Date
1 - 5 of 5
File //Member files/A. Sujin transcriptions/jottings2.pdf updated #file-notice
|
dsg@groups.io Notification <noreply@...>
The following files have been updated in the Files area of the dsg@groups.io group. By: Alan Weller Description: |
|
|
|
szmicio
Hi Guys,
Well, nicely done. I read the first jotting(Zoom Jotting 1) page 7 of 179: <I’ll try to add just a brief note from my jottings during different discussions. Jeff had made a comment about giving something to someone to eat. Ajahn stressed that giving or not giving is by conditions, no matter what, not by anyone’s control. Understanding this is the only way that there will be less clinging, less lobha. If we try to change what is experienced, “I” is there again. Don’t regret! Don’t think about the past or future! All conditioned dhammas gone or not yet come!> L: Giving someone(hungry) something to it. It's kusala, Buddha advised to always give, so that's a training for giving or even giving away. It's kusala. And it's good, conditioned. I reckon that we all need to practice giving besides understanding barely, Just only my opinion on that topic. Why not to regret? Because if regret then may lead to a change in one's behaviour, so it may be positive later, ain't it? All conditioned, but why not to do good along with right understanding. Buddha always encourages to avoid evil, and DO GOOD along with understanding. If one understands, this is conditioned, and not giving still? is it a Buddha teaching? Buddha taught: dana, sila and bhavana. Just a couple of my few jottings. Best wishes Lukas |
|
|
|
Sarah Procter Abbott
Lukas
L: Well, nicely done. I read the first jotting(Zoom Jotting 1) page 7 of 179:S: This is the point I was just stressing. It's so useless to try to change what is arising now. "Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state;.." MN 131 L: Giving someone(hungry) something to it. It's kusala, Buddha advised to always give, so that's a training for giving or even giving away. It's kusala.S: Give and understand it's dhamma, not my giving. This is the way that gradually there will be less clinging (and wrong view) to "my kusala". L: Why not to regret? Because if regret then may lead to a change in one's behaviour, so it may be positive later, ain't it?S: Dosa with regret accumulates and conditions more sorrow and self-pity. Understanding now is far more beneficial. L: All conditioned, but why not to do good along with right understanding. Buddha always encourages to avoid evil, and DO GOOD along with understanding.S: Yes, like now! L: If one understands, this is conditioned, and not giving still? is it a Buddha teaching? Buddha taught: dana, sila and bhavana.S: And the greatest giving is giving up the idea of self and sharing the understanding with others. If one cannot give away little things and help others when there are opportunities, how can there be the giving up of self and all akusala? L: Just a couple of my few jottings.S: Very glad to hear them. Please keep adding your jottings and comments to my jottings and comments! Sarah |
|
|
|
szmicio
Hi Sarah(Nina)
S: This is the point I was just stressing. It's so useless to try to change what is arising now. "Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state;.." MN 131 Lukas: But in Pathana or in Nina's Conditionality of life book on Pathana. It is said that arammana-paccaya can be actually a past good state(e.g like offering) it can be a condition to present kusala state arise of offering, by arammana paccaya. So the past can be a condition to the future state? Also, that will be hard to spell correctly and recollect, what was that purechjata .. nissay paccaya? something like tkat. correct me, please. It is a condition that future states can condition the present moment states. So I think kusala development like dana is supported by correct and wholesome recollection of kusala or past state or even future state so it's good to recollect. Please answer how it really is? Best wishes Lukas |
|
|
|
nina
Dear Lukas,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Purejata: as to base prenascence-condition, quoted from my “Conditions”: Seeing arises at the eye-base (cakkhu-vatthu). This rúpa which is the eye-sense (cakkhu pasåda-rúpa) and which has the capacity to receive visible object, is produced by kamma. Rúpa cannot function as base at its arising moment, since it is then too weak. It can only function as base after its arising moment, thus at the time when it is present. It cannot be base either at its dissolution moment. Rúpa lasts longer than citta. When we compare its duration with the duration of citta, rúpa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta . Thus, the rúpa which can function as eye-base has to arise before seeing-consciousness, and when seeing-consciousness arises it is still present. Kamma keeps on producing this rúpa throughout our life, also when seeing does not arise. It produces all the rúpas which can function as base throughout life, there never is any lack of them. The eye-base (cakkhu-vatthu) is base only for seeing-consciousness, it is not base for the other cittas arising in the eye-door process; these have the heart-base (hadaya-vatthu) as their base. The previously arisen ear-base conditions hearing-consciousness, thus, it conditions it by way of prenascence-condition. The other sense-bases also condition the cittas which are dependent on them after having previously arisen, thus by way of prenascence-condition. As regards object-prenascence-condition, årammaùa-purejåta-paccaya, this refers to rúpa which can be object of citta. Since rúpa is weak at its arising moment, it can only be experienced by citta during the moments of its presence. Thus, rúpa which is object of citta has arisen previously to that citta; it conditions that citta by way of prenascence. Visible object which impinges on the eyesense is not experienced immediately; there are first bhavanga-cittas , and then the eye-door adverting-consciousness arises which is the first citta of the eye-door process which experiences visible object. This citta arises at the heart-base which has previously arisen and which conditions the citta by way of base-prenascence-condition. Nina
|
|
|