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

[dsg] Re: The Buddha & His Disciples Are Not Concepts

Expand Messages
  • upasaka_howard
    Hi, Sukin - ... HCW: While you re asking rhetorical questions: Is what you write above an answer?? (Rupas, early on, are conditions for very much that occurs
    Message 1 of 483 , May 11, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi, Sukin -

      --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder <sukinder@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Howard,
      >
      >
      > > > What kind of cause /effect are you pointing at, conditionality, kamma /
      > > > vipaka or is it accumulated tendencies?
      > > ----------------------------------
      > > HCW:
      > > I believe it goes much beyond this. For example, physical conditions
      > > that one is born with affect all sorts of things throughout life.
      > > Consider birth defects, for example.
      > >
      >
      >
      > Is the seeing of a dwarf different from that of a giant? Is the
      > attachment or aversion which follows the sense experiences any less in
      > the one as compared to the other? Is the aversion of someone with a
      > birth defect greater than that of a normal person?
      -----------------------------
      HCW:
      While you're asking rhetorical questions: Is what you write above an answer?? (Rupas, early on, are conditions for very much that occurs in the future, often for an entire lifetime.)
      ----------------------------
      >
      >
      > > > The "interrelationship" which the "staccato, freeze-frame perspective"
      > > > fails to cover. What exactly are involved in the interrelationship and
      > > > which concept in the Dhamma it corresponds with?
      > > --------------------------------
      > > HCW:
      > > Only-at-the-moment conditionality cannot account for change, for
      > > change is a cross-temporal matter.
      > >
      >
      >
      > When it comes to reality, I know impermanence which I believe the
      > "only-at-the-moment conditionality" best illustrates, but I don't
      > understand change. Can you tell me what this "change" is?
      ------------------------------------
      HCW:
      No.
      ------------------------------------
      >
      >
      > > > There are 24 conditions, I don't remember most of them, but I do
      > > believe
      > > > that they are all different. Saying that conditionality happens in the
      > > > moment does not imply that there is only one type of condition, namely
      > > > contiguity condition. That one kind of dhamma arises before another
      > > > dhamma still points to the conditioning / conditioned relationship that
      > > > happens in the moment. Even in the case of asynchronous
      > > kamma-condition,
      > > > the kammaja rupa or vipaka citta arises as a result of the coming
      > > > together of different realities, in the moment.
      > > ---------------------------------
      > > HCW:
      > > You have great faith in a particular Abidhammic theory. Particularly,
      > > you are certain that it came from the Buddha and is a complete theory.
      > > Okay.
      > >
      >
      >
      > I'll admit that mostly it is regurgitating theory. But this is not what
      > the faith / confidence is based upon. What the Abhidhamma tells me is
      > that there are only the mental and physical phenomena existing from
      > moment to moment, and I know this to be true every time there is any
      > attention to the present moment with any level of understanding.
      >
      > Did it come from the Buddha? Well, if not the Buddha then it must come
      > from someone with greater wisdom. And is there anyone wiser than the
      > Buddha?
      > Why do you think that it wasn't the Buddha who actually taught the
      > Abhidhamma? Is it because you consider what is stated in it to be false?
      >
      >
      > > > So are you referring to the 24 conditions when you talk about the idea
      > > > of "interrelationship"? Why would you do this here on DSG, where more
      > > > than anywhere else, conditionality is emphasized? It seems to me that
      > > > you are talking about something else, something which we in fact never
      > > > take into account. So again I ask, what is this "interrelationship"
      > > > about? My first impression was similar to Ken H's, namely that you are
      > > > making a case for some kind of "self".
      > > ---------------------------------
      > > HCW:
      > > It just ain't so. And there is no basis for it. And, frankly, relating
      > > interrelationship to atta-view is absurd, for they go in opposite
      > > directions!
      > >
      >
      >
      > It may be true, but you have not yet explained what this
      > "interrelationship" is all about. Until then, the mental picture that I
      > presently have, does appear to be about "atta".
      ------------------------------------
      HCW:
      I find it hard to believe that you are unfamiliar with interrelationships.
      -----------------------------------
      >
      >
      > > > > HCW:
      > > > > You'll state here that this is how it is rather than this is how you
      > > > > *believe* it is? Okay - it's nice to be a truth knower! ;-)
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > > You mean if I say "I believe" that would give credibility to what I
      > > say?
      > > --------------------------------------
      > > HCW:
      > > I would make your statement true, and it would protect the truth.
      > >
      >
      >
      > What "truth" would you be referring to if you don't have at least an
      > intellectual understanding about it? An abstract idea similar to that of
      > other religions?
      >
      >
      > > > Is there a place for doubt in the Dhamma? Either one understands at the
      > > > level of pariyatti, patipatti or pativedha and knows it, or one does
      > > not
      > > > understand at all.
      > > -------------------------------------
      > > HCW:
      > > This strikes me as quite similar to what devout Moslems would say of
      > > Islam, devout Jews of Judaism, and so on. The Buddha warned against
      > > such attitudes.
      > >
      >
      > So you consider Islam and Judaism to point at the Four Noble Truths
      > which is "now," just as the Dhamma does?
      ------------------------------------
      HCW:
      I said nothing along such lines. What you are asking is a non-sequitur. Actually, it happens that I find much commonality between Judaism and the Dhamma, but that is irrelevant to what I said above. What I spoke about above is failure to distinguish, in thought and speech, between believing and knowing. The Buddha csrtsinly tsught that one dedicated to truth distinguishes these.
      -----------------------------------
      >
      > Metta,
      >
      > Sukin
      =================================
      With metta,
      Howard


      > Safeguarding the Truth

      "But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth."

      "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.

      "If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth.

      (From the Canki Sutta)
    • jonoabb
      Hi Rob E RE: Hi Jon. RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion. J: Glad to
      Message 483 of 483 , Oct 1, 2013
      • 0 Attachment

        Hi Rob E

         

        RE: Hi Jon. 


        > RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion.


        > J:  Glad to hear you'll be checking out the text of the sutta for a change!! :-))


        RE:

        :-)  I appreciate what I desperately hope is your humor here, and if so, is very funny. 


        I will get back to you with the usual sutta quotes as soon as I can.  :-)


        Very very funny, Jon.   ; - /


        Best,

        Rob  E.


        - - - - - - - - - -


        J:  You may have forgotten in the confusion over the new format that you have already come back with a quote from the Satipatthana Sutta.  My reply to your message can be found here:

        http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dhammastudygroup/conversations/messages/133161


        Jon

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