like 'bare > attention' or 'seeing things as they are' and assume that simply > because there is no obvious clinging one is now understanding reality > directly. However, citta and sanna (perception) arise and experience > realities too. What makes the difference - as to whether there is > true insight - is the factor of panna (wisdom). And that, at the > level of satipatthana, is dependent on correct understanding of the > Dhamma. > robert ---------------------------------------------- Dear Robert, Thanks for your response. It occurred to me also when I re-read this, that those who look at nirvana as a camera-like 'objective' perception must have failed to look at the aspect of Vipassana that 'breaks down' the objective existence of objects into less and less coherent arisings, that de-constructs dhammas in other words. Science keeps thinking when it breaks down realities that it will eventually find the final nugget at the heart of phenomena. Buddhism states from the outset that this nugget is missing and that when you break down realities, they break down all the way to annatta and temporary skandhas [if I understand correctly]. If we look at objects as 'objects' we're really missing annatta, aren't we? [Not claiming to fully get it myself, however]. But I do get the idea that the presumption of entity means that even if we can't 'find ourselves' or any other object on the first pass, we feel sure that we will eventually find it, and it's 'in there somewhere'. The explosion of this myth is one of the Buddha's core teachings. For 'primitive' religions, the spirits were the unseen phenomena that had to be respected and served. For modern human beings it is the 'self'. The spirit that science believes in and tiptoes around and prays to is the 'real object' that it believes doesn't change or dissolve, rather than the momentary arising of phenomena, which will and always does, change continuously. Regards, Robert E. 7785 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 11:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Robert E] Nice to hear back from you Dan! Regards, Robert ========================== --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Thanks for the helpful comments, Robert E. I appreciate your > attention. > > Recognizing doubt as doubt when it arises is very important. I like > your idea of doubt masquerading as surety. Whenever we feel most > certain about some piece of Dhamma, it could be just a tricky > manifestation of doubt. I don't doubt it! > > > > 2. I don't think we can avoid the obstacles on the path, such as > wrong view, > > wrong knowledge, etc. That's everyone's condition. > > Although I can only speak for myself, I think that's probably right. > > > Mistakes are okay, as long as you keep going. If that weren't true, > imagine what > > sad shape we'd all be in. > > Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu. > > Dan ===== 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" 7786 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 11:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] This is really great stuff, Erik, a very clear meditation manual in brief. I think you could take this to a desert island and do pretty well with no other material. Best, Robert E. ============================== --- Erik wrote: > --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > > > Dan: > > This hardening of concepts is certainly a problem when it manifests > > itself as a rigid dogmatism. But it is also a problem in less > obvious > > ways. [much snipped] > > When I was taught meditation by my teachers it was presented much > more simply than this. If I had heard this long list of potential > dangers I think I'd have become totally paralyzed by worry and doubt, > such that meditation would have been impossible. > > "Wisdom is to see the truth of the various manifestations of body and > mind. When we use our trained and concentrated minds to examine the > five khandhas (material form, feelings, perceptions, mental > formations and consciousness), we will see clearly that both body and > mind are impermanent, unsatisfactory and not self. In seeing all > compounded things with wisdom we do not cling or grasp. Whatever we > receive, we receive mindfully. We are not exessively happy. When > things of ours break up or disappear, we are not unhappy and do not > suffer painful feelings - for we see clearly the impermanent nature > of all things. When we encounter illness and pain of any sort, we > equanimity because our minds have been well trained. The true refuge > is the trained mind. > > "All of this is known as wisdom which knows the true characteristics > of things as they arise. Wisdom arises from mindfulness and > concentration. Concentration arises from a base of morality or > virtue. All these things, morality, concentration and wisdom, are so > inter-related that it is not really possible to separate them. In > practice it can be looked at in this way: First there is the arising > of morality. When mindfulness of breathing is practised continuously > until the mind is quiet, this is the arising of concentration. Then > examination showing the breath as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not- > self, and the subsequent non-attachment, is the arising of wisdom. > Thus the practice of mindfulness of breathing can be said to be the > course for all development of morality, concentration and wisdom. > They all come together. We can say this practice reaches the Buddha- > Dhamma truly and precisely. > > "The practice of meditation must be pursued as continouosly as > possible in order for it to bear fruit. Don't meditate for a short > time one day and then in one or two weeks, or even a month. Meditate > again, this will bring results. The Buddha taught us to practise > often, to practise diligently, that is, to be as continuous as we can > in the practice of mental training. To practise meditation we should > also find a suitable quite place free from distractions. In gardens > or under shady trees in our back yards, or in places where we can be > alone are suitable environments." > > > But really, escape is very distant. No sense in > > fooling myself about that! > > By placing it "far away" many would say you are fooling yourself. The > Tibetan schools list "four faults" to recognizing our innate wisdom: > not recognizing it's 1) too near 2) too easy 3) too profound and 4) > too excellent. > > > > > > ===== 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" 7787 From: m. nease Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 0:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I suppose I just prefer to talk about the 'deeper' > levels (speaking purely > relatively, of course) because I see the > opportunities for doing so being > so extremely limited, as to compared to the > countless lifetimes ahead when > the purely conventional level will be the best we > have access to. > > And for this opportunity and stimulation I am > exceedingly grateful to > everyone on this list! > > With heartfelt thanks > > Jon Heartfelt thanks back at you, too, Jon. mike 7788 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 0:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > Yes, thinking about the level of 'merit' one is accumulating in doing > > > something kusala is no doubt unwholesome, and so detracts from the > > overall > > > level of purity of the action being performed. I dare say that most > > of > > > our 'wholesome actions' are, like in this example, a mixture of kusala > > and > > > akusala mental states. ... > > > > I wonder if it would be wholesome to be aware that one is doing a > > meritorious > > deed, but rather than feeling good about the merit, enjoying a feeling > > of 'giving' > > or gratitude, happiness for the other person who receives the gift, > > etc.? > > > > Robert E. > > Yes, there is a level of kusala that, at the moment of performing kusala, > knows and appreciates that kusala is being performed. And there also is a > form of kusala that rejoices in another's good fortune (this is mudita, > one of the 4 brahma-vihara's--but be alert to the near and far enemies!). Yeah, when I'm acknowledged or complimented, or when I feel I've done something worthwhile, I notice an awful lot of relief and pride rising up. Since I'm able to look at it, I feel that this is at least a step in the right direction, but it's amazing how the ego-sense pops up and just craves being made real by acknowledgment. On the other hand, I've found that beating oneself with a stick is equally ineffective. I just try to look at it now and see what's happening. Best, Robert E. 7789 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 0:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > I think that what I am calling 'intention' would be the 'active' form of > > a 'view'. > > If I think the world is all about money and power, my intention will be > > to get > > money and power, etc. I understand the desire to use 'view' in terms of > > Right > > View and the other views that are stuck in one or another concept of > > reality. I > > think 'intention' is probably just another aspect of the same thing. > > > > Robert E. > > Agreed. And I would only add that the intention (ie. in your example, to > get money) has its roots in the wrong thinking (ie. that the world is all > about money and power), so that as long as the latter remains the former > must continue to manifest in some guise or another. I see what you mean, it's the chicken and the egg. You are saying that the Buddha [I assume] attributes the wrong intention to the wrong view, and I was attributing the view to the intention. I guess it would be against the rules to ask, 'then what causes Wrong View to arise?' Smilingly, Robert E. 7790 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 0:45pm Subject: Re: Simile of saw, evil/kind mistress, right speech --- Dear Frank, I agree with the gist of your post. Just a small correction. the commentary to the sutta about the monk who committed suicide notes that the monk was not yet enlightened when he cut his throat. The pain was an object for satipatthana and he went though the vippasana insights and stages of enlightenment from the time of cutting his throat and before finally collapsing and dieing. It can happen very fast when the conditions are right. On the simile of the saw - yes I guess few of us could behave in such a way - but that is only because we cling to the khandas as self. We believe they exist and we have an idea of a whole. At moments of sati and insight though there is detachment from taking any of the khandas for self - and so we can see how it is possible to have no dosa in such situations robert frank kuan wrote: > Hello Sarah, Kom, others, > > > > > Majjhima Nikaya 21 > > > Kakacupama Sutta > > > The Simile of the Saw > > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn021.html#vedehika > > Rereading that sutta, two of the similes really > struck me this time. Just not the two you might think. > The saw simile always kind of annoyed me because it's > like, get real, who can really focus their mind in the > moment on metta when they're in that much pain? Even > an arhat committed suicide when they had overpowering > physical pain, and the Buddha condoned it as a > blameless action (another MN sutta). The simile with > the servant getting beaten by the kind mistress also > really annoys me, for many reasons. I can just see > some obnoxious dhamma email list members posting > inflammatory material and then using this sutta to > justify their public service in "testing" people's > defilements. > The two similes that really made an impact on me > are the ones with the ganges river and the formless > space. The saw simile is like asking limited humans > who have enough of a hard time trying to do the > impossible, whereas the ganges simile somehow feels > more attainable to me. > > -fk > > > sutta excerpt: > Suppose that a man were to come along carrying a > burning grass torch and saying, 'With this burning > grass torch I will heat up the river Ganges and make > it boil.' Now, what do you think -- would he, with > that burning grass torch, heat up the river Ganges and > make it boil?" > > "No, lord. Why is that? Because the river Ganges is > deep & enormous. It's not easy to heat it up and make > it boil with a burning grass torch. The man would reap > only a share of weariness & disappointment." > > "In the same way, monks, there are these five aspects > of speech by which others may address you: timely or > untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, > beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of good-will > or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely > way or an untimely way. They may address you with what > is true or what is false. They may address you in an > affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you > in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may > address you with a mind of good-will or with inner > hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: 'Our > minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil > words. We will remain sympathetic to that person's > welfare, with a mind of good will, and with no inner > hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness > imbued with good will and, beginning with him, we will > keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an > awareness imbued with good will equal to the river > Ganges -- abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from > hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should > train yourselves. > > > > > > 7791 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 4:47pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Anders > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > Lately, since > school started, I have found it very difficult to keep > > up with the amount of posts here, and I have basically only been > > reading those which were direct responses to me as well as a select > > other few. > > > > I am afraid that I will have to take a break from dsg for a while, > > until I find the time to properly attend this group. > > > > I'll probably stop by a few time sover the next week or so to check > > for any replies to posts I've made and wrap things up, but otherwise, > > I don't think I'll be posting here for a while. > > > > It's been fun. > > And it's been good having you. Look forward to having you back again when > you feel the time is right. > > Good luck with the studies in the meantime. Thank you. 7792 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 4:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Anders, --- Anders Honore wrote: > Lately, since school started, I have found it very difficult to keep up with the amount of posts here> I don't think I'll be posting here for a while. ..... Anders. we’ve all been appreciating your contributions and many thanks for your attempts to ‘keep up’. Look in from time to time if you can, otherwise perhaps we’ll see you at Xmas or Easter;-)) > > It's been fun. Likewise and many thanks for your recent comments in our discussions which I’ve taken note of. Let me just pull our a couple of your responses for quick replies before you run: ...................................................................... A: > > All that remains is the primal mind, > > true & unchanging. > S: > Sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.... A: There's a point to my little query here. I'm not trying to say: "This view of Nirvana is correct or incorrect" or anything like that. Rather, I'm trying instigate an investigative response: So this doesn't accord with your own understanding of Theravada. Why is that? Obviously, someone isn't really enlightened since these two views are so contradictory, but who is it? Mun & Chah (and Mahayanists too) or the Abdhidhamma (which I assume, is where what you are saying is stated) and some of the commentators? How will one know which one is correct or not? Is it really beneficial to believe either is correct, if one doesn't know for himself? Will clinging to one view obstruct eventual realisation of Nibbana? What if its the "wrong" one that one takes to be true? Will that obstruct realisation of Nibbana? Will the right one? ....................................................................... Sarah: When I said it didn’t make sense, what I meant was: 1) It doesn’t accord with what I read in the Tipitaka 2) but more, it doesn’t ‘match’ with what is being experienced now (for me). If I read that right now there is seeing and visible object, heat, cold, happiness and sadness, they can be tested and proved immediately. When I read that visible object is experienced through the eyes and is not-self, likewise, it ‘fits’ logically and with experience of what is seen. Personally, I’ve never had any doubts about the abhidhamma or ancient commentaries because what I’ve read from them (really, just a little) has always matched what makes sense in the Buddha’s Teachings. A ‘true and unchanging’ ‘primal mind’ or nibbana makes no sense on any level to me. When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s book, I saw N. also quoted from AN1, 10: ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but it is defiled by intrusive (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, and it is freed from intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The commentary to this text explains the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life continuum (bhavanga), which is ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted by defilements. The defilements arise only in the active thought process, not in the subliminal flow of consciousness’. Now in this example, which we’ve discussed at length, I’m sure that without the commentary notes, I might not have understood it correctly even thought the nibbana interpretation wouldn’t have made sense to me. Reading the bhavanga interpretation, it seems logical and furthermore, I admit I have confidence in these ancient commentaries that had to be approved by several councils of arahats so soon after the Buddha’s parinibbana. Who are we to question the wisdom of these arahats? The other day I was talking to Robert E about Patanjali and ancient Hindu masters and by chance (In Yoga Journal) I came across this extract: ‘From the yogic perspective, all human beings are ‘born divine’ and each human being has at core a soul (atman) that dwells eternally ...In Patanjali’s classic statement of this view ‘tat tvam asi’ (thou art that), we already are that which we seek. We are God in disguise. We are already inherently perfect, and we have the potential in each moment to wake up to this true, awake, and enlightened nature’. These are the views that the Buddha was very familiar with and proved to be totally erroneous. However, as Dan has clearly articulated (in my view) in recent posts, the clinging to a self is very insiduous and can take many forms. I know my comments here will seem very controversial, but I’m just making them for you to take away and consider. When there is the idea of a ‘Buddha nature’ or bodhi citta or even a ‘primal mind’, could these be aspects of trying to reintroduce a self into the Buddha’s Teachings? Very best wishes, Anders and many, many thanks for your pleasant, mature and well-reasoned posts to dsg. Sarah 7793 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 5:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana -Erik's raft Hi Erik, --- Erik wrote: > Being the simpleton that I am, prefer the elementary stuff like the > Suttas and the clear teachings on mindfulness I've been taught by my > kind teachers here at Wat Mahatat. > > On that note I will, like Anders, be taking a break from DSG, and > intentionally place my efforts in a more fruitful direction like > applied meditation--keeping my eye on the Far Shore and my hand > gently on the tiller of my storm-tested little raft; and leave this > dry-docked state-of-the-art battleship of the Abhidhamma to those who > find it neceessary to have a Ph.D. in nuclear physics before setting > sail. May I be a little presumptuous and say that, eloquent as this is, it doesn’t sound like our Great Debater.....what were all those comments you made to others about fear and the rest when they bowed out of discussions???;-)) Now a Ph D in nuclear physics would not be for me, but thanks! What happened to all those aspirations to study abhidhamma which I believe even your Tibetan lineage deems essential (even at state-of-the-art battleship levels) for understanding the Teachings?? Take a break, Erik, but pop in whenever you feel inclined to give us all a shake-up ..like I said to Herman, the door’s open. If anyone is NOT a simpleton, it's you;-) Take care and best wishes meanwhile with your pesonal plans;-)) Sorry we won’t be seeing you in Bkk either. Sarah p.s I take it that the silence with regard to my responses on the 6 pairs and Metta means we’re in perfect accord for twice;-)) 7794 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 5:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Dear Mike C, thank you very much for your post and comments below (and thanks Frank for your help). > From: Michael Chu < > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > meditation > Dear Sara and all, >> > I am very lazy at my practice of meditation. I > average about fifteen > minutes of meditation every other day. Comparing > myself to my fellow > cultivator friends, namely Frank and William, who do > at least one hour of > sitting meditation each day continuously for several > years, I have noticed > their ability to be mindful and serene far exceed > mine. Mike, may I make 2 quick comments here? I don’t think it’s very fruitful to compare yourself with others. Doesn’t this just lead to thoughts of inferiority (in this case) and unhappy feelings? Secondly, do we ever really know another’s state of mind? isn’t it hard enough to know when we’re really calm or have mindfulness as opposed to a pleasant feeling or subtle clinging? We can never tell in another just be the appearance or posture what the state of mind is. > > I personally noticed that lacking the mindfulness of > cultivation from > meditation, I am having a much more difficult time > progressing in the Noble > Eightfold Path compare to my peers. On the > concentration group, I can only > sporadically address my present moment with the right > effort, mindfulness, > and concentration. Without the appropriate > concentration, I find myself to > have further difficulty achieving the right speech and > action. Mike, i think you have the right idea when you recognise that the time for mindfulness is the present moment. However, it seems that you have an idea of a ‘self’ that should be able to progress, concentrate, be mindful and achieve rt speech and action. When we mind so much about these states, doesn’t it also show how much we cling to ME, myself. Doesn’t it show how much we’d like to be the mindful, concentrated one with good speech and action? What about when we compare or wish to have mindfulness, being aware of the clinging to self at these times? Wouldn’t that be a little progress? People have the idea that concentration should be fixing undistractedly on an object . But in what way is it pure or wholesome when this happens? There is concentration all the time, even when we’re distracted (according to the Teachings). My progress > of having the right understanding, thought, and speech > is also hindered. By > lacking the right understanding, I find myself making > poor plans for my > livelihood. My clarity of mind is always compromised. We all lack right understanding most the time, Mike. Recognizing how little understanding there is, is a really good start. Actually, I think the more understanding develops, the more it sees what real beginners we are. As one of our members, suggested, we think we know and then there’s a little breakthrough and we realise it was all wrong after all! For understanding to really develop, we need to hear and consider more about what are the actual phenomena that can be known. When we talk about livelihood plans, we can talk about them from many angles. Frank is considering taking early retirement and living in a forest. Form a conventional point of view, these would be poor livelihood decisions. From a Buddhist point of view, it would depend on the intentions and motivations involved, because in Buddhism, we’re always more concerned with the present state of mind than ‘the story’. I hope your livlihood works out better in both regards! > > I also noticed lacking the ability to be mindful even > hinders the right > breathing and induces undesirable states like > sluggishness, impatience, > restlessness, and anger. I can only so far only be > able to do a limited > form of damage control on these undesirable states > when I occasionally > remember to stay away from them. Another thing I > noticed is that these > undesirable statements can be quickly terminated if I > catch them on their > early stages. To be able to catch the arising of > these undesirable states, > we need to be mindful. It seems that we can ‘catch’ them or stop them arising and conventionally, this is often true. Hence we say to a child ‘snap out of it’ and the child sometimes does! On a deeper level, however, we can see we’re pretty much stuck with our ‘character’ and inclinations, so that sooner or later these negative states will arise again and again in spite of good intentions. Why is this? Because they have been gathering for so very long and are not controllable. Even if mindfulness is mindful of the anger or impatience for a moment, what about next moment? Again, may I suggest, that the reason we mind so much about these states is not usually because we see the danger of ALL kinds of unwholesomeness, but because the ones you’ve mentioned are unpleasant and we cling so much to a self! When we’re having a great time and there’s no anger or impatience, do we mind about the excitement and attachment? What about all the ignorance in between? > >> The very reason why we should apply appropriate > mindfulness and catch the > arising anger before it gets any bigger and out of > control. > > So far the best way to achieve mindfulness that I know > of is through > practicing proper meditation. If you have any > suggestion that we can better > achieve mindfulness, I would love to know. Actually, Mike, there is no self to apply mindfulness or do anything. This doesn’t mean ‘give up’ and it doesn't mean 'sit' or 'don't sit', it means learn more about what mindfulness really is, what the objects of mindfulness are and develop understanding (by understanding , not doing) of these same realities at any time. This is what I call bhavana or meditation. One or two practical suggestions: 1) Join DSG, go to ‘Useful Posts’ at this link and scroll down to ‘new to Dhamma’ for some suggestions or other topics that look interesting. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 2) Keep asking questions here....be patient for replies and ignore posts that are too technical for now. 3) Go to this website and read anything that doesn’t seem too hard http://www.abhidhamma.org/ Hope to hear more form you, Best wishes, Sarah 7795 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 7:32pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Anders, > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > Anders. we've all been appreciating your contributions and many thanks for your > attempts to `keep up'. Look in from time to time if you can, otherwise perhaps > we'll see you at Xmas or Easter;-)) Yes, probably :-) > .................................................................... > A: > > All that remains is the primal mind, > > > true & unchanging. > > > S: > Sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.... > > A: There's a point to my little query here. I'm not trying to say: "This > view of Nirvana is correct or incorrect" or anything like that. > Rather, I'm trying instigate an investigative response: > So this doesn't accord with your own understanding of Theravada. Why > is that? Obviously, someone isn't really enlightened since these two > views are so contradictory, but who is it? Mun & Chah (and > Mahayanists too) or the Abdhidhamma (which I assume, is where what > you are saying is stated) and some of the commentators? > How will one know which one is correct or not? Is it really > beneficial to believe either is correct, if one doesn't know for > himself? Will clinging to one view obstruct eventual realisation of > Nibbana? What if its the "wrong" one that one takes to be true? Will > that obstruct realisation of Nibbana? Will the right one? > .................................................................... ... > Sarah: When I said it didn't make sense, what I meant was: > > 1) It doesn't accord with what I read in the Tipitaka I would reformulate that to "it doesn't accord with your logical interpretation of the Tipitaka." My reading is a different one, of course. In the end, the real truth of the matter isn't found in the scriptures, but in the mind. > 2) but more, it doesn't `match' with what is being experienced now (for me). > If I read that right now there is seeing and visible object, heat, cold, > happiness and sadness, they can be tested and proved immediately. When I read > that visible object is experienced through the eyes and is not- self, likewise, > it `fits' logically and with experience of what is seen. Personally, I've never > had any doubts about the abhidhamma or ancient commentaries because what I've > read from them (really, just a little) has always matched what makes sense in > the Buddha's Teachings. A `true and unchanging' `primal mind' or nibbana makes > no sense on any level to me. Well, there are of course many approahces to finding truth/Dhamma, but the Buddha refuted most of them as valid in the Kalama sutta. "Come, Kaalaamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by oral tradition; nor upon succession (from teacher to disciple,); nor upon rumour; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon pure reason; nor upon inference; nor upon reasoned consideration; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming expertise; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher'." Do you think your measurements for truth fall into any of these categories? PS. I have come across a great article on the Kalama Sutta, which you might enjoy. The link is: http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/Knowledge.htm > Now in this example, which we've discussed at length, I'm sure that without the > commentary notes, I might not have understood it correctly Of course you are assuming that you understand it correctly, but the only way to truly know is through Panna. > even thought the > nibbana interpretation wouldn't have made sense to me. Reading the bhavanga > interpretation, it seems logical and furthermore, I admit I have confidence in > these ancient commentaries that had to be approved by several councils of > arahats so soon after the Buddha's parinibbana. Who are we to question the > wisdom of these arahats? So soon? The Pali Canon was compiled centuries after his Parinibbana, and I'll bet the commentaries are even later. It is always easy to slap the label "300 arahants" on them commentators to canonify their writings as well, but I do not take such statements on blind authority (nor do I take the Mahayana teachings on blind authority). > I know my comments here will seem very controversial, but I'm just making them > for you to take away and consider. When there is the idea of a `Buddha nature' > or bodhi citta or even a `primal mind', could these be aspects of trying to > reintroduce a self into the Buddha's Teachings? Well, writings such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra does not even make any pretense: It says outright that there is a self (Nirvana/Buddha- nature). Prominent figures such as Nagarjuna (who, if aybody, must be regarded as "canon" within Mahayana) said the same thing. As I have stated several times here, I have found no place whatsoever in the Pali Canon that says that there categorically no self. The only thing that comes close is the "Sabbe dhamma anatta", but as we know "dhamma" is pretty much a catch-all prhase which can mean a multitude of things. There a loads of suttas in which the Buddha explains in great detail how all conditioned dhammas are anatta (where he basically goes trhough the entire chain of dependent co- origination), but he never once mentions Nibbbana specifically in relation to annatta. Again, how does your own understanding of anatta accord with the criterions in the Kalama sutta? > Very best wishes, Anders and many, many thanks for your pleasant, mature and > well-reasoned posts to dsg. Thank you. It's been nice talking with you, Sarah. Anders 7796 From: Erik Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 11:00pm Subject: Re: Cetana -Erik's raft --- Sarah wrote: > May I be a little presumptuous and say that, eloquent as this is, it doesn't > sound like our Great Debater.....what were all those comments you made to > others about fear and the rest when they bowed out of discussions???;-)) Hi Sarah, Just to wrap this up...for the record I'm not bowing out of any sort of fear. Come on! :) I'm taking a break for now because I feel there's nothing I can add here at the moment, and I'd rather put my best efforts in a direction I feel more productive, namely, applied meditation. I have a lot of practice to do with mindfulness of the body in general with all the new techniques I've been taught, and all these discussions have made me see that talking about it beyond a certain point is unhelpful for me. > Now a Ph D in nuclear physics would not be for me, but thanks! > > What happened to all those aspirations to study abhidhamma which I believe even > your Tibetan lineage deems essential (even at state-of-the-art battleship > levels) for understanding the Teachings?? I am not abandoning study of the Pali Abhidharma. I do feel that spending my best efforts in it is not the most productive use of my time right now, though. As far as Abhidharma goes, it's only the Abhidharmakosha which is necessary for Tibetan translation work. I have been interested in the Pali Abhidhamma primarily because it has some things the 'kosa doesn't (and vice-versa), and out of a wish to be as thorough as possible. In fact, the Tripitaka's version of the Abhidhamma has confirmed the accuracy of the Abhidharmakosha in many ways I didn't even expect, so I find it very helpful in this regard. > Take care and best wishes meanwhile with your pesonal plans;-)) Sorry we won't > be seeing you in Bkk either. I am likewise sorry to be missing you this time around, but I have an, um, prior engagement. :) > p.s I take it that the silence with regard to my responses on the 6 pairs and > Metta means we're in perfect accord for twice;-)) I though the "six pairs" follow-ups were great! I didn't agree with them 100% (come on, what did you expect? :), but nonetheless am glad you posted them! 7797 From: Erik Date: Sat Sep 1, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] --- Robert Epstein wrote: > This is really great stuff, Erik, a very clear meditation manual in brief. I > think you could take this to a desert island and do pretty well with no other > material. I'll be sure to let Ajahn Chah know you appreciated his simple instructions as much as I did, if you don't beat me to the Far Shore, that is! :) 7798 From: Erik Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 0:33am Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] > I'm not trying to teach meditation to beginning meditators. I'm just > describing some of the ways that I see the mental processes described > in Mulapariyaya sutta > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn001.html) manifested > in everyday life. It is very easy to underestimate the impact and > influence of wrong view from moment to moment and from day to day. Last wrap-up...if you're concerned with this, then why not go full- bore and take the most comprehensive approach to studying Right View available? Why not try the "diamond slivers" and the refutation of the extremes by Nagarjuna? Or better, spend some time studying with qualified teachers in the Gelukpa school of Tibetan Buddhism--which is the most thorough of any extant Buddhist system when it comes to refuting wrong view? I have yet to see any system that exposes various flavors of wrong view in more subtle and explicit detail than the Gelukpa's Madhyamika-Prasangika system. This and "trangye" (the Gelukpa refutation of other tenet systems' wrong views), when meditated on intellectually, helps refute common and subtle wrong views like those held by the so-called Cittamatra system of tenets that "mind exists absolutely", as well as wrong views held by various other tenet systems such as the Vaibhasika, the Sautrantika, and the "lower" Madhyamika systems like Svatantrika. If this approach sounds interesting to you, you may wish to investigate Jefferey Hopkins' "Meditation on Emptiness" for more detail. For people with over-active intellects this can be a very effective strategy (when studied with qualified teachers), since it uses logic and reason to help the mind overcome its tendency to fabricate all sorts of subtle "true existents"--such as "partless particles", "paramattha dhammas" etc. It is even more effective when combined with debate. I found this the most helpful approach of all in my own studies, besides actual mindfulness on the breath and concentration. Actually, it was "trangye" that prepared the groundwork for my mindfulness and concentration meditation. When I began my meditation I was well- trained on what to be on the lookout for--particualarly the most subtle wrong view of all, a view I'd come into trangye with--the view that "mind exists absolutely"--the so called "Cittamatra" view which we spent months tearing apart in excruciating detail, before I was finally able to see where it was mistaken and let it go. That viwe was my particualr malfunction; but everyone has a slighly different malfunction, which is why so many sysetms are analyzed and refuted-- there's a good chance some view we're clinging to is in there and gets refuted. The point of all of this is to help overcome the the tendency to cling to views, and many people may not need to go into this level of detail--but it's nice to know you can, if you really need to. 7799 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 0:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still attachement. Attachments = dukka Kind regards Kenneth Robert Epstein wrote: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > Yes, thinking about the level of 'merit' one is accumulating in doing > > > something kusala is no doubt unwholesome, and so detracts from the > > overall > > > level of purity of the action being performed. I dare say that most > > of > > > our 'wholesome actions' are, like in this example, a mixture of kusala > > and > > > akusala mental states. ... > > > > I wonder if it would be wholesome to be aware that one is doing a > > meritorious > > deed, but rather than feeling good about the merit, enjoying a feeling > > of 'giving' > > or gratitude, happiness for the other person who receives the gift, > > etc.? > > > > Robert E. > > Yes, there is a level of kusala that, at the moment of performing kusala, > knows and appreciates that kusala is being performed. And there also is a > form of kusala that rejoices in another's good fortune (this is mudita, > one of the 4 brahma-vihara's--but be alert to the near and far enemies!). Yeah, when I'm acknowledged or complimented, or when I feel I've done something worthwhile, I notice an awful lot of relief and pride rising up. Since I'm able to look at it, I feel that this is at least a step in the right direction, but it's amazing how the ego-sense pops up and just craves being made real by acknowledgment. On the other hand, I've found that beating oneself with a stick is equally ineffective. I just try to look at it now and see what's happening. Best, Robert E. 7800 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 1:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Sarah, This is a great example of the value of commentaries (I think) as well as an apt and needed exposure of yet another apparent (but mistaken) support for the 'primal mind' notion. Also a helpful sidelight on bhavangacitta, by the way. However, is Ven. Nyanaponika's footnote to be considered a part of the commentaries approved by one of the councils of arahatas? Thank you, Ma'am, mike --- Sarah wrote: > When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about > the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s > book, I saw N. also quoted from AN1, 10: > ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but it > is defiled by intrusive > (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, > and it is freed from > intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) > > Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The > commentary to this text explains > the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life > continuum (bhavanga), which is > ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted by > defilements. The > defilements arise only in the active thought > process, not in the subliminal > flow of consciousness’. > > Now in this example, which we’ve discussed at > length, I’m sure that without the > commentary notes, I might not have understood it > correctly even thought the > nibbana interpretation wouldn’t have made sense to > me. Reading the bhavanga > interpretation, it seems logical and furthermore, I > admit I have confidence in > these ancient commentaries that had to be approved > by several councils of > arahats so soon after the Buddha’s parinibbana. Who > are we to question the > wisdom of these arahats? 7801 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > attachement. Attachments = dukka > Kind regards > Kenneth Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say that I think it is possible to enjoy something without being attached to it. What do you think? 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" 7802 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > This is really great stuff, Erik, a very clear meditation manual in > brief. I > > think you could take this to a desert island and do pretty well > with no other > > material. > > I'll be sure to let Ajahn Chah know you appreciated his simple > instructions as much as I did, if you don't beat me to the Far Shore, > that is! :) Well, if you get there first, please save me a space! : ) Robert E. 7803 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, whenever/whatever we enjoy, there will be an attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we could not observe it. Technically speaking when we enjoy something, there is an attachment because there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable or subtle. Hence in my personal perspective, I do not think we could at present enjoy something without being not attached to it. If we are detach from what we are doing, then the feeling of pleasure will not arise because we are not attached. And again techniccally speaking this means there will not be any enjoyment as there is no arise a feeling of pleasure. Kind regards Kenneth Robert Epstein wrote: --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > attachement. Attachments = dukka > Kind regards > Kenneth Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say that I think it is possible to enjoy something without being attached to it. What do you think? Robert E. 7804 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, whenever/whatever we enjoy, > there will be an attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we could not > observe it. Technically speaking when we enjoy something, there is an attachment > because there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable or subtle. Hence in > my personal perspective, I do not think we could at present enjoy something > without being not attached to it. If we are detach from what we are doing, then > the feeling of pleasure will not arise because we are not attached. And again > techniccally speaking this means there will not be any enjoyment as there is no > arise a feeling of pleasure. > Kind regards > Kenneth I am no expert, but it seems to me, Kenneth, that you are equating pleasureable feelings or sensations with attachment itself. It seems to me for the path to function through mindfulness, there must be a possibility of any experience being able to be non-attached to through looking at it with awareness and becoming aware of its characteristics of not-self, emptiness and impermanence. Does seeing the insubstantial nature of an object or experience remove the sensation or feeling of pleasure, and does pleasure or enjoyment only arise as an outgrowth of attachment? These are interesting questions. I think that it is possible to enjoy something but not cling to it and to let it go when it is over. I think this is more possible when encountering it with mindfulness and not getting absorbed by the experience. I recognize that this would be hard, however, and if you are saying mainly that in our current state this would be extremely unlikely, then I can understand your point of view. But if one is free of attachment, I do not imagine that this person would necessarily be like a robot, seeing what is there but with absolutely no experience of a response to it. Can one have a response and be non-attached at the same time? That is again an interesting question which I am not in a position to answer. I have met a few people in my life whom I believe by reputation and experience were enligthtened, and they were certainly capable of laughing at a joke or enjoying a meal. They merely did not have a notion of self or dharma being real or self-existent. Although I am anxious to let go of clingings and attachments, to objects as well as views, [as well as the one I am expressing here ], I want to also be careful not to fall into annihilationism and to think that I must therefore hold onto aversion to those things. I think it was the ascetics that Buddha criticized for being so averse to psychophysical clinging that they abused and neglected their bodies, and that this did not create an appropriate state of mind for realization. If I am distorting this point, which I am uncertain about, please let me know. 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" 7805 From: Sarah Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Mike, Always good to hear from you! --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > This is a great example of the value of commentaries > (I think) as well as an apt and needed exposure of yet > another apparent (but mistaken) support for the > 'primal mind' notion. Also a helpful sidelight on > bhavangacitta, by the way. Thanks and yes. > However, is Ven. Nyanaponika's footnote to be > considered a part of the commentaries approved by one > of the councils of arahatas? Nyanaponika’s footnote was his ‘summary’ of the ancient commentary to AN (not published in English I think). The Pali for the ‘essential’ phrase in the commentary is: ‘navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m.’ Jim indicated the meaning: "In the ninth : 'luminous' is clear, pure. 'mind' is bhava"ngacitta.” With regard to the question as to whether the ancient commentaries were approved by which councils and at what dates (maybe Anders’ rather than your question, Mike), others would be able to give far more useful comments on this. I believe it is a generally accepted fact that the pali canon and ancient commentaries as we read them were approved at several Councils over many centuries and show, as I read them very slowly, almost complete uniformity . Robert and Jim have studied the references with regard to the authenticity of the commentaries and abhidhamma in far more detail and Rob wrote some useful posts on this, saved at this link under ‘abhidhamma; its origins’ (or sth like that): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Many thanks again, Mike, Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about > the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s > book, I saw Nyanaponika also quoted from AN1, 10: > ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but it > is defiled by intrusive > (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, > and it is freed from > intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) > > Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The > commentary to this text explains > the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life > continuum (bhavanga), which is > ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted by > defilements. The > defilements arise only in the active thought > process, not in the subliminal > flow of consciousness’. > 7806 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 11:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Nyanaponika’s footnote was his ‘summary’ of the > ancient commentary to AN (not > published in English I think). Thanks, this was what I was getting at (though I don't think my question was clear). What I wondered was if this footnote was Ven. Nyanaponika's comment or his (paraphrased) translation of an old commentary--clearly (now) the latter. > The Pali for the ‘essential’ phrase in the > commentary is: ‘navame pabhassaranti > pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti > bhava"ngacitta.m.’ > > Jim indicated the meaning: "In the ninth : > 'luminous' is clear, pure. > 'mind' is bhava"ngacitta.” Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated it. Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote (again?) really helped to clarify this. Something I still don't understand is a question I asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I wonder if it would be accurate to say that the bhavangas don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but still pass along (potential) subtle defilements (anusaya). Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated kamma etc. could continue to be passed along from each citta to the next, creating (among other things) the illusion of continuity. > With regard to the question as to whether the > ancient commentaries were > approved by which councils and at what dates (maybe > Anders’ rather than your > question, Mike), others would be able to give far > more useful comments on this. > I believe it is a generally accepted fact that the > pali canon and ancient > commentaries as we read them were approved at > several Councils over many > centuries and show, as I read them very slowly, > almost complete uniformity . I'm certainly willing to accept this as a working hypothesis. I haven't gone in depth into 'hermaneutics' and detailed (and questionable) histories as this sort of approach never seems to dispel much doubt for me. On the other hand, I've found Robert's logical arguments especially convincing (i.e., what motivation would have inspired large numbers of monks, strictly bound by precepts, to conspire to interpolate a huge amount of material into the tipitaka and then lie about it from then on? -excuse the paraphrase, Robert). Admittedly this is just logic, but I believe that's allowed if balanced with comparisons to the suttas and with personal observation. Even Ven. Bodhi who, I gather, accepts the idea of the abhidhamma as a later addition to the tipitaka (see message 3350), has this to say about it: "The reason the Abhidhamma Pitaka is so deeply revered only becomes clear as a result of thorough study and profound reflection, undertaken in the conviction that these ancient books have something significant to communicate. When one approaches the Abhidhamma treatises in such a spirit and gains some insight into their wide implications and organic unity, one will find that they are attempting nothing less than to articulate a comprehensive vision of the totality of experienced reality, a vision marked by extensiveness of range, systematic completeness, and analytical precision. From the standpoint of Theravada orthodoxy the system that they expound is not a figment of speculative thought, not a mosaic put together out of metaphysical hypotheses, but a disclosure of the true nature of existence as apprehended by a mind that has penetrated the totality of things both in depth and in the finest detail. Because it bears this character, the Theravada tradition regards the Abhidhamma as the most perfect expression possible of the Buddha's unimpeded omniscient knowledge (sabbaññuta-ñana). It is his statement of the way things appear to the mind of a Fully Enlightened One, ordered in accordance with the two poles of his teaching: suffering and the cessation of suffering". A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma The Abhidhammattha Sangaha of Acariya Anuruddha Excerpt: Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi, General Editor > Robert and Jim have studied the references with > regard to the authenticity of > the commentaries and abhidhamma in far more detail > and Rob wrote some useful > posts on this, saved at this link under ‘abhidhamma; > its origins’ (or sth like > that): > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Right--thanks for reminding me of the links. > --- Sarah wrote: > > > When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about > > the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s > > book, I saw Nyanaponika also quoted from AN1, 10: > > ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but > it > > is defiled by intrusive > > (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, > > and it is freed from > > intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) > > > > Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The > > commentary to this text explains > > the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life > > continuum (bhavanga), which is > > ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted > by > > defilements. The > > defilements arise only in the active thought > > process, not in the subliminal > > flow of consciousness’. 7807 From: m. nease Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Robert, Hope you don't mind my butting in (again). --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' > or bad 'feel' about the > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you > do, they are still > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > Kind regards > > Kenneth > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just > say that I think it is possible > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > What do you think? Attachment (as I understand it in this context) refers to identification with one of the khandhas. Since there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be attached, I think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) to a khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), or clinging to (identification with) a pleasant feeling. A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without lobha (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm enjoying this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I think--but maybe that's just 'me'. mike 7808 From: m. nease Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Kenneth, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, > whenever/whatever we enjoy, there will be an > attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we > could not observe it. Technically speaking when we > enjoy something, there is an attachment because > there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable > or subtle. Hence in my personal perspective, I do > not think we could at present enjoy something > without being not attached to it. Agreed. > If we are detach > from what we are doing, then the feeling of pleasure > will not arise because we are not attached. And > again techniccally speaking this means there will > not be any enjoyment as there is no arise a feeling > of pleasure. Not sure about this--I thought I remembered the Buddha speaking about 'enjoying' and 'delighting'. Here's an example I came up with: "The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in non-ill will. To him -- enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will -- this thought often occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, whether weak or firm.' "The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in seclusion. To him -- enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion -- this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is unskillful is abandoned.' Itivuttaka 38 The Group Of Twos http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/itivuttaka/iti2.html It seems to me that sukkha vedanaa will arise when the conditions for it exist (I don't know think that attachment is a necessary condition for pleasant feeling), even when there is no ego--just that lobha and vedanna upaadaana won't arise. But maybe I'm mistaken. What do you think? Thanks for letting me join in your discussion. mike > Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or > bad 'feel' about the > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you > do, they are still > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > Kind regards > > Kenneth > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say > that I think it is possible > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > What do you think? > > Robert E. 7809 From: Ken Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:42am Subject: Re: toeing the party line....;-) Mike You wrote; " . . . These rebukes of the Buddha are always bracingly instructive. I've read this one before, (though I think the translation was 'you foolish man'), but forget the source--can you cite it?" Gladly. The reference given by Walpola Rahula ("What the Buddha Taught" p24), for the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta is M I (PTS), p256 ff. I tried to find it on the net but without success. Are you making a collectiio of these rebukes? I'd like to make a collection of the various ways of seeing the Four Foundations of Mindfulness as "the Middle Way." Your recent comment; "In this context I think satipatthaana could be called the middle path between 'dealing with akusala' and ignoring it," will make a good start. Kind regards Ken 7810 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 9:04am Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > Nyanaponika's footnote was his `summary' of the > > ancient commentary to AN (not > > published in English I think). > > Thanks, this was what I was getting at (though I don't > think my question was clear). What I wondered was if > this footnote was Ven. Nyanaponika's comment or his > (paraphrased) translation of an old > commentary--clearly (now) the latter. From the superficial comparisons I did from B. Bodhi's notes and the commentaries (in MN), whenever he refers to the ancient Acariya's commentaries, he explicitly says so. When he doesn't, it is implied that the source is not the ancient commentaries. kom 7811 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Hope you don't mind my butting in (again). > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' > > or bad 'feel' about the > > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you > > do, they are still > > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > > Kind regards > > > Kenneth > > > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just > > say that I think it is possible > > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > > What do you think? > > Attachment (as I understand it in this context) refers > to identification with one of the khandhas. Since > there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be attached, I > think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) to a > khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), or > clinging to (identification with) a pleasant feeling. > > A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without lobha > (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana > (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm enjoying > this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I > think--but maybe that's just 'me'. > > mike Thanks, Mike, I appreciate the discussion. It's sort of an important topic to me, and I'll try to explain why. I understand your point, and I probably agree, that for us folks on the way here it's probably a long shot to have enjoyments without attachment or unpleasant experiences without aversion. But it's important to me to point at a model of experience that does not involve being attached to aversion or averse to attachment. It seems to me that if the model is 'anti-experience' based on the addictive nature of experience, that new karmic effects are created on top of the ones that already need to be released. I am saying that when enjoyment or pleasure arises, that the subtle response 'I shouldn't be enjoying this because it will cause attachment' may be in the mind of the practitioner, and that this is a mistake. That this is not an expression of mindfulness but of thought-reaction to what is arising. If one instead takes the attitude that I believe the Buddha prescribes, if I am correct, one would simply want to say: 'See pleasure as pleasure, and if attachment is present, see attachment as attachment', etc. I think that it is important to not only look at primary attachment and aversion, but attachment to aversion and aversion to attachment. I would consider these a practioner's problems, because they would only arise for someone who sincerely cared about the path. But I think they're very important to someone who has already committed themselves to not feeding attachment. Does any of this make sense? Robert E. 7812 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, > > whenever/whatever we enjoy, there will be an > > attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we > > could not observe it. Technically speaking when we > > enjoy something, there is an attachment because > > there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable > > or subtle. Hence in my personal perspective, I do > > not think we could at present enjoy something > > without being not attached to it. > > Agreed. > > > If we are detach > > from what we are doing, then the feeling of pleasure > > will not arise because we are not attached. And > > again techniccally speaking this means there will > > not be any enjoyment as there is no arise a feeling > > of pleasure. > > Not sure about this--I thought I remembered the Buddha > speaking about 'enjoying' and 'delighting'. Here's an > example I came up with: > > "The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in > non-ill will. To him -- enjoying non-ill will, > delighting in non-ill will -- this thought often > occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, > whether weak or firm.' > > "The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in > seclusion. To him -- enjoying seclusion, delighting in > seclusion -- this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is > unskillful is abandoned.' > > Itivuttaka 38 > The Group Of Twos Thanks, Mike. I think these are good examples of Buddha describing a kind of benign enjoyment and delight, and is part of what I was hinting at. It may be for advanced states only, but is still something to understand, so that we don't see all pleasant experience as being inherently expressions of attachment. Wouldn't it be a shame if we were meant to enjoy, without attachment, the subtle flavor of the advanced portion of the path to enlightenment, and instead suppressed this, thinking it erroneously to represent attachment? Perhaps lower enjoyments that attach us to the things of the world are suspect, but the enjoyment of the path itself may not be attached, but may be natural expressions of the correct mood on the way to Nirvana. I also recall some discussion of the jhanas or other progressive states where it is mentioned in each stage how pleasant and enjoyable each state is. Perhaps someone else can remind me where the Buddha speaks this way. Thanks, Robert E. =============== 7813 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 1:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Hi Sarah, This is a wonderful post. I learned from it a lot. Thank you and all who participated in this discussion. ~mettha Ranil >From: Sarah >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation >Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:57:06 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Mike C, > >thank you very much for your post and comments below (and thanks Frank for >your >help). > > > From: Michael Chu < > > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > > meditation > > > Dear Sara and all, > >> > > I am very lazy at my practice of meditation. I > > average about fifteen > > minutes of meditation every other day. Comparing > > myself to my fellow > > cultivator friends, namely Frank and William, who do > > at least one hour of > > sitting meditation each day continuously for several > > years, I have noticed > > their ability to be mindful and serene far exceed > > mine. > >Mike, may I make 2 quick comments here? I don’t think it’s very fruitful to >compare yourself with others. Doesn’t this just lead to thoughts of >inferiority >(in this case) and unhappy feelings? Secondly, do we ever really know >another’s >state of mind? isn’t it hard enough to know when we’re really calm or have >mindfulness as opposed to a pleasant feeling or subtle clinging? We can >never >tell in another just be the appearance or posture what the state of mind >is. > > > > I personally noticed that lacking the mindfulness of > > cultivation from > > meditation, I am having a much more difficult time > > progressing in the Noble > > Eightfold Path compare to my peers. On the > > concentration group, I can only > > sporadically address my present moment with the right > > effort, mindfulness, > > and concentration. Without the appropriate > > concentration, I find myself to > > have further difficulty achieving the right speech and > > action. > >Mike, i think you have the right idea when you recognise that the time for >mindfulness is the present moment. However, it seems that you have an idea >of a >‘self’ that should be able to progress, concentrate, be mindful and achieve >rt >speech and action. When we mind so much about these states, doesn’t it also >show how much we cling to ME, myself. Doesn’t it show how much we’d like to >be >the mindful, concentrated one with good speech and action? > >What about when we compare or wish to have mindfulness, being aware of the >clinging to self at these times? Wouldn’t that be a little progress? People >have the idea that concentration should be fixing undistractedly on an >object . >But in what way is it pure or wholesome when this happens? There is >concentration all the time, even when we’re distracted (according to the >Teachings). > > My progress > > of having the right understanding, thought, and speech > > is also hindered. By > > lacking the right understanding, I find myself making > > poor plans for my > > livelihood. My clarity of mind is always compromised. > >We all lack right understanding most the time, Mike. Recognizing how little >understanding there is, is a really good start. Actually, I think the more >understanding develops, the more it sees what real beginners we are. As one >of >our members, suggested, we think we know and then there’s a little >breakthrough >and we realise it was all wrong after all! For understanding to really >develop, >we need to hear and consider more about what are the actual phenomena that >can >be known. > >When we talk about livelihood plans, we can talk about them from many >angles. >Frank is considering taking early retirement and living in a forest. Form a >conventional point of view, these would be poor livelihood decisions. From >a >Buddhist point of view, it would depend on the intentions and motivations >involved, because in Buddhism, we’re always more concerned with the present >state of mind than ‘the story’. I hope your livlihood works out better in >both >regards! > > > > I also noticed lacking the ability to be mindful even > > hinders the right > > breathing and induces undesirable states like > > sluggishness, impatience, > > restlessness, and anger. I can only so far only be > > able to do a limited > > form of damage control on these undesirable states > > when I occasionally > > remember to stay away from them. Another thing I > > noticed is that these > > undesirable statements can be quickly terminated if I > > catch them on their > > early stages. To be able to catch the arising of > > these undesirable states, > > we need to be mindful. > >It seems that we can ‘catch’ them or stop them arising and conventionally, >this >is often true. Hence we say to a child ‘snap out of it’ and the child >sometimes >does! On a deeper level, however, we can see we’re pretty much stuck with >our >‘character’ and inclinations, so that sooner or later these negative states >will arise again and again in spite of good intentions. Why is this? >Because >they have been gathering for so very long and are not controllable. Even if >mindfulness is mindful of the anger or impatience for a moment, what about >next >moment? > >Again, may I suggest, that the reason we mind so much about these states is >not >usually because we see the danger of ALL kinds of unwholesomeness, but >because >the ones you’ve mentioned are unpleasant and we cling so much to a self! >When >we’re having a great time and there’s no anger or impatience, do we mind >about >the excitement and attachment? What about all the ignorance in between? > > > >> The very reason why we should apply appropriate > > mindfulness and catch the > > arising anger before it gets any bigger and out of > > control. > > > > So far the best way to achieve mindfulness that I know > > of is through > > practicing proper meditation. If you have any > > suggestion that we can better > > achieve mindfulness, I would love to know. > >Actually, Mike, there is no self to apply mindfulness or do anything. This >doesn’t mean ‘give up’ and it doesn't mean 'sit' or 'don't sit', it means >learn >more about what mindfulness really is, what the objects of mindfulness are >and >develop understanding (by understanding , not doing) of these same >realities at >any time. This is what I call bhavana or meditation. > >One or two practical suggestions: > >1) Join DSG, go to ‘Useful Posts’ at this link and scroll down to ‘new to >Dhamma’ for some suggestions or other topics that look interesting. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > >2) Keep asking questions here....be patient for replies and ignore posts >that >are too technical for now. > >3) Go to this website and read anything that doesn’t seem too hard >http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > >Hope to hear more form you, > >Best wishes, >Sarah > 7814 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Num, Num wrote: > Hi Kom and Nina, > > Hope you guys don't mind I try to get in the discussion about paccaya. It's > hard for me reading about paccaya. Again, please do correct me and I always > appreciate every input. This is only my opinion. Nina may add more when she comes back from her trip, but meanwhile my turn to ‘get in’ to your discusion;-) Paccaya are very complicated and it’s just these few days with no students that I can give them a little more attention. (Actually I tried last week, but didn’t have a yahoo connection and then other posts jumped the queue!) > > From your writing (Nina's) about conditions and from other sources I have > read and listened, Jhana paccaya included both miccha-samadhi and > samma-samadhi. Also from your books and some discussion with Kom, all 7 > Jhana( esp ekaggata) factors can arise in both kusula or akusula citta. In > Dosa based samadhi, only domanassa can be a vedana along with other Jhana > factors, viakka, vicara as well as ekaggata. In Lobha based samadhi vitakka, > > vicara, piti, somanassa(sukha), ekaggata and I think even upekkha can be a > Jhanna factors here b/c at time lobha-mula-citta can accompany by upekkha as > well, not only in last stage of Jhana in both four and five level. But if > samadhi is samma-samadhi, which means it's accompanied by panna, Jhana cannot > > be akusala in nature. So panna distinguishs Jhana into kusala and akulasa. Num, this all seems pretty correct to me (no guarantees, though!!). From U Narada’s text (below), we read ‘It is due to jhana condition that a faultless or faulty action in thought, word or deed can be completely performed from the beginning right thought to the end. Without jhana condition it would not be possible (1) to shoot birds and animals...’etc Those who wish to read more can do so at: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ I also find U Narada’s ‘Guide to Conditional Relations’ helpful (PTS) As Dan wrote (very helpfully) recently, it’s so easy to confuse different states and to confuse kusala with akusala. It’s also easy to overestimate one’s own attainments in these areas, I think. It’s helpful to reflect on how jhana can be taken in this wide sense as condition to see how even strong samadhi and the other factors can all be unwholesome. As Nina writes: ‘When there is no panna which precisely knows when there is kusala cita and when akusala citta, one can take wrong concentration for right concentration. One may mistakenly believe that the citta is calm when one just sits and for example looks for a long time at a kasina (disk) whih is one of the meditation subjectys. Instead of true calm which is wholesome there is merely clinging to quiet’. A little later she adds: ‘When one overestimates the development of jhana there will be wrong concentration. It is dificult to distinguish between jhana factors such as vitakka and vicara. While we are thinking there must be vitakka and vicara performing their functions, they arise together, but do we discern their different characteristics? Do we know the characteristic of piti and can we distinguish it from sukha, pleasant feeling? When we find out for ourselves how difficult it is to distinguish between these jhana-factors, we will understand that there must be a high degree of panna for the development of the jhana-factors’. >> Also in Magga paccaya, miccha-ditthi has been included as a factor, but > ditthi and panna(samma-ditthi) cannot arise together. If magga paccaya at > that moment has samma-ditthi(panna), all other magga factors also have been > entitled as samma- â€|.., if it's not a right path (with miccha-ditthi) > whatever magga factors which coarise at that moment all become part of > miccha-magga. Exactly so. Someone recently (Robert E?) suggested one couldn’t follow the wrong path for 30 years if one was sincere in one’s endeavours (or something to that effect, apologies Rob E if this isn’t correct). On the contrary, I think that if miccha -ditthi is being taken for samma-ditthi, it’s very possible to just be accumulating more miccha-ditthi, not just for 30 years but for aeons of lifetimes! Nina gives an example under ‘Path condition’ which is relevant to some of the discussions on dsg: ‘One may take the wrong path for the right path when one thinks that one should not be aware of akusala, that one should suppress it before one can develop vipassana. When we understand that akusala citta is conditioned by numerous factors, some of them stemming from the past, some of them factors of the present, we are reminded to be aware of akusala in order to see it as not self.’ Thanks for your comments and encouragement to consider a little more in these areas, Num. Hope you had a good trip to Canada and look forward to more of your timely insights. Very heavy rain in Hong Kong, so a good chance to catch up here;-) Sarah 7815 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Kom and all, I appreciated your comments, Thai commentary notes and Nina’s very helpful pointers on this topic which I’ve been pursuing a little as I just told Num. --- Kom Tukovinit wrote:............................................ > . Do you by > any chance have further explanation about why Domanassa would assist > the citta to be fixed on the object (but not anger, for example)? I > think I can understand about how the rest of the factors assist the > citta in being fixed on the object, but I still don't see how > domanasa does this. .................................................. In addition to Nina’s clear and helpful comments given here in brief: ........................................... Nina: In the Guide to Conditional Relations, by U Narada, Ch II, 17 Jhana Condition) it is explained that the jhanafactors make the associated states fix themselves formly to pleasant and unpleasant objects. We should see domanassa not in isolation, but associated with the other jhanafactors ............................................... I’d like to add another quote from U Narada later(p.218)which might also be helpful. This is regard to sukha, translated as bliss. I think it’ll be easy to see how domanassa performs its function in the same (opposite) way: ‘Next, bliss performs its function of great relish so that consciousness cannot turn away from the object which it enjoys. for although consciousness enjoys the object, unless the relish is very great the object will not be dear enough for consciousness to fasten on to it. Because the delight, which takes place for a short while owing to the novelty of the object, will soon turn into disgust and eventually consciousness will turn away from the object’. Kom, returning to the Sutta > Digha Nikaya 21 > Sakka-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html and the 2 kinds of domanassa, to be pursued and not to be pursued again, firstly thanks for your Thai commentary notes (yes, not available in English, but your translation is very helpful). I think I may have been barking up the wrong tree. Nina gave me a good clue below when she likened it to the tanha issue in the Netti which some of us discussed at length: ........................................ Nina: You dealt again with another aspect, domanassa that can be pursued, as explained in the Co. This is actually similar to desire that should not be pursued and that could be pursued, in the 'Guide", the Netti, .......................................... As I mentioned, Khun Sujin stressed that it should not be understood that tanha was ever kusala in anyway. However tankha for following the noble path is or developing kusala is not as bad as other kinds of tanha (connected to the 5 sensualities) as it can be upanissaya paccaya for kusala and this is what should be understood. This is how I read the Thai comm notes you provided, but it may not sound convincing to others;-) ........................................... Kom: ‘The commentary mentioned that domanassa that should not be pursued includes domanassa that is connected to the 5 sensualities. The domanassa that should be pursued includes domanassa resulting from wanting to attain the lokutarra phala but doesn't attain adaquate amount of vipassana in a certain period of time, the wanting of the same kind of ayatana as the ariyans. As a result of the want, the domanassa arises. "To be pursued" domannassaa includes: domanassa resulting from leaving the 5 sensualities, from vipassana, from being mindful - being aware, from the 1st Jhana, etc. It was then explained in detail how a Bikhu can have domanassa resulted from wanting to have the result but has not attained. .................................................. Finally, a quote from Nyanaponika on the jhana factors in ‘Abhidhamma Studies, p57: ‘The intensity of a state of consciousness does not allow anything to be said about its ethical value or its spiritual rank. It is a point common to the intensifying factors and the pentad of sense-contact that both groups are ethically indifferent; they may occur in wholesome, unwholesome, and karmically neutral consciousness. Both groups take, as it were, the colour of their “root sap”, that is, they assume the quality of thw wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral “root causes’ (muula or hetu) associated with them....’ Kom, Num and others, let me just say I’m just learning a little a I write and any corrections or comments from your ‘bright brains’ are very welcome or from any others. It’s been interesting and I think the understanding of jhana (and path) factors, both kusala and akusala as conditions at this moment is very useful, even if it’s mostly theoretical for now! Best wishes, Sarah 7816 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:20pm Subject: Anusaya-latent tendencies-Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated it. > Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote > (again?) really helped to clarify this. yes, sometimes it has to be the right note at the right time....;-)) > > Something I still don't understand is a question I > asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I wonder > if it would be accurate to say that the bhavangas > don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but still > pass along (potential) subtle defilements (anusaya). > Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated kamma > etc. could continue to be passed along from each citta > to the next, creating (among other things) the > illusion of continuity. yes, all the anusaya are passed along from citta to citta regardless of which jati (plane) the citta is (i.e whether kusala- wholesome, akusala-unwholesome, vipaka-result or kiriya-inoperative), so even with the bhavanga cittas, with no gap or interval between them. We have to go back to the paccaya (conditions) to understand the intricacies of how this happens and how the citta arising now could not be any other citta than it is. Excuse this brief answer for now (I'm jhana-ed out)! Others may add more detail too. Thanks for your other comments about the comentaries, Mike. Btw when I mentioned the verse in 'Good Grief' posts was a little more tricky, I didn't realise how tricky;-)) Speak soon, Sarah 7817 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Ranil, --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > This is a wonderful post. I learned from it a lot. Thank you and all who > participated in this discussion. I appreciate your kind comments and thank you for participating by reading and reflecting;-)) Look forward to hearing more from you. Sarah > > > From: Michael Chu < > > > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > > > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > > > meditation 7818 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Kenneth, You're another one who has slipped in quietly I believe?? That's fine and you're very welcome. I'm enjoying (yes, plenty of attachment for sure) your posts with Robert E and others. If you also care to tell us a little more about your'self' and dhamma background and where you live, that would be interesting too... Btw, I can't fault what you've written here!! Best regards, Sarah --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > Kind regards > > Kenneth 7819 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Hi Anders, I’ll keep this pretty brief as I know you’re busy and trying to take a break;-)) --- Anders Honore wrote: > > So soon? The Pali Canon was compiled centuries after his Parinibbana, > and I'll bet the commentaries are even later. It is always easy to > slap the label "300 arahants" on them commentators to canonify their > writings as well, but I do not take such statements on blind > authority (nor do I take the Mahayana teachings on blind authority). I think I’ve answered this (as best I can without more research)in my note to Mike under the same heading.... > > Well, writings such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra does not even make > any pretense: It says outright that there is a self (Nirvana/Buddha- > nature). Prominent figures such as Nagarjuna (who, if aybody, must be > regarded as "canon" within Mahayana) said the same thing. > As I have stated several times here, I have found no place whatsoever > in the Pali Canon that says that there categorically no self. The > only thing that comes close is the "Sabbe dhamma anatta", but as we > know "dhamma" is pretty much a catch-all prhase which can mean a > multitude of things. There a loads of suttas in which the Buddha > explains in great detail how all conditioned dhammas are anatta > (where he basically goes trhough the entire chain of dependent co- > origination), but he never once mentions Nibbbana specifically in > relation to annatta. The Buddha encourages us to understand the paramattha dhammas which are appearing now and can be known now. These are the conditioned realities appearing through the 6 doorways which as you said, should be known by panna. He doesn’t talk about a primal mind or bodhi citta appearing through one of these doorways because these are concepts, along with nibbana (until realised) that cannot be known directly. The concern in the teachings is with realities to be known right now. > Again, how does your own understanding of anatta accord with the > criterions in the Kalama sutta? When I read any of the suttas (from the difficult one I was discussing with Mike and Kom to the Satipatthana sutta or Kalama sutta to any others), they are all about paramattha dhammas, the understanding of these dhammas as anatta and the development of satipatthana and vipassana. Different suttas have a different emphasis according to the audience at the time. In the Kalama Sutta, the emphasis is on understanding directly those states which are wholesome and those which are unwholesome, those which bring ‘good’ results and those which bring ‘bad’ results. As I just stressed on the tricky jhana post, there cannot be any bhavana (mental development or meditation) of either samatha or vipassana if there is no understanding of the difference between wholesome and unwholesome moments. When I read these suttas, they remind me right now to develop awareness and understand whether the citta which is directing these words and the acompanying mental states are wholesome or unwholesome. Are we lost in stories now? Is there seeing and visible object now? Is there any self or primal mind in the seeing or is it just the nama which experiences an object for a moment, and then gone? Very much look forward to more in due course, Anders. Sarah 7820 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Rob E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff hips > > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;--)) ;--)) > > My immediate response is 'no' and then my secondary response is 'yes'. > I think > it's 'no' in the sense that no physical obstacle should be sufficient to > bar > someone from exercising mindfulness. On the other hand, I can't say > that > meditating lying down is going to have the same effect as meditating > sitting up, > or that slumping over is going to have the same effect as sitting up > straight, or > that sitting with tension in body and breathing is going to have the > same effect > as sitting with gentle uprightness. > > I am not aware of what the Buddha said on posture and position, but I > know that if > I sit cross-legged on the floor and watch the breath it is a very > different > experience in some ways than what happens if I lie down [which I do when > falling > asleep] and watch the breath. In the Satipatthana Sutta (in the section on The Modes of Deportment), the Buddha had this to say about posture and position: "And further, O bhikkhus, when he is going, a bhikkhu understands: 'I am going'; when he is standing, he understands: 'I am standing'; when he is sitting, he understands: 'I am sitting'; when he is lying down, he understands: 'I am lying down'; or just as his body is disposed so he understands it…. Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body…." The 4 postures and positions described here--going, standing sitting and lying down--between them cover all postures that may be assumed at any time. This helps us to understand that satipatthana (ie. mundane insight) is not limited as to posture or time. Nor is it limited as to kind of activity. In the same sutta, Section on The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, the Buddha said: "And further, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practising clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practising clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, … in wearing the robes and bowl, … in regard to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savoured, … in defecating and in urinating, … in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practising clear comprehension. … Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body…" This likewise covers all activities at any time of the day. So although things do seem different depending on whether we are, for example, sitting or lying down, being quiet or rushing around, with the family or 'in practice', satipatthana as taught by the Buddha is something that cuts across all these differences. It is something that is independent of situation or occasion. It can be useful to ask ourselves whether our understanding of what satipatthana is consistent with this, or whether we have an idea of satipatthana that requires that certain conditions as to posture, activity or time need to be satisfied in order for it to arise. Jon 7821 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Binh) - > This is an interesting sutta you quote below, particularly the > last > paragraph, apparently indicating a jhana-less approach to arahantship: On my reading, 2 of the 4 approaches given here (ie. numbers 2 and 4 below) indicate a jhana-less approach. (By 'jhana-less' I mean in the sense of not requiring prior development of mundane jhana. But all 4 ways are accompanied by concentration that is jhana-equivalent in its force.) Here are the 4 ways again, with extracts from footnotes to the translation [passages in square brackets are mine]: 1. After developing samatha The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. 2. Before developing samatha The commentary reads: "This refers to one who by his natural bent first attains to insight and then, based on insight produces concentration (samadhi)." The sub-com reads: "This is one who makes insight the vehicle (vipassanaa-yaanika)." 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha [This is the instance of insight being 'based on' jhana. The insight arises after emerging from jhana, and takes the jhana moments as its object. This is the 'yoked/conjoined' instance.]. 4. By overcoming the corruptions (ie without any part being played by samatha) The footnote reads: 'According to AA [the commentary], the "agitation" (uddhacca) meant here is a reaction to the arising of the ten "corruptions of insight" when they are wrongly taken as indication path-attainment. The term dhammavitakka, "thoughts about higher states" is taken to refer to the same ten corruptions. …' Regarding the 4th way just given, you observe: > AN IV, 165 > Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' > 83. Ways to Arahantship > "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by > higher > states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in > him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he > is > doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies > eliminated." > ************************************************* > The questions that occur to me are the following: > > 1) What is meant by "higher states of mind"? > > 2) What sort of agitation would arise as a result of them? > > 3) Exactly what is the state wherein one's "mind becomes > internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated"? It sounds like it *could* be > access concentration or khanika samadhi (moment-to-moment > concentration). > That would be interesting. This would, indeed, suggest an approach to > complete enlightenment, one out of four, that does not have jhanic > attainment > as a requirement at all, though it still requires a strong and rather > stable > one-pointedness of mind. Your questions (1) and (2) are covered by the footnote, I think. On your Q.3, we need to keep in mind the distinction between samatha and samadhi. Samatha bhavana (tranquillity development) refers to the development of kusala by concentration on a single object, eventually to a degree of absorption in the object where all sense-door impressions, and the akusala associated with those experiences, are suppressed. Being (temporarily) freed from akusala, the mind becomes exceedingly tranquil. Samadhi cetasika (concentration mental factor) is a cetasika whose function is to fix the citta on whatever object is the object of the citta at that moment. It accompanies every citta. At moments of enlightenment (magga citta) samadhi cetasika arises and performs its function with an intensity equivalent to that of the jhanas. It is developed to this 'jhana-equivalent' level during the course of the development of mundane insight over the many (millions of) lifetimes it has taken to attain to enlightenment. In other words, every moment of satipatthana during this lifetime means the further development and accumulation of khanika samadhi. So, yes, it may well be that 'concentration' in the passage from the sutta refers to khanika samadhi; but this does not connote the development of samatha bhavana. I think the important point to realise about all this is as follows, if my understanding is correct: Regardless of which of the 4 ways of enlightenment one is talking about, attainment of supramundane path consciousness (enlightenment) is always the culmination of the development of mundane path consciousness (ie. mundane insight--vipassana bhavana). In other words, it is not the culmination of samatha bhavana. Even those whose attainment is 'based on' jhana (No. 3 in the series above) cannot attain unless mundane insight has been developed to the necessary degree. So on a practical level, it always comes back to the development of awareness of realities appearing at the present moment, as taught in the Satipatthana Sutta--for this is how mundane insight is developed. Jon 7822 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief!- Num Correction: --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Num, > > Those who wish to read more can do so at: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > I meant to add that those who wished to read in more detail can do so in 'Conditions' by Nina Van Gorkom at this website. (A lot easier to digest than the Pathana, imho;-)) 7823 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Thanks Sarah, From your post I learnt the following important point: No point of comparing myself with others (even to the extent of the status of the mind.). I am myself and I am where I am and I have to act according to that state of mind or the situation ...etc. Ofcoures I knew it throuht my life but your post made me really understand it. It was like a missing peace which made the picture complete. Also, yesterday I heard in a sermon over here in Sri Lanka (from Rev. Uduwe Dhammaloka) that when ever you are in troble, having problems...etc Buddha has told to do 2 things. 1. To adhere to the five percepts 2. Try to control your mind No 1 will solve most of the problems itseems. for example you may end all the lies you have told and you have to tell just by telling the truth once (ofcourse there might be a bomb blast after you tell the truth but at least your problem is going to be over) and you may stop drinking is you are in to drinking. And by no 2 you can avoid yourself falling into more problems by being mindful. But again we have to use the above wisely. Should not tell the truth like a fool. Now I have to ask this. There are some situations in life that it may seem easier not to tell the truth. Say like this. If I tell the truth another person will get hurt. If I dont tell, I will get hurt. So I will not tell the truth because the other person will get hurt. How should these situations be handled? ~meththa to you and all Ranil >From: "ranil gunawardena" >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation >Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 05:47:34 > >Hi Sarah, > >This is a wonderful post. I learned from it a lot. Thank you and all who >participated in this discussion. > >~mettha >Ranil > > > >From: Sarah > > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation > >Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:57:06 +0800 (CST) > > > >Dear Mike C, > > > >thank you very much for your post and comments below (and thanks Frank >for > >your > >help). > > > > > From: Michael Chu < > > > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > > > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > > > meditation > > > > > Dear Sara and all, > > >> > > > I am very lazy at my practice of meditation. I > > > average about fifteen > > > minutes of meditation every other day. Comparing > > > myself to my fellow > > > cultivator friends, namely Frank and William, who do > > > at least one hour of > > > sitting meditation each day continuously for several > > > years, I have noticed > > > their ability to be mindful and serene far exceed > > > mine. > > > >Mike, may I make 2 quick comments here? I don’t think it’s very fruitful >to > >compare yourself with others. Doesn’t this just lead to thoughts of > >inferiority > >(in this case) and unhappy feelings? Secondly, do we ever really know > >another’s > >state of mind? isn’t it hard enough to know when we’re really calm or >have > >mindfulness as opposed to a pleasant feeling or subtle clinging? We can > >never > >tell in another just be the appearance or posture what the state of mind > >is. > > > > > > I personally noticed that lacking the mindfulness of > > > cultivation from > > > meditation, I am having a much more difficult time > > > progressing in the Noble > > > Eightfold Path compare to my peers. On the > > > concentration group, I can only > > > sporadically address my present moment with the right > > > effort, mindfulness, > > > and concentration. Without the appropriate > > > concentration, I find myself to > > > have further difficulty achieving the right speech and > > > action. > > > >Mike, i think you have the right idea when you recognise that the time >for > >mindfulness is the present moment. However, it seems that you have an >idea > >of a > >‘self’ that should be able to progress, concentrate, be mindful and >achieve > >rt > >speech and action. When we mind so much about these states, doesn’t it >also > >show how much we cling to ME, myself. Doesn’t it show how much we’d like >to > >be > >the mindful, concentrated one with good speech and action? > > > >What about when we compare or wish to have mindfulness, being aware of >the > >clinging to self at these times? Wouldn’t that be a little progress? >People > >have the idea that concentration should be fixing undistractedly on an > >object . > >But in what way is it pure or wholesome when this happens? There is > >concentration all the time, even when we’re distracted (according to the > >Teachings). > > > > My progress > > > of having the right understanding, thought, and speech > > > is also hindered. By > > > lacking the right understanding, I find myself making > > > poor plans for my > > > livelihood. My clarity of mind is always compromised. > > > >We all lack right understanding most the time, Mike. Recognizing how >little > >understanding there is, is a really good start. Actually, I think the >more > >understanding develops, the more it sees what real beginners we are. As >one > >of > >our members, suggested, we think we know and then there’s a little > >breakthrough > >and we realise it was all wrong after all! For understanding to really > >develop, > >we need to hear and consider more about what are the actual phenomena >that > >can > >be known. > > > >When we talk about livelihood plans, we can talk about them from many > >angles. > >Frank is considering taking early retirement and living in a forest. Form >a > >conventional point of view, these would be poor livelihood decisions. >From > >a > >Buddhist point of view, it would depend on the intentions and motivations > >involved, because in Buddhism, we’re always more concerned with the >present > >state of mind than ‘the story’. I hope your livlihood works out better in > >both > >regards! > > > > > > I also noticed lacking the ability to be mindful even > > > hinders the right > > > breathing and induces undesirable states like > > > sluggishness, impatience, > > > restlessness, and anger. I can only so far only be > > > able to do a limited > > > form of damage control on these undesirable states > > > when I occasionally > > > remember to stay away from them. Another thing I > > > noticed is that these > > > undesirable statements can be quickly terminated if I > > > catch them on their > > > early stages. To be able to catch the arising of > > > these undesirable states, > > > we need to be mindful. > > > >It seems that we can ‘catch’ them or stop them arising and >conventionally, > >this > >is often true. Hence we say to a child ‘snap out of it’ and the child > >sometimes > >does! On a deeper level, however, we can see we’re pretty much stuck with > >our > >‘character’ and inclinations, so that sooner or later these negative >states > >will arise again and again in spite of good intentions. Why is this? > >Because > >they have been gathering for so very long and are not controllable. Even >if > >mindfulness is mindful of the anger or impatience for a moment, what >about > >next > >moment? > > > >Again, may I suggest, that the reason we mind so much about these states >is > >not > >usually because we see the danger of ALL kinds of unwholesomeness, but > >because > >the ones you’ve mentioned are unpleasant and we cling so much to a self! > >When > >we’re having a great time and there’s no anger or impatience, do we mind > >about > >the excitement and attachment? What about all the ignorance in between? > > > > > >> The very reason why we should apply appropriate > > > mindfulness and catch the > > > arising anger before it gets any bigger and out of > > > control. > > > > > > So far the best way to achieve mindfulness that I know > > > of is through > > > practicing proper meditation. If you have any > > > suggestion that we can better > > > achieve mindfulness, I would love to know. > > > >Actually, Mike, there is no self to apply mindfulness or do anything. >This > >doesn’t mean ‘give up’ and it doesn't mean 'sit' or 'don't sit', it means > >learn > >more about what mindfulness really is, what the objects of mindfulness >are > >and > >develop understanding (by understanding , not doing) of these same > >realities at > >any time. This is what I call bhavana or meditation. > > > >One or two practical suggestions: > > > >1) Join DSG, go to ‘Useful Posts’ at this link and scroll down to ‘new to > >Dhamma’ for some suggestions or other topics that look interesting. > > > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > > >2) Keep asking questions here....be patient for replies and ignore posts > >that > >are too technical for now. > > > >3) Go to this website and read anything that doesn’t seem too hard > >http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > > > >Hope to hear more form you, > > > >Best wishes, > >Sarah > > > > 7824 From: frank kuan Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 1:31am Subject: Can we enjoy without attachment? My comments are at the end. -fk [ken] > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > attachement. Attachments = dukka [rob e] Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say that I think it is possible to enjoy something without being attached to it. What do you think? [ken] > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, whenever/whatever we enjoy, > there will be an attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we could not > observe it. Technically speaking when we enjoy something, there is an attachment > because there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable or subtle. Hence in > my personal perspective, I do not think we could at present enjoy something > without being not attached to it. If we are detach from what we are doing, then > the feeling of pleasure will not arise because we are not attached. And again > techniccally speaking this means there will not be any enjoyment as there is no > arise a feeling of pleasure. [rob e] I am no expert, but it seems to me, Kenneth, that you are equating pleasureable feelings or sensations with attachment itself. It seems to me for the path to function through mindfulness, there must be a possibility of any experience being able to be non-attached to through looking at it with awareness and becoming aware of its characteristics of not-self, emptiness and impermanence. Does seeing the insubstantial nature of an object or experience remove the sensation or feeling of pleasure, and does pleasure or enjoyment only arise as an outgrowth of attachment? These are interesting questions. I think that it is possible to enjoy something but not cling to it and to let it go when it is over. I think this is more possible when encountering it with mindfulness and not getting absorbed by the experience. I recognize that this would be hard, however, and if you are saying mainly that in our current state this would be extremely unlikely, then I can understand your point of view. But if one is free of attachment, I do not imagine that this person would necessarily be like a robot, seeing what is there but with absolutely no experience of a response to it. Can one have a response and be non-attached at the same time? That is again an interesting question which I am not in a position to answer. I have met a few people in my life whom I believe by reputation and experience were enligthtened, and they were certainly capable of laughing at a joke or enjoying a meal. They merely did not have a notion of self or dharma being real or self-existent. Although I am anxious to let go of clingings and attachments, to objects as well as views, [as well as the one I am expressing here ], I want to also be careful not to fall into annihilationism and to think that I must therefore hold onto aversion to those things. I think it was the ascetics that Buddha criticized for being so averse to psychophysical clinging that they abused and neglected their bodies, and that this did not create an appropriate state of mind for realization. [mike nease] Attachment (as I understand it in this context) refers to identification with one of the khandhas. Since there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be attached, I think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) to a khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), or clinging to (identification with) a pleasant feeling. A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without lobha (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm enjoying this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I think--but maybe that's just 'me'. "The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in non-ill will. To him -- enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will -- this thought often occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, whether weak or firm.' "The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in seclusion. To him -- enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion -- this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is unskillful is abandoned.' Itivuttaka 38 The Group Of Twos http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/itivuttaka/iti2.html It seems to me that sukkha vedanaa will arise when the conditions for it exist (I don't know think that attachment is a necessary condition for pleasant feeling), even when there is no ego--just that lobha and vedanna upaadaana won't arise. But maybe I'm mistaken. What do you think? Thanks for letting me join in your discussion. [rob e] Thanks, Mike, I appreciate the discussion. It's sort of an important topic to me, and I'll try to explain why. I understand your point, and I probably agree, that for us folks on the way here it's probably a long shot to have enjoyments without attachment or unpleasant experiences without aversion. But it's important to me to point at a model of experience that does not involve being attached to aversion or averse to attachment. It seems to me that if the model is 'anti-experience' based on the addictive nature of experience, that new karmic effects are created on top of the ones that already need to be released. I am saying that when enjoyment or pleasure arises, that the subtle response 'I shouldn't be enjoying this because it will cause attachment' may be in the mind of the practitioner, and that this is a mistake. That this is not an expression of mindfulness but of thought-reaction to what is arising. If one instead takes the attitude that I believe the Buddha prescribes, if I am correct, one would simply want to say: 'See pleasure as pleasure, and if attachment is present, see attachment as attachment', etc. I think that it is important to not only look at primary attachment and aversion, but attachment to aversion and aversion to attachment. I would consider these a practioner's problems, because they would only arise for someone who sincerely cared about the path. But I think they're very important to someone who has already committed themselves to not feeding attachment. Does any of this make sense? [rob e commenting on sutta references] Thanks, Mike. I think these are good examples of Buddha describing a kind of benign enjoyment and delight, and is part of what I was hinting at. It may be for advanced states only, but is still something to understand, so that we don't see all pleasant experience as being inherently expressions of attachment. Wouldn't it be a shame if we were meant to enjoy, without attachment, the subtle flavor of the advanced portion of the path to enlightenment, and instead suppressed this, thinking it erroneously to represent attachment? Perhaps lower enjoyments that attach us to the things of the world are suspect, but the enjoyment of the path itself may not be attached, but may be natural expressions of the correct mood on the way to Nirvana. I also recall some discussion of the jhanas or other progressive states where it is mentioned in each stage how pleasant and enjoyable each state is. Perhaps someone else can remind me where the Buddha speaks this way. [fk] I don't have anything enlightening to add, just some more thoughts to add to the confusion :-) 1) Rob E already beat me to the punch, but looking at how the progressive jhana states become more subtle and the pleasure is more refined, moving from physical pleasure toward mental bliss towards pure equanimity, it gives us an idea of what kind of pleasure the noble ones could "enjoy without attachment". 2) On a mundane level, even the noble ones experience pleasant, unpleasant, and neither pleasant nor unpleasant feelings. 3) Often, when non-noble ones and people who haven't attained proficiency in the jhanas start pulling the "enjoyment without attachment" card, I seriously wonder if there is just a rationalization to pleasure seek. (not attacking or accusing anyone here, if anything, I have to guard myself from that tendency :-) An excerpt from Samyutta I just read last night that always helps me to put things in perspective: page 648, first volume BB translation: "Bhikkhus, one who seeks delight in the earth element seeks delight in suffering. ONe who seeks delight in suffering, I say , is not freed from suffering. (repeat for other 3 elements of form aggregate...) One who does not seek delight in the earth element does not seek delight in suffering. ONe who does not seek delight in suffering, I say, is freed from suffering." -fk 7825 From: Howard Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 11:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Jon - Thank you for this! It is a very detailed, informative, and reasonable (to me) offering. Much appreciated! I have a brief question and brief comment. The question pertains to: ********************************* 1. After developing samatha The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. ******************************** (Is the last sentence part of the footnote? It surprises me that access concentration is included here.) My comment pertains to: ********************************** 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha [This is the instance of insight being 'based on' jhana. The insight arises after emerging from jhana, and takes the jhana moments as its object. This is the 'yoked/conjoined' instance.]. ********************************* (This is the approach reportedly taken by Sariputta.) ============================= With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/3/01 8:38:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Binh) - > > This is an