The un-liberated being -- who listens and wisely considers the Buddha's Dhamma, who then acknowledges the complication, acknowledges the illusion of self, and acknowledges that he is stuck with this illusory sense of self (which is gradually becoming weaker due to his understanding and practice) until there is elimination of clinging by following the 8-fold path to the degree required.dhamma follower wrote:Dear Sam,
I don't think the Buddha had to face it. In the Pali texts, what is the word that is today translated as meditation?: bhavana. Bhavana means development, not sitting meditation. The Buddha taught the conditions for each kind of bhavana (samatha and vipassana) to be developed. At that time, many people had the accumulations to enter jhana. Many more people only listened to the Buddha's discourses and attained enlightenment. Now, do we really know, understand, accept and remember what are these conditions?SamKR wrote:
In my limited understanding, the relationship between the teaching about not-self and the teaching about intentionally doing any practice is very complicated -- which the Buddha had to face. It was his great patience and skill that he managed to teach both at the same time to different people having different levels of wisdom; that's why he is a samma-sambuddha.
Who uses the tool and how in terms of ultimate realities? Only one citta at a time. If the citta is not accompanied by panna -right understanding, it is not the path. The path is not occuring if right view is not there.SamKR wrote:In my limited understanding, initial right view about no self is a tool for the final direct realization of no self. A person intentionally uses this tool (ie., initial right view about no self) while understanding the complication and acknowledging his sense of self that he is stuck with -- towards the final direct realization of no self
The causes for wisdom
Re: The causes for wisdom
Re: The causes for wisdom
Hi robertkrobertk wrote:the thought of taking up a Dhamma book looking for wisdom to grow shows confidence in the value of the Dhamma.
So there is a hierarchy of value given to different activities?
Also: In an earlier post when talking about meditation you said "For me I have my other hobbies so am not so interested for now". I wondered if you envisioned that there would be a time when you returned to a more formalized* practice.
*although it seems that your present practice is actually already rather formalized.
Thanks
Re: The causes for wisdom
Sati does arise because of one's intention or will. That's because sati just is intending, willing, to "remain focused on [x]". Sati is a faculty of the mind, namely, the ability to intentionally keep something in view.dhamma follower wrote:The stretching on "formal practice" suggests that certain dhammas (such as sati) can arise because of one's intention or will.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
Re: The causes for wisdom
It's probably more precise to say that sati arises together with volitional intention (cetanā) and other mental factors. Thus, mindfulness, volitional intention and attention (manasikāra) work in concert to focus the mind. These concomitant mental factors can occur in any of the four postures, including sitting on a cushion with one's legs crossed, etc.kirk5a wrote:Sati does arise because of one's intention or will. That's because sati just is intending, willing, to "remain focused on [x]". Sati is a faculty of the mind, namely, the ability to intentionally keep something in view.
Re: The causes for wisdom
I'd agree with that. The main thing for me is that the notion of sati being somehow disconnected from one's actions and intentions, and therefore one has "no control" over whether sati "arises" or not - that I think is a very distorted view of sati. Sati is something "developed."Ñāṇa wrote: It's probably more precise to say that sati arises together with volitional intention (cetanā) and other mental factors. Thus, mindfulness, volitional intention and attention (manasikāra) work in concert to focus the mind. These concomitant mental factors can occur in any of the four postures, including sitting on a cushion with one's legs crossed, etc.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;A man with a raised sword will follow right behind you, and wherever you spill even a drop of oil, right there will he cut off your head.' Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil, let himself get distracted outside?"
"No, lord."
"I have given you this parable to convey a meaning. The meaning is this: The bowl filled to the brim with oil stands for mindfulness immersed in the body. Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
Dear BBB,beeblebrox wrote:
A practice, whether it's wrong or right, would be something that always arises with conditions... never from a self. The latter is an illusion... always.
Where did I suggest that practice is done by a self? What I was saying is that the idea of having to do formal practice is motivated by the wrong view of self.
If there's understanding of dhammas arising only by conditions, why there needs to be a formal practice? What kind of conditions does a formal practice provide for the arising of panna?
Brgds,
DF
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
RobK has addressed it already. If we say that there are conditions for panna to arise, none of the three views above is applied here.beeblebrox wrote:I think the sutta might be relevant. For example, look at this:Mr Man wrote:Is this Sutta relivent (AN 3.61)?
"Monks, there are these three sectarian guilds that — when cross-examined, pressed for reasons, & rebuked by wise people — even though they may explain otherwise, remain stuck in [a doctrine of] inaction. Which three?
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
And this:"Having approached the brahmans & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.'
Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, [ . . . ] a person is a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.'
When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views.
"Having approached the brahmans & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all without cause, without condition,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all without cause, without condition?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.'
[ . . . ]
When one falls back on lack of cause and lack of condition as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my third righteous refutation of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views.
D.F
Re: The causes for wisdom
Dear DF,
Aren't these deliberate and intentional actions? Why isn't self view involved in them, while it is involved in meditation?
And what are those conditions? Opening the book and reading it, going to the websites to read more about wisdom, going to Bangkok to hear the lectures...dhamma follower wrote:RobK has addressed it already. If we say that there are conditions for panna to arise, none of the three views above is applied here.
D.F
Aren't these deliberate and intentional actions? Why isn't self view involved in them, while it is involved in meditation?
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
It should be formulated differently: it is the underlying idea of a self who can make certain dhammas to arise at certain time that motivates a formal practice. If there's understanding that no one can predict when sati will arise but only when intellectual understanding of dhammas has been accumulated enough, one lives one's life naturally and listen to the Dhamma and consider what is heard (or read) by conditions without expectations.Alex123 wrote:Dear DF,
Why properly done vipassana conditions self view and why doesn't daily life condition self view?dhamma follower wrote:The idea of a self goes hand in hand with the idea that dhammas do not depend only on conditions to arise.
I can't seem to find a coherent answer to this from KS followers.
Also, who implies that meditation is unconditioned and doesn't require any conditions?
I should add here that intellectual understanding doesn't mean collecting knowledge. There needs to be the understanding of dhammas as they appear now as only dhammas, not self, again and again, by conditions.
Brgds,
D.F
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: The causes for wisdom
Greetings,
Metta,
Retro.
That should be stressed, as it's a point at rarely comes through when discussions of this nature are had.dhamma follower wrote:I should add here that intellectual understanding doesn't mean collecting knowledge. There needs to be the understanding of dhammas as they appear now as only dhammas, not self, again and again, by conditions.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
The un-liberated being -- who listens and wisely considers the Buddha's Dhamma, who then acknowledges the complication, acknowledges the illusion of self, and acknowledges that he is stuck with this illusory sense of self (which is gradually becoming weaker due to his understanding and practice) until there is elimination of clinging by following the 8-fold path to the degree required.[/quote]SamKR wrote:
Who uses the tool and how in terms of ultimate realities? Only one citta at a time. If the citta is not accompanied by panna -right understanding, it is not the path. The path is not occuring if right view is not there.
Dear Sam,
In reality, there's no one. At a given moment, either it is akusala citta with wrong view, akusala without wrong view, kusala without panna, kusala with panna seeing the danger of sensuous object, kusala with panna understanding realities as they are. Only the last kind of citta is the one that condition the Path. In our ordinary deluded mode, we mix up dhammas into situation and are unclear about what conditions what, hence the idea of accepting a "relative wrong view" in order to have right view later on. That's not correct. Forturnately, there the teaching in details which help us to see that we are most of the time in the ocean of akusala, and that the cultivation of the Path is most intricate...
Brgds,
D.F
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
Dear Retro,retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
That should be stressed, as it's a point at rarely comes through when discussions of this nature are had.dhamma follower wrote:I should add here that intellectual understanding doesn't mean collecting knowledge. There needs to be the understanding of dhammas as they appear now as only dhammas, not self, again and again, by conditions.
Metta,
Retro.
Indeed, it is a very important point. The Buddha taught the dhammas for us to understand whatever appears now correctly as no one, no self, only element arising by conditions. Only this present dhamma can be understood: seeing now, thinking now, etc....
Achaan Sujin stresses this again and again...
Brgds,
D.F
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: The causes for wisdom
Greetings,
Well hopefully that answers the question of what a "daily practice" looks like then.
Metta,
Retro.
Well hopefully that answers the question of what a "daily practice" looks like then.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
I wonder if there is an assumption here that one must approach the Buddha's Teachings only from a standpoint of the Abhidhamma, and if that is the case, then the question is are we referring to the Abhidhamma Pitaka or the much later Abhidhammatthasangaha? Is the only way of talking about understanding limited to Abhidhamma style language, or can we get along quite well enough using sutta language?dhamma follower wrote:
I should add here that intellectual understanding doesn't mean collecting knowledge. There needs to be the understanding of dhammas as they appear now as only dhammas, not self, again and again, by conditions.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: The causes for wisdom
Other than not restricting oneself to solely Abhidhamma style language, finding suttas language more than adequate, what Theravadin teacher says otherwise?dhamma follower wrote:
Indeed, it is a very important point. The Buddha taught the dhammas for us to understand whatever appears now correctly as no one, no self, only element arising by conditions. Only this present dhamma can be understood: seeing now, thinking now, etc....
Achaan Sujin stresses this again and again...
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723