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

Re: [dsg] "Is that enough to develop understanding?"

Expand Messages
  • philip
    Hi Nina ... Little by little by little. I still think the cold shower of there is no Nina is premature for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there
    Message 1 of 15 , Mar 22, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Nina

      > ------
      > N: I was listening to Jan 4, Ivan's funeral. I said: "the stories
      > make me so sad." Acharn: "Because of me."
      > Acharn: "Thinking about Lodewijk and Ivan, there is attachment and it
      > hinders, it hinders the understanding of seeing, but it takes a long
      > time to really understand."

      Little by little by little. I still think the "cold shower" of "there is no Nina" is premature for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there is some sort of misappropriation of panna that we haven't really developed yet, it seems to me. But we can gradually approach the deep truth, get glimpses of it. But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All this useless worrying.

      Last night I was comforted by this, from SPD:

      "We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief occurs only at the moments when vitthi cittas arise. When vitthi cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell etc, we do not experience any object through the six doors....why then do we not develop panna so that attachment and clinging to the objects that appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be less akusala. "

      Fine but we have to develop that wisdom very gradually without forcing things.

      Wow interesting technology I dictated the last two sentences by speaking into my phone and it was transcribed automatically!

      Phil






      > ------
      > >
      > > Ph: > We also have to consider aayatanas, we have to consider all
      > > details,
      > > > from all angles. It is not enough to remind ourselves of 'Visible
      > > > object now. Seeing now'.
      > >
      > > But they are ayatanas, aren't they?
      > ------
      > N: Sure, there is association of different realities when seeing.
      > ------
      > >
      > > Ph: I love Abhidhamma details but I feel many/most of them will
      > > remain in the book, we can study them and appreciate how deep the
      > > Buddha's wisdom was and how little we understand. If we try to make
      > > the details relevant to our experience it is lobha again. In my
      > > opinion.
      > -----
      > N: No, not necessarily so, although lobha can always come in. Several
      > times Acharn explained details of the Abhidhamma in such a relevant
      > way. This moment, this moment. If Abh. does not pertain to this
      > moment the study is useless.
      > ------
      > >
      > > Ph:Thanks Nina. I think you said you were doing writing based on
      > > your trip to Thailand. Looking forward to that, when there are
      > > conditions for it to be shared.
      > N: Finished, but only the last sentences, the conclusion. At the same
      > time I have ADL to make it ready for the last overhaul by Tom
      > Westheimer. This takes a lot of time, so I finish this first.
      > -----
      > Nina.
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • jonoabb
      Hi Phil (and Nina) ... J: Agreed that wisdom develops gradually and cannot be forced. However, that doesn t mean we shouldn t hear, and consider as best we re
      Message 2 of 15 , Mar 22, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Phil (and Nina)

        --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" <philco777@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Nina
        >
        > > ------
        > > N: I was listening to Jan 4, Ivan's funeral. I said: "the stories
        > > make me so sad." Acharn: "Because of me."
        > > Acharn: "Thinking about Lodewijk and Ivan, there is attachment and it
        > > hinders, it hinders the understanding of seeing, but it takes a long
        > > time to really understand."
        >
        > Little by little by little. I still think the "cold shower" of "there is no Nina" is premature for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there is some sort of misappropriation of panna that we haven't really developed yet, it seems to me. But we can gradually approach the deep truth, get glimpses of it. But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All this useless worrying.
        >
        > Last night I was comforted by this, from SPD:
        >
        > "We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief occurs only at the moments when vitthi cittas arise. When vitthi cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell etc, we do not experience any object through the six doors....why then do we not develop panna so that attachment and clinging to the objects that appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be less akusala. "
        >
        > Fine but we have to develop that wisdom very gradually without forcing things.
        > ===============

        J: Agreed that wisdom develops gradually and cannot be forced.

        However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't hear, and consider as best we're able, descriptions of the deeper aspects of the teachings, such as the danger involved in clinging to objects that are experienced through the sense-doors.

        Hearing about such matters can condition useful reflection; it will not necessarily give rise to wishing for higher levels of understanding, or ideas of wrong practice such as somehow 'dealing with' the clinging.

        And I think similar considerations apply to statements such as "there is no Nina". Much depends on the context (i.e., the circumstances in which the comment is made).

        Jon
      • Nina van Gorkom
        Dear Phil, ... N: As Acharn says: a glimpse of understanding. Understanding is like a drop in the ocean of ignorance. ... N: As Acharn says: because of me. As
        Message 3 of 15 , Mar 24, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Phil,
          Op 22-mrt-2013, om 23:43 heeft philip het volgende geschreven:

          > I still think the "cold shower" of "there is no Nina" is premature
          > for us, if we are comforted by thinking this, there is some sort of
          > misappropriation of panna that we haven't really developed yet, it
          > seems to me. But we can gradually approach the deep truth, get
          > glimpses of it.
          >
          ------
          N: As Acharn says: a glimpse of understanding. Understanding is like
          a drop in the ocean of ignorance.
          -------
          > Ph: But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly
          > real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And
          > beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These
          > days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I
          > suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All
          > this useless worrying.
          >
          -------
          N: As Acharn says: because of me.
          As to seeking comfort in understanding and lobha, a fact you mention
          often, at the moment of understanding there is no lobha, since
          understanding always goes together with alobha, detachment.
          -------
          >
          > Last night I was comforted by this, from SPD:
          >
          > "We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief
          > occurs only at the moments when vitthi cittas arise. When vitthi
          > cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell etc, we do not
          > experience any object through the six doors....why then do we not
          > develop panna so that attachment and clinging to the objects that
          > appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be
          > less akusala. "
          >
          ------
          N: This is true, we can check this to some extent.
          -------
          Ph: Is there also sakkaya ditthi when we take seeing for self, sanna
          for self etc, or only when we take all khandas together as unit for
          self?
          ------
          N: You received answers. I am not inclined to think of Khandhas as a
          unit , but consider one reality at a time. Khandhas as a unit seems
          so theoretical. What appears now? Feeling? Feeling is khandha. We
          believe we are in feeling, feeling is in us, etc.

          Nina.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Lukas
          Dear Nina and Phil, I think it all must be very natural, like daily life. Right understanding, not different than daily life. ... L: I asked recently via
          Message 4 of 15 , Mar 24, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Nina and Phil,
            I think it all must be very natural, like daily life. Right understanding, not different than daily life.

            > -------
            > N: As Acharn says: because of me.
            > As to seeking comfort in understanding and lobha, a fact you mention
            > often, at the moment of understanding there is no lobha, since
            > understanding always goes together with alobha, detachment.
            > -------

            L: I asked recently via internet. Understanding doesnt come even I would like to understand. Acharn repeated: 'I would like to'. She added later: 'Right understanding cannot attached to anything'.

            Best wishes
            Lukas
          • philip
            Hi Nina (and Jon and Lukas) ... Or an opening in the dome of lobha, or the curtain of moha. Well, both. That rare island of understanding, momentary, arising
            Message 5 of 15 , Mar 25, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Nina (and Jon and Lukas)

              > ------
              > N: As Acharn says: a glimpse of understanding. Understanding is like
              > a drop in the ocean of ignorance.

              Or an opening in the dome of lobha, or the curtain of moha. Well, both. That rare island of understanding, momentary, arising due to conditions, with alobha. I think listening is helpful for this, we listen without forcing understanding, but it clicks now and then.

              At other times, we push, and force things. Venerable Dhammadaro speaks very well about this in part 2 of his talks in the audio file. He talks about subtle wrong practice. It's easy to see obvious wrong practice, such as meditation, walking slow etc. But what about subtle wrong practice. For example, we might look hard at an object, trying to determine visible object. Or we might hear about feeling, and try to check what is feeling now. Or when we are angry, we might assume that there is dosa to be experienced intentionally at this moment. That sort of thing. But there are lots of realities other than dosa when there is anger, no rules about what reality is to be object of awareness now. But in our wanting and trying we overreach, momentarily, This is not something to try to stop, it happens due to conditions. But we can be aware of it.

              > -------
              > > Ph: But for now our loved ones are horrifibly real. I say horribly
              > > real because there is so much suffering of worrying about them. And
              > > beautifully real because they are such precious companions. These
              > > days I worry about Naomi getting ill. She works such long hours. I
              > > suffer worrying about our old age together, counting pennies. All
              > > this useless worrying.
              > >
              > -------
              > N: As Acharn says: because of me.
              > As to seeking comfort in understanding and lobha, a fact you mention
              > often, at the moment of understanding there is no lobha, since
              > understanding always goes together with alobha, detachment.


              Ph: Yes, always with alobha. That is the key. A *big* key. People who reject abhidhamma can get around this and decide that their practice can be rooted in wanting, without problem. (Maybe they can claim kusala chanda, wishful thinking.) But for those who accept that the Dhamma is very deep, there can be no cavalier attitutude towards lobha ditthi in practice. That leaves out 99.99% of Buddhists...


              So to coclude my participation in this thread, I would say Abhidhamma is not in the book only when sati is aware of a reality witout attachment. If life is being experienced in Abhidhamma terms on a regular and predictable basis, I would suggest that a lot of lobha will also be there and that it is not bhavana, because bhavana must be kusala.

              Little by little by little, that is the only way.

              Thanks also re the sakkaya ditthi explanations.


              Phil
            • sarah
              Dear Phil, ... .... S: Yes, it is enough when understanding arises now. Just that which is seen, just the reality which sees it! That s all. Actually, very
              Message 6 of 15 , Mar 27, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Phil,

                --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" <philco777@...> wrote:

                > Always refreshing to hear Ajahn talk (Hin Hua) about seeing and visible object, no need to explain what it is, just understand it. Visible object now. Seeing now.
                >
                > "Is that enough for understanding to develop?"
                ....
                S: Yes, it is enough when understanding arises now. Just that which is seen, just the reality which sees it! That's all. Actually, very simple and yet, so subtle, because Self always gets in the way, wanting to 'do' something, wanting to ask a 'how?' or 'what?' or look for a short-cut which always turns out to be such a long-cut!

                Just visible object now appearing. Just seeing now which sees it. That's all!

                Metta

                Sarah
                =====
              • sarah
                Dear Lukas, ... ... S: Well said. ... .... S: Yes, always I would like ..... always wanting something for oneself. So more clinging, less understanding at
                Message 7 of 15 , Mar 27, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear Lukas,

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

                  > I think it all must be very natural, like daily life. Right understanding, not different than daily life.
                  ...
                  S: Well said.
                  ...

                  > L: I asked recently via internet. Understanding doesnt come even I would like to understand. Acharn repeated: 'I would like to'. She added later: 'Right understanding cannot attached to anything'.
                  ....
                  S: Yes, always "I would like"..... always wanting something for oneself. So more clinging, less understanding at such times...

                  Metta

                  Sarah
                  ====
                • philip
                  Hi Sarah ... It is enough, if left alone, but so many accumulated kilesa that condition the demanding of more from understanding,the needing of more. As Nina
                  Message 8 of 15 , Mar 27, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Sarah

                    > S: Yes, it is enough when understanding arises now. Just that which is seen, just the reality which sees it! That's all. Actually, very simple and yet, so subtle, because Self always gets in the way, wanting to 'do' something, wanting to ask a 'how?' or 'what?' or look for a short-cut which always turns out to be such a long-cut!
                    >
                    > Just visible object now appearing. Just seeing now which sees it. That's all!
                    >

                    It is enough, if left alone, but so many accumulated kilesa that condition the demanding of more from understanding,the needing of more. As Nina pointed out, I mention the possibility/probability that we seek comfort from Dhamma. I am in that situation at the moment. Went to see the film Amour, about the elderly couple going through the "indignities" of old age, illness and death together. It was too soon after seeing my mother's last hardships, and too close to my recurring worries about what is to come for Naomi and I.

                    Only Nama and rupa, Ven Dhammadaro talks about how people can say this with confidence, saddha. If there is saddha, understanding must be kusala, therefore with alobha. Like all kusala, saddha is occasional, arising due to conditions. I am grateful to have friends who speak of the true Dhamma. No feelgood falseties of the kind propagated by Mahayana (in Japan at least.)

                    Only Nama and rupa, with a capital N because this damn phone won't allow me to write it otherwise.

                    Phil
                  • sarah
                    Hi Phil, ... ... S: I also watched in on my flight here from Sydney (but the end got chopped off by arrival announcements!). Whatever happens, just dhammas,
                    Message 9 of 15 , Apr 2, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Phil,

                      --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" <philco777@...> wrote:

                      > >S: Just visible object now appearing. Just seeing now which sees it. That's all!
                      ...
                      >P: It is enough, if left alone, but so many accumulated kilesa that condition the demanding of more from understanding,the needing of more. As Nina pointed out, I mention the possibility/probability that we seek comfort from Dhamma. I am in that situation at the moment. Went to see the film Amour, about the elderly couple going through the "indignities" of old age, illness and death together. It was too soon after seeing my mother's last hardships, and too close to my recurring worries about what is to come for Naomi and I.
                      ...
                      S: I also watched in on my flight here from Sydney (but the end got chopped off by arrival announcements!). Whatever happens, just dhammas, just very ordinary, as Ajahn Sujin would say. Yes, not for everyone, but we never know when sati and panna will arise unexpectedly. Anytime at all.
                      ...
                      >
                      > Only Nama and rupa, Ven Dhammadaro talks about how people can say this with confidence, saddha. If there is saddha, understanding must be kusala, therefore with alobha. Like all kusala, saddha is occasional, arising due to conditions. I am grateful to have friends who speak of the true Dhamma. No feelgood falseties of the kind propagated by Mahayana (in Japan at least.)
                      >
                      > Only Nama and rupa, with a capital N because this damn phone won't allow me to write it otherwise.
                      ....
                      S: Yes, only nama and rupa, even when cursing about the phone:-))

                      Always back to this moment, whatever is conditioned now is real and can be known.

                      Any chance of joining us, Annie & Lan in KK beg June?

                      Metta

                      Sarah
                      =====
                    • philip
                      Hi Sarah ... We can say this with any variety of dhammas arising, any variety of degrees of understanding, saddha and other kusala factors. Of course we are
                      Message 10 of 15 , Apr 3, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Sarah

                        > ....
                        > S: Yes, only nama and rupa,

                        We can say this with any variety of dhammas arising, any variety of degrees of understanding, saddha and other kusala factors. Of course we are more likely to say it with akusala, moments of kusala are very rare. But if it is akusala to say "only nama and rupa" without real undestanding and with clinging, so be it. At least we are not falling into really serious wrong practices.


                        > Always back to this moment, whatever is conditioned now is real and can be known.

                        I like that "real and can be known." I like it. Lobha. And perhaps in there a moment of understanding arising with alobha, but that is not likely to be an object of understanding itself, as far as I ... understand.


                        > Any chance of joining us, Annie & Lan in KK beg June?


                        I'm afraid not, hopefully another KK someday. For now extra holiday time must be reserved for another bereavment trip, which lurks somewhere in the not distant future...

                        Thanks as always for the great recordings.


                        Phil
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.