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

Lost in the nimitta anupinacciya?

Expand Messages
  • philip
    Hi all I heard Sarah say usually if we haven t heard anything about Dhamma we re just lost in the - and this is the part I neef help with nimitta
    Message 1 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi all

      I heard Sarah say "usually if we haven't heard anything about Dhamma we're just lost in the" - and this is the part I neef help with " nimitta anupinacciya" or something lije tgat. In another talk I heard the same word cone up and she said it was something about details, so I guess it's maybe the details the mind latches on to and sucks on out of the visible object, the leech in the crocodile and leech simile in Vism (or some other commentary.)

      If that rings a bell can anybody tell me the exact term so can look into it further? Thanks,

      Metta,
      Phil
    • Nina van Gorkom
      Dear Phil, ... N: Nimitta and anuvya~ncana: the outward appearance and the details of things. This occurs a lot in the suttas. We are lost in stories, persons,
      Message 2 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Phil,
        Op 15-okt-2011, om 14:03 heeft philip het volgende geschreven:

        > I heard Sarah say "usually if we haven't heard anything about
        > Dhamma we're just lost in the" - and this is the part I neef help
        > with " nimitta anupinacciya" or something lije tgat.
        >
        -----
        N: Nimitta and anuvya~ncana: the outward appearance and the details
        of things. This occurs a lot in the suttas. We are lost in stories,
        persons, etc. Unmindful. Here the meaning of nimitta is not
        sa"nkhaara nimitta we have been studying. Before I gave you three
        different meanings in different contexts. The third one is the mental
        image of the samatha meditation subject.
        The outward appearance and the details of things, this happens all
        the time, even now. Good to remember!

        -----
        Nina.




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • philip
        Hi Nina ... Ok, thank you. Taught iften in SN 35, in the context of guarding the sense doors. The sign and the detailed features, for example, the one we
        Message 3 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Nina

          > N: Nimitta and anuvya~ncana: the outward appearance and the details
          > of things. This occurs a lot in the suttas. We are lost in stories,
          > persons, etc.

          Ok, thank you. Taught iften in SN 35, in the context of guarding the sense doors. The sign and the detailed features, for example, the one we discussed the other day. he saw a set of bones walk by. The hands, eyes. lips of the woman would have been
          the anuvyancana, but not for him. For us, always anuvyancana, we latch onto one part of visible object. don't see all of it (I think I heard the other day.) and are fascinated by details.

          Trying to train the mind to stop at the seen, natural that earnest people are attracted to the idea of doing so, alas it cannot be by trying,, by striving in that way...thus we hear we must be courageous, and honest about how deep avijja is, begin again and again to consider seeing and visible object, you have done so for 40 years, much patience and courage, I think.

          Metta,
          Phil




          Unmindful. Here the meaning of nimitta is not
          > sa"nkhaara nimitta we have been studying. Before I gave you three
          > different meanings in different contexts. The third one is the mental
          > image of the samatha meditation subject.
          > The outward appearance and the details of things, this happens all
          > the time, even now. Good to remember!
          >
          > -----
          > Nina.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • scottduncan2
          Phil, P: ...Trying to train the mind to stop at the seen, natural that earnest people are attracted to the idea of doing so, alas it cannot be by trying,, by
          Message 4 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Phil,

            P: "...Trying to train the mind to stop at the seen, natural that earnest people are attracted to the idea of doing so, alas it cannot be by trying,, by striving in that way..."

            Scott: Agreed.

            The seen is overlain by the thought about so rapidly as to be instantaneous. The idea of 'training the mind' is really quite problematic. Those who believe in 'mind-training' seem to conceive of a different sort of 'mind' than citta.

            This 'mind' seems to amount to that of which one is 'conscious' at any given 'moment.' This 'mind' would represent a much larger, much more compromised 'segment' of 'experience' than 'the seen' as to be entirely of a scale much larger and more gross than 'the seen.' Such a 'mind' is always behind 'the seen' or 'the heard' or whatever and hence, any so-called 'training' would have to be so much post-hoc thought.

            Phenomenological referents are unreliable.

            'Experience' is illusory.

            Scott.
          • philip
            Hi Scott Since my original title contains an incorrect stab at a Pali term, I will change the title. ... Phil: And of course a reading of suttas in
            Message 5 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Scott

              Since my original title contains an incorrect stab at a Pali term, I will change the title.

              > The seen is overlain by the thought about so rapidly as to be instantaneous. The idea of 'training the mind' is really quite problematic. Those who believe in 'mind-training' seem to conceive of a different sort of 'mind' than citta.

              Phil: And of course a reading of suttas in translation without understanding of Abhidhamma gives credence to the idea of striving as they do or write about doung.


              > This 'mind' seems to amount to that of which one is 'conscious' at any given 'moment.' This 'mind' would represent a much larger, much more compromised 'segment' of 'experience' than 'the seen' as to be entirely of a scale much larger and more gross than 'the seen.' Such a 'mind' is always behind 'the seen' or 'the heard' or whatever and hence, any so-called 'training' would have to be so much post-hoc
              thought.

              Ph: This is intetesting. Of course you know you are inviting a lot more debate but I think it seems to be time for you to do that.


              > Phenomenological referents are unreliable.

              Ph: I agree. Just a lot of thinking disguised as something more direct and therefore valuable as far as I can..um, think.

              Of course hearing people's ideas on the internet is bound to add to that impression, everything must be intellectualuzed even more than what is going on in mind door process when not trying to explain explicitly, I guess.

              Enter The Alex?

              Metta,
              Phil

              Metta,
              Phil



              > 'Experience' is illusory.
              >
              > Scott.
              >
            • philip
              Hi again ... BTW, thanks for all the questions you asked to Rob, I think that was a helpful method, socratic? Scottratic? Anyone reading them could reflect...
              Message 6 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi again


                > Ph: This is intetesting. Of course you know you are inviting a lot more debate but I think it seems to be time for you to do that

                BTW, thanks for all the questions you asked to Rob, I think that was a helpful method, socratic? Scottratic? Anyone reading them could reflect...

                Metta,
                Phil
              • scottduncan2
                Phil, Ph: ...This is interesting. Of course you know you are inviting a lot more debate but I think it seems to be time for you to do that... Scott: I don t
                Message 7 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  Phil,

                  Ph: "...This is interesting. Of course you know you are inviting a lot more debate but I think it seems to be time for you to do that..."

                  Scott: I don't think so. I see things as do Jon, Sarah, Nina, et al (although with much less clarity). The only way in which we differ is in our divergent styles of discourse.

                  I think that each time anyone here, who understands the Dhamma similarly, writes from that perspective, 'practitioners' will have to 'debate' since they come from an entirely different perspective altogether. Every expression of the so-called 'DSG' point-of-view is a direct challenge to those who believe that 'practice' is possible in the way they can barely describe. If you'll look at both of Jon's recent replies to Rob E., for example, you'll see the very same 'inviting of debate.'

                  Scott.
                • philip
                  Hi Scott ... Ph: That s true. Personally I welcome the arrival of your more demanding style, it s good if people are pushed harder to explain just what
                  Message 8 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Scott
                    > Scott: I don't think so. I see things as do Jon, Sarah, Nina, et al (although with much less clarity). The only way in which we differ is in our divergent styles of discourse.
                    >
                    Ph: That's true. Personally I welcome the arrival of your more demanding style, it's good if people are pushed harder to explain just what their understanding and practice of meditation is, in as real terms as possible.

                    Metta,

                    Phil
                  • scottduncan2
                    Phil, Ph: ...Personally I welcome the arrival of your more demanding style, it s good if people are pushed harder to explain just what their understanding and
                    Message 9 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Phil,

                      Ph: "...Personally I welcome the arrival of your more demanding style, it's good if people are pushed harder to explain just what their understanding and practice of meditation is, in as real terms as possible."

                      Scott: I agree with us. Down with Ambiguity and Rhetoric!

                      Scott.
                    • Robert E
                      Hi Guys. ... Hooray for Dogma! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = =
                      Message 10 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Guys.

                        --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" <scduncan@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Phil,
                        >
                        > Ph: "...Personally I welcome the arrival of your more demanding style, it's good if people are pushed harder to explain just what their understanding and practice of meditation is, in as real terms as possible."
                        >
                        > Scott: I agree with us. Down with Ambiguity and Rhetoric!

                        Hooray for Dogma!

                        Best,
                        Rob E.

                        = = = = = = = =
                      • Robert E
                        Hi Phil, Scott, pt and all. ... Well if that s the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the no-practice camp
                        Message 11 of 20 , Oct 15, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Hi Phil, Scott, pt and all.

                          --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" <philco777@...> wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Hi Scott
                          > > Scott: I don't think so. I see things as do Jon, Sarah, Nina, et al (although with much less clarity). The only way in which we differ is in our divergent styles of discourse.
                          > >
                          > Ph: That's true. Personally I welcome the arrival of your more demanding style, it's good if people are pushed harder to explain just what their understanding and practice of meditation is, in as real terms as possible.

                          Well if that's the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the 'no-practice' camp explaining exactly what kinds of understandings they are developing through considering the Dhamma, and how this affects their experience of spontaneous kusala arising in their lives. Let's demand that everyone get very personal and disclose whether they are experiencing kusala or not from their practice or lack thereof. So far only pt has explained how his understanding of the Dhamma affects his responses and experiences in real-life situations, and it was very illuminating to me. You have also done this in the past, Phil, when you were still an advocate of promoting "kusala behavior" and eliminating as much akusala as possible through your actions and choices. Now that you are taking this new tack, I think that you and Scott should have a turn right now at disclosing the influence of Dhamma in your personal lives in great detail for everyone to inspect and comment upon, since you are both so demanding of others. We can also have an on-list contest to see whether meditators or non-meditators are having a higher percentage of kusala arise on a daily basis, to be judged by a panel that is divided half and half.

                          Best,
                          Rob E.

                          = = = = = = = = =
                        • philip
                          Hi Rob E ... Ph: No, that wouldn t be wise, you know the adze handle simile. Since you guys believe in the wisdom of specific methods, I think it places a duty
                          Message 12 of 20 , Oct 16, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Rob E
                            >
                            > Well if that's the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the 'no-practice' camp explaining exactly what kinds of understandings they are developing through considering the Dhamma, and how this affects their experience of spontaneous kusala arising in their lives. Let's demand that everyone get very personal and disclose whether they are experiencing kusala or not from their practice or lack thereof.

                            Ph: No, that wouldn't be wise, you know the adze handle simile. Since you guys believe in the wisdom of specific methods, I think it places a duty on you to either defend them in the face of scrutiny or remain silent about them when you are at DSG, which as you know is not a group that was founded in the spirit of "get up a little earlier every day and meditate, urban professional, or you will regret it."

                            As for my previous beliefs, you can keep mentionning them if you want, god knows they are on clear display in past posts and from the talks iin KK this year. but that was then ( and may be again, who knows) this is now. I think I was misled by listening to Bhikkhu Bodhi talks on Majjhima Nikaya, I didn't think such a venerated monk could be wrong. Those talks got me going in a wrong direction. I still value sila, panna and sila support each other.

                            Rob, as I was saying, I want out of this debate and hope to stick to developing my understanding of dhammas. I guess I made a provocative comnent - my bad, serves me right!

                            Metta,
                            Phil

                            Metta,
                            Phil







                            So far only pt has explained how his understanding of the Dhamma affects his responses and experiences in real-life situations, and it was very illuminating to me. You have also done this in the past, Phil, when you were still an advocate of promoting "kusala behavior" and eliminating as much akusala as possible through your actions and choices. Now that you are taking this new tack, I think that you and Scott should have a turn right now at disclosing the influence of Dhamma in your personal lives in great detail for everyone to inspect and comment upon, since you are both so demanding of others. We can also have an on-list contest to see whether meditators or non-meditators are having a higher percentage of kusala arise on a daily basis, to be judged by a panel that is divided half and half.
                            >
                            > Best,
                            > Rob E.
                            >
                            > = = = = = = = = =
                            >
                          • scottduncan2
                            Rob E., Sorry, missed this one: R: Well if that s the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the no-practice camp
                            Message 13 of 20 , Oct 16, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Rob E.,

                              Sorry, missed this one:

                              R: "Well if that's the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the 'no-practice' camp explaining exactly what kinds of understandings they are developing through considering the Dhamma, and how this affects their experience of spontaneous kusala arising in their lives..."

                              Scott: Like we have a 'practice' too? Nice try.

                              It's on you to defend *your* 'practice' on a list where 'practice' is not believed in - and where you attempt to convince people about it anyway.

                              You can add a bit of 'detailed description' of your own 'practice' yourself though, since it hasn't been all that forthcoming. That way we can look at the dhammas that are said to be utilized by you as you 'practice' and discuss them, as pt would like to do.

                              Scott.

                              Scott.
                            • Robert E
                              Hi Phil. ... Oh, I would just disagree with you completely about this. I don t think that someone who subscribes to a particular practice in their life, and
                              Message 14 of 20 , Oct 16, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi Phil.

                                --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" <philco777@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > Hi Rob E
                                > >
                                > > Well if that's the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the 'no-practice' camp explaining exactly what kinds of understandings they are developing through considering the Dhamma, and how this affects their experience of spontaneous kusala arising in their lives. Let's demand that everyone get very personal and disclose whether they are experiencing kusala or not from their practice or lack thereof.
                                >
                                > Ph: No, that wouldn't be wise, you know the adze handle simile. Since you guys believe in the wisdom of specific methods, I think it places a duty on you to either defend them in the face of scrutiny or remain silent about them when you are at DSG,

                                Oh, I would just disagree with you completely about this. I don't think that someone who subscribes to a particular practice in their life, and who also has an interest in Dhamma, conditionality, cittas and cetasikas has any obligation at all to justify their being here in the group just as much as anyone else. And I certainly don't think that the "founding of dsg" on one or another philosophical bent means that a certain group of people on this list either have an obligation to disclose and justify their practice or else to keep their mouths shut and talk in the same terms and beliefs as everyone else as you are now directly suggesting. That is just ridiculous, Phil. After I followed Scott's taunting and your coaxing to talk about my meditation practice and was willing to entertain some challenges and questions and discuss the issues involved, you are now pushing the issue even further and suggesting quite strongly that there is something wrong with having the view that practice is even acceptable in this group. I reject what you are saying, and I think you should think carefully about the implications and take it back.

                                > which as you know is not a group that was founded in the spirit of "get up a little earlier every day and meditate, urban professional, or you will regret it."

                                I don't give a damn what you think this group was founded on and whether you think there is an inherent view against meditation. I have been here talking, debating and sharing my view of Dhamma as well as learning a lot from others for many years, and I think you are stepping over the line to now suggest that somehow those who believe in meditating are second class citizens who should shut up and talk in dhamma terms or not at all. You have now been insinuating a number of times that the meditators here have an obligation to justify their practice, and I'm getting sick of it. Back off and be glad to have your own way of approaching Dhamma and stop criticizing others and suggesting that there's something wrong with them. Stow it.

                                > As for my previous beliefs, you can keep mentioning them if you want, god knows they are on clear display in past posts and from the talks iin KK this year. but that was then ( and may be again, who knows) this is now.

                                Then let it apply to you and don't turn around to judge others.

                                > I think I was misled by listening to Bhikkhu Bodhi talks on Majjhima Nikaya, I didn't think such a venerated monk could be wrong. Those talks got me going in a wrong direction. I still value sila, panna and sila support each other.
                                >
                                > Rob, as I was saying, I want out of this debate and hope to stick to developing my understanding of dhammas. I guess I made a provocative comment - my bad, serves me right!

                                No problem with your current practice or whatever you would like to call it. If you do talk to others about their way of approaching Dhamma, I suggest you do so with an open mind and share your ideas, rather than telling them what to do, when to talk, and what to talk about.

                                Best,
                                Rob E.

                                = = = = = = = =
                              • Robert E
                                Hi Scott. ... Forget it. I think I ve fed the machine more than enough already, and gotten nothing back but prejudice and misinterpretation for the trouble.
                                Message 15 of 20 , Oct 16, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hi Scott.

                                  --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" <scduncan@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Rob E.,
                                  >
                                  > Sorry, missed this one:
                                  >
                                  > R: "Well if that's the case, we should also in fairness have some detailed personal descriptions from the 'no-practice' camp explaining exactly what kinds of understandings they are developing through considering the Dhamma, and how this affects their experience of spontaneous kusala arising in their lives..."
                                  >
                                  > Scott: Like we have a 'practice' too? Nice try.
                                  >
                                  > It's on you to defend *your* 'practice' on a list where 'practice' is not believed in - and where you attempt to convince people about it anyway.
                                  >
                                  > You can add a bit of 'detailed description' of your own 'practice' yourself though, since it hasn't been all that forthcoming. That way we can look at the dhammas that are said to be utilized by you as you 'practice' and discuss them, as pt would like to do.

                                  Forget it. I think I've fed the machine more than enough already, and gotten nothing back but prejudice and misinterpretation for the trouble. Let's move on and talk about dhammas or else just ignore me. And if you can't even have a "dhamma" discussion when one comes up without making your same old general points about practice over and over again, please don't bother.

                                  Best,
                                  Rob E.

                                  = = = = = = =
                                • sarah
                                  Hi Rob E, ... We can also have an on-list contest to see whether meditators or non-meditators are having a higher percentage of kusala arise on a daily basis,
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Oct 18, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi Rob E,

                                    --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" <epsteinrob@...> wrote:
                                    We can also have an on-list contest to see whether meditators or non-meditators are having a higher percentage of kusala arise on a daily basis, to be judged by a panel that is divided half and half.
                                    ....
                                    S: :-)) How would the panel measure???

                                    Seriously, I agree that any "getting personal" is useless. Instead of discussing and understanding more about dhammas as anatta, it seems to lead to more of a thinking about "me and my experiences". Perhaps the point is to show how very useless this is by exposing it. However, I think there is quite enough dwelling on "me and my experiences" in daily life without looking to increase it through dhamma study. Instead of being therapeutic in any way, it's just adding to the self-blocks in samsara.

                                    Usually in Bangkok, if people start to talk about their experiences (or are encouraged to do so), K.Sujin will just ask about now, what is real now. All those experiences have completely gone, no use dwelling on them at all - whether good or bad. I always find this so helpful as we cling so much already to our special experiences.

                                    It's like when people are interested in checking or measuring how much awareness there is in a day - just more Self-interest again instead of understanding and being aware of what appears now.

                                    Metta

                                    Sarah
                                    ====
                                  • Robert E
                                    Hi Sarah. ... Thanks, Sarah, for the calm and clarity, and a very good point. I guess it s interesting to see everyone buzzing around like bees up to a point,
                                    Message 17 of 20 , Oct 19, 2011
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Hi Sarah.

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

                                      > Usually in Bangkok, if people start to talk about their experiences (or are encouraged to do so), K.Sujin will just ask about now, what is real now. All those experiences have completely gone, no use dwelling on them at all - whether good or bad. I always find this so helpful as we cling so much already to our special experiences.
                                      >
                                      > It's like when people are interested in checking or measuring how much awareness there is in a day - just more Self-interest again instead of understanding and being aware of what appears now.

                                      Thanks, Sarah, for the calm and clarity, and a very good point. I guess it's interesting to see everyone buzzing around like bees up to a point, just to see how reactive we all are, but I agree it is not too informative after a little while.

                                      Hard not to react once it starts going back and forth. Hopefully we'll settle down a little now to look at Scott's good quote from the commentary.

                                      Best,
                                      Rob E.

                                      = = = = = = = = =
                                    • Nina van Gorkom
                                      Dear Sarah, ... N: I remember. Whenever we speak to her about our problems, she will point to this moment. Some people are disappointed that she does not
                                      Message 18 of 20 , Oct 19, 2011
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Dear Sarah,
                                        Op 19-okt-2011, om 8:38 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven:

                                        > Usually in Bangkok, if people start to talk about their experiences
                                        > (or are encouraged to do so), K.Sujin will just ask about now, what
                                        > is real now. All those experiences have completely gone, no use
                                        > dwelling on them at all - whether good or bad. I always find this
                                        > so helpful as we cling so much already to our special experiences.
                                        -------
                                        N: I remember. Whenever we speak to her about our problems, she will
                                        point to this moment. Some people are disappointed that she does not
                                        answer straight, but in the end some may come to the conclusion that
                                        this is the most effective way.
                                        As to Abhidhamma study being theoretical, I think we told you in
                                        India that we visited a Thai temple where two small boys started to
                                        recite by heart the Dhammasagani. It was very sweet the way they did
                                        this. When we asked them about the application in life the teacher
                                        said: not yet, this is in a higher class. Also in Birma it is a
                                        tradition to start theory for years and later on practice. It is good
                                        to know that people have different backgrounds.

                                        Nina.



                                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      • sarah
                                        Dear Nina & all, ... .... S: Actually, back to this moment and the dhamma now is the most straight too! ... .... S: Yes, I remember we visited a temple in
                                        Message 19 of 20 , Oct 23, 2011
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Dear Nina & all,

                                          --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:

                                          > >S: Usually in Bangkok, if people start to talk about their experiences
                                          > > (or are encouraged to do so), K.Sujin will just ask about now, what
                                          > > is real now. All those experiences have completely gone, no use
                                          > > dwelling on them at all - whether good or bad. I always find this
                                          > > so helpful as we cling so much already to our special experiences.
                                          > -------
                                          > N: I remember. Whenever we speak to her about our problems, she will
                                          > point to this moment. Some people are disappointed that she does not
                                          > answer straight, but in the end some may come to the conclusion that
                                          > this is the most effective way.
                                          ....
                                          S: Actually, back to this moment and the dhamma now is the most straight too!
                                          ...
                                          > As to Abhidhamma study being theoretical, I think we told you in
                                          > India that we visited a Thai temple where two small boys started to
                                          > recite by heart the Dhammasagani. It was very sweet the way they did
                                          > this. When we asked them about the application in life the teacher
                                          > said: not yet, this is in a higher class. Also in Birma it is a
                                          > tradition to start theory for years and later on practice. It is good
                                          > to know that people have different backgrounds.
                                          ....
                                          S: Yes, I remember we visited a temple in Burma where the chief monk (and other monks, perhaps) could recite the entire Tipitaka in Pali. Some of the group were very impressed, but K. Sujin just asked what the use was if there was no understanding now. I was also thinking of Ajahn Naeb and others who had a lot of Abhidhamma book knowledge but just theory, not in accordance with daily life understanding of dhammas. As you mentioned to Rob E recently, "do not worry about names and terms. Abhidhamma is not in the book as Kh Sujin often says. It pertains to reality here and now. No need to think of classifications."

                                          I remember how shocked one of our friends was when we went to Cambodia. He had studied the Patthana in a lot of detail and had all sorts of tables showing the relationship between different conditions which he wished to explain about. Again, K.Sujin was unimpressed and brushed aside all the tables and details, just asking him about the present reality now.

                                          I sympathised with Lodewijk's visits to doctors. I'm glad you can make the most of the time for reading Sangiiti. I've been having to go to the Chinese doctor here several times for very painful massage and needles for my hip. On the first couple of visits I foud the pain unbearable in the massage, but now I take along my ipod with dhamma discussion and it becomes quite bearable with all the reminders about present dhammas. I even fell asleep under the needles this morning!

                                          Metta

                                          Sarah
                                          =====
                                        • Nina van Gorkom
                                          Dear Sarah, ... N: Thank you for your concern. The doctor even talked about a pacemaker, but after a cycle test she found that we can still delay this. Next
                                          Message 20 of 20 , Oct 24, 2011
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Dear Sarah,
                                            Op 24-okt-2011, om 7:46 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven:

                                            > I sympathised with Lodewijk's visits to doctors. I'm glad you can
                                            > make the most of the time for reading Sangiiti. I've been having to
                                            > go to the Chinese doctor here several times for very painful
                                            > massage and needles for my hip. On the first couple of visits I
                                            > foud the pain unbearable in the massage, but now I take along my
                                            > ipod with dhamma discussion and it becomes quite bearable with all
                                            > the reminders about present dhammas. I even fell asleep under the
                                            > needles this morning!
                                            --------
                                            N: Thank you for your concern. The doctor even talked about a
                                            pacemaker, but after a cycle test she found that we can still delay
                                            this. Next week the outcome of several tests.
                                            I hope your hip will soon be better and as you say (I often think of
                                            this), Dhamma is the best medicine. Lodewijk asked how Jon 's health
                                            is, he was worried. You told me about the itches.
                                            Nina.



                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.