Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1)
- Hi Mike,
M: > <. ..> one should distinguish control of ultimate realities and the mundane stuff that we "control". One can obviously exercise mundane "control" in the sense of learning to eat, read, type, ride a bicycle, become calm by following an object like the breath, learn about Dhamma, discuss it on DSG.
I think we agree, but I'd like to make it clear: *Conventionally speaking* we can control some things and not others. We can control a bicycle and we can't control the weather. But *ultimately* there is no more control over a bicycle than there is over the weather. It's just that "bicycle" is a concept of a controllable object, while "weather" is a concept of an uncontrollable object.
Mike: > How best to see though that mundane stuff to see that the ultimate reality behind it is not controllable?
There is only one way, isn't there? And that is to associate with wise friends, hear the true Dhamma, wisely consider it, and see how it applies here and now.
We may have different opinions on that. :-)
M: > That's the important question.
Yes, I know what you mean. However, at the risk of nitpicking I have to ask, for whom is it important? Right understanding either arises to know the present reality, or it doesn't. In either case no one is affected.
What I am trying to say is: when there is right understanding nothing matters - there is dispassion for all phenomena. Even when the object of consciousness is an unpleasant one, if there is right understanding of the way things ultimately are now, nothing matters. Does it?
- Hi Rob E,
I didn't get round to grading you on the quiz, you so kindly took!
Anyway, you did very well, beginning to slip up with the trickier qus at the end:-))
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "epsteinrob" <epsteinrob@...> wrote:
> > 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again.
> Disagree to some extent. I agree up to a point.
> > 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again.
> I don't totally agree with that.
> > 20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way!
> Don't totally agree with that.
> Tough quiz! :-)
S: To get full marks, you needed to fully agree, but like most people here, began to raise objects at no. 18!
Thanks again for being a good sport!