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

Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: what can citta know?

Expand Messages
  • Sarah Procter Abbott
    Dear Num, I m not sure if I ll catch you before you leave, but if not, perhaps you d like a little more discussion on bhavarupa as I wasn t quite happy with my
    Message 1 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Num,

      I'm not sure if I'll catch you before you leave, but
      if not, perhaps you'd like a little more discussion on
      bhavarupa as I wasn't quite happy with my earlier
      response as you may have been looking for more detail
      as well.

      I'm checking more information in 'The Physical
      Phenomena in and Around Ourselves' by Nina Van Gorkom
      and I'm going to be quoting from this. (Pls note I
      have an old manuscipt edition which may now be updated
      or printed or on the web, I'm not sure.) I know you
      are familiar with most of this information, but I'm
      also quoting some of the introduction for others
      who've never heard of bhavarupa.

      "....There are 28 kinds of rupa in all. Rupas are not
      merely textbook terms, they are realities which can be
      experienced. Not everybody can experience all kinds of
      rupa, it depends on one's accumulations which
      realities can be experienced. However, learning about
      all kinds of realities is helpful in order to
      understand more clearly that what we take for 'self'
      consists of many different elements which do not
      stay....."

      "...The objects which can be experienced through the
      sense-doors and also the senses (pasada rupas) are
      gross rupas, the other rupas are subtle rupas. The
      pasada rupas are produced solely by kamma. There are
      also subtle rupas which are produced soley by kamma.
      They are: the woman faculty, the man-faculty, the
      life-faculty and the heart-base.

      As to the woman-faculty (itthindriyam) and the
      man-faculty (purisindriyam), which are collectively
      called bhavarupa or sex, these are rupas produced by
      kamma from the first moment of life and throughout
      life. Thus, it is due to kamma whether one is born as
      a male or as a female. The 'Atthasalini (II, Book II,
      Ch III, 322) explains that birth as a human being is
      kusala vipaka, but since good deeds have different
      degrees also their results have different degrees.
      Birth as a female is the result of kusala kamma which
      is of a lesser degree than the kusala kamma which
      conditions birth as a male...."

      "The 'Atthasalaini' (II, Boo II, ChIII,322) gives the
      following definitions of the female faculty and the
      male faculty:
      'Of these two controlling faculties the feminine has
      the characteristic of (knowing) the state of a woman,
      the function of showing 'this is a woman', the
      manifestation which is the cause of femininity in
      feature, mark, occupation, deportment. The masculine
      controllign faculty has the characteristic of
      (knowing) the state of a man, the function of showing
      'this is a man', the manifestation which is the cause
      of masculinity in feature, etc. (note: See also
      Dhammasangani par.633,634 and Vis. X1V, 58)

      These two faculties which are coextensive with the
      whole body (Vis X1V,58) are not known by visual
      cognition but only by mind-cognition. But, the
      Atthasalani (321) states, their characteristic
      features etc., which are conditioned by their
      respective faculties, are known by visual cognition as
      well as by mind-cognition.

      Seeing experiences only visible object, it does not
      know 'This is a woman' or 'This is a man'. The citta
      which recognizes feminine or masculine features does
      so through the mind-door, but this recognizing is
      conditioned by seeing. When the commentary states
      that these characteristic features are known by visual
      cognition as well as by mind-cognition, it does not
      speak in detail about the different processes of
      cittas which experience objects through the eye-door
      and through the mind-door...." (end quote)

      There's plenty more, but this may add a little more to
      your consideration and at least give you a few
      references to follow up on your return to St Louis.

      Best regards and have a good trip!

      Sarah









      _______________________________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Get your free @... address at http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk
    • m. nease
      Dear Num, Catching up again! You sent this a long time ago, and I m not sure I ever thanked you for it. I ve been familiar with both of these for a long
      Message 2 of 24 , Feb 12, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Num,

        Catching up again! You sent this a long time ago, and
        I'm not sure I ever thanked you for it. I've been
        familiar with both of these for a long time, but your
        reminder was very welcome:

        --- Srnsk@... wrote:

        > Malunkyaputta sutta: Majjhima Nikaya 63,
        > Vacchagotta sutta: Majjhima Nikaya 72.
        >
        > The way the Buddha answered the questions is very
        > fascinating.

        Yes, and the Vacchagotta is particuarly interesting as
        an example of the Buddha directly teaching right view
        to a layperson with no reference to any kind of
        bhavana:

        http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn72.html

        Thanks again.

        mike

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
        a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
      • Sarah Procter Abbott
        Dear Mike, ... While we wait for Num to return from South America, may I chip in? ... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn72.html ... Is this true?
        Message 3 of 24 , Feb 13, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Mike,

          --- "m. nease" <mlnease@...> wrote: > Dear Num,


          While we wait for Num to return from South America,
          may I chip in?
          >
          > Yes, and the Vacchagotta is particuarly interesting
          > as
          > an example of the Buddha directly teaching right
          > view
          > to a layperson with no reference to any kind of
          > bhavana:
          >
          >
          http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn72.html
          >

          Is this true? For me, when I read the sutta it is all
          about bhavana and in particular about vipassana
          bhavana (development of insight mental development).
          The following extract is talking about understanding
          the 5 khandhas(aggregates) consisting of rupa, vedana,
          sanna, citta and cetaskikas, as not self. This is the
          heart of vipassana bhavana:

          quote: <Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"
          "A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata
          has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this:
          'Such is form, such its origin, such its
          disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such
          its disappearance; such is perception...such are
          mental fabrications...such is consciousness, such its
          origin, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I
          say, a Tathagata -- with the ending, fading out,
          cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all
          construings, all excogitations, all I-making &
          mine-making & tendencies to conceits -- is, through
          lack of sustenance/clinging, released." end quote>

          Have I misunderstood you?

          Regards,
          Sarah



          _______________________________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Get your free @... address at http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk
        • m. nease
          Dear Sarah, ... Well, yes, but my fault for poor use of Pali (as usual). I used bhavana to try to get around objections to the use of meditation in the
          Message 4 of 24 , Feb 14, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Sarah,

            --- Sarah Procter Abbott <sarahdhhk@...>
            wrote:

            > Dear Mike,

            > While we wait for Num to return from South America,
            > may I chip in?
            > >
            > > Yes, and the Vacchagotta is particuarly
            > interesting
            > > as
            > > an example of the Buddha directly teaching right
            > > view
            > > to a layperson with no reference to any kind of
            > > bhavana:

            > Have I misunderstood you?
            >
            > Regards,
            > Sarah

            Well, yes, but my fault for poor use of Pali (as
            usual). I used 'bhavana' to try to get around
            objections to the use of 'meditation' in the sense of
            formal meditation. Clearly, vipassana bhavana is what
            is meant.

            Thanks!

            mike

            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
            a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
          • Sarah Procter Abbott
            Mike, O.K.! So what I understand when I read bhavana is mental development which can be either samatha bhavana or vipassana bhavana or both....! So I think
            Message 5 of 24 , Feb 14, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Mike,

              O.K.!

              So what I understand when I read bhavana is 'mental
              development' which can be either samatha bhavana or
              vipassana bhavana or both....!

              So I think what you're saying is there's no reference
              to instructing anyone to sit cross-legged, concentrate
              on anything etc ...(by prescription or description...)

              Sarah

              --- "m. nease" <mlnease@...> wrote: > Dear
              Sarah,
              >
              > Well, yes, but my fault for poor use of Pali (as
              > usual). I used 'bhavana' to try to get around
              > objections to the use of 'meditation' in the sense
              > of
              > formal meditation. Clearly, vipassana bhavana is
              > what
              > is meant.
              >
              > Thanks!
              >
              > mike
              >
              > __________________________________________________
              > Do You Yahoo!?
              > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail -
              > only $35
              > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
              >
              >
              >


              _______________________________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Get your free @... address at http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk
            • m. nease
              Dear Sarah, ... Of course, yes. ... That is what I meant, yes. Thanks for your patience... mike __________________________________________________ Do You
              Message 6 of 24 , Feb 14, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Sarah,

                --- Sarah Procter Abbott <sarahdhhk@...>
                wrote:

                > Mike,
                >
                > O.K.!
                >
                > So what I understand when I read bhavana is 'mental
                > development' which can be either samatha bhavana or
                > vipassana bhavana or both....!

                Of course, yes.

                > So I think what you're saying is there's no
                > reference
                > to instructing anyone to sit cross-legged,
                > concentrate
                > on anything etc ...(by prescription or
                > description...)

                That is what I meant, yes. Thanks for your
                patience...

                mike

                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
                a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.