Dear Lennart,
Op 12-jun-2009, om 16:30 heeft Lennart Lopin het volgende geschreven:

> I really hope I do not offend anyone on this list here, but I am very
> glad to talk about this with Nina, my favorite Abhidhamma expert! -

-------

> N: Kindly said, but an expert? To be vi~n~nuu one has to practise
> accordingly. (I had an interesting discussion with Jim who prefers
> 'learned' for vi~n~nuu). Well, still a lot to learn.

As to offending: no, never. Another opinion can be a challenge to
consider more. If someone feels annoyed, it is his dosa.
---------

> L: I know that soon after the parinibbana many more "ultimate dhammas"
> where established (i.e. in the various Abhidhamma schools) and even
> things like "gender" or "vitakka" where included as "ultimate
> realities" when ultimately (LOL) they are not.

-------
N: It may be of interest to look at the Anupadasutta (M. 111) where
Saariputta said: <Ye ca pathamajjhaane dhammaa: vitakko ca vicaaro
ca piiti ca sukha~nca cittekaggataa ca....>
Vitakka and vicaara are dhammas, and as I understand not just
conventional terms.
As to gender, bhavaruupa, I do not find it difficult to understand
that this is one of the ruupas produced by kamma at the first moment
of our life and then throughout life.
-------

> L: We know that
> vitakka, vicara, gender, health, beauty, sounds, pain etc etc. can all
> be reduced to the 5 groups / or six-sense-experience (I must add
> stress is on experience NOT 'perceived' abstract reality - big
> difference!).
> So why add more and more and more complicated classifications?
> Probably a very human need for ... hm, proliferation?

------
N: They can be classified as five khandhas, as elements, as
aayatanas. The Buddha said in the suttas that one should become
skilfull as to the khandhas, dhaatus, aayatanas and he gave further
explanations. Thus, more details are valuable.
-------

> L: Practically, however, - when it boils down to samatha/vipassana
> practice - the description of the 5 groups of grasping is all we would
> actually need in terms of "concepts". Don't you think?

------
N: The Buddha taught for fortyfive years, to help us to understand
what these khandhas, naama and ruupa, really are. He taught how to
develop understanding of them. It depends on the individual how many
details he needs. When one is 'dumb' one needs a lot of detail.
---------

>
> L:So, coming back to where I had started I do not see any reference to
> "ultimate reality" in sutta (!) passages where the Buddha talks about
> jhana. I understand that might very well be completely different when
> reading the same sutta text with an abhidhamma schooled eye.

-------
N: Vitakka and vicaara seem rather close, although there is a
difference. Hard to know their different characteristics when they
actually occur. But it is necessary to know this precisely if one
develops jhaana and will abandon them one at a time in order to reach
a higher stage. These different jhaanafactors are mentioned in the
suttas, and also the fact that they are abandoned, but the
Visuddhimagga gives a more detailed explanation.
I just touched on a few points, trying to give a further explanation.
But I am well aware that we have different vitakkas because of
different ways of thinking, due to different accumulated inclinations
and background.
---------
Nina.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]