Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

69036Re: Antw.: [dsg] Q. Rupas, Ch 1, no 2

Expand Messages
  • TGrand458@aol.com
    Mar 1 9:04 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Nina

      In a message dated 3/1/2007 3:36:34 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
      vangorko@... writes:

      There is nothing left of that lute.
      Seeing falls away, and I do not see a gradual change of seeing.
      Cittas arise and fall away extremely fast. There is no time for a
      gradual change.

      TG: I fail to see how the Sutta on the lute backs this up one iota. There
      are various suttas where the Buddha speaks about gradual change... A ship
      being slow withered away due to weathering. A mountain slowing declining in
      height generating after generation, the Adze handle gradually wearing away over
      the course of time, a mountain crag being worn away by a kasi cloth over
      periods of time measured in terms of aeons (different than the first mountain

      I can't think of one sutta that backs up the "arising and immediately
      ceasing" outlook. So far, your two Sutta examples don't in any way, yet you
      comment (indirectly) as if they do ... which is interesting.

      TG: I personally think the above account of impermanence -- rupas
      being replaced
      by new rupas, etc. -- is just flat wrong and not useful in applying
      Also, it lacks a conditional component which I think is
      to insight.
      N: Eyesense falls away and is replaced, otherwise you would not be
      seeing now. So long as kamma produces eyesense in your life there are
      conditions for seeing. You do not create your own seeing, you do not
      own it.

      TG: Kamma is not a "something" that produces eye sense either. It is
      conditions that generate what arises and it is conditions that disintegrate the
      same. Kamma is one of many conditions necessary for eye sense. Eye sense
      varies IN ACCORDANCE to conditions. I do not consider it to be "popping on and

      The three sentences in your statement above are unrelated so its hard to
      figure out what you're getting at. At any rate, the last sentence is hardly
      something that someone would need to be trying to convince me of.

      Concitions are being taught all the time, both for namas and for
      rupas. Also, when we realize that a reality that falls away falls
      away completely, helps us to have less conceit, clinging to my
      important personality.

      TG: I think it would be better to get rid of thinking of phenomena as
      "realities" or "dhammas" and instead directly realize that all conditions,
      experienced and otherwise, are empty of self or anything of "their" own. They are
      resultants and echoes of "other" empty resultants/echoes. They are hollow of
      essence, they are insubstantial, they are like phantoms, they are like death,
      they are affliction.

      Even when we understand this in theory, it
      helps us to think in the correct way. This can condition direct
      understanding. We have to begin somewhere and the right beginning,
      correct intellectual understanding is what supports the development
      of insight later on. Gradually so! Don't you think so?
      TG: Gradually? Why would "understanding" be gradual from your point of
      view? Would it not arise and then immediately cease???

      At any rate, yes, correct intellectual understanding is crucial. Now as to
      what that "correct understanding" is ... that is the matter we disagree on to
      some significant extent. :-) But, that's what makes it interesting to
      discuss with you and others.


      <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free
      email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 18 messages in this topic