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

Re: [dsg] Re: science vs dhamma - small correction

Expand Messages
  • upasaka@aol.com
    Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/1/2010 5:13:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@yahoo.com.au writes: Hi Howard (Robert E and Sarah), ... H: I
    Message 1 of 308 , Nov 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi, Ken -

      In a message dated 11/1/2010 5:13:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      kenhowardau@... writes:

      Hi Howard (Robert E and Sarah),

      --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote:
      >
      > Hi, Ken and Robert and, most especially, Sarah -
      >
      > In a message dated 10/31/2010 8:34:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      > kenhowardau@... writes:
      >
      > Hi Sarah (and Robert E),
      >

      <. . .>

      H: > I will just accept that by that terminology you are referring
      > to actual content of experience as opposed to phenomena with
      > "thingness" conceptually overlaid.)
      -------------------------------------------

      I'd like to reiterate: Paramattha dhammas are definitely absolute,
      distinct, realities - in their own right - with their own sabhava.

      Whatever other theoretical entanglements I might have got into with
      RobertE, I was definitely not straying from the party line. I would never do
      that! :-)
      ---------------------------------------------------------
      Good to know, Ken. :-) In any case, perhaps I made a mistake, but I
      thought it was Sarah I was replying to.
      -------------------------------------------------------



      Ken H

      =================================
      With metta,
      Howard


      Seamless Interdependency

      /A change in anything is a change in everything/

      (Anonymous)




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Nina van Gorkom
      Dear Lukas, ... N: S IV, 112 (Ghosita sutta). ... N: right, Ven. Bodhi refers to the co: Contact as associated with eye- consciousness that functions as a
      Message 308 of 308 , Apr 27, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Lukas,
        Op 26-apr-2012, om 12:31 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven:
        > There is a quotation from Cetasikas, on phassa, contact. It
        > includes a sutta, that I have a question with.
        > -------
        >
        N: S IV, 112 (Ghosita sutta).
        ------
        > L: <The sutta does not mention each moment of citta in the
        > process of cittas. It is understood that the pleasant feeling and
        > unpleasant feeling
        > referred to do not arise at the moment of seeing-consciousness, but
        > later on in the
        > process.>
        >
        ---------
        N: right, Ven. Bodhi refers to the co: Contact as associated with eye-
        consciousness that functions as a condition by way of decisive
        support (upanissaya) for a pleasant feeling in the javana. Evenso for
        unpleasant feeling and also for upekkhaa, indifferent feeling.
        In the co. no further details on upekkhaa. Here realities as elements
        are stressed. We find feelings so important, but they are only
        elements devoid of self.
        > -------
        > L: In a moment of seeing, there arises 3 elements, eye-base,
        > visible object and seeing-consciouseness.
        > This is a vipaka citta, associated with indifferent feeling. There
        > is also a phassa.
        >
        > <When the elements of eye and objects that are pleasing and
        > eyeconsciousness
        > occur together, housefather, owing to the pleasurable contact
        > there arises pleasant feeling.
        >
        > When the elements of eye, objects that
        > are displeasing and eye-consciousness occur together, owing to the
        > unpleasant
        > contact resulting there arises painful feeling.
        >
        > When the elements
        > of eye, objects that are of indifferent effect and eye-
        > consciousness occur
        > together, owing to neutral contact resulting, there arises feeling
        > that is
        > neutral.>
        >
        > L: I consider this pleasing and displeasing objects as vipaka
        >
        -------
        N: No, the experience of these objects is vipaaka. We have to be very
        precise.
        --------
        > L: and ruupa that is conditioned by kamma, that
        > is accordingly kusala and akusala vipaka.
        >
        ------
        N: Again, ruupa is not vipaaka. Ruupas of the body can be conditioned
        by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. When the beautiful colour
        of a flower is experienced, the colour is conditioned by temperature,
        not by kamma. Vipaaka is said only of citta and accompanying cetasikas.
        -------
        > L: But why is mentioned indifferent effect? Indifferent vipaaka?
        > But there is no such things as indifferent vipaka. I would like to
        > hear more on this.
        >
        -------
        N: Vipaakacitta experiences only a pleasant object or an unpleasant
        object, it is either the result of kusala kamma or of akusala kamma,
        as you suggest. The upekkhaa is just conditioned by the seeing, the
        vipaakacitta, by way of dependence-condition.
        -----
        Nina.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.