Topics

Zoom CN Dhamma discussion Aug. 20th: Innermost


alberto
 

Hi,

Yesterday Ajahn explained inner and outer dhammas in depth:

2020-08-20 Thur. CN Zoom discussion: 

[00:06:00]
 
Q: Why citta is innermost?
 
A. Sujin: Because citta arises all the time and there are cetasikas arising with one moment of citta, so when one citta arises there must be many cetasikas arising with it in one moment, so what is the inner, innermost, citta or cetasikas? Because sometimes some cetasikas do not arise at all, but citta is always there, the chief of experiencing an object, only one object at a time.
 
And citta itself, without the akusala cetasikas or kusala cetasika would be pure, but it isn't pure, it's tainted by the akusala cetasikas, so what is outside to paint the citta?
 
Even a moment of akusala citta, citta itself not including cetasikas is pure, but akusala cetasikas are that which make it tainted, impure. So what is the innermost?
 
No matter how many cetasikas arise with it, citta cannot be cetasikas and cetasikas cannot be citta, so citta is the chief of experiencing, no matter whatever level of kusala or akusala, citta itself will never be akusala or kusala, because is pure and when akusala cetasikas arises with it is not pure, not kusala, and when kusala cetasikas arise with it, it is kusala, but citta itself is pure, so it is the innermost, not akusala yet until akusala cetasikas arise with it.
 
At a moment when there is attachment, we can understand that moment by thinking about that which is clinging to something, but not knowing or understanding citta which is the innermost.
 
So a cetasika can be known as it is when there are the conditions for its arising and appearing, but for citta, it arises all day along but no one can understand the innermost, because one just known the moment of akusala or the kusala moment. Is it a bit clearer, just a little bit?
 


szmicio
 

Hi Alberto, (&Sarah)
I will not be in tomorrow Saturday Dhamma discussion with Ajahn, but maybe you could rise points from me.? Some may be constructive points, and not me blbla bla while under the influence. It s my suggestion to you, so don't feel like you need to do it. As we all heard and learned there is everything is conditioned, anatta.

I can't come in tomorrow, since I have been very sick recently. It is not hangover really, I don't have hangovers. After drinking, I am becoming very sick that last days. Monday, doctor is calling me if Antabuse medication or detox. Thank you. I really wish I could join AS talking and questioning. But maybe next week.

Than Ajahn:
And citta itself, without the akusala cetasikas or kusala cetasika would be pure, but it isn't pure, it's tainted by the akusala cetasikas, so what is outside to paint the citta?
 
Even a moment of akusala citta, citta itself not including cetasikas is pure, but akusala cetasikas are that which make it tainted, impure. So what is the innermost?

Lukas: I wonder if we can call pure, or light as 'BUddha nature'? Because in unortodox Mahajana they say 'Buddha nature' I reckon. So the doctrine of Mahajana(In Kathavathy opposite group to later Vibhajavana if me correct?) in Mahajan there is a concept of 'Buddha-nature'. So Can we say cittam pandaram and this may be what later schools means by their interpretation of panadarm citta as Buddha nature? I am not looking for a compromise or peace in between those two schools, but I am asking to understand more what Buddha meant in Kathhavathu about wrong views obviously. So Buddha nature is barely a concept of later traditions, but I trying to understand, for what meaning Buddha nature really has.? As Than Ajahn said, about citta is pure without akusala cetasikas. And concept of Buddha nature refers to something, I reckon, like there something primarily in the dhamma(a person) that is pure and not influanced by any unwholesome ness. So I wonder if there is any connection, and what is the meaning of Buddha-nature?

====
Than A. Sujin: Because citta arises all the time and there are cetasikas arising with one moment of citta, so when one citta arises there must be many cetasikas arising with it in one moment, so what is the inner, innermost, citta or cetasikas? Because sometimes some cetasikas do not arise at all, but citta is always there, the chief of experiencing an object, only one object at a time.

Lukas: Innermost, what was that in Vibhanga? The term for inner most, hadaya? It must be only that in this case while instances of cittas are so compassionate explained by Thathagatha. This cannot be confused with ajjhatta/bahiddha. So only innermost means hadaya I think , like heart, aint it Alberto?

I really think Ajahn Sujin is the only existent Dhamma teacher, that is the last savaka and is so straight following exactly what Buddha and Elders really thought. She is an amazing mahaupasika, and great Vibhajavadin. She is understanding and doing exactly what Buddha and Elders told us to do.

I think only That Than Ajahn has a great carita from birth(not to mention her amazing understanding of life and dhamma). And my problem is that I am born with spoiled morality and weak carita. I followed AS so many years and now I am thinking, maybe it's not helping me. Since Ajahn only matters right understanding, because she has that great kusala behaviour accumulated. I have a problem with drink, and I am spoiled morally and alcohol dependent. I really doubt right teaching Ajahn is sharing, I don't think so it helps me, since I need sila first and good behave. This is my doubt.

Alberto, what do you think, could you render some questions to Ajahn from that? It's my doubt and I think her answer may help me a bit in my alcohol quiting and trying start leaving a new wholesome life from the beginning. I want to stay with kusala, it so calm, does not harm any one, does not agitate. Kusala is the best

Thank you
Lukas








Sarah Abbott
 

Lukas
I will not be in tomorrow Saturday Dhamma discussion with Ajahn...

S: Even if you're sick, it's much better if you join the discussion and ask your own questions. Ajahn can understand your points much more easily and have a dialogue with you. 

I've joined many sessions when I've not been well or immediately after surgery and it's the best medicine and one thinks of helping and sharing with others too at such times with comments and questions. If it's really not possible, join us tomorrow.

Hope to see you! It takes courage, I know.

Sarah


alberto
 

Hi Lukas,
 
Lukas: I wonder if we can call pure, or light as 'BUddha nature'? Because in unortodox Mahajana they say 'Buddha nature' I reckon. So the doctrine of Mahajana(In Kathavathy opposite group to later Vibhajavana if me correct?) in Mahajan there is a concept of 'Buddha-nature'. So Can we say cittam pandaram and this may be what later schools means by their interpretation of panadarm citta as Buddha nature? I am not looking for a compromise or peace in between those two schools, but I am asking to understand more what Buddha meant in Kathhavathu about wrong views obviously. So Buddha nature is barely a concept of later traditions, but I trying to understand, for what meaning Buddha nature really has.? As Than Ajahn said, about citta is pure without akusala cetasikas. And concept of Buddha nature refers to something, I reckon, like there something primarily in the dhamma(a person) that is pure and not influanced by any unwholesome ness. So I wonder if there is any connection, and what is the meaning of Buddha-nature?
 
 
A: I've read DSG only after the Zoom discussion, sorry, I'll try to answer myself...
In Tipitaka the word Buddha refers to any enlightened being: Sammasambuddhas, the perfect ones who have accumulated parami to the topmost limit: to the level that they attain enlightenment by themselves and can teach what they've enlightened to others as well, the Paccekabuddhas who have accumulated parami to the level that they enlighten by themselves but not quite to the level that they can teach what they've enlightened to others, and Savakabuddha those who have accumulated just enough parami to penetrate the 4 truths by listening and developing the teachings as explained by a Sammasambuddha. Will any of us here ever be a Sammasambuddha? I doubt it, a Paccekabuddha? A bit more likely (just a bit :), a Savakabuddha? it's such a long long way ahead, who can know? only a Sammasambuddha.
 
 
Lukas: Innermost, what was that in Vibhanga? The term for inner most, hadaya? It must be only that in this case while instances of cittas are so compassionate explained by Thathagatha. This cannot be confused with ajjhatta/bahiddha. So only innermost means hadaya I think , like heart, aint it Alberto?
 
Yes I think so too, like in the heart of the matter... innermost!
 
Sorry to hear about your health problems, try to take care of yourself the best that you can!
 
Alberto
 


szmicio
 

Hi Alberto,

A: I've read DSG only after the Zoom discussion, sorry, I'll try to answer myself...
In Tipitaka the word Buddha refers to any enlightened being: Sammasambuddhas, the perfect ones who have accumulated parami to the topmost limit: to the level that they attain enlightenment by themselves and can teach what they've enlightened to others as well, the Paccekabuddhas who have accumulated parami to the level that they enlighten by themselves but not quite to the level that they can teach what they've enlightened to others, and Savakabuddha those who have accumulated just enough parami to penetrate the 4 truths by listening and developing the teachings as explained by a Sammasambuddha. Will any of us here ever be a Sammasambuddha? I doubt it, a Paccekabuddha? A bit more likely (just a bit :), a Savakabuddha? it's such a long long way ahead, who can know? only a Sammasambuddha.


Lukas: I am sorry you couldn't understand me, and what I meant.

I meant savaka before, not savaka Buddha. I know you tried your best, Sorry.
I only asked the pandara citta and 'Buddha nature' by Mahajana. So yes I can feel with you this BUddhahood thing. But is not that. Sorry I got you a problem and bothered you. It's not that.

Best wishes
Lukas


Sarah Abbott
 
Edited

Alberto (& Lukas)

Lukas: Innermost, what was that in Vibhanga? The term for inner most, hadaya? It must be only that in this case while instances of cittas are so compassionate explained by Thathagatha. This cannot be confused with ajjhatta/bahiddha. So only innermost means hadaya I think , like heart, aint it Alberto?
 
Al: Yes I think so too, like in the heart of the matter... innermost!

S: (As discussed a short while ago)

Yes, hadaya is a synonym for citta, the innermost nāma, manāyatana

This is not to be confused with the subtle rūpa, hadaya which arises in a group conditioned by kamma and is the vatthu (base) for all cittas in this realm aparat from seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. As a subtle rūpa it's dhammāyatana, the outer āyatana.

Sarah
 
 


Sarah Abbott
 

Lukas

L: > I only asked the pandara citta and 'Buddha nature' by Mahajana

S: Do they understand that no matter what it's called, each citta arises and falls away and is anatta (or suññata), completely gone, never to return? So any "Buddha nature" must be anicca, dukkha and anattā too.

Sarah


alberto
 

Hi Lukas,
 
L: I meant savaka before, not savaka Buddha.
 
A: Then I think we're savaka at any moment when there's any level of understanding of the teachings of the Buddha beginning with sabbe dhamma anatta.
 
Alberto
 


alberto
 

Hi Sarah,
 
S: Yes, hadaya is a synonym for citta, the innermost nāma, manāyatana
This is not to be confused with the subtle rūpa, haddāya which arises in a group conditioned by kamma and is the vatthu (base) for all cittas in this realm aparat from seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. As a subtle rūpa it's dhammāyatana, the outer āyatana.
 
A: Yes, that's right, thanks Sarah (I've just checked the Pali spelling, is the same for both, as a word for citta and as vatthu rupa, and it's also hadaya, the heart, as the 11th "part" of the body, kesa, loma, nakha...)
 
Alberto


Sarah Abbott
 

Alberto

 
A: Yes, that's right, thanks Sarah (I've just checked the Pali spelling, is the same for both, as a word for citta and as vatthu rupa, and it's also hadaya, the heart, as the 11th "part" of the body, kesa, loma, nakha...)
S: yes, exactly the same word. (Thx, I made a spelling error later corrected). One is citta, the nāma and one is the subtle rūpa. One of the Vietnamese friends was also getting confused about this point in a discussion too.

On the point you were discussing with Jon about the sotāpanna's understanding or something which you questioned - I remember he was just stressing the point which Nina keeps mentioning is so important with regard to conventional usage in daily life. There's a table and a tree but no misunderstanding that this is anything other than conventional usage. The arahats still know who is who and what is what, even though all doubts and wrong views were eradicated at the stage of sotāpanna. No question that there are only dhammas that are the world "crumbling away" at each moment.

SN 1V, "The World"?

"Then a certain monk came to see the Exalted One.... Seated at one
side that monk said to the Exalted One: 'The world! The world! is
the saying, lord. How far, lord, does this saying go?'

" 'It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the world'.
What crumbles away? The eye... objects...

eye-consciousness... eye-contact... that pleasant or unpleasant or
neutral feeling that arises owing to eye-contact... tongue... body...
mind... It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the
world'."

Sarah
 


Azita Gill
 

Hallo Alberto and Sarah,

thank you, I've just learnt something new about hadaya, did not know before this that it is a synonym for citta. 
I apologise for the disruption to discussion on Sun.  I probably should not have turned on video while having a curious 5 yr old sitting on my knee :(   in fact I hardly heard anything of the discussion  because there was quite a bit of activity going on around me.  Just wanted to see you all.

Re my query on Saturday, the passage I read was from the Guhatthaka Sutta:
           One should take nothing as "mine" :  having abandoned taking things as mine on account of craving, having relinquished taking things as mine on account of views, one should not take as mine, the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body or mind.......
            the first five, eye etc I take to mean rupa which is why I wondered what mind would be. If it means the eye base etc then I assume it must mean heart base.   However if it means the citta which sees etc  than it does mean all the other cittas that do not arise at the sense bases.    Have I got this right?

           Appreciate the Zoom discussions, generally with a lot of attachment and as the above sutta states;
     "See them trembling over things taken as 'mine'.  They tremble when they are anxious about being deprived of an object taken as 'mine';  they tremble when being deprived of it.......

 Live for understanding
Azita



Sarah Abbott
 
Edited

Azita


Az: thank you, I've just learnt something new about hadaya, did not know before this that it is a synonym for citta. 
I apologise for the disruption to discussion on Sun.  I probably should not have turned on video while having a curious 5 yr old sitting on my knee :(   in fact I hardly heard anything of the discussion  because there was quite a bit of activity going on around me.  Just wanted to see you all.
S: We were glad to see you and your grandchild too!

Re my query on Saturday, the passage I read was from the Guhatthaka Sutta:
           One should take nothing as "mine" :  having abandoned taking things as mine on account of craving, having relinquished taking things as mine on account of views, one should not take as mine, the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body or mind.......
            the first five, eye etc I take to mean rupa which is why I wondered what mind would be. If it means the eye base etc then I assume it must mean heart base.   However if it means the citta which sees etc  than it does mean all the other cittas that do not arise at the sense bases.    Have I got this right?
S: B.Bodhi's translation in Sn is rather different. I suppose it is these lines:

777. See them trembling over things taken as “mine”
like fish in a depleted stream with little water.
Having seen this too, one should take nothing as “mine,” not forming attachment to states of existence. (6) 

 

Here's a commentary note given: 

"One should take nothing as “mine”: Having abandoned taking things as “mine” on account of craving, having relin-quished taking things as “mine” on account of views, one should not take as “mine” the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, or mind; forms . . . tactile objects, or mental phenomena; family, group, abode, gain, fame, praise, pleasure, robes, almsfood, lodging, or medicinal requisites; any realm of existence or mode of existence—in the desire realm, the form realm, or the formless realm—in the past, future, or present, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, or cognized"

S:  I
t says "one should not take as “mine” the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, or mind; forms . . . tactile objects, or mental phenomena", 
 these refer to the 12 āyatanas, the inner and outer dhammas we've been discussing recently. The inner āyatanas are eye-sense, ear-, nose-, tongue-, body- and all cittas included in manāyatana (translated here also as mind). The outer āyatanas are visible objects, sounds, odours, tastes, tactile objects and cetasikas and subtle rūpas all included in dhammāyatana (translated here as mental phenomena).

Sarah


alberto
 

Sarah: On the point you were discussing with Jon about the sotāpanna's understanding or something which you questioned - I remember he was just stressing the point which Nina keeps mentioning is so important with regard to conventional usage in daily life. There's a table and a tree but no misunderstanding that this is anything other than conventional usage. The arahats still know who is who and what is what, even though all doubts and wrong views were eradicated at the stage of sotāpanna. 
 
Alberto: I've no objections on that
 


nina
 

Dear Azita,

Good, that is daily life. Understanding can be developed naturally. As you said before about your grand daughter, when you asked her to touch the table, she said: hard. If there are conditions, it is good when you tell us more about her.

Nina.

Op 24 aug. 2020, om 00:22 heeft Azita Gill <azitag@...> het volgende geschreven:

I probably should not have turned on video while having a curious 5 yr old sitting on my knee :(   in fact I hardly heard anything of the discussion  because there was quite a bit of activity going on around me.  Just wanted to see you all.


szmicio
 

Hi Alberto,

>L: I meant savaka before, not savaka Buddha.
 
>A: Then I think we're savaka at any moment when there's any level of understanding of the teachings of the Buddha beginning with sabbe dhamma anatta.

Lukas: Well, so now you are right.! Because when you mentioned savaka Buddha, I thought it wasn't referring to the topic at all. And sometimes we must be watchful, to don't bend over or lean towards our personal views(wrongly accumulated for a time).
Still, savaka means listener(also I think it can be meaning an Elder or disciple). But mostly Savaka means listener, from what have I heard. And Vibhanga(analysis) is equal to savaka. That's why we are called the the followers of the Listeners, or Recollectors, Analysis of The Buddha Dhamma. My definition according to Scripts.

Anyway, I have a very tough time now. I was thinking episodically about Goenka method(made up of course in 19th century) but I was thinking of pain mental, and what Goenka said, that meditation is now, reflection or understanding and not react toward anything. AS you know Mr. Goenka said this practical thing that he discovered from Buddha the link now is feeling(vedana). It's not easy for me. And I am looking for a cure for my illness. So I had been considering that the feeling unpleasant or pleasant is conditioned, it's only feeling, is gonna go. I don't know, I am desperate, and I am trying everything.

Best wishes
Lukas


szmicio
 

Hi Sarah, Alberto

S: Yes, hadaya is a synonym for citta, the innermost nāma, manāyatana
This is not to be confused with the subtle rūpa, haddāya which arises in a group conditioned by kamma and is the vatthu (base) for all cittas in this realm aparat from seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. As a subtle rūpa it's dhammāyatana, the outer āyatana.
 
A: Yes, that's right, thanks Sarah (I've just checked the Pali spelling, is the same for both, as a word for citta and as vatthu rupa, and it's also hadaya, the heart, as the 11th "part" of the body, kesa, loma, nakha...)

Lukas: I only referred as innermost, citta is hadaya. Innermost. I didn't refer to the kind of ruupa that is hadaya. I only referred to the two instances of cittas in Vibhangapali. that cittam pandara and hadaya. So pure and innermost. And also do not confuse hadaya, innermost <citta> as ajjhatta/bahiddha that is mentioned in satipathanna MN.10 or Vibhangapali I.Khhandha instances. So do not confuse the citta hadaya innermost or most inner with ajjhatta like internal referring to self.

Best wishes
Lukas


szmicio
 

Hi Azita, Alberto, Sarah and all

>Azita: Hallo Alberto and Sarah,
>thank you, I've just learnt something new about hadaya, did not know before this that it is a synonym for citta.

Lukas: Since Alberto quoted Ajahn Sujin passage in the beginning post. And Ajahn Sujin was referring 'innermost' and 'pure'. And she described in her talk those separately two instances, namely 'innermost' and 'pure' or you azita may now it as 'luminous', so these two what Ajahn Sujin explained she referred actually to 'little charactristics' of citta(As Buddha taught In Vibhangapali, Abhdidhammapitaka). Ajahn Sujin never says something unimportant or what Buddha didn't teach. Ajahn is very good in the Elders teaching and how she teaches now is exactly as Elders did after Budda passed away. So it's very easy to look up those two words 'pure' and 'innermost'. And this pandara and hadaya. All an instance, a characteristic of a citta, or vi~n~nana. Ajahn Sujin is using vitakka very well to hit you, but my problem is 'not having good conduct(carita)', partly I assume because of alcohol. And I respect Ajahn for her easy going way to share and cultivate and spread among people the right understanding, but I am afraid it will not help me only theoretical understanding while lacking sila and a good conduct cariya. That's why I am saying AS has both vijjacariya, and I may be in a wrong place here, since I have no proper good conduct of behaviour and only restraint could have change it I reckon.

AS was many times says like metta, no need to have it is already there. That was Ajahns words many times. So not for me. I don't have metta accumulated. or any restraint and kusala. For Ajahn Suji it's easy, she has it since accumulated.

Best wishes
Lukas


Azita Gill
 

Hallo Sarah,

 thanks for the clarification.  The dhamma is a lot deeper than I think when reading alone, always good to have someone to check uncertainties  with.   I appreciate your time and energy Sarah.

Live for understanding,
Azita


alberto
 

Hi Lukas,
 
L: It's not easy for me. And I am looking for a cure for my illness. So I had been considering that the feeling unpleasant or pleasant is conditioned, it's only feeling, is gonna go. I don't know, I am desperate, and I am trying everything. 
 
A: I remember in Huahin Ajahn reminding us to go to doctors and take their medicines to cure the body and that the Dhamma is the best medicine to cure the mind... take care of both your body and your mind the best that you can! what else can you do? I've found this sutta reminding us that thinking with expectations is conditioned, just as thinking without them is.
 
<<<<<<
...
“And how, householder, does one entertain expectations? Here, householder, someone thinks: ‘May I have such form in the future! May I have such feeling in the future! May I have such perception in the future! May I have such volitional formations in the future! May I have such consciousness in the future!’ 
It is in such a way that one entertains expectations.
“And how, householder, is one without expectations? Here, householder, someone does not think: ‘May I have such form in the future! May I have such feeling in the future! May I have such perception in the future! May I have such volitional formations in the future! [12] May I have such consciousness in the future!’ 
It is in such a way that one is without expectations.
>>>>>>>>>>>
 


nina
 

Dear Alberto,

I like the sutta and the way you present it to Lukas. In the future, I used to think of a future life, but it can be the nearest future. That makes it more actual. Just now we have different expectations to be realised soon.

Nina. 

Op 25 aug. 2020, om 17:03 heeft alberto <alberto.spera@...> het volgende geschreven:

“And how, householder, does one entertain expectations? Here, householder, someone thinks: ‘May I have such form in the future! May I have such feeling in the future! May I have such perception in the future! May I have such volitional formations in the future! May I have such consciousness in the future!’ 
It is in such a way that one entertains expectations.