Sensing Dhamma as they really are Reply to Ken O

 REPLY TO Ken O- March,2004-Journey to Nibbana Yahoo Group

Dear Ken,
I tried answering those points you raised as best as I can:
__________________________________________

Ken:

Hi Hasitpudda

If concentration develop wisdom, then people who attend tennis show
will have been enlighted because they are very concentrated on the
show ;-).
____________________________________________
Hasituppada:

This needs no answer as it is irrelevant to a Dhamma discussion and
simplistic.
_____________________________________________
Ken:

Concentration does not develop wisdom, please remember
Buddha learnt concentration up to the 8th jhanas from two well known
teachers at his time before he was a Buddha and he found that it does
not lead to deathless. During his night of awakening, Buddha realises vipassana,
Dependent Origination, he does not realise concentration because he
already know concentration. Concentration is a means but not the key
itself. When one looks at Great Forty Sutta, Right view is the
forerunner and not right concentration. Only with right view, then
concentration is of benefit, what is right view, right view is the
direct knowledge of the 4NT which can only  be attained when one is
enlightened.
______________________________________________

Hasituppada:

Did I say concentration develops wisdom, then I am wrong. I am
sorry. I should have said Meditation develops wisdom. The
meditation has two aspects, first the concentration and the second
the insight. It is this latter meditation that develops wisdom-which
is the beginning of the understanding of the impermanence,
unsatisfactoriness and, no-self.
_________________________________________________
Ken:

When pple say to me that dhamma can be a deterent to practise then I
dont know why at that time during Buddha preaching, there are Ven
Sariputta who still listen to him. Then there are those who are
still stream entrant still listen to him.
__________________________________________________
Hasituppada:

Buddha's time was different, his person itself may have inspired
attention and immense saddha. Buddha's Chief Disciples acted in
place of Buddha in his absence to teach and make discourses,
therefore it is natural that Venerable Sariputta listened to
Buddha's Discourses. And do not forget they were Arahats.
________________________________________________
Ken:

I dont think it is a deterent, it is only a deterent because 
one does not know dhamma
precisely then it becomes a deterent.
_______________________________________________
Hasituppada:

I think I said learning Dhamma too much could be a deterrent to
meditation. I stand by it.
________________________________________________
Ken:

You are wrong to compare Ven Ananda to the rest of 
Venerables, each has different capacities.
Some become stream entrant just by four stanzas, some do not even
smell stream entrant learn their whole life.
_________________________________________________
Hasituppada:

I brought Venerable Ananda in to show that knowledge of Dhamma alone
is no guarantee for acquiring wisdom, with which you see the three
lakkhana. He was after all the Treasurer of Buddha Dhamma. When
Buddha was alive it was quite different.....
_________________________________________________
Ken:

When again, you said that study is only gathering knowledge, did you
read the suttas correctly, when one has faith, one lend ear, when one
lend ear, one listen to the dhamma.... then zeal arouse, ... then
effort arouse... then insight. That is the power of listening, dont
undermine its significance because without it where is the basis of
zeal to meditate in the first place.
________________________________________________
Hasituppada:

I said it is alright to read and study Dhamma and listen to Dhamma
but all that knowledge is better left outside the Kuti when you
meditate.

I wander whether you have noticed during your meditation sessions,
how what you had been reading, recurrently keep "popping up" in
your mind as "thoughts". Sometimes it is impossible to bring the
mind to a one pointed concentration because of these "disturbing"thoughts.

That is where the reading is a deterrent.
________________________________________________
 

Ken:

Meditate is a mean but not the key, if not during Buddha time, 
there will have been thousand of Brahims become enlighted likewise
 for the jhanas teachers of Buddha before he was a Buddha
________________________________________________
Hasituppada:

You know as well as I do that the Brahmins had other objectives in
meditation and the Buddha another. Brahminism and Jhana do not aim
at enlightenment.

Meditation is the one and only way to Nibbana (Ekayano Maggo)

Dear Ken, I have nothing against your learning Dhamma on the other
hand I admire and respect you. Please continue. It has its
benefits, and understanding Dhamma is a great priviledge that we
have.

I was thinking in terms of Meditation for seeking freedom from the
bonds of Samsara. We are both followers of the Buddha's teachings. I
consider it my good kamma to have come across a group composed of
persons like you who are devoted to Dhamma. I am sure we had
crossed our paths before in Samsara. If not how is it that we are
discussing Dhamm together, even with our different ways of its
acceptance.

In Maha Mangala Sutta it is said "Asevanaca Balana.n,Panditana.nca
Sevana" It is a blessing not to keep the company of fools, and it is
a blessing to keep the company of the wise.

May you be happy, Ken,
with metta,
Hasituppada.
_______________________________________
Ken O

Posts to Journey to Nibbana Yahoo Group (second)

Dear Hasituppada,

Could you please check rupa and object?

Htoo Naing

P.S: Below include some replies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--- In JourneyToNibbana@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada"
wrote:

Mind is the sixth sense door. Every sense door "takes in" objects.
Therefore the Mind door also takes in objects (arammanas). What are
the objects of the mind door. They are the arising and falling away
thoughts.

In this case the thoughts are the rupa and knowing the presense of a
thought is the nama.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Htoo:

Thoughts are objects but not rupa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You may ofcourse experience a rupa ( a thought), by getting attached
to it or having an aversion towards it. That will be "thinking"
about the thougt. A thought too has all
the elemnts of a though arising in contact with an external object
by another sense door like the eye.

First knowing of the arising thought is the passa(( phassa ? )),
liking or disliking it is the vedana(( not exactly )).Knowing
the connection with what the thought has arisen is the sanna.
Knowing the thought is the vinnana and then it becomes a part of the
sankaras.

If you pay bare attention (without thinking)of the thought it will
pass way. An experience in meditation comes about when there are not
thoughts, and the mind is silent.

It may be the thinking about thoughts that may cause confusion. Let
a thought arise and pass away, and just be aware of it.

That is how I see it.

with metta,
Hasituppada

Sensing Dhamma as they Really are ( reply to torloff87048-26 March,2004)

Dear Hasituppada,

I appreciate what you are saying here. I understood your post on
thoughts as mind-objects was about experience, not intellectual
learning or reasoning. Because you wrote in response to my problems
with thoughts in meditation, I was ready to hear what you had to
say. This turned out very fruitful for me- I heard your meaning and
experienced it for myself (just a little bit, but enough to realize
the importance of it.) Your language was well-suited to helping me
and there was no confusion about it for me. It can be nice to go
back and express things in correct Abhidhamma language, but that has
nothing to do with the help you gave me. I hope you will continue to
share your experiences like this. If I have an intellectual question
about the Dhamma there are many people who can help me answer it. To
me that is "good Dhamma." But there are not many people like
yourself who have penetrated the Dhamma in experience and who will
share it to help others get there too. To me that is "best Dhamma."


With Metta,

Toby

It is good to understand every aspect of thoughts and nama and
rupa. I read often Nina's writings which are a store house of
information. All that I know of Abhidhamma is what I have gathered
from Nina's writings. I do not STUDY Visuddhimagga and all suttas
in details.

For my purpose of meditation intellectualisation of Dhamma is
inessenstial. Meditation develops wisdom and the dhamma will be
REALISED rather than understood.

If the Mind is a sense door what does it sense ? For me it senses
thoughts that is all that is to it.

with metta,
Hasituppada (Charles )

A Series of Posts to JTN Yahoo Group -First

Sensing Dhamma as they really are

Discussion with Torloff87048 2632004 (25 March 2004) in Journey to Nibbana. Yahoo Group

Dear Tep,

See below in answer to your question. I leave both our messages in
place so others can follow the thread if they want to.

With Metta, Toby

  Toby:

  "Now I see there is another way to watch thoughts, even noting if
one chooses whether they are past feelings, perceptions, cittas,
formations or concepts, without getting tangled up in thinking."

Tep:
 
If it does not cause you much trouble, please elaborate a bit on
the "another way" you mentioned above. In particular, how can
you "choose" any of the five aggregates when it occur at a given
moment?


The "another way" is what Hasituppada's post showed to me: To watch
thoughts as they arise before they become thinking. The thought is
just the non-five-sensory thing that enters into the mind that wasn't
there the moment before. What I mean about noting if the thought is
past feeling, perception, citta, formation or concept is not about
the aggregates that are arising with the thought. It is about the
classification of the thought as a mind-object. The complete
classification from the Abhidhamma (as we all know by now) is:
Sensitive matter.
Subtle matter.
Cittas
Cetasikas
Concepts
Nibbana.
What this means to me is that when watching thoughts arise, one can
note which type of thought it is, such as, "This thought is about the
feeling I had last night," or, "This thought is about my perception
of sound a minute ago," or, "This thought is about a concept I read
yesterday." Or more briefly, "This is thought about feeling," etc.
In my description I broke "cetasikas" down into feeling, perception
and formations, along the lines of the aggregates, because that was a
familiar way to classify such previously arisen mental factors. I
left out sensitive matter, subtle matter and nibbana only because I
do not find them as mind-objects during my meditation at this point.

I hope this answers your question.


Dear Htoo, Han Tun, Hasituppada and others,

Thank you for your comments on my questions concerning mind-objects.
It is a complicated topic compared to the five sense-bases. Your
responses help me to look at it in a more fruitful way. I still have
some confusion over the analytical understanding of mind-objects
since the experience of them is so different from the other five
sense-objects. It seems to me now that the important thing with mind-
objects is to watch the arising and passing away of the mind (citta)
and mental factors (cetasika) that occur with them, and not worry too
much about what the actual object is in terms of the classification
as sensitive matter, subtle matter, citta, cetasika, Nibbana or
concept. However we classify it, there is still an experience that
can be watched mindfully.

With Metta,

Toby