Hi Robert E

(97459)
> ----------------------
> My God, you are quick on the uptake.  No sooner do I reply to a post [at 4 am
in the morning having 'Buddhist Philosophy-based Insomnia'] than you send me a
new one in the early morning of the next day.
> ----------------------

Just trying to give you something useful to occupy yourself with during your
insomnia ;-))

> ----------------------
> Joking aside, I appreciate the exchange.
> ----------------------

And me too ...

> ----------------------
> I think the point that may be disputed is not whether cetasikas take the same
object as citta, but the mechanics of how this occurs.  I don't think it is
Theravadin orthodoxy that a discrete citta arises for each experient that arises
and that the cetasikas are aligned one at a time around a single quality such as
hardness and that this is the level of experience that forms a dhamma.  I think
the way in which this is described is Abhidhamma orthodoxy, rather than for the
whole of the Theravadin community.  Some take this as doctrine and others not.
> ----------------------

Without wanting to get into a debate as to what is or is not Theravadin
orthodoxy, here's a passage from CMA on the relationship between citta and
cetasika:

Ch 11, Compendium of Mental Factors
Par. 1

<<<
The fifty-two states associated with consciousness that arise and cease together
(with consciousness), that have the same object and base (as consciousness), are
known as mental factors.

Guide to #1:
"That arise and cease together (with consciousness)":
The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that
are common to them all:

1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada)
2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha)
3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana)
4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka)
>>>

> ----------------------
> > I have no idea as to the mechanics of the matter, as this is not explained
in any of the texts I've read.
>
> Well, that is interesting, in so detailed a teaching.  That is too bad.
>
> That is like saying that we know which pipes are connected in the plumbing but
we have no idea how they get put together.
> ----------------------

Whether that's a bad thing or not depends on the objective.

> ----------------------
> > Investigation would have to begin, I think, by finding out what the texts
have to say on the subject.  There is simply no way that a matter as detailed as
this (cetasikas arising together with the citta and thus simultaneously) could
be investigated by direct experience.
>
> Then how was it determined in the first place?  I assume an arahant could
directly experience this taking place and thus was able to write it down?
> ----------------------

It is capable of verification by direct experience, but it requires panna of a
sufficiently high level.  Thus, not capable of investigation by the likes of you
and me ;-)) is what I meant.

Jon

Hi Rob Ep (& Scott),

part 2
[referring to the quote Scott gave on pa~n~naa and vitakka cetasikas..]

--- On Tue, 28/4/09, Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@...> wrote:
>Below, I have separated out some parts of this wonderful quote - and I mean it,
because it is such a clear description of how a dhamma is known - and hope you
can direct me to some explanation of how they take place. They don't seem
"single-moment" descriptors at all:
....
S: Before I start, keep in mind as Nina, Ken H, Scott and others have been
stressing, that whatever similes or conventional descriptions are given, we are
talking about one citta at a time accompanied by a minimum of 7 cetasikas, all
experiencing the same object momentarily:

> >Scott: In the Sammohavinodanii, p. 111:
>
> >"Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its
own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but

>with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object]
it can.

>Okay, applied thought gives assistance by repeatedly beating. Sounds like more
than one moment, yes?
...
S: There have to be countless cittas (over lifetimes)accompanied by vitakka (and
vicara)and pa~n~naa before the pa~n~naa will be of sufficient strength to
directly understand the ti-lakkhana. The pa~n~naa needs the vitakka to 'direct'
it over and over again. This is why vitakka (samma sankappa) is also classified
under the 'understanding' section of the eightfold path factors.
...
>Also, looking into the nature of the three characteristics is dependent on
understanding its "mode of change" - I forget the right word - and this is
something that is comparing its former state to its present state is it not?
...
S: No, I don't think so. It is directly understanding that characteristic of a
particular dhamma when it's clearly known. For example, in the beginning,
visible object is just known as visible object, the rupa which doesn't
experience anything. As pa~n~naa grows (*a lot!*), it can directly understand
its arising and falling away. In other words, it is a more developed, more
precise understanding of that same reality, from the 3rd stage of insight.
...

>>Quote: How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and
being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with
the power of the eye only, but by turning it over with his fingers he is able to
look at it on all sides;

>turning it over and looking at all sides - can this happen in a single moment?
....
S: Don't take the simile too literally. It's just explaining how pa~n~naa needs
the 'extra fingers' to assist it understand the object. It cannot perform its
function on its own.
...

>>Quote: likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as
impermanent, etc., but with applied thought with its characteristic of focusing
the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and
turning over, it can take what is given and determine it.
...
>applied thought,
focusing the mind
striking and threshing
beating and turning over
take what is given and determine it

>Is there any way imaginable that this kind of action - applying, striking and
threshing, beating and turning over, taking and determining - can take place in
a single moment?
....
S: Yes. Just as seeing needs contact (phassa) to experience visible object, so
most other cittas, including those accompanied by pa~n~naa, need vitakka to
direct them onto their objects. Very momentary:-)
...

>It goes against the whole sense of this function as one that is investigating
and looking into the object further in order to see its nature as impermanent
etc.
...
S: These are just similes and metaphors given to indicate that vitakka assists
the citta 'investigate' or 'enter the palace'. forget the similes if they don't
help. Actually, I remember K.Sujin saying she doesn't find similes helpful, so
you'd be in good company.....if they don't help the understanding of dhammas,
let them go!

More to come!

Metta,

Sarah
======

Hi Robert E

(97459)
> ----------------------
> > If you mean commentaries to individual suttas, there are many available from
BPS ("Wheel" series, etc) and also from Wisdom, Amazon and the like.  For
example, "The Way of Mindfulness" is the
> > Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary.
>
> Well I would be interested in this.  Thank you.  The commentary on
Satipatthana Sutta would be a good place to start.  Let's see if I can get
permission to add yet another book to my Buddhist library.
> ----------------------

Actually, this is also available on-line for downloading (although a printed
copy is much easier to read and refer to, I find):
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html

> ----------------------
> > If you'd like an overview of the whole Theravada perspective, you might like
to consider something like Visuddhimagga or the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, both of
which are in effect compilations of all 3 pitakas and their commentaries.
>
> I think the Sangaha is online, and I think I have a downloaded copy of the
Vism as well.  I will have to learn to read....
> ----------------------

I think you may be mistaking something else for the Vism, which is not available
for downloading.  It is a hefty tome, and not exactly readable in the way the
suttas are.  But it's an excellent reference work, with lots of cross-references
to sutta passages for the detail it gives.

> > Hope this is helpful.
>
> Indeed, I appreciate it.  And a very nice exchange for a Sunday.  Now, off to
battle sloth and torpor......   Talk to you soon.
> ----------------------

My suggestions for first and second purchase would be CDB (translation of SN)
and CMA (translation of Abhidhammattha Sangaha).  Others will have different
choices ;-))

Jon

Hi Rob Ep (& Scott),

(Actually, my birthday, so a few tel. and other interruptions this end on a
really beautiful sunny day and holiday here.....;-))

part 3

--- On Tue, 28/4/09, Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@...> wrote:
>Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being
of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of
assisting]."

>
> >Scott: Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika.
The above shows a bit of how conascent mental factors perform separate but
coordinated functions, according to characteristic,
....
S: Yes, and also why Right Thinking is included in the understanding group.
...

>> within the whole of the moment of consciousness and directed at the same
object.

>Is there any reason why this cannot take place in successive moments?
...
S: The cetasikas perform their various functions at a moment of consciousness.
Of course, there are also successive moments when they continue to perform their
functions (7 at a stretch). When we're talking about right understanding, we're
referring to the 7 javana cittas in a sense door or mind door process.
...

>Many of the operations of consciousness depend on accumulations. Why can't this
be a process in which understanding is accumulated through Right Thought?
...
S: You're right that these same javana cittas depend on accumulations. They are
accumulated whenever they arise and condition further such javana cittas with
understanding in future. At the same time that the understanding accumulates, so
do the other accompanying factors, such as samma sankappa/vitakka (Right
Thought). We can't however refer to right understanding being accumulated
'through' Right Thought unless you're referring to pariyatti (right conceptual
understanding) as condition for direct understanding. This, however, is a
different context.

Please let us know what is not clear or doesn't make sense in this thread.

Metta,

Sarah
=======

Hi again Robert E

> Without wanting to get into a debate as to what is or is not Theravadin
orthodoxy, here's a passage from CMA on the relationship between citta and
cetasika:
>
> Ch 11, Compendium of Mental Factors
> Par. 1
>
> <<<
> The fifty-two states associated with consciousness that arise and cease
together (with consciousness), that have the same object and base (as
consciousness), are known as mental factors.
>
> Guide to #1:
> "That arise and cease together (with consciousness)":
> The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that
are common to them all:
>
> 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada)
> 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha)
> 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana)
> 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka)
> >>>

Below are some more passages on this subject, courtesy of posts by Han (from
CMA) and Sarah (Atthasalini).

Jon

CMA

"The cetasikas are mental phenomena that occur in
immediate conjunction with citta or consciousness, and
assist citta by performing more specific tasks in the
total act of cognition. The mental factors cannot
arise without citta, nor can citta arise completely
segregated from the mental factors. But though the two
are functionally interdependent, citta is regarded as
primary because the mental factors assist in the
cognition of the object depending upon citta., which
is the principal cognitive element. The relationship
between citta and the cetasikas is compared to that
between a king and his retinue. Although one says "the
king is coming", the king does not come alone, but he
always comes accompanied by his attendants. Similarly,
whenever a citta arises, it never arises alone but
always accompanied by its retinue of cetatsikas."
[page 76 of CMA]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/83296


Atthasalini, Analysis of Terms:

"But consciousness does not arise singly. Just as in saying, `the king has
arrived,' it is clear that he does not come alone without his attendants, but
comes attended by his retinue, so this consciousness should be understood to
have arisen with more than fifty moral (mental) phenomena
(pa.n.naasakusaladhammehi). But it may be said that consciousness has arisen in
the sense of a forerunner (pubba"ngama.m). For in worldly phenomena
consciousness (lokiya dhamma.m) is the chief, consciousness is the principal,
consciousness is the forerunner.

In transcendental phenomena (lokuttara.m dhamma.m), however, understanding is
the chief, understanding is the principal, understanding is the forerunner."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/46575

Hello all,

Every weekend when I go to the Dhammagiri Forest Monastery, Kholo, we recite the
Karaniya Metta Sutta - this version:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html

I'm wondering exactly what is meant by "fixed views" at the end of the Sutta:

"This is said to be the sublime abiding.
	 By not holding to fixed views,
The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision,
	 Being freed from all sense desires,
Is not born again into this world."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html

It reminds me of the sutta where Ven. Ananda is answering questions put by
Kokanuda the wanderer:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.096.than.html
which has always been a little unclear to me.
Thoughts?

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---

Hi Sarah,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi Rob Ep (& Scott),
>
> (Actually, my birthday, so a few tel. and other interruptions this end on a
really beautiful sunny day and holiday here.....;-))
>

Happy Birthday!  While being an ancient, Theravada dinosaur, you still look
pretty good! :-))

Metta,
James

Hi Sarah, happy birthday,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi Alberto,
>
> Thanks for all the good detail. May I ask which texts you are finding most
your detail in? For example, I'm interested to read about the 'single kamma'
conditioning as you suggest as opposed to different kamma conditioning each
single sense consciousness. It makes sense and is along the lines I've heard.
>

Can't give you a textual reference straight away.
I think that, were it more than one single kamma conditioning the arising &
falling of upadinna/kammaja rupa (eyes, ears, nose, tongue and body sense) in
one's single lifetime, one's pasadas would change unpredictedly from that of a
human being to that of an animal etc. And our bhavanga/life-continuum would also
unpredictedly change from sahetuka kusala-vipaka citta, the result of (strong)
past kusala kamma arising with alobha and adosa and possibly with panna too, to
ahetuka (kusala or akusala) vipaka, without any of the three roots that
distinguish humans bhumi/plane of existance and other sugati/happy ones from
that of animals, dugati/unhappy ones.

Alberto

Dear Friends,

Following on from #97499 Fours (6-8) (cy: #97549, #97560):

CSCD

309. <<Cattaaro ariyava.msaa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu santu.t.tho hoti itariitarena
ciivarena, itariitaraciivarasantu.t.thiyaa ca va.n.navaadii, na ca ciivarahetu
anesana.m appatiruupa.m aapajjati; aladdhaa ca ciivara.m na paritassati, laddhaa
ca ciivara.m agadhito [agathito (sii. pii.)] amucchito anajjhaapanno
aadiinavadassaavii nissara.napa~n~no paribhu~njati; taaya ca pana
itariitaraciivarasantu.t.thiyaa nevattaanukka.mseti na para.m vambheti. Yo hi
tattha dakkho analaso sampajaano pa.tissato, aya.m vuccataavuso â€" <bhikkhu
poraa.ne agga~n~ne ariyava.mse .thito>.

<<Puna capara.m, aavuso, bhikkhu santu.t.tho hoti itariitarena pi.n.dapaatena,
itariitarapi.n.dapaatasantu.t.thiyaa ca va.n.navaadii, na ca pi.n.dapaatahetu
anesana.m appatiruupa.m aapajjati; aladdhaa ca pi.n.dapaata.m na paritassati,
laddhaa ca pi.n.dapaata.m agadhito amucchito anajjhaapanno aadiinavadassaavii
nissara.napa~n~no paribhu~njati; taaya ca pana
itariitarapi.n.dapaatasantu.t.thiyaa nevattaanukka.mseti na para.m vambheti. Yo
hi tattha dakkho analaso sampajaano pa.tissato , aya.m vuccataavuso â€" <bhikkhu
poraa.ne agga~n~ne ariyava.mse .thito>.

<<Puna capara.m, aavuso, bhikkhu santu.t.tho hoti itariitarena senaasanena,
itariitarasenaasanasantu.t.thiyaa ca va.n.navaadii, na ca senaasanahetu
anesana.m appatiruupa.m aapajjati; aladdhaa ca senaasana.m na paritassati,
laddhaa ca senaasana.m agadhito amucchito anajjhaapanno aadiinavadassaavii
nissara.napa~n~no paribhu~njati; taaya ca pana itariitarasenaasanasantu.t.thiyaa
nevattaanukka.mseti na para.m vambheti. Yo hi tattha dakkho analaso sampajaano
pa.tissato, aya.m vuccataavuso â€" <bhikkhu poraa.ne agga~n~ne ariyava.mse
.thito>.

<<Puna capara.m, aavuso, bhikkhu pahaanaaraamo hoti pahaanarato, bhaavanaaraamo
hoti bhaavanaarato; taaya ca pana pahaanaaraamataaya pahaanaratiyaa
bhaavanaaraamataaya bhaavanaaratiyaa nevattaanukka.mseti na para.m vambheti. Yo
hi tattha dakkho analaso sampajaano pa.tissato aya.m vuccataavuso â€" <bhikkhu
poraa.ne agga~n~ne ariyava.mse .thito>.

Walshe

DN 33.1.11(9) 'Four Ariyan lineages (ariya-va'msa). Here, a monk (a) is content
with any old robe, praises such contentment, and does not try to obtain robes
improperly or unsuitably. He does not worry if he does not get a robe, and if he
does, he is not full of greedy, blind desire, but makes use of it, aware of
[such] dangers and wisely aware of its true purpose. Nor is he conceited about
being thus content with any old robe, and he does not disparage others. And one
who is thus skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, [iii 225] is known as a
monk who is true to the ancient, original (agga~n~ne) Ariyan lineage. Again, (b)
a monk is content with any alms-food he may get ... Again, (c) a monk is content
with any old lodging-place ... And again, (d) a monk, being fond of abandoning
(pahaana), rejoices in abandoning, and being fond of developing (bhaavanaa),
rejoices in developing, is not therefore conceited...And one who is thus
skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, is known as a monk who is true to
the ancient, original Ariyan lineage.

Olds

[4.9]  Four Old Time Ways of the Aristocrats:
Here friends a beggar is content having anywhich robe, speaks well of
contentment with anywhich robe, does not accept un-essential or unseemly
robes[4.9.1]; not obtaining robes he is not dissatisfied, attaining robes he
accepts and uses them without greed and infatuation, thus he guiltlessly enjoys
the use thereof perceiving the possible dangers, wise to the ways things work
out. Furthermore, being content having anywhich robe, he neither puts himself
above nor puts down others, nor is he self satisfied at being of such
respectable behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of the Ancient,
Old-Time Aristocrats.
Again, friends a beggar is content having any lump-dole'd'inni-bowl, speaks well
of contentment with any food put in the bowl, does not accept un-essential or
unseemly food; not obtaining food he is not dissatisfied, attaining food he
accepts and uses it without greed and infatuation, thus he guiltlessly enjoys
the use thereof perceiving the possible dangers, wise to the ways things work
out. Furthermore, being content with any handouts, he neither puts himself above
nor puts down others, nor is he self-satisfied at being of such respectable
behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of the Ancient, Old-Time
Aristocrats.
Again, friends a beggar is content having any sit'n'sleep'n-spot, speaks well of
contentment with any place to sit and sleep, does not accept un-essential or
unseemly dwelling places; not obtaining lodging he is not dissatisfied,
attaining shelter he accepts and uses it without greed and infatuation, thus he
guiltlessly enjoys the use thereof perceiving the possible dangers, wise to the
ways things work out. Furthermore, being content with any sit'n'sleep'n-spot, he
neither puts himself above nor puts down others, nor is he self-satisfied at
being of such respectable behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of
the Ancient, Old-Time Aristocrats.
Again, friends, a beggar taking pleasure in letting go, enjoying letting go,
taking pleasure in advancement, enjoying advancement and furthermore, taking
pleasure in letting go, enjoying letting go, taking pleasure in advancement,
enjoying advancement, he neither puts himself above nor puts down others, nor is
he self-satisfied at being of such respectable behavior. He indeed is one who
may be called one of the Ancient, Old-Time Aristocrats.

RD's

[225][4.9] Four Ariyan lineages. Herein, brethren, a brother is content with
whatever robes [he may have], commends contentment of this kind, and does not
try togain robes in improper unsuitable ways. And he is not dismayed if he gain
no robe, but when he has gained one,he is not greedy, nor infatuated nor
overwhelmed; he wears it heedful lest he incur evil and understanding its
object. Finally, by this contentment as toany garment, he heither is puffed up
nor disparages others. Now he that is expert, not slothful, heedful, mindful, is
called, brethren, a brother who is true to the ancient distinguished lineage of
the Ariyans.
The same is he who is similarly content with his alms, and withhis lodging.
Lastly, bethren, the brother who, having the love both of eliminating on the one
hand, and of developing on the other, loves both to eliminate and to develop, in
loving both, neither is puffed up, nor disparages others. He that is herein
expert, not slothful, heedful, mindful, is called a brother who is true to the
ancient distinguished lineage of the Ariyans.

**olds:

[4.9] Cattaaro ariya-va.msaa.
ariya-va'nsaa: Walshe and Rhys Davids: Ariyan Lineages. PED: 1. a bamboo (mo:
count the links); 2. race, lineage, family; 3. tradition, hereditary custom,
usage, reputation; 4. dynasty; 5. a bamboo flute, fift; 6. a certain game (MO:
some guesses have been: playing a toy flute, a game called tip-cat where you hit
a stick with a stick trying to keep it moving along end on end, possibly
pick-up-sticks, possibly walking on stilts, or balancing a bamboo pole in the
air endwise)
[4.9.1] Such as robes made of silk that involve the death of many creatures,
very fine robes, or robes offered as a consequence of pressure (hints) either
applied by someone else or by the beggar himself at an earlier time.

Sincerely,

Scott, connie, Nina.

Hi Chris

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" <cforsyth1@...>
wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Every weekend when I go to the Dhammagiri Forest Monastery, Kholo, we recite
the Karaniya Metta Sutta - this version:
>
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html
>
> I'm wondering exactly what is meant by "fixed views" at the end of the Sutta:
>
> "This is said to be the sublime abiding.
>  By not holding to fixed views,
> The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision,
>  Being freed from all sense desires,
> Is not born again into this world."
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html

The term "fixed views" here seems to be a translation of the Pali "ditthi" and
so refers to wrong view.

In the commentary to this stanza (Paramatthajotika, trans. by Nanamoli as "The
Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning") it explains that "lovingkindness is near to
[wrong] view of self because it thas creatures for its object".

It then explains that the person who understands nama as nama and rupa as rupa
avoids falling into wrong view, and eventually attains enlightenment.

So these lines are a referecne to the development of insight.

Hope this makes sense.

Jon

Hi, Ken -

In a message dated 4/30/2009 6:24:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
kenhowardau@... writes:

Hi  Howard,

I'm not very interested in concepts or stories. Even stories  told in the
suttas don't interest me very much in their own right. I am  more
interested in the dhammas they indirectly describe. But, even  so:

-------
Ven S: > > ALL Sammasam-Buddhas and  Pacceka-Buddhas arise in middle
India.

Howard: > I consider that  to be nonsense, and I entirely disbelieve it.
-------

I wonder if  that is the right attitude to take. We've discussed it a few
times over the  years, and I have always given the example of the
parallel universe theory.  (As I understand the theory, the possibility
of there being just a single  universe is extremely unlikely. Much more
likely is that there is an  infinitely large number of universes, each a
slight variation of our own.  And for every one of those universes there
is an infinitely large number of  universes that are slight variations of
it (and so on ad  infinitum.)

The parallel universe theory might not be a helpful one  from our
perspective, but I don't think any scientifically minded person  would
call it nonsense and entirely disbelieve it. (The same applies to  the
Big-Bang-Big-Crunch theory.)
-------------------------------------------
     Boy, for someone who's not interested in stories!  In any case, Ken, I
would make two points:
     1) I see no hint at all that a  parallel-universe notion is implied.
And multiple big bangs  (the "breath of Brahma") was the cosmology of the
time. Also, trotting out the  parallel universe story as an explanation is as
good as nothing, because  it can provide an explanation of virtually anything
one can concoct.
     2) "The right attitude to TAKE"??? Ken, are you  suggesting control? In
any case, it is simply the truth that I am telling when I  say that I do
not believe that the earth and all it's countries (the same land  masses as
now) will be recreated again and again with each new big bang, with  the same
languages being spoken(!) (even assuming that the multiple  big-bang theory
is a correct story), and I do not believe that Buddhas will  appear only in
"the India of the time." Note, though, that I don't say that I  KNOW what is
the case, and I do not say that these claims are false. I  say that I don't
believe them, a simple statement of fact. Should I say that I  DO believe
it when I do NOT? I also don't believe that the first people appeared  in the
Garden of Eden or that the ten commandments were handed down by a thunder
god on Mount Sinai or that the wonderful teacher called "Jesus of Nazareth"
was  the "only begotten son of God." Every religion in the world, with the
exception of Buddhism (and somewhat also Judaism) says that one must
believe, and chastises as infidels those who do not. Even that kind man Jesus
spoke of "Ye with little faith"!
---------------------------------------------



More to the point, the same appluies the  'Buddhas originating only from
India' theory. Until it contradicts what we  know to be true shouldn't we
just leave the possibility open?

------------------------------------------------------
     I am foreclosing no  possibilities.
---------------------------------------------------
  We could follow examples from the
suttas and simply say, "Maybe  so, . . . maybe so."
----------------------------------------------------
     Maybe so, sure, unless a physical or logical  impossibility. However,
it is also *possible* that I was an  adopted Martian child and that
Zoroastrianism was the only true  religion in the world - but I don't believe
these
to be the  case.
---------------------------------------------------


Ken H
===========================
With metta,
Howard



Safeguarding the Truth

/There are five  things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now.
Which five?  Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, &
an agreement  through pondering views. These are the five things that can
turn out in two ways  in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in
conviction and yet  vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in
conviction, and yet  they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are
well-liked... truly  an unbroken tradition... well-reasoned... Some things
are well-pondered and yet  vain, empty, & false. Some things are not
well-pondered, and yet they are  genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases
it
isn't proper for a  knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to
a definite conclusion,  'Only this is true; anything else is worthless."

"If a  person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,'
safeguards the  truth."

"If a person likes something... holds an  unbroken tradition... has
something reasoned through analogy... has something he  agrees to, having
pondered
views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to,  having pondered views,'
safeguards the truth."/

(Selected  from the Canki Sutta, MN 95)
**************Join ChristianMingle.com® FREE! Meet Christian Singles in
your area. Start now!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221673648x1201419171/aol?redir=http://\
www.christianmingle.com/campaign.html%3Fcat%3Dadbuy%26
src%3Dplatforma%26adid%3Dfooter:050109%26newurl%3Dreg_path.html)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Howard,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------------
>     Maybe so, sure, unless a physical or logical  impossibility. However,
> it is also *possible* that I was an  adopted Martian child

Okay, now I totally believe that one; and it explains so much!! :-))

Metta,
James

Hi, James -

In a message dated 5/1/2009 8:26:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
buddhatrue@... writes:

Hi  Howard,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@...  wrote:
>  ----------------------------------------------------
>   Maybe so, sure, unless a physical or logical  impossibility.  However,
> it is also *possible* that I was an  adopted Martian  child

Okay, now I totally believe that one; and it explains so much!!  :-))
----------------------------------------
     LOLOL!!!!
--------------------------------------



Metta,
James
======================
     Klaatu barada nikto!

With Martian metta,
Howard


/A change  in anything is a change in  everything/

(Anonymous)
**************Join ChristianMingle.com® FREE! Meet Christian Singles in
your area. Start now!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221673648x1201419171/aol?redir=http://\
www.christianmingle.com/campaign.html%3Fcat%3Dadbuy%26
src%3Dplatforma%26adid%3Dfooter:050109%26newurl%3Dreg_path.html)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

dear hoping to read the Visuddhimagga,
If you read English &/or Chinese, you might want to take a look at
thepathofpurification.blogspot.com -- just below the image of the front cover. 
Please consider listening to the lectures as well.
peace,
connie


RE: > I think the Sangaha is online, and I think I have a downloaded copy of the
Vism as well.  I will have to learn to read....
> ----------------------

JA: I think you may be mistaking something else for the Vism, which is not
available
for downloading.  It is a hefty tome, and not exactly readable in the way the
suttas are.  But it's an excellent reference work, with lots of cross-references
to sutta passages for the detail it gives.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear friends,

We are so attached to outer world of people and things.

Best wishes
Lukas

hallo Bhante, Howard and others,

  As you suggest, dry intellectualism is pointless and just leads to the same.

   Unless there is deep knowledge of presently arising dhammas: citta, cetasika
and rupa then there will be endless speculation of the past, the future and even
the present.
   the present is conditioned by the past and the future will also be conditioned
by the past and the present [which very quickly becomes the past due to anicca]
    there will be future Buddhas, which in reallity are citta, cetasika and rupa,
I have no doubt, and I must admit that I do have a big wish to be in the front
row to listen to these Buddhas. :-)

patience, courage and good cheer,
  azita


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "bhikkhu.samahita"
<bhikkhu.samahita@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Howard and Azita:
>
> Reg: The 10 future Buddhas!

hallo Lukas,

  Nice comment and I want to add that we are also very attached to the inner
world of 'me, mine and myself'.

  I think its true to say that the biggest attachment is to our very own
existence. I believe its only at the time of arahant that all attachment to self
is extinguished.

  If there were no attachment to 'me,mine,myself' then the outer world of people
and things would be of no concern.

Patience, courage and good cheer
  azita

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" <szmicio@...> wrote:
>
> Dear friends,
>
> We are so attached to outer world of people and things.
>
> Best wishes
> Lukas
>

Hi Howard,

I would like to make clear that I was not recommending the Parallel
Universe theory or the Big Bang theory as ways of explaining the Dhamma.

Without any reference to Buddhism at all, I just meant that reasonable
people  would not dismiss those theories as "nonsense that they entirely
disbelieved." After all, there are top-level physicists who take them
very seriously, so who are we to dismiss them?

Having made (or tried to make) that point I then carried it over to
Dhamma study. There is no need to reject or accept conventional stories
told in the suttas. Only dhammas can be understood as ultimately real or
ultimately unreal - ultimately true or ultimately false. Stories about
people and places are just stories.

Ken H

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote:
>
>

> Boy, for someone who's not interested in stories! In any case, Ken, I
> would make two points:
> 1) I see no hint at all that a parallel-universe notion is implied.
> And multiple big bangs (the "breath of Brahma") was the cosmology of
the
> time. Also, trotting out the parallel universe story as an explanation
is as
> good as nothing, because it can provide an explanation of virtually
anything
> one can concoct.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Friends:

What is Right Understanding of the 3 Facts!

The Blessed Buddha once said:
It is impossible, Bhikkhu and Friends, and cannot ever happen,
that one possessed of right understanding should ever regard
any phenomenon as really permanent ... or
any phenomenon as lasting happiness ... or
any state as an identical, same, and own self...
But it is quite possible, that the ordinary worldling may indeed
have, entertain and act upon such naive and distorted beliefs...!


<...>

Source:
Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 15:1-3
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm

Have a nice day!


  Friendship is the Greatest!
  Bhikkhu Sam�hita, Sri Lanka *
   <http://what-buddha-said.net/> http://What-Buddha-Said.net

Understand the 3 Basics!

Hey gazita2002 who wrote:

> there will be future Buddhas, which in reality are
> citta, cetasika and rupa,

The Buddhas range cannot be imagined! They 'are'
- not of this world - They 'are' beyond that...
Out of range so to speak! Immeasurable...

Samahita ;-)

> Howard: >
> Apparently 1) that it is all  already  determined who >
> they are - so, no new  Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions
> upon trillions of  years,

Not so, friends!
Bodhisattas are generated any time one qualified male makes
the bodhisatta wish in front of a Sammasambuddha.
So Bodhisattas are generated continuously.
Many more that 10 are waiting in line for
their turn to bloom into enlightenment...

When Gotama Buddha made his wish at Buddha Dipankara's feet,
there were 23 Buddhas in line before he awakened! They were
named: Kondañña, Mangala, Sumana, Revata, Sobhita, Anomadassī,
Paduma, N�rada, Padumuttara, Sumedha, Suj�ta, Piyadassī,
Atthadassī, Dhammadassī, Siddhattha, Tissam, Phussa, Vīpassī,
Sikhī, Vessabhū
and in this same universe:
# Kakusandha
# Kon�gamana
# Kassapa
The lives of these are all described in the Canonical
Buddhavamsa: The Chronicle af past Buddhas.
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/buddhavamsa.htm

The qualifications to be a Boddhisatta are that one is:
     * (1) a human being,
     * (2) a male,
     * (3) sufficiently developed to become an arahant in that very birth,
     * (4) a recluse at the time of the declaration,
     * (5) he should declare his resolve before a Buddha,
     * (6) should be possessed of attainments such as the jh�nas,
     * (7) be prepared to sacrifice all, even life, and
     * (8) his resolution should be absolutely firm and unwavering.

For details see:
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/bodhisatta.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/buddha.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/d/diipankara.htm

The next Buddha, which is the last in this universe is Metteyya:
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/me_mu/metteyya.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/Metteyya/arimet00.htm

Dear Azita

>  Nice comment and I want to add that we are also very attached to the inner
world of 'me, mine and myself'.

L: In Visuhimagga there was said:

"Inner jungle, outer jungle, people are entangled in the jungle,
And so I ask [the] Gotama, who could clear away this jungle? (S.i,13)

This was the question asked.

The precis is that the tangled jungle is the name of ta.nhaa [craving], with its
entangling network. Truly, ta.nhaa is called tangled because it is like a
jungle; a network of branches as in a bamboo cluster tangle bound since it
arises again and again in ara.mma.nas [objects] such as the ruupa, evolving with
both the superior and inferior ones. Therefore, ta.nhaa is called both inner and
outer jungle since it arises both for one's own and others' belongings, both in
one's own and others' beings, both at the inner and outer aayatanas. Thus,
beings in the three worlds are entangled by the jungle. The word people intends
all beings; bound, entangled by the jungle of ta.nha which is like a jungle:
like a bamboo entangled in the bamboo cluster, for example. Likewise, people are
entangled. Therefore, I ask the Gotama this question. He addressed the Buddha by
his clan name, the Gotama. Who could clear away this entangled jungle, he asked:
who could, who is capable of clearing this jungle that entangles beings in all
three perpetual [planes of] existences?

Thus questioned by the devaputta, the Buddha, whose ~naana [knowledge]
penetrates all dhammas unimpeded, who is the deva of devas, deva over devas,
sakka over sakkas, brahma over brahmas; fearless with the four vesaara.jjhanas
[confidences], possessor of dassabala~nanas [10 supramundance powers], with
unobstructed ~nanas and samantachakkhu [all seeing, omniscience], answered the
devaputta with this gaathaa [verse]:

The bhikkhu who is wise, diligent, governed by pa~n~na, and unwavering in his
siila while he develops the citta and pa~n~na, would be able to clear away this
tangled jungle."

L: Of course there are futher explanations about that. Bhikkhu means the one who
knows the bounds and dangers of samsara. dilligent points out a kind of dhammas
which arise on conditions. When there is satipatthana, there are always dhammas
of diligent, and those are called right effort.
"He develops citta and panna" means also dhammas which do their own work.
Those all are conditions for clear away this tangle jungle. Buddha knew about it
and pointed us the way. That's ekayano maggo. The way of panna and awarness in
daily life.

Maybe anyone else can say something about indriyasamvarasiila?

My best wishes
Lukas

Dear Scott & all,

part 1

As usual, you raise many good and deep issues...

--- On Thu, 30/4/09, Scott <scduncan@...> wrote:
>A 'thought', as I understand it, in its structure and as its given to
experience, seems formed, whole, coherent, having meaning. It seems to be in the
form of words, almost as if it is 'heard' or 'being read' in the mind.
...
S: Yes, this is a good description of what is conventionally meant as 'a
thought'.
....
>In the same way that the experience of visible object, which is said to arise
and be given to seeing consciousness one at a time, and to fall away is part of
a rapid sequence of alternating dhammaa, including bhavanga, so too, I imagine,
the 'thought' through the mind-door. Whereas the 'world' seems continuous and
made up of coherent visible structures, people, animals, movement, sounds,
smells, etc., so too 'thought' seems at least semi-continuous.
....
S: Yes, as it seems. In fact what is experienced by those cittas through the
mind-door is a momentarily experienced concept.
...

>Does the 'thought' arise in the form we experience it? I'd suggest that a
'thought', like any other dhamma of experience, and Sarah I think you have said
this, is not the whole it seems to be, but rather is part of a much more complex
series of dhammaa:
...
S: No, not as we think we experience it - this is a concept, a long story about
the throught. In fact vitakka (and other cetasikas) touch upon the object very
briefly  (and even in the sense door process). Because of many, many mind-door
experiences and moments of vitakka 'thinking' or directing citta onto its
objects, concepts, we have the idea of thinking of people and animals as if this
happened with one 'hit' of thinking. Only by directly understanding the
characteristics of such thinking cittas and cetasikas (and other realities, such
as seeing and hearing), can it be known what is really meant by 'thinking' and
'thought' in the Dhamma.
....
>Scott: Is the coherence of a 'thought' as illusory as the apparent coherence of
the rest of the external world?
...
S: Yes....a long story about a thought. An illusion about an illusion!
....
>Scott: Given that pa~n~naa is not present permanently, but rather, in relation
to an experienced thought about the world, has already arisen and fallen away,
what is it that makes the reflection 'wise' as opposed to 'unwise'? How does a
right thought about dhamma relate to pa~n~naa?
...
S: 'Wise' according to the sobana cetasikas which arise with the citta which
'thinks' or experiences the ideas about the world. If there is sati and other
sobhana cetasikas, there is wise reflection. Usually it refers to those cittas
with pa~n~naa. So pa~n~naa and vitakka in particular, assist the citta to 'think
wisely' about the object. For example, there can be a 'right' or 'wrong thought'
about people now as we write. It depends on whether the citta and cetasikas are
kusala or akusala.
...

>Sarah, you suggest:

Sarah: "...there can be wise or unwise thinking about the
concepts or 'wholes'. Like now as we think about the words on the screen, there
can be reflection with pa~n~naa about how really there is only visible object
seen or there can be ignorance and attachment. Of course, kusala and akusala
cittas follow each other rapidly in succession."

Scott: Here, 'reflection with pa~n~naa' implies that pa~n~naa is present as part
of the moment of reflection. How does this then come to be a 'thought' about
Dhamma such as you or I experience in a day?
....
S: It depends on accumulated sa~n~naa, vitakka, sati, pa~n~naa and so on. This
is why sa~n~naa is given as the proximate cause of sati. If there is no right
remembrance of Dhamma, there is no wise reflection of it. Back again to natural
decisive support condition.
....
to be contd.

Metta,

Sarah
======

Dear Scott (Connie, Alberto, Lukas, Ken H & all),

part 2

--- On Thu, 30/4/09, Scott <scduncan@...> wrote:
....
>Consider the following, from the Sammohavinodani (p.p. 140-141); this is from a
section discussing the Noble Eightfold Path, and seems to be distinguishing
mundane from supramundane 'thinking':

>"...Then, at the moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight
arises in him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of
applied thought of sense desire through substitution by opposing qualities.
Pursuing insight, he reaches the path...Thus, these, namely, thinking of
renunciation and so on, are multiple in the prior stage because of the
multiplicity of arising through insight and jhaana. But at the moment of the
path, profitable thinking arises singly fulfilling the path factor by
accomplishing non-arising because of the cutting away the foundation of the
unprofitable thinking which had arisen in the three instances. This is Right
Thinking."

>Scott: What is the 'thinking' referred to in the above? How do you understand
the notion of 'multiplicity' versus 'singly'? Again, what is a 'thought'? What
is 'adverting' - is it 'thinking about'? What is the relation of the moment to
the experienced 'whole thought'? Thanks for the discussion.
....
S: I take 'thinking' in the above to be referring to samma sankappa, right
thinking (vitakka cetasika) of the eightfold path. In this context, 'applied
thought' refers to vitakka cetasika, so 'applied thought of sense desire' refers
to akusala vitakka, the opposite of samma sankappa.
At the moment of magga citta, when defilements are eradicated stage by stage,
the factors, including samma sankappa, arise singly. This is in contrast to the
multiple moments of samma sankappa arising in the development of insight and
jhaana (of course not as the development of the path in the case of jhaana.)

I can't see 'adverting' in the passage, so I'd need to know whether you are
referring to one of the 3 kinds of manasikaara or something else. As for the
relation of 'the moment to the 'whole thought'', in fact there's only ever a
moment of experiencing an object, as you know. 'c-o-m-p-u-t-e-r' - many cittas,
many mind-door processes, many moments of vitakka involved in the experience as
we know it.

There are a few topics in these two posts - pls feel free to break them up
further. I'll be glad to hear yours and others' further comments.

Metta,

Sarah
=======

Dear Sarah an friends

> S: I take 'thinking' in the above to be referring to samma sankappa, right
thinking (vitakka cetasika) of the eightfold path. In this context, 'applied
thought' refers to vitakka cetasika, so 'applied thought of sense desire' refers
to akusala vitakka, the opposite of samma sankappa.

L:
There are cittas which experience concepts almost all the time. But we tend to
take it for ourselves, for our thinking. There is moha and ditthi.Can you say
more about ditthi and moha in daily life?

There is also vitaka that hits its object. No one can think or choose what he
thinks. That's imposible to think when vitaka doest hit an object.

Best wishes
Lukas

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Chris
>
> --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" <cforsyth1@>
wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Every weekend when I go to the Dhammagiri Forest Monastery, Kholo, we recite
the Karaniya Metta Sutta - this version:
> >
> > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html
> >
> > I'm wondering exactly what is meant by "fixed views" at the end of the
Sutta:
> >
> > "This is said to be the sublime abiding.
> >  By not holding to fixed views,
> > The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision,
> >  Being freed from all sense desires,
> > Is not born again into this world."
> > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html
>
> The term "fixed views" here seems to be a translation of the Pali "ditthi" and
so refers to wrong view.
>
> In the commentary to this stanza (Paramatthajotika, trans. by Nanamoli as "The
Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning") it explains that "lovingkindness is near to
[wrong] view of self because it thas creatures for its object".
>
> It then explains that the person who understands nama as nama and rupa as rupa
avoids falling into wrong view, and eventually attains enlightenment.
>
> So these lines are a referecne to the development of insight.
>
> Hope this makes sense.
>
> Jon
>
Hello Jon,

Thank you for your response.  Here is the Pali from the particular verse in the
Metta sutta:

152. Diṭṭhiñca anupagamma sīlav� dassanena sampanno
K�mesu vineyya gedhaṃ nahi j�tu gabbhaseyyaṃ punaretīti.

I'm wondering if it could mean "Ditthin (adj. -- n.) one who has a view, or
theory, a follower of such & such a doctrine Ud 67 (evaŋ˚+evaŋ v�din)" ~
that is, strongly adhered to views rather than simply meaning Wrong View?

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---

Hi Sarah,

-------------
<. . .>
S: > Well put - yes, we shouldn't wonder that the Dhamma is deep and
subtle...
--------------

"Knowable only to the wise" is one way the suttas describe it, isn't it?
And even when does it becomes know to the wise, it still remains deep
and subtle by nature. I think on one occasion Ananda was rebuked by the
Buddha for suggesting that it became easy.

---------------------------
S: > Congratulations on the job - that was a long surfing holiday you
took....  May we ask what your new title is? Does it mean we may get to
see you in Bangkok next year?
----------------------------

Thanks. It's hard to explain. I was helping some friends to set up a
home insulation business. There was a position created that was easy,
well paid and (best of all) short term. And they offered it to me!

What was supposed to be a simple task of measuring and quoting has, in
practice, taken on responsibilities for sales, advertising,
administration . . . Oh to be back in the surf!

Ken H



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Ken.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" <kenhowardau@...> wrote:

Rob E. wrote:
   ...For instance, you cannot at
> all explain how something can "repeatedly take place" in a single
> moment,
> -------------------------------------
>
> I did try to explain, but you rejected my explanation. I have also tried
> to explain how anicca was an inherent characteristic of [momentary]
> dhammas. You've rejected that explanation and insisted anicca was a
> concept deduced after a series of observations.
>
> ---------------------------

> ---------------------------
>
> Let's take the example of "tenacity." I believe it is real. I am not
> sure which paramattha dhamma could be called tenacity, but I believe one
> of them could be. Therefore I believe tenacity to be a conditioned
> paramattha dhamma, and, by definition, momentary. You, on the other
> hand, would argue that tenacity could only be a concept deduced after a
> series of observations E.g., (1) a person might be observed to be
> holding an opinion . . . (2) still holding that opinion . . . (3) still
> holding that opinion! Gosh, that's tenacity!

Well, tenacity isn't a "reality," it is a concept used to describe a succession
of events.  To take human conceptualizations of the way we interpret events in
the world, and to somehow magically turn them into paramatha dhammas because you
"believe so," is nonsensical.  I can make up a number of concepts and decide
they are dhammas if I like, but there's no reason to think I am correct.  Is
"stick-to-itiveness" a cetasika that arises in the moment?  It's similar to
tenacity but a little different.  Well, it is just another slightly different
concept.  You are taking human ideas and attributing some kind of ultimate
status to them without any rhyme or reason.  Because you say so?

In fact tenacity is a fine example.  It does take place over time.  You believe
you have "explained" to me how such a thing is possible, in the case of anicca,
but you did not explain it.  An explanation lays out the mechanics of something.
You don't seem to know the difference between a claim and an explanation.  When
you claim something, you then have to give evidence.  But you don't have to do
that, because you have your default interpretation of the "holy word" of the
Abhidhamma.  Belief in a system is no substitute for evidence.

Anicca is not a weird idea, it is one that makes sense.  It means that things
are temporary and thus undependable and unsatisfying.  There's nothing esoteric
about that; it's a fine and astute observation of the Buddha and a philosophical
stand on reality.  If you contemplate anicca in this way you realize that life
is not worth clinging to; it is going to change on you and can't be depended on.
That's a pretty good start!  Then you can eventually see this more and more
directly with panna.  All fine!  But then you come along and insist on changing
this fine and understandable doctrine - true on its face - into an esoteric
object that doesn't make any sense.  It MUST appear in the moment as an
'inherent characeristic,' even though you have no idea what that means or how it
would appear or what it would appear as.  How does the "temporariness" of
dhammas appear in "one moment."  You have no idea!  But that won't stop you from
claiming it.  How absurd.

I have a lot of respect for the wisdom of the Abhidhamma, but I don't much care
for it as a dogma, or as a substitute for intelligence.  There is no reason to
make higher understanding the enemy of reason, none at all.  I gave a perfectly
workable explanation of how characteristics that appear 'over time' can fit into
the "single moment" nature of ultimate realities, and it doesn't violate
anything in the text, which never states that anicca is known by panna in a
single moment - show me where it does - or that the "turning over" and "beating"
function of the "knowing" cetasika that assists panna takes place "in a single
moment."  The text doesn't claim this at all.  My explanation which makes use of
the accumulation and passing along of information from one citta to the next - a
normal and acknowledged part of the pattern of single cittas that arise in a
sequential group - to allow vicara or vipaka to take several strikes at the
dhamma during its changing cycle and report those changes to the citta of the
moment, which passes it on to the next.  This kind of thing takes place in
Abhidhamma explanation all the time, yet you reject the idea for no good reason,
even though the text says clearly that it is the observation of the element of
change of the dhamma that allows panna to understand anicca directly.  The
element of change is the difference registered in the dhamma from one point of
time to the next.  The Abhidhamma speaks about the changing nature of the dhamma
as it rises, persists and then falls away, and that it is this changing nature
of the dhamma that demonstrates anicca.  So why not use your common sense and
look at this pattern and the repeated strikings at the object in a way that does
justice to the obvious meaning of the Abhidhamma itself?  Instead you use a
superficial clinging to the idea that EVERYTHING must be there in each single
moment, which I don't believe is ever stated in either the Abhidhamma or the
commentaries.  If you think I am overgeneralizing, then find me a single
statement that says that anicca is present in all its glory in one moment and
totally discerned by one single citta.  I doubt you will find it, as it
contradicts the texts we have been recently citing.

> I think your approach to the Abhidhamma will have the same consequences
> no matter which conditioned dhamma is considered. It will not allow you
> to see how a dhamma could be a reality existing for just one moment.

I don't think you will ever be able to see the actuality of how these processes
take place as long as you cling to the idea that the single moment contains
everything at once, even though the whole system of Abhidhamma rests on how
accumulations are developed from one citta to the next and how various functions
arise in patterns of cittas with corresponding cetasikas and *not* on any one
single citta.  Your view of the single citta is superficial and doesn't take
account of the beauty of the patterns of rising and falling, communicating and
cooperating patterns of cittas and cetasikas.

> I'd better post this now and try to respond to the rest of your message
> later. I seem to have gone from one extreme to another - lazy
> beachcomber to non-stop worker.
>
> Time is money! :-)

Ha ha, well that is true.  But it's also true that money is temporary, while
beach combing is forever!  :-)

Best,
Robert E.

= = = = = = = = = =

Hi Sarah.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...>
wrote:

> S: :-) Desperately seeking would be pretty akusala, but the function of
vitakka as 'thrashing' its object is very, very common and need not be akusala!
Yes, no wonder dhammas are said to be 'oppressed' - arising, being thrashed and
more and then falling away instantly:-).

:-)

> Think of a citta (a moment of consciousness) experiencing its object, but only
with the assistance of other factors to contact, focus on, lay hold of/thrash,
feel, attend to and so on. Apart from a few specific cittas, mainly the sense
experiencing cittas such as seeing and hearing which don't need the assistance
of vitakka to direct (or lead) the citta onto its object, all other cittas do
need this assistance. In the Atthasalini, the simile is given of someone wanting
to enter the king's palace, but needing the assistance of a someone close to the
king to do this.

Thank you, that is helpful; though I am still wanting an understanding of how
the "beating" function takes place in time - whether its findings are passed
along from one citta to the next...

> I need to get a drink after just returning from the beach, so will post this
and get back to the rest in a minute.

Duly noted; I am sorry you are suffering on the beach, while I am content here
at my desk among my piles of "accumulations" which I am sorting out.

Best,
Robert E.

= = = = = = = = = =

Hi Jon.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> wrote:

> Guide to #1:
> "That arise and cease together (with consciousness)":
> The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that
are common to them all:
>
> 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada)
> 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha)
> 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana)
> 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka)
> >>>

This is a good piece of information, thanks.

>
> > ----------------------
> > > I have no idea as to the mechanics of the matter, as this is not explained
in any of the texts I've read.
> >
> > Well, that is interesting, in so detailed a teaching.  That is too bad.
> >
> > That is like saying that we know which pipes are connected in the plumbing
but we have no idea how they get put together.
> > ----------------------
>
> Whether that's a bad thing or not depends on the objective.

I suppose. But if you want to know how things work, you need to have a view of
the mechanism, do you not?  This pariyatti business is beginning to seem rather
thready to me.  I mean, to have a decent intellectual understanding of something
you have to have a vision of how the whole thing works, don't you?  I hope I'm
not going to wind up with the impression that the "glue" that holds the whole
works together is just a lot of faith with a spotty amount of actual
understanding....

> > ----------------------
> > > Investigation would have to begin, I think, by finding out what the texts
have to say on the subject.  There is simply no way that a matter as detailed as
this (cetasikas arising together with the citta and thus simultaneously) could
be investigated by direct experience.
> >
> > Then how was it determined in the first place?  I assume an arahant could
directly experience this taking place and thus was able to write it down?
> > ----------------------
>
> It is capable of verification by direct experience, but it requires panna of a
sufficiently high level.  Thus, not capable of investigation by the likes of you
and me ;-)) is what I meant.

Hmn...Well I appreciate your including me in the same group as yourself.  I
mean, I may be too ignorant to know a cetasika when I see one, but at least I'm
not completely oblivous.  Or am I.....

Best,
Robert E.

= = = = = = = = = = = = =