Another email from the same person...this came first actually

Here we go...

----------------------

Dear [me :)]

According to the psychic experts, we are born with a psychic ability to a
certain extent and we can also evolve to higher vibration levels which can
bring great benefits to us physically and mentally.

At the up coming Vipassana Meditation Workshop in Bangkok on February 23 -
24, Marina Lobova, a Russian Psychic and meditation master, will be guiding
us on simple psychic training techniques which combined with her experience
of Life Sciences Nanotechnology will help us to stay healthy and vibrant.

This is the opportunity not to be missed indeed. Hope you can join us.

All the best,
-------------

THE END

An email....!@#?

I received this email a few days ago from a meditation teacher (who make money teaching meditation to corporate customers). I think it's a bit strange !@#?...
------------------------

Please note an additional topic of the talks at this weekend workshop by
Marina Lobova, a Russian Psychic/Meditation master as follows:

Since 1999, she has been working with an elderly Buddhist monk/meditation
master, Luang Por Charoen, who has been taking care of approximately 5,000
AIDS patients from all over the world each year at his temple in Saraburi.

The monk has also devoted 40 years to the study of the sacred and encrypted
signs of natural sources. He communicates and writes the sounds of nature
in numerical form. He has said “The Earth talks to you through the language
of Her Musical vibrations. Open your heart and soul. Listen to it”

In the year 2000, the monk’s work “Earth’s Message” was decoded from a
numerical format into wonderful melodies by a group of scientists and
musicians as follows:

Prof. G.I. Shipov – International Institute of the Theoretical and
Applied Physics, Moscow, Russia
Dr. O.I. Kaekina – Neurologist/Researcher, Moscow, Russia
Prof. N.A. Naumov – Institute of Space Research, Moscow, Russia
Prof. A.B. Burlakov – Moscow State University – Genetic Department
Prof. V.L Voeikov – Moscow State University – Biological Department
M. Donnya – the arranger, Graduate of Tchaikovsky Conservatorie,
Mosow, Russia
Prof. Dr. Narong Nimsakul – President of World Laser Surgery
Association. Institute of Modern Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand

The healing effects of “Earth’s Message” will open your heart and soul and
expand your consciousness.

Our body is a great symphony of the orchestral manifestation of the subtle
vibrations of many organs, glands, psychic centers, clusters, cells and
smaller units. The subtle memories have a longer life span. Each state of
catharsis may be remembered throughout your conscious life.

The monk’s original manuscript will be displayed at the workshop. Come and
listen to a master piece of work and experience the total bliss yourself.

Somdet Toh

From AccessToInsight.Org by Ajahn Thanissaro

Somdet Toh — his formal title was Somdet Budhacariya (Toh Brahmaransi) — was probably the most famous and widely loved monk in nineteenth century Thailand. A skilled meditator closely associated with the royal family, he was famous for many reasons, but his wide popularity rests on two things: Despite his rank, he was easily approachable to people on all levels of society; and he made amulets that — because of his meditative prowess — were reputed to be very powerful. He was also famous for his wisdom and wit. Since his death, in 1872, a cult has grown up around his memory, with many mediums throughout Thailand claiming to channel his spirit.

At the same time, many legends have grown up around his name. Here are a few of my favorites. I can't vouch for their accuracy, but they all carry a good lesson, which is why they merit passing on.

Somdet Toh was an illegitimate son of a nobleman who eventually became King Rama II. The story goes that one day in 1787 or 1788, when the nobleman was in northern Thailand cleaning up after the Burmese invasion, he happened to get separated from his troops. As he rode along on his horse, he came across a house with a young woman about sixteen years old standing in front. Thirsty, he asked her for some water. She went to the well, got a bowl of water — in Thailand in the old days, they would drink water out of a bowl, rather than out of a glass — and crushed a lotus flower over the bowl, sprinkling the stamens all over the surface of the water. Then she handed the bowl to him as he was sitting on his horse. He took one long look at the stamens on top of the water and then had to drink the water very carefully so as not to swallow them. As he handed the bowl back to her, he asked her, "Was that a trick?"

"No," she said. "I saw that you were so thirsty that you might gulp the water down and end up choking on it. So I figured this would be a good way to make sure that you drank slowly."

Well. He asked her, "Are your parents around?" So she fetched her parents. They didn't know who he was, but he was obviously a nobleman, so when he told them, "I'd like to have your daughter," they gave their consent. So she joined the king in the army camp, but as the campaign was ending he said to her, "I'm afraid I can't take you down to the palace with me, but in case you do have a child by me, here's my belt. Give the child my belt and I'll know that it's my child. I'll take care of him or her in the future." So he left her and went down to Bangkok.

Her whole family soon followed down to Bangkok when they discovered that she actually was pregnant. They moved onto a floating house moored on the bank of the Chao Phraya River in front of a monastery, Wat In. She gave birth to a son and named him Toh, which means "large." When he was old enough, he was ordained as a novice. A few years later, when the nobleman had become King Rama II, the family took Novice Toh to Wat Nibbanaram — currently Wat Mahathaad, a temple right across the road from the Grand Palace — and showed the belt to the abbot. The abbot took the belt to the king and the king said, "Yes, that's my son." So he later sponsored Novice Toh's ordination as a monk.

When Prince Mongkut — later Rama IV — was ordained as a monk, Phra Toh was his "older brother monk," the one who gave him his initial training in Dhamma and Vinaya. Soon after Prince Mongkut's ordination, his father died, and although by birth Prince Mongkut was next in line for the throne, the Privy Council chose one of his half-brothers to reign as Rama III instead. When this happened, Phra Toh decided it would be wise to leave Bangkok, so he went into the forest. Prince Mongkut stayed on as a monk for 28 years, until Rama III passed away. He was then offered the throne, so he disrobed and was crowned King Rama IV.

Soon after his coronation he sent out word to fetch Phra Toh back to Bangkok. Officials went into the forest, dragging back any monk they could find, and asking, "Is this the monk?" "No." "Is this the monk?" "No." Finally word got to Phra Toh, and he came out voluntarily. The king gave him the title of Somdet — which, next to the Supreme Patriarch, is the highest title a monk can hold — and put him in charge of Wat Rakhang, the monastery across the river from the palace.

Rama IV is remembered as a wise and humane king. Somdet Toh's own epithet for him — in a brief poem he wrote summarizing the history and prophesizing the future of the Chakri (Bangkok) dynasty — was that he maintained or embodied the Dhamma. And Rama IV's desire to have Somdet Toh near the palace is an indication of his wisdom. He knew that, as king, he would have trouble finding people fearless and selfless enough to tell him frankly when he was wrong, and so he wanted his former teacher nearby to perform this function.

But even as the king's former teacher, Somdet Toh had to exercise tact and skill in criticizing the king.

One story tells that one day early in his reign, the king — and remember, he had been a monk for twenty-eight years — was sitting out on the boat landing in front of the palace drinking with his courtiers. So Somdet Toh came paddling across the river in a small boat. The king, displeased, said to him, "Here I've made you a Somdet. Don't you have any respect for your title? How can you paddle your own boat?" The Somdet replied, "When the king of the country is drinking in public, Somdets can paddle their own boats." Turning around, he paddled back to Wat Rakhang. That was the last time the king drank in public.

Another time, Rama IV felt that since Thailand had been laid waste by the Burmese, many ancient Thai customs had disappeared, so new customs should be developed to replace them. So he decided, "Wouldn't it be nice if we had a boat parade at the end of the rains retreat? Every monastery in Bangkok will be responsible for decorating a boat, and we'll have a contest to reward the best-looking boat." So the royal decree went out that every monastery in Bangkok had to decorate a boat for the parade.

When the day for the parade came, a long line of beautifully decorated boats floated past the royal reviewing stand — except for one, a little canoe carrying a monkey tied to a leash with a sign on its back. The king's immediate reaction was anger: "Somebody's making fun of me." He had his officials check the roster to see which monastery was responsible for the boat, and it was Wat Rakhang, Somdet Toh's monastery.

So they took the sign off the monkey to see what it said. It said, "Willing to lose face in order to save cloth," which rhymed in Thai, but didn't make any more sense in Thai than it does in English. A few days later, the king invited Somdet Toh into the palace for a meal and a Dhamma talk, after which he asked him, "Suppose someone sponsored a boat with a sign like this on the back of a monkey. What do you think it might mean?" And the Somdet said, "Well, it might mean that monks don't have any resources of their own to decorate boats and it's certainly not appropriate for them to ask for donations from laypeople to decorate boats, so the only course left open to them would to have been to put their robes in the pawn shop. So they were willing to lose face in order to save their robes." That was the last time the parade was ever held.

Another story concerns a funeral in the royal palace. Funerals in the palace could go on for a hundred days before the cremation. Every night they'd invite four monks to chant. The famous, high-ranking monks would chant toward the beginning of the hundred days, and by the end of the period they were getting down into the ranks of the junior monks. One night toward the end of this particular funeral they invited four young monks who had never seen the king before in their lives. And this was back in the days when if the king said, "Off with your head!" it was off with your head. So they were nervous about their performance. After all, the king had been a monk for 28 years. He would know if they made any mistakes in their chanting.

Finally the king entered the room, followed by his entourage. Now, Rama IV had a rather stern and fearsome appearance, and as soon as the monks took one look at him they went running behind a curtain. This infuriated the king. "What is this? Am I a monster? An ogre? What is this? Disrobe them immediately!" So a royal decree was written up and sent over the river for Somdet Toh to disrobe the monks. He happened to be sitting at a writing table, next to a small altar where incense was burning. Taking one look at the royal decree, he placed it over a stick of incense, burned three holes in it, and sent it back across the river to the palace. The king, of course, had studied Buddhist doctrine; he knew what the three fires were: the fire of passion, the fire of anger, and the fire of delusion. The Somdet's message was, "Put them out." So the monks didn't have to disrobe. That's how you criticize a king.

Once, however, Somdet Toh didn't get away with criticizing the king. There is a tradition recorded in the Apadanas that the Buddha's clan, the Sakyan clan, started from a time when the sons and daughters of a particular king had to leave their country. They took up residence in Kapilavastu, the area that eventually became the Buddha's home. After building their city and settling in, they looked around the area for spouses but couldn't find anyone who was high-born enough for them to marry. So the brothers ended up marrying their own sisters. That's the tradition recorded in the Apadanas to explain the name of the Sakyan — "One's Own" — clan.

One day Somdet Toh was giving a talk on this topic in the royal palace, and after discussing this point he continued, "Ever since then it's become a custom among royal families. Uncles go running after their nieces, cousins go running after their cousins..." Now, Rama IV's major queen was his niece, so again he was furious. "You cannot stay in this country!" he said. So Somdet Toh was banished from Thailand. Now, in Thailand the civil law does not extend into the sima, the territory immediately around ordination halls. For instance, if a thief goes running into a sima, the police have to get the abbot's permission before they can go into the sima after him. So the Somdet returned to Wat Rakhang and moved into the ordination hall. For about three months he didn't set foot outside the sima.

Meanwhile, the king had forgotten all about the banishment order, and one day he said, "We haven't had Somdet Toh over for a talk in a long time. Let's invite him over." So the invitation went across the river to the monastery, but word came back, saying "I cannot set foot in this country, remember?" "Oh," the king said, "I forgot." And he lifted the banishment order.

So it wasn't an easy thing to criticize kings in those days. Even if you were his personal teacher, you had to be careful.

Of course, not all of Somdet Toh's comments about the king were critical. After all, the respect he felt for the king was what had inspired him to leave the forest to be of help in the first place.

One of the most famous stories about their relationship concerns a Dhamma talk Somdet Toh gave in the palace. Palace Dhamma talks were highly ritualized affairs. The talk was expected to be long and literary, preceded with and followed by many elaborate chants and other formalities. Once Rama IV invited Somdet to present such a talk and had prepared an especially large pile of offerings to be presented to the Somdet after the talk — a sign that he was looking forward to an especially long and learned disquisition, to test the Somdet's knowledge of the Dhamma. After the beginning formalities, however, Somdet Toh said only one sentence: "The king already knows everything there is to know." Then he chanted the ritual passages to conclude the talk and returned to his seat on the dais, quiet and composed. Immensely pleased, the king presented him with the offerings, commenting that that was the best Dhamma talk he had ever heard. (Ajaan Lee tells the story that later another monk tried the same trick, but with different results: The king was so offended that he had the monk stripped of his ecclesiastical titles.)

At another, similar event at the palace, Somdet Toh began the closing blessing with the standard chant:

Yatha varivaha pura
Paripurenti sagaram
Evameva ito dinnam
Petanam upakappati...

Just as rivers full of water fill the ocean full,
Even so does that given here benefit the hungry ghosts...

As he reached this point in the chant, the king in a very unusual breach of Buddhist etiquette called out, "Why are you giving all the merit to the hungry ghosts? What did they do to deserve it?"

Somdet Toh, without missing a beat, backed up to change the last line:

Evameva ito dinnam
Sabbam rañño upakappati...

Even so does everything given here benefit the king...

The king, who was fluent in Pali himself, was delighted with the Somdet's ability to think on his feet.

There are many other legends concerning Somdet Toh that don't deal with the king. Ajaan Fuang, my teacher, especially liked to tell a story of how Somdet Toh dealt with high-ranking lay people who would visit monasteries and waste the monks' time in idle conversation.

Somdet Toh ate his meals in a small open pavilion in front of his dwelling. If a stray dog wandered past, he would toss a little food to the dog — which meant that, over time, a whole pack of dogs would regularly come to sit around him at his meal time, waiting for food. This meant that if any high-ranking lay people wanted to come pay their respects and chat with him while he was eating, they'd have to bow down to the dogs as well. As a result, only the people who weren't too proud to bow down to the dogs got to talk to him during his mealtime.

Another story concerns a wealthy layman who wanted to invite Somdet Toh to his house for a meal and a Dhamma talk. Events like this would often be fairly public, with the donor inviting many friends and relatives to participate in the meal offering and to hear the talk. So the layman sent his servant to convey the invitation to Somdet Toh, saying that he wanted Somdet Toh to give a talk on a lofty topic, the four noble truths. Now, it so happened that the servant wasn't familiar with the term, "four noble truths" — which in Thai is ariyasat. To him, it sounded like naksat, or zodiac. So he told Somdet Toh that his master wanted to hear a Dhamma talk on the zodiac. The Somdet knew that this couldn't possibly be right, but the servant's mistake amused him, and he decided to use it as an opportunity to make a Dhamma point — and have a little fun at the same time.

When the day for the talk arrived, he went to the layman's house and, after the meal, got up on the sermon seat and began the talk by saying, "Today our esteemed host has invited me to deliver a Dhamma talk on the zodiac." He then proceeded to describe the twelve houses of the zodiac in a fair amount of detail. Meanwhile, the master was staring daggers at the servant. After finishing his description of the zodiac, the Somdet then added, "But, regardless of what house of the zodiac people are born into, they are all subject to suffering." With that, he switched to the four noble truths — and probably saved the servant's job.

Another time some Christian missionaries came to visit the Somdet. One of the missionary strategies in those days was to show off their knowledge of science so as to dazzle the heathens, win their respect, and possibly win converts. With Somdet Toh so closely associated with the king, perhaps they thought that if they could convert him, the king might be converted as well. So they discussed various scientific topics with him, and finally touched on the fact that they had proof that the world was round. The Somdet, instead of being surprised, said, "I know. In fact, I can show you where the center of the world is." This surprised the missionaries, so they asked him to show them. He got up, took his staff, went out in front of his hut, and planted the staff firmly on the ground, saying, "Right here."

"But how could that be?" they asked him.

He answered, "If the world is round, it's a sphere, right? And any point on the surface of the sphere is as central as any other point on the surface."

After that, the missionaries left him alone.

On the final day of the Rains retreat in 1868, Rama IV passed away. His eldest son, Prince Chulalongkorn, who was now Rama V, was only fifteen years old. As a result, the running of the government was placed in the hands of a Regent — Chao Phraya Sri Suriyawong (Chuang Bunnag) — who was to hold this office until Rama V reached maturity. (In a later reminiscence, Rama V stated that during this period he lived in constant fear of being assassinated.) Shortly after the Regency was instituted, Somdet Toh — who was now 80 — appeared at the Regent's palace in the middle of a sunny day, carrying a lit torch that he held aloft with one hand, and a long, narrow palm-leaf Dhamma text that he carried at a backward-sloping angle under his other arm. After he had walked through the palace halls in this way, word reached the Regent. The Regent respectfully approached Somdet Toh and asked him to take a seat, after which he assured him that he understood the Somdet's message: He would not allow his deliberations to be overcome with the darkness of defilement, and he would hold to the Dhamma as a rudder while steering the ship of state.

Four years later Somdet Toh passed away.

A History of Indian Buddhism - book

I just bought this book today from a Buddhist bookstore in Hong Kong. Hope it's good!

The author is Hirakawa Akira, translated by Paul Groner, first published in India in 1993, then reprinted again in 1998 and 2007.

Old temple in Lampang, North of Thailand

Ruins in Sukhothai

'til your last breath

...As Jetsun Milarepa said, "Do not be impatient to attain enlightenment, but practice until your last breath."...

(Dilgo Khyentse & Padampa Sangye, page 136)

( 57 ) from "The Hundred Verses of Advice"

I really like this (57) from "The Hundred Verses of Advice" quoted below the dotted line, and I don't see this to be different from "anidassana vinnana", which I believe is described by:

"There is monks a domain where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no wind, no sphere of infinite space, no sphere of nothingness, no sphere of neither awareness nor non-awareness; there is not this world, there is not another world, there is no sun or moon. I do not call this coming or going, nor standing nor dying, nor being reborn; it is without support, without occurrence, without object. Just this is the end of suffering."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

(57)

The unborn absolute body is like the very heart of the sun -
People of Tingri, there is no waxing or waning of its radiant clarity.


The Dharmakaya, the absolute dimension, the ultimate nature of everything, is emptiness. But it is not mere nothingness. It has a cognitive, radiant clarity aspect that knows all phenomena and manifests spontaneously. The dharmakaya is not something produced by causes and conditions; it is the primodially present nature of the mind.

The recognition of this primordial nature is like the sun of wisdom rising and piecing through the night of ignorance. The darkness is dissipated instantly; the shadows cannot remain. The clarity of the dharmakaya does not wax and wane like the moon, but is like the unchangeable brilliance that reigns at the center of the sun.

(Dilgo Khyentse & Padampa Sangye, The Hundred Verses of Advice, page 106)

Long forgotten memories

Sometime ago (actually, decades ago), I sat meditate and had a strange experience. It was nothing magic, just an experience that I never had since I was about 3-5 years old. When I was young and had fever, I used to have "nightmare" of floating in black space, and I would cry. That was a long forgotten memory.

In that meditation session, I experienced the same thing again. Only that I was in my 20s then, and did not see it as a "nightmare". Strange, though. The experience came in meditation, not in dream, but it was exactly the same. In a way, I still wonder how many long-forgotten funny memories that may creep up in meditation again...

Knowledge and understanding of the "unconditioned"

As human and other living beings live in the world that is defined by space and time, we are unable to comprehend "the unconditioned" beyond samsara that have no relevance to both space and time - where both space and time have no meaning.

No wonder we keep on not understanding anything about this "unconditioned". The problem with our mode of learning is that we try to understand things, including something that is beyond our comprehension, our ability to understand. Direct experience is totally different kind of knowledge from mere understanding or mere conceptualization, and to know this "unconditioned" we need to directly experience it, not understanding it.

Even though in some schools of Buddhism masters are said to be able to "introduce" their students to this "unconditioned", in my opinion they can not really give the students the true knowledge of this "unconditioned". Only direct knowledge can give practitioners true knowledge of the "unconditioned" beyond samsara, beyond space and time.

Bardo - from The Hundred Verses of Advice

I don't know much about Tibetan Buddhism, so this is a little note on Bardo:

"...Your consciousness will leave your body and wander in the bardo. There, with an illusory mental body, you will find yourself alone in the shadows, lost and desperate, not knowing what to do, not knowing where to go. The hallucinations that torment most beings at that time are terrifying beyond description. Although they are no more than projections of the mind, they nevertheless have a powerful reality at the time...."

"...The only possible source of comfort will be ...the Dharma...."

(Dilgo Khyentse & Padampa Sangye, The Hundred Verses of Advice", page 60 - 61)

--------------------------
Well, Bardo is not taught in Theravada Buddhism, nor in the Thai Forest Tradition ajahns. But it does sound like wandering spirits immediately after death. Perhaps everybody will experience this state between one life and the next, perhaps not. Perhaps beings pass on to the next life directly. I think it all depends on kamma.

Concepts in Mahayana considered heterodoxy according to the Theravadins

From E-Sangha forum's thread

Bits by Venerable Dhammanando

"...But seriously, the Kathāvatthu of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka records the Third Council debates on a great many views, though it doesn't say who held which view (that is left to the Kathāvatthu commentary, composed centuries later). However, a number of the views rejected by the Theravāda seem to exhibit proto-Mahāyānic tendencies. These tendencies are towards docetism, merit transference, the Mahāyānist conception of prajñāpāramitā, downgrading of the arahant and various miscellaneous matters.

Below I list the main ones:


1. Parihāni micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant may fall away from arahantship.
2. Parūpahāra micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant may have a seminal emission while sleeping.
3. Aññāṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant lacks knowledge.
4. Kaṅkhā micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant may have doubts.
5. Paravitāraṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant is excelled by others.
6. Vohāra micchādiṭṭhi — that the Buddha’s everday speech was supramundane.
7. Ariyanti micchādiṭṭhi — that all ten Tathāgata Powers are ariyan.
8. Niyāmokkanti micchādiṭṭhi — that a Bodhisatta becomes an ariyan before his final life.
9. Anāgatañāṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that there is knowledge of the future.
10. Paṭuppanna micchādiṭṭhi — that all present events may be simultaneously known.
11. Paribhogamayapuñña micchādiṭṭhi — that merit increases with utility.
12. Itodinna micchādiṭṭhi — that what is given here sustains elsewhere.
13. Pathavī kammavipākoti micchādiṭṭhi — that the earth is kamma-produced.
14. Chagati micchādiṭṭhi — that there are six realms.
15. Antarābhava micchādiṭṭhi — that there is an intermediate state.
16. Amatārammaṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that the Deathless may be an object of attachment for an arahant.
17. Iddhibala micchādiṭṭhi — that through the power of psychic mastery one may live for an aeon.
18. Kamma micchādiṭṭhi — that all kamma gives rise to vipāka.
19. Saddo vipākoti micchādiṭṭhi — that sound is the result of kamma.
20. Saḷāyatana micchādiṭṭhi — that the six sense-bases are the result of kamma.
21. Jīvitā voropana micchādiṭṭhi — that one of right view may take life.
22. Na vattabbaṃ saṅgho dakkhiṇaṃ paṭiggaṇhāti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that the sangha accepts gifts.
23. Na vattabbaṃ saṅgho dakkhiṇaṃ visodhetīti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that the sangha purifies gifts.
24. Na vattabbaṃ saṅgho bhuñjatīti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that the sangha eats.
25. Na vattabbaṃ saṅghassadinnaṃ mahapphalanti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that a gift to the sangha brings great reward.
26. Na vattabbaṃ buddhassadinnaṃ mahapphalanti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that anything given to the Buddha brings great reward.
27. Aparinipphanna micchādiṭṭhi — that the aggregates, elements etc. are all undetermined.
28. Manussaloka micchādiṭṭhi — that it is wrong to say that the Buddha lived in the world of men.
29. Dhammadesanā micchādiṭṭhi — that it is wrong to say that the Buddha taught the Dhamma.
30. Tathatā micchādiṭṭhi — that there is a ‘thusness’ that is the fundamental character of all things.
31. Nirayapāla micchādiṭṭhi — that there are no guards in the hell realm.
32. Sāsana micchādiṭṭhi — that the Buddha’s Dispensation may be improved.
33. Saṃyojana micchādiṭṭhi — that after arahantship some fetters may remain.
34. Buddha micchādiṭṭhi — that Buddhas differ from one another in grades.
35. Sabbadisā micchādiṭṭhi — that the Buddhas persist in all directions.
36. Parinibbāna micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant’s final Nibbāna may be attained without all fetters having been cast off.
37. Issariyakāma micchādiṭṭhi — that Bodhisattas may be voluntarily reborn in hell or other evil states.

........"

Bits about Kathavatthu and its origin from wiki

----------------------------------------

Well, well...

Kind of amusing, I think. In my opinion, the differences between Mahayana and Theravada will be there for a long time for us to debate on. There will be those who wish to maintain that one is right and the other completely wrong, while at the same time there will be those in the other end of the spectrum who wish to reconcile the two. But perhaps Mahayana and Theravada beliefs can never be reconciled by referring to scriptures. New practitioners may simply have to choose which are the most appropriate and "sound right the most" for them to choose to follow (as they are not yet enlightened).

Another thoughts, perhaps for those enlightened ones, the focus on differences may not be worth putting one's effort on too much as it may not lead one to "the end of dukkha" and "the realization of the 4NT" from Theravada's point of view, or to what Mahayana practitioners call "the realization of emptiness" (!?) - probably the same anyway, and is the goal of Buddhism, all traditions, all schools. May be the realized masters of any schools don't bother. "The Truth" as directly realized by Buddhist masters are the same.

Why do Buddhist masters of different traditions and schools sometime talk about the same "Truth" even though they live far apart or even in different times? I think it takes real practice to realize the Truth, and not just scripture debates. By realizing for oneself, the quarrels between traditions become nonsense.

The customs of the Noble Onces

By Ajahn Thanissaro on Forest Tradition Ajahn from AcccessToInsight.org

Throughout its history, Buddhism has worked as a civilizing force. Its teachings on karma, for instance — the principle that all intentional actions have consequences — have taught morality and compassion to many societies. But on a deeper level, Buddhism has always straddled the line between civilization and wilderness. The Buddha himself gained Awakening in a forest, gave his first sermon in a forest, and passed away in a forest. The qualities of mind he needed in order to survive physically and mentally as he went, unarmed, into the wilds, were key to his discovery of the Dhamma. They included resilience, resolve, and alertness; self-honesty and circumspection; steadfastness in the face of loneliness; courage and ingenuity in the face of external dangers; compassion and respect for the other inhabitants of the forest. These qualities formed the "home culture" of the Dhamma.

Periodically, as Buddhism spread and adapted to different societies, some practitioners felt that the original message of the Dhamma had become diluted. So they returned to the wilderness in order to revive its home culture. Many wilderness traditions are still alive today, especially in the Theravada countries of Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia. There, mendicant ascetic monks continue to wander through the remaining rainforests, in search of Awakening in the same environment where the Buddha found Awakening himself. Among these wilderness traditions, the one that has attracted the largest number of Western students, and is beginning to take root in the West, is the Kammatthana (Meditation) Forest tradition of Thailand.

The Kammatthana tradition was founded by Ajaan Mun Bhuridatto in the early decades of this century. Ajaan Mun's mode of practice was solitary and strict. He followed theVinaya (monastic discipline) faithfully, and also observed many of what are known as the thirteen classic dhutanga (ascetic) practices, such as living off almsfood, wearing robes made of cast-off rags, dwelling in the forest, eating only one meal a day. Searching out secluded places in the wilds of Thailand and Laos, he avoided the responsibilities of settled monastic life and spent long hours of the day and night in meditation. In spite of his reclusive nature, he attracted a large following of students willing to put up with the hardships of forest life in order to study with him.

He also had his detractors, who accused him of not following traditional Thai Buddhist customs. He usually responded by saying that he wasn't interested in bending to the customs of any particular society — as they were, by definition, the customs of people with greed, anger, and delusion in their minds. He was more interested in finding and following the Dhamma's home culture, or what he called the customs of the noble ones: the practices that had enabled the Buddha and his disciples to achieve Awakening in the first place. This phrase — the customs of the noble ones — comes from an incident in the Buddha's life: not long after his Awakening, he returned to his home town in order to teach the Dhamma to the family he had left six years earlier. After spending the night in a forest, he went for alms in town at daybreak. His father the king learned of this and immediately went to upbraid him. "This is shameful," the king said. "No one in the lineage of our family has ever gone begging. It's against our family customs."

"Your majesty," the Buddha replied, "I now belong, not to the lineage of my family, but to the lineage of the noble ones. Theirs are the customs I follow."

Ajaan Mun devoted many years of his life to tracking those customs down. Born in 1870, the son of rice farmers in the northeastern province of Ubon, he was ordained as a monk in the provincial capital in 1892. At the time of his ordination, there were two broad types of Buddhism available in Thailand. The first can be called Customary Buddhism — the mores and rites handed down over the centuries from teacher to teacher with little, if any, reference to the Pali canon. For the most part, these customs taught monks to live a sedentary life in the village monastery, serving the local villagers as doctors or fortune tellers. Monastic discipline tended to be loose. Occasionally, monks would go on a pilgrimage they called "dhutanga" which bore little resemblance to the classic dhutanga practices. Instead, it was more an undisciplined escape valve for the pressures of sedentary life. Moreover, monks and lay people practiced forms of meditation that deviated from the path of tranquillity and insight outlined in the Pali canon. Their practices, called vichaa aakhom, or incantation knowledge, involved initiations and invocations used for shamanistic purposes, such as protective charms and magical powers. They rarely mentioned nirvana except as an entity to be invoked for shamanic rites.

The second type of Buddhism available at the time was Reform Buddhism, based on the Pali canon and begun in the 1820's by Prince Mongkut, who later became King Rama IV (and still later was portrayed in the musical The King and I). Prince Mongkut was ordained as a monk for twenty-seven years before ascending the throne. After studying the canon during his early years as a monk, he grew discouraged by the level of practice he saw around him in Thai monasteries. So he reordained among the Mons — an ethnic group that straddled the Thai-Burmese border and occupied a few villages across the river from Bangkok — and studied Vinaya and the classic dhutanga practices under the guidance of a Mon teacher. Later, his brother, King Rama III, complained that it was disgraceful for member of the royal family to join an ethnic minority, and so built a monastery for the Prince-Monk on the Bangkok side of the river. There, Mongkut attracted a small but strong following of like-minded monks and lay supporters, and in this way the Dhammayut (lit., In Accordance with the Dhamma) movement was born.

In its early years, the Dhammayut movement was an informal grouping devoted to Pali studies, focusing on Vinaya, the classic dhutanga practices, a rationalist interpretation of the Dhamma, and the revival of meditation techniques taught in the Pali canon, such as recollection of the Buddha and mindfulness of the body. None of the movement's members, however, could prove that the teachings of the Pali canon actually led to enlightenment. Mongkut himself was convinced that the path to nirvana was no longer open, but he felt that a great deal of merit could be made by reviving at least the outward forms of the earliest Buddhist traditions. Formally taking a bodhisattva vow, he dedicated the merit of his efforts to future Buddhahood. Many of his students also took vows, hoping to become disciples of that future Buddha.

Upon disrobing and ascending the throne after his brother's death in 1851, Rama IV was in a position to impose his reforms on the rest of the Thai Sangha, but chose not to. Instead, he quietly sponsored the building of new Dhammayut centers in the capital and the provinces, which was how — by the time of Ajaan Mun — there came to be a handful of Dhammayut monasteries in Ubon.

Ajaan Mun felt that Customary Buddhism had little to offer and so he joined the Dhammayut order, taking a student of Prince Mongkut as his preceptor. Unlike many who joined the order at the time, he wasn't interested in the social advancement that would come with academic study and ecclesiastical appointments. Instead, his life on the farm had impressed on him the sufferings inherent in the cycle of life and death, and his single aim was to find a way out of the cycle. As a result, he soon left the scholarly environment of his preceptor's temple and went to live with a teacher named Ajaan Sao Kantasilo (1861-1941) in a small meditation monastery on the outskirts of town.

Ajaan Sao was unusual in the Dhammayut order in that he had no scholarly interests but was devoted to the practice of meditation. He trained Ajaan Mun in strict discipline and canonical meditation practices, set in the context of the dangers and solitude of the wilderness. He could not guarantee that this practice would lead to the noble attainments, but he believed that it headed in the right direction.

After wandering for several years with Ajaan Sao, Ajaan Mun set off on his own in search of a teacher who could show him for sure the way to the noble attainments. His search took nealry two decades and involved countless hardships as he trekked through the jungles of Laos, central Thailand, and Burma, but he never found the teacher he sought. Gradually he realized that he would have to follow the Buddha's example and take the wilderness itself as his teacher, not simply to conform to the ways of nature — for nature is samsara itself — but to break through to truths transcending them entirely. If he wanted to find the way beyond aging, illness, and death, he would have to learn the lessons of an environment where aging, illness, and death are thrown into sharp relief. At the same time, his encounters with other monks in the forest convinced him that learning the lessons of the wilderness involved more than just mastering the skills of physical survival. He would also have to develop the acuity not to be misled by dead-end sidetracks in his meditation. So, with a strong sense of the immensity of his task, he returned to a mountainous region in central Thailand and settled alone in a cave.

In the long course of his wilderness training, Ajaan Mun learned that — contrary to Reform and Customary beliefs — the path to nirvana was not closed. The true Dhamma was to be found not in old customs or texts but in the well-trained heart and mind. The texts were pointers for training, nothing more or less. The rules of the Vinaya, instead of simply being external customs, played an important role in physical and mental survival. As for the Dhamma texts, practice was not just a matter of confirming what they said. Reading and thinking about the texts could not give an adequate understanding of what they meant — and did not count as showing them true respect. True respect for the texts meant taking them as a challenge: putting their teachings seriously to the test to see if, in fact, they are true. In the course of testing the teachings, the mind would come to many unexpected realizations that were not contained in the texts. These in turn had to be put to the test as well, so that one learned gradually by trial and error to the point of an actual noble attainment. Only then, Ajaan Mun would say, did one understand the Dhamma.

This attitude toward the Dhamma parallels what ancient cultures called "warrior knowledge" — the knowledge that comes from developing skills in difficult situations — as opposed to the "scribe knowledge" that people sitting in relative security and ease can write down in words. Of course, warriors need to use words in their training, but they view a text as authoritative only if its teachings are borne out in practice. The Canon itself encourages this attitude when it quotes the Buddha as teaching his aunt, "As for the teachings of which you may know, 'These teachings lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to divesting, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"

Thus the ultimate authority in judging a teaching is not whether the teaching can be found in a text. It lies in each person's relentless honesty in putting the Dhamma to the test and carefully monitoring the results.

When Ajaan Mun had reached the point where he could guarantee that the path to the noble attainments was still open, he returned to the northeast to inform Ajaan Sao and then to continue wandering. Gradually he began to attract a grassroots following. People who met him were impressed by his demeanor and teachings, which were unlike those of any other monks they had known. They believed that he embodied the Dhamma and Vinaya in everything he did and said. As a teacher, he took a warrior's approach to training his students. Instead of simply imparting verbal knowledge, he put them into situations where they would have to develop the qualities of mind and character needed in surviving the battle with their own defilements. Instead of teaching a single meditation technique, he taught them a full panoply of skills — as one student said, "Everything from washing spittoons on up" — and then sent them into the wilds.

It was after Ajaan Mun's return to the northeast that a third type of Buddhism emanating from Bangkok — State Buddhism — began to impinge on his life. In an effort to present a united front in the face of imperialist threats from Britain and France, Rama V (1868-1910) wanted to move the country from a loose feudal system to a centralized nation-state. As part of his program, he and his brothers — one of whom was ordained as a monk — enacted religious reforms to prevent the encroachment of Christian missionaries. Having received their education from British tutors, they created a new monastic curriculum that subjected the Dhamma and Vinaya to Victorian notions of reason and utility. Their new version of the Vinaya, for instance, was a compromise between Customary and Reform Buddhism designed to counter Christian attacks that monks were unreliable and lazy. Monks were instructed to give up their wanderings, settle in established monasteries, and accept the new state curriculum. Because the Dhammayut monks were the best educated in Thailand at the time — and had the closest connections to the royal family — they were enlisted to do advance work for the government in outlying regions.

In 1928, a Dhammayut authority unsympathetic to meditation and forest wanderers took charge of religious affairs in the northeast. Trying to domesticate Ajaan Mun's following, he ordered them to establish monasteries and help propagate the government's program. Ajaan Mun and a handful of his students left for the north, where they were still free to roam. In the early 1930's, Ajaan Mun was appointed the abbot of an important monastery in the city of Chieng Mai, but fled the place before dawn of the following day. He returned to settle in the northeast only in the very last years of his life, after the local ecclesiastical authorities had grown more favorably disposed to his way of practice. He maintained many of his dhutanga practices up to his death in 1949.

It wasn't until the 1950's that the movement he founded gained acceptance in Bangkok, and only in the 1970's did it come into prominence on a nationwide level. This coincided with a widespread loss of confidence in state monks, many of whom were little more than bureaucrats in robes. As a result, Kammatthana monks came to represent, in the eyes of many monastics and lay people, a solid and reliable expression of the Dhamma in a world of fast and furious modernization.

Buddhist history has shown that wilderness traditions go through a very quick life cycle. As one loses its momentum, another often grows up in its place. But with the wholesale destruction of Thailand's forests in the last few decades, the Kammatthana tradition may be the last great forest tradition that Thailand will produce. Fortunately, we in the West have learned of it in time to gather lessons that will be help in cultivating the customs of the noble ones on Western soil and establishing authentic wilderness traditions of our own.

Perhaps the most important of those lessons concerns the role that the wilderness plays in testing and correcting trends that develop among Buddhists in cities and towns. The story of the Kammatthana tradition gives lie to the facile notion that Buddhism has survived simply by adapting to its host culture. The survival of Buddhism and the survival of the Dhamma are two different things. People like Ajaan Mun — willing to make whatever sacrifices are needed to discover and practice the Dhamma on its own terms — are the ones who have kept the Dhamma alive. Of course, people have always been free to engage in Buddhist traditions in whatever way they like, but those who have benefited most from that engagement are those who, instead of reshaping Buddhism to fit their preferences, reshape themselves to fit in with the customs and traditions of the noble ones. To find these customs isn't easy, given the bewildering variety of traditions that Buddhists have spawned over the centuries. To test them, each individual is thrown back on his or her own powers of relentless honesty, integrity, and discernment. There are no easy guarantees. And perhaps this fact in itself is a measure of the Dhamma's true worth. Only people of real integrity can truly comprehend it. As Ajaan Lee, one of Ajaan Mun's students, once said, "If a person isn't true to the Buddha's teachings, the Buddha's teachings won't be true to that person — and that person won't be able to know what the Buddha's true teachings are."

Ajahn Chah by Ajahn Jayasaro @ YouTube (one of them)

There seems to be 33 YouTube clips in total, so if you click the left and right sides of the "TV" you should be able to listen to all of them.

Biography of Ajahn Chah at YouTube

CLICK BELOW FOR:

Biography of Ajahn Chah by Ajahn Jayasaro at YouTube.

I don't know how long it will be there, so I may try to download them later on tonight or tomorrow. Is it possible??

Original source that I found was at bswa.org, posted by Bhikkhu Pesala. Also, the thread referred to this page at YouTube.

Life and death of puppies

Over the past couple of months, two puppies died on me.

The first one was called Jade, Casper's sister (the only puppy I have with me now), who died a bit more than a month ago after we took her to see a vet in Wanchai Animal Clinic for minor bacteria infection on her tail. The vet put one of those dog collars on her, and she had been shivering to death (I think). She was so afraid, and probably had a heart attack, but we could never be sure as I did not ask for an autopsy. She could still be alive if I took the collar off (a bit too late now for feeling sorry for not doing it then...)

The second one was Hollie, or Holly, who died last week. We adopted her to be a friend of Casper when she was about two and a half months old (10 - 12 weeks), and only had one vaccine against some of puppies' deadly deceases. It turned out that by the second day that she was with us, she already developed severe diarrhea and was unable to eat or drink. We took her to see a vet around midnight of the second day that she came to live with us, and the vet diagnosed that she suffered from a very dangerous virus infection (for dogs) called "Pavo...something". It was likely that she already had the virus with her even when she was with the breeder (i.e. even before she was given to the pet shop, before the pet shop gave her to us). So that night we went back to the pet shop and asked the pet shop and the breeder to look after her until she got better and became 100% healthy. Before Chinese New Year, we got her back, and even took her to see our "new" vet again (about 10 days ago), and the vet said that she was fine. After a couple of days she suffered from flu and probably bacteria infection and we gave her medicines and things for a week.

Then one morning after the second day that I put her to sleep in the same cage as Casper she didn't "fully" wake up. Somehow she slept under a pillow, and Casper unknowingly slept on top of that pillow, so she might have been squashed between the mat and the pillow, and was unable to move, and...probably lost all energy, and was unable to bark or cry. I went to sleep around 3:30am in the morning and did not find anything unusual, not until the morning when our helper, Avi, came to pick the pups up to go toileting. When our helper, Avi, took Holly to the vet in the early morning after she sensed that she was in a very weak state, it was already too late.

I guess I had to blame myself for not being careful enough especially with small and sick puppies, and I guess I also had to blame the pet shop as well as the breeder for not taking care of the pups properly, even before giving Holly back to us before the Chinese New Year (why the rush). I have a very bad experience with raising young pups, as well as with pet shops and dog breeders here. No point putting all the blame to everybody else, as I also should have known better.

The 4th jhana

"The fourth jhana is a state of profound stillness and peace, in which the mind rests with unshakeable one-pointedness and equanimity, and breathing has calmed to the point of stopping. The mind has a radiant purity, due to its "brightly shining" depths having been uncovered and made manifest at the surface level. It is said to be very "workable" and "adaptable" like refined gold, which can be used to make all manner of precious and wonderful things. It is thus an ideal take-off point for various further developments. Indeed it seems to have been the state from which the Buddha went on to attain enlightment."

(Harvey 1990, 250-2)

I have never practice Zen Buddhism before, so I am quite unfamiliar with the (in my opinion) strange way that Zennies sit meditate. From the famous web-forum that I often visit there is a link to this website www.buddhabum.com/store/ that sells something calls "seiza bench" which are supposed to be quite comfortable to sit meditate.

If I have a chance, I might get one :-)

From unchain.biz to forestdharma.net

Before I use this domain name "forestdharma.net", this Buddhist "notebook" blog originally had the domain name "unchain.biz". I really like the word "unchain" because it is associated with the word "unbinding", which is associated with breaking the chain of samsara - ing (at least in my personal opinion). However, I guess I did not like the ".biz" so much because (1) the ".biz" is for business domain; and (2) ".biz" just sounds funny, a bit strange for a Buddhist blog.

Initially, I refrained from using anything to do with forest+dharma, or forest+dhamma because I am only a lay person who practice Buddhism according to the Thai forest tradition, and nothing more. I am not an ordained bhikkhu (although I have ordained twice when I was in my 20s at Wat Doi Dhamma Chedi in Sakon Nakorn in Isan, Thailand) .... Then I thought...why not? why shouldn't I use this domain name? ...nobody is using it, and also at blogger forestdharma.blogspot.com is still available, so I decided to make the switch this morning!

A piece from "Awakening of Faith"

From Awakened of Faith

..........

a. The Aspect of Enlightenment

(1) Original Enlightenment

The essence of Mind is free from thoughts. The characteristic of that which is free from thoughts is analogous to that of the sphere of empty space that pervades everywhere. The one without any second, i.e. the absolute aspect of the World of Reality (dharmadhatu) is none other than the undifferentiated Dharmakaya, the "Essence-body" of the Tathagata. Since the essence of Mind is grounded on the Dharmakaya, it is to be called the original enlightenment. Why? Because "original enlightenment" indicates the essence of Mind (a priori) in contradistinction to the essence of Mind in the process of actualization of enlightenment; the process of actualization of enlightenment is none other than the process of integrating the identity with the original enlightenment.

(2) The Process of Actualization of Enlightenment

Grounded on the original enlightenment is nonenlightenment. And because of nonenlightenment, the process of actualization of enlightenment can be spoken of.
Now, to be fully enlightened to the fountainhead of Mind is called the final enlightenment; and not to be enlightened to the fountainhead of Mind, nonfinal enlightenment.

What is the meaning of this? An ordinary man becomes aware that his former thoughts were wrong; then he is able to stop (nirodha) such thoughts from arising again. Although this sometimes may also be called enlightenment, properly it is not enlightenment at all because it is not enlightenment that reaches the fountainhead of Mind.

The followers of Hinayana, who have some insight, and those Bodhisattvas who have just been initiated become aware of the changing state (anyathatva) of thoughts and are free from thoughts which are subject to change [such as the existence of a permanent self (atman), etc.]. Since they have forsaken the rudimentary attachments derived from unwarranted speculation (vikalpa), their experience is called enlightenment in appearance.

Bodhisattvas who have come to the realization of Dharmakaya become aware of the temporarily abiding state (sthiti) of thoughts and are not arrested by them. Since they are free from their rudimentary false thoughts derived from the speculation that the components of the world are real, their experience is called approximate enlightenment.

Those Bodhisattvas who have completed the stages of a Bodhisattva and who have fulfilled the expedient means needed to bring forth the original enlightenment to the fullest extent will experience the oneness with Suchness in an instant; they will become aware of how the inceptions of the deluded thoughts of the mind arise (jati), and will be free from the rise of any deluded thought. Since they are far away even from subtle deluded thoughts, they are able to have an insight into the original nature of Mind. The realization that Mind is eternal is called the final enlightenment. It is, therefore, said in a sutra that if there is a man who is able to perceive that which is beyond thoughts he is advancing toward the Buddha wisdom.
Though it is said that there is an inception of the rising of deluded thoughts in the mind, there is no inception as such that can be known as being independent of the essence of Mind. And yet to say that the inception of the rising of deluded thoughts is known means that it is known as existing on the ground of that which is beyond thoughts [i.e., the essence of Mind]. Accordingly, all ordinary people are said not to be enlightened because they have had a continuous stream of deluded thoughts and have never been freed from their thoughts; therefore, they are said to be in a beginningless ignorance. If a man gains insight into that which is free from thoughts, then he knows how those thoughts which characterize the mind [i.e., deluded thoughts] arise, abide, change, and cease to be, for he is identical with that which is free from thoughts. But, in reality, no difference exists in the process of the actualization of enlightenment, because the four states [of arising, abiding, etc.] exist simultaneously and each of them is not self-existent; they are originally of one and the same enlightenment [in that they are taking place on the ground of original enlightenment, as its phenomenal aspects].

And, again, original enlightenment, when analyzed in relation to the defiled state [in the phenomenal order], presents itself as having two attributes. One is the "Purity of Wisdom" and the other is the "Suprarational Functions".

(a) Purity of Wisdom.

By virtue of the permeation (vasana, perfuming) of the influence of dharma [i.e., the essence of Mind or original enlightenment], a man comes to truly discipline himself and fulfills all expedient means of unfolding enlightenment; as a result, he breaks through the compound consciousness [i.e., the Storehouse Consciousness that contains both enlightenment and nonenlightenment], puts an end to the manifestation of the stream of deluded mind, and manifests the Dharmakaya [i.e., the essence of Mind], for his wisdom (prajna) becomes genuine and pure.

What is the meaning of this? All modes (lakshana) of mind and consciousness under the state of nonenlightenment are the products of ignorance. Ignorance does not exist apart from enlightenment; therefore, it cannot be destroyed [because one cannot destroy something which does not really exist], and yet it cannot not be destroyed [insofar as it remains]. This is like the relationship that exists between the water of the ocean [i.e., enlightenment] and its waves [i.e., modes of mind] stirred by the wind [i.e., ignorance]. Water and wind are inseparable; but water is not mobile by nature, and if the wind stops the movement ceases. But the wet nature remains undestroyed. Likewise, man's Mind, pure in its own nature, is stirred by the wind of ignorance.

Both Mind and ignorance have no particular forms of their own and they are inseparable. Yet Mind is not mobile by nature, and if ignorance ceases, then the continuity of deluded activities ceases. But the essential nature of wisdom [i.e., the essence of Mind, like the wet nature of the water] remains undestroyed.

(b) Suprarational Functions

He who has fully uncovered the original enlightenment is capable of creating all manner of excellent conditions because his wisdom is pure. The manifestation of his numberless excellent qualities is incessant; accommodating himself to the capacity of other men he responds spontaneously, reveals himself in manifold ways, and benefits them.

(3) The Characteristics of the Essence of Enlightenment

The characteristics of the essence of enlightenment have four great significances that are identical with those of empty space or that are analogous to those of a bright mirror.

First, the essence of enlightenment is like a mirror which is really empty of images. It is free from all marks of objects of the mind and it has nothing to reveal in itself, for it does not reflect any images.

Second, it is like a mirror influencing (vasana) all men to advance toward enlightenment. That is to say, it is truly nonempty; appearing in it are all the objects of the world which neither go out nor come in; which are neither lost nor destroyed. It is eternally abiding One Mind. All things appear in it because all things are real. And none of the defiled things are able to defile it, for the essence of wisdom [i.e., original enlightenment] is unaffected by defilements, being furnished with an unsoiled quality and influencing all men to advance toward enlightenment.

Third, it is like a mirror which is free from defiled objects reflected in it. This can be said because the nonempty state [of original enlightenment] is genuine, pure, and bright, being free from hindrances both affectional and intellectual, and transcending characteristics of that which is compounded [i.e., the Storehouse Consciousness].

Fourth, it is like a mirror influencing a man to cultivate his capacity for goodness, serving as a coordinating cause to encourage him in his endeavors. Because the essence of enlightenment is free from defiled objects, it universally illumines the mind of man and induces him to cultivate his capacity for goodness, presenting itself in accordance with his desires [as a mirror presents his appearance].
............

Photo of Ajahn chah

Ajahn Chah (downloaded from Abhayagiri Buddhist Monastery)

The mind knows itself...(Ajahn Chah)

From Ajahn Chah's "A Path to Peace (2)"

... In its natural state, the mind is the same - in it, there exists no loving or hating, nor does it seek to blame other people. It is independent, existing in a state of purity that is truly clear, radiant and untarnished. In its pure state, the mind is peaceful, without happiness or suffering - indeed, not experiencing any vedana (feeling) at all. This is the true state of the mind. The purpose of the practice, then, is to seek inwardly, searching and investigating until you reach the original mind. The original mind is also known as the pure mind. The pure mind is the mind without attachment. It doesn't get affected by mind-objects. In other words, it doesn't chase after the different kinds of pleasant and unpleasant mind-objects. Rather, the mind is in a state of continuous knowing and wakefulness - thoroughly mindful of all it is experiencing. When the mind is like this, no pleasant or unpleasant mind-objects it experiences will be able to disturb it. The mind doesn't 'become' anything. In other words, nothing can shake it. The mind knows itself as pure. It has evolved its own, true independence; it has reached its original state. How is it able to bring this original state into existence? Through the faculty of mindfulness wisely reflecting and seeing that all things are merely conditions arising out of the influence of elements, without any individual being controlling them. This is how it is with the happiness and suffering we experience. When these mental states arise, they are just 'happiness' and 'suffering'. There is no owner of the happiness. The mind is not the owner of the suffering - mental states do not belong to the mind. Look at it for yourself. In reality these are not affairs of the mind, they are separate and distinct. Happiness is just the state of happiness; suffering is just the state of suffering. You are merely the knower of these. In the past, because the roots of greed, hatred and delusion already existed in the mind, whenever you caught sight of the slightest pleasant or unpleasant mind-object, the mind would react immediately - you would take hold of it and have to experience either happiness or suffering. You would be continuously indulging in states of happiness and suffering. That's the way it is as long as the mind doesn't know itself - as long as it's not bright and illuminated The mind is not free. It is influenced by whatever mind-objects it experiences. In other words, it is without a refuge, unable to truly depend on itself. You receive a pleasant mental impression and get into a good mood. The mind forgets itself.

In contrast, the original mind is beyond good and bad. This is the original nature of the mind. If you feel happy over experiencing a pleasant mind-object, that is delusion. If you feel unhappy over experiencing an unpleasant mind-object, that is delusion. Unpleasant mind objects make you suffer and pleasant ones make you happy - this is the world. Mind-objects come with the world. They are the world. They give rise to happiness and suffering, good and evil, and everything that is subject to impermanence and uncertainty. When you separate from the original mind, everything becomes uncertain - there is just unending birth and death, uncertainty and apprehensiveness, suffering and hardship, without any way of halting it or bringing it to cessation. This is the endless round of rebirth...

There is monks a domain...

"There is monks a domain where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no wind, no sphere of infinite space, no sphere of nothingness, no sphere of neither awareness nor non-awareness; there is not this world, there is not another world, there is no sun or moon. I do not call this coming or going, nor standing nor dying, nor being reborn; it is without support, without occurrence, without object. Just this is the end of suffering."

(Trans. in Gethin 1998: 76-77).

Some discussions on Mahayana and Theravada

at E-Sangha

HERE

and
HERE

and
HERE

and

HERE

and more !!! Seems to be a popular topic nowadays.

Paticca-samuppada

Anguttara Nikaya 3:61:

It is with ignorance (avijja) as a condition
that formations (sankhara) come to be;
with formations as a condition,
consciousness (vinnana) comes to be;
with consciousness as a condition,
name and form (nama-rupa) come to be;
with name and form as a condition,
the six bases (salayatana) come to be;
with the six bases as a condition,
contact (phassa) comes to be;
with contact as a condition,
feeling (vedana) comes to be;
with feeling as a condition,
desire (tanha) comes to be;
with desire as a condition,
clinging (upadana) comes to be;
with clinging as a condition,
being (bhava) comes to be;
with being as a condition,
birth (jati) comes to be;
with birth as a condition,
aging and death (jara-marana) come to be,
and also sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair;
that is how there is an origin to this whole mass of suffering (dukkha).
This is called the Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering.

My post on "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m"

At E-Sangha...

Disclaimer: this is my understanding from practicing in the Thai forest tradition, but what I am writing below does not represent the teachings of the forest tradition, only my limited understanding of it.

Regarding "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m", it is unconditioned. Since it is unconditioned, it cannot interact with anything. It cannot influence samsara, nor can it be influenced by samsara. It is not a controller of anything as it does not have any ability to control, or be controlled.

Since it is "unborn" and "deathless", there is no concept of time. Time does not apply. Time only applies to things that are conditioned, like the five aggregates. For the unconditioned, time simply does not exist. No time.

We are so caught up with samsara way of thinking where time is an inescapable reality, and as we never have experienced anything that is “not bound by time”, we always think of this as having to be either nihilistic or eternalistic. But both terms do not apply.

The only reason that, in my understanding, " vi~n~naana.m andassana.m" is used is because of the quality of knowing. However, this quality is of “simply knowing” only, and not of thinking, not understanding, not comprehending, not storing any tiny bits of memory. Simply knows. Luminous because knowing is limitless, but there light/color/darkness do not apply.

When we use the word mind, we think of a thing. This is not a thing either, and cannot be found, and does not exist nor not exist. It is not the mind. Sometimes the word mind is used simply because for lack of better words.

Is it Self or True Self? Far from that as well. Self or whatever we call me or mine only belongs to samsara. “We” are the self, the illusion, the concept. The “one” that knows is also a concept. It's not also the new-age or ancient-age "one with all, and all with one". Or getting back into the Atman either, no mini Me finally rejoining the Big Me.

But this can be known, and the only way that it is known is directly from practice to see samsara as is. Simple. But that "direct knowledge" of is also in samsara. As this can be known, some Buddhist practitioners do not deny it. Some may not like to talk much about it as it is incomprehensible, and unexplainable, and only to be known by oneself. But since we have not yet experienced this , it does not mean that this is "false" or "wrong". [I know, some wouldn't want to anyway, or say it's a fake mind-made thing, whatever.]

For those who have direct knowledge of this "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m", which is also not any jhanic states either as it does not belong to any realms of existence nor does it have any kinds of existence (nor not exist), it is more true than anything in front of our eyes.

PS – I do not equate this to nibbana though.

Just my limited understanding from listening and learning from some meditation masters.

Emptyuniverse on "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m"

A post by Emptyuniverse at E-Sangha...


Anyhoo, since it's now established that one who translates vi~n~naana.m andassana.m as "non-manifestative consciousness," etc., isn't necessarily a heretic guilty of wrong view, it's worth looking at this second allegation: that this translation is merely an oxymoron.

First, a list of some authors and translators who have seen fit to translate vi~n~naana.m andassana.m along these lines:

- the consciousness that makes no showing (Ven. Nanamoli)
- non-manifestative consciousness (Ven. Nyanananda)
- consciousness non-manifesting (from A Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya by Ven. Nanamoli and Ven. Bodhi)
- awakened consiciousness (from the Introduction of Ven. Sumedho's Intuitive Awareness)
- consciousness which is unmanifest (Ven. Amaro)
- consciousness without feature, consciousness without surface (Ven. Thanissaro)
- non-manifestative consciousness (Ven. Analayo)
- where consciousness is signless (M. Walshe)
- undemonstratable consciousness (Jeffrey Hopkins, Ven. Lati Rimpoche, trans. of rnam shes bstan med, from The Buddhism of Tibet)

Second, Ven. Bodhi's translation of this term in MN 49: Brahmanimantanika Sutta:

Consciousness non-manifesting,
Boundless, luminous all-round:

that is not pataken of by the earthness of earth, that is not partaken of by the waterness of water ... that is not partaken of by the allness of all.

And his reason for departing from the commentary when doing so (endnote 513 from The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya):

These lines (which also apear as part of a full verse at DN 11.85/i.223) have been a perennial challenge to Buddhist scholarship, and even Aacariya Buddhaghosa seems to founder over them. MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbaana, called "consciousness" (vi~n~naa.na.m) in the sense that "it can be cognized" (vijaanitabba.m). This derivation is hardly credible, since nowhere in the Nikaayas is Nibbaana described as consciousness, nor is it possible to derive an active noun from the gerundive. MA explains anidassana.m as meaning invisible, "because it (Nibbaana) does not come within range of eye-consciousness," but again this is a trite explanation. The word anidassana occurs at MN 21.14 in the description of empty space as an unsuitable medium for painting pictures; thus the idea seems to be that of not making manifest.

MA offers three explanations of sabbato pabha.m: (1) completely possessed of luminosity (pabhaa); (2) possessing being (pabhuuta.m) everywhere; and (3) a ford (pabha.m) accessible from all sides, i.e. through any of the thirty-eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy.

Ven. Nyanananda's comments on this same excerpt from MN 49:

In the Brahmanimantanikasutta of the Majjhima Nikaaya, also, the first two lines of the verse, vi~n~naana.m anidassana.m, anan­ta.m sabbato pabha.m, occur. But here the commentator follows a dif­ferent line of interpretation. Whereas in his commentary to the Keva.d.dhasutta he explains anidas­sana.m as an epithet of Nibbaana, in the sense of having nothing to compare with, here he takes it in the sense of not being visi­ble to the eye. Cakkhuvi~n~naa.nassa aapaatha.m anupagamanato ani­dassana.m naama, "it is called anidassana be­cause it does not come within the range of eye-consciousness".

In explaining the term sabbato pabha.m, he suggests several alter­native interpretations. In the first interpretation, he takes pabhaa to mean light, or lustre. Sabbato pabhan'ti sabbato pabhaa­sampanna.m. Nibbaanato hi a~n~no dhammo sappabhataro vaa joti­vantataro vaa pari­suddhataro vaa pa.n.darataro vaa natthi. "Sabbato pabha.m means more lustrous than anything else. For there is nothing more lustrous or lu­minous or purer or whiter than Nib­baana".

The etymology of the term sabbato pabha.m has been given a twist, for the word sabbato is taken in a comparative sense, 'more lustrous than anything'. As we have pointed out, the term actu­ally means 'lustrous on all sides'. Then a second interpretation is given, bringing in the word pabhuu, 'lord' or 'chief'. Sabbato vaa pabhuu, that is to say more prominent than anything else. In sup­port of it he says: Asukadisaaya naama nibbaana.m natthii'ti na vat­tabba.m, "it should not be said that in such and such a direction Nibbaana is not to be found". He says that it is called pabhuu, or lord, because it is to be found in all directions. Only as the third interpretation he cites his simile of the ford already given in his commentary to the Keva.d.dhasutta.

What is the reason for giving so many figurative interpreta­tions as alternatives to such a significant verse? Surely the Bud­dha would not have intended the verse to convey so many con­flicting meanings, when he preached it.

No doubt the commentators have made a great effort to pre­serve the Dhamma, but due to some unfortunate historical cir­cumstances, most of the deep discourses dealing with the sub­ject of Nibbaana have been handed down without even a clue to the correct version among variant readings. This has left the commentators nonplussed, so much so that they had to give us several vague and alternative inter­pretations to choose from. It is up to us to decide, whether we should accept this position as it is, or try to improve on it by exploring any other possible means of explanation.

We had occasion to mention in our very first sermon that the Bud­dha himself has prophesied that those discourse which deal with voidness would, in time to come, go into disuse, with their deeper meanings obscured. The interpretations just quoted go to show that already the prediction has come true to a great ex­tent.

And third, the relevant passage from DN 11: Kevaddha Sutta (Nyanananda trans.):

Consciousness, which is non-manifestative,
Endless, lustrous on all sides[....]

And his comments regarding Ven. Buddhaghosa's treatment of these lines:

The commentator begins his exposition with the word vi~n~naa.na.m itself. He comes out with a peculiar etymology: Vi~n~naa.nan'ti tattha vi~n~naatabbanti vi~n~naa.na.m nibbaanassa naama.m, which means that the word vi~n~naa.na, or consciousness, is in this context a synonym for Nibbaana, in the sense that it is 'to be known', vi~n~naatabba.m. This forced etymology is far from con­vincing, since such a usage is not attested elsewhere. Moreover, we come across a long list of epithets for Nibbaana, as many as thirty-three, in the Asa.nkhatasa.myutta of the Sa.myutta Nikaaya, but vi~n~naa.na is not counted as one. In fact, no­where in the dis­courses is vi~n~naa.na used as a synonym for Nibbaana.

Next, he takes up the word anidassana, and makes the fol­lowing comment: Tad eta.m nidassanaabhaavato anidassana.m, that Nibbaana is called anidassana because no illustration for it could be given. The idea is that it has nothing to compare with. Then comes the explana­tion of the word ananta.m. According to the commentator Nibbaana is called ananta, endless, because it has neither the arising-end, up­paadanto, nor the falling-end, vayanto, nor the otherwiseness of the persisting-end, .thitassa a~n~nathatta. Strangely enough, even the last mentioned middle-state is counted as an 'end' in the commentators concept of three ends. So this is the substance of his commentary to the first three words vi~n~naa.na.m, anidassana.m, ananta.m.

The commentarial interpretation of the term sabbato pabha.m is even more confusing. The word pabhaa is explained as a syno­nym for papa, meaning 'ford'. The bha element in the word, he explains, is a result of consonantal interchange with the original pa in papa. Pakaa­rassa pana bhakaaro kato. The idea is that the original form of this particular term for Nibbaana is sabbato pa­pa.m. The meaning attrib­uted to it is 'with fords on all sides'. Nibbaana is supposed to be meta­phorically conceived as the ocean, to get down into which there are fords on all sides, namely the thirty-eight topics of meditation. This interpretation seems rather far fetched. It is as if the commen­tator has re­sorted to this simile of a ford, because he is already 'in deep wa­ters'! The word pabhaa, as it is, clearly means light, or radi­ance, and its association with wisdom is also well attested in the canon.

Just considering these two venerable authors/translators, it seems that they have employed significant textual analysis in departing from the commentaries to give their translation of this term. It's obvious that they don't do so lightly. IMO their analysis is cogent.

Metta.

Is samsara = dukkha ?

In the simple form:

1st Noble Truth = Truth of dukkha
2nd Noble Truth = Truth of the cause of dukkha
3rd Noble Truth = Truth of the cessation of dukkha
4th Noble Truth = Truth of the way to the end of suffering, the 8-fold path

What is dukkha? In everyday words, dukkha is often translated as "suffering" or sometimes "stressful". If I have to choose between the two, I would choose the second one.

What is the origin of dukkha? It's ignorance, the "not knowing" the reality of the 4NT itself, or some may prefer the not knowing what samsara and nibbana is all about.

The Third Noble truth is the end of suffering. Some says that it is when there is no more suffering. Some say that it is nibbana. I say it's both. However, to me the end of suffering is not the end of the process, but the "..." that is not bound by samsara, not bound by ignorance, which is simply is nibbana. Although I believe it is also correct to say that dukkha is ended when all the 10 fetters have been eradicated, so arahants has no dukkha even when they are alive, I tend to link the First Noble Truth to samsara itself. The condition of samsara as "impermanence, non-self, and suffering/stressful " is packaged in "dukkha". So in another word, there is only dukkha and nibbana. Dukkha = conditioned = samsara-ing, while on the other hand, nibbana = unconditioned , unborn, deathless, cannot be found/not found.

The Forth Noble Truth is known when the noble ones realized the first 3 Noble Truths, as when they realize these Noble Truths, it becomes clear to them as to how to practice in the correct way, which is the 8-fold path.


There are a lot of questions reagarding the First Noble Truth. It goes like; "when I am happy and do not suffer, I am not in dukkha, so does the First Noble Truth apply in this case?"; or something like; "if a heavenly being are constantly happy and do not experience, do the First Noble Truth apply to them?

I'd say "yes". As stated in the co-independent origination, ignorance is the root of all things in samsara, then as ignorance has not been uprooted, samsara is still inherently dukkha. The only exception when the 5 aggregates are not dukkha is when one becomes an arahant and is no longer fooled by avijja, ignorance. As there is no ignorance, the root of dukkha has already been eliminated. Even though there are still 5 aggregates, these five aggregates are merely aggregates and are not bound by the rules of karma of samsara in the same way as for unenlightened beings like us.

A post on the Forest Tradition at E-Sangha forum

There are a lot of miraculous stories of Thai forest teachers, indeed some may be very real, and some may be just stories retold over and over.

IMHO Ajahn Chah's most miraculous power is his amazing ability to teach. Son of poor farmers in Issan who did not speak English, had the ability to teach both Thai and western students such that now the Thai forest tradition is well-known across the world with renounced Western Ajahns such as Ajahn Sumedho, Ajahn Brahm, as well as a number of Thai Ajahns in many branch monasteries.

His teachings touch the hearts of those who care to listen with open mind. And for those who practice, the truths of his words can be found in their hearts. Despite the "brandings" that we read about once in a while that his teachings, and his students' teachings, are not strictly orthodox Theravada (or sometimes even described with more amusing words), for those of us who follow the forest tradition, and for those who may simply like his simple yet profound teachings, Ajahn Chah's words are very valuable.

I have no doubt in Ajahn Chah's miraculous ability to teach.



PS - I'd like to add that in additional to students that we know of, both HM the King and HM the Queen of Thailand have been making frequently visits to the forest ajahns during their private times over the past several decades. The King himself have temporary ordained at a young age, and no doubt have had access to teachings of well-versed high ranking scholar ajahns in Bangkok, and no doubt have heard about the branded "unorthodox" teachings of the forest ajahns. This has not stopped him from visiting forest tradition ajahns in Isaan many times a year to both pay respect and seek guidance for practice over the years - probably longer than my 40-year-old life, and not as royal duties. The Thai King had been practicing Buddhism for a long time.

Of course, this does not give the forest tradition a "royal seal", as if such a thing would say anything. But for those who may say that followers of the forest tradition are heretic, especially those who live in Thailand, they may like to include the Thai Monarchy in their list as well.