From brburl at charter.net Sat Nov 1 23:40:54 2008 From: brburl at charter.net (Bruce Burrill) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 00:40:54 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Excellent Pali resource In-Reply-To: <3AAC4C08-B958-41BA-B8A3-D69A8472BA6B@wheelwrightassoc.com> References: <3AAC4C08-B958-41BA-B8A3-D69A8472BA6B@wheelwrightassoc.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20081102004022.035ba648@charter.net> http://dharmafarer.googlepages.com/home From wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg Sun Nov 2 00:17:06 2008 From: wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg (Wong Weng Fai) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 14:17:06 +0800 (SGT) Subject: [Buddha-l] Excellent Pali resource In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20081102004022.035ba648@charter.net> References: <3AAC4C08-B958-41BA-B8A3-D69A8472BA6B@wheelwrightassoc.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20081102004022.035ba648@charter.net> Message-ID: That's the wonderful site of Piya Tan - a regular contributor on Buddha-L. Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Weng-Fai On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Bruce Burrill wrote: > http://dharmafarer.googlepages.com/home > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > From jayarava at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 02:20:05 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 01:20:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Do you mind? Message-ID: <822462.60699.qm@web51410.mail.re2.yahoo.com> I was reading something by Kalupahana today and he was making definite distinctions between the terms citta, mano, vi????a. I'm aware that P?li texts often don't distinguish sharply between the terms, but there do seem to be useful distinctions. If I read him right he is saying that: Citta is what arises on contact with an object - mental or physical. Mano is what processes arisen cittas in order to interpret the content of them and relates them to previous experiences, it is the cognitive function. It deals both with mental objects, but also with the secondary information arising from the senses - the mental component of sensing. Finally vi????a is the knowing that mechanism of mano churns out - especially in the sense of the overall consciousness, the sense of being aware, of reflexive awareness. Kalupahana suggests that the verbal forms of the words (cinteti, ma??ati, and vij?n?ti) make the sense of them more clear. His view seem to tie in nicely with Sue Hamilton's account of the khandhas as the apparatus of experience, rather than the totality of the universe. Does this make sense? Does it over simplify the tradition or the existential situation? There are a number of other traditional terms for the mind or its activities (e.e cetan?, manasik?ra, pa???) would they fit into this model? If there was a distinction at some point, what does the subsequent loss of distinction signify? (confusion?) Any thoughts? Jayarava From mburch5717 at aol.com Sat Nov 1 12:21:31 2008 From: mburch5717 at aol.com (mburch5717 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddha-l Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CB0A65CC32EE92-1168-31C9@WEBMAIL-DY39.sysops.aol.com> Timothy, Thanks very much for the slide show about Tasajara. Very interesting. Do you know enough to comment on what the condition of Tasajara is overall after the fires? Metta, Mike -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-request at mailman.swcp.com To: buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com Sent: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 11:00 am Subject: buddha-l Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 Send buddha-l mailing list submissions to buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to buddha-l-request at mailman.swcp.com You can reach the person managing the list at buddha-l-owner at mailman.swcp.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of buddha-l digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Rain at Tassajara (Timothy Smith) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:58:47 -0700 From: Timothy Smith Subject: [Buddha-l] Rain at Tassajara To: Buddhist discussion forum Message-ID: <3AAC4C08-B958-41BA-B8A3-D69A8472BA6B at wheelwrightassoc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Some of you may be interested in the situation post-fires at Tassajara. Here's a slide-show from our local paper. http://extras.montereyherald.com/slideshows/zen110108/index.html Timothy Smith Wheelwright Associates www.wheelwrightassoc.com ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l End of buddha-l Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 *************************************** From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 3 09:17:40 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 09:17:40 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha nature Message-ID: <56B4E91188C94A36904A316FCDEB08FE@OPTIPLEX> Autumn does work magic on ye olde brain. Here's another one that came up as I was watching the honey bees working hard in the last days of warmth on the bushy pink chrysanthemum blossoms outside my porch. I keep looking to see if they are stocking up on pollen, but their pollen sacks are empty--so they must be eating something from the flower centers: Pilgrim bees bopping over lush chrysanthemums seeking alms-- Pink petals, golden hearts From jinavamsa at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 22:53:30 2008 From: jinavamsa at yahoo.com (Mitchell Ginsberg) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 21:53:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Re Buddha nature In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <335188.14628.qm@web62505.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Hello Joanna and all, About your poem, Pilgrim bees bopping over lush chrysanthemums seeking alms-- Pink petals, golden hearts That final line with the consonance and the imagery is quite striking and lovely. The pink and golden juxtaposition is like pale Buddhist colors, now that I think about it! (Oh, there's the required Buddhist part for the posting!!!!) Glad you are enjoying the autumn where you are. Mitchell G. ========== Homepage (updated 20 October 08): http://www.geocities.com/jinavamsa/ (with link to memorial dedication to Robert C. Solomon) See also http://www.geocities.com/jinavamsa/mentalhealth.html From twin_oceans at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 12:09:11 2008 From: twin_oceans at yahoo.com (Katherine Masis) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:09:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist temple built from beer bottles Message-ID: <9675.30987.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Buddhist temple built from beer bottles: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/10/temple-built-from-beer-bottles.php Katherine Mas?s From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Tue Nov 4 12:22:08 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:22:08 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist temple built from beer bottles References: <9675.30987.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002801c93eb2$a1ad74d0$2101a8c0@Dan> Buddhist temple built from beer bottles: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/10/temple-built-from-beer-bottles.php Katherine Mas?s You know what they say about people who live in glass houses. Perfectly appropriate for a Buddhist temple. Also for US election day. Whether tonight ends in celebration or disappointment, we should be able to generate enough additional bottles to build a few extensions (maybe a meditation/hangover hall). Dan From karp at uw.edu.pl Tue Nov 4 13:10:56 2008 From: karp at uw.edu.pl (Artur Karp) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:10:56 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Request for a paper In-Reply-To: <335188.14628.qm@web62505.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <335188.14628.qm@web62505.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20081104210849.042f5060@poczta.uw.edu.pl> Dear List, I urgently need Etienne Lamotte's paper "Did the Buddha insult Devadatta?", published in the UKABS Buddhist Studies Review, vol. 14, No 1, 1997, pp. 3-18. Would anyone kindly send me a copy? Thanking you in advance, Artur Karp University of Warsaw Poland From pqcampbell at sympatico.ca Tue Nov 4 14:08:55 2008 From: pqcampbell at sympatico.ca (Patricia Q. Campbell) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 16:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist temple built from beer bottles In-Reply-To: <002801c93eb2$a1ad74d0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: Interesting. The use of something to build a temple that, in its original purpose, is a violation of Buddhist precepts: it's rather tantric! Patricia. -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Dan Lusthaus Sent: November 4, 2008 2:22 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Buddhist temple built from beer bottles Buddhist temple built from beer bottles: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/10/temple-built-from-beer-bottles.php Katherine Mas?s You know what they say about people who live in glass houses. Perfectly appropriate for a Buddhist temple. Also for US election day. Whether tonight ends in celebration or disappointment, we should be able to generate enough additional bottles to build a few extensions (maybe a meditation/hangover hall). Dan _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From gary.gach at gmail.com Wed Nov 5 19:00:30 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 18:00:30 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> am finishing my revision of section in my book on cognitive science anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then were surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down into alpha. or was it that they kept ringing the bell and the TM'ers eventually became used to it while the zennies heard it as fresh each time ?? OR ... am i conflating two similar experiments ??? (or what)+ -- Gary Gach http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach 1.415.771.77.93 may all beings be well From jkirk at spro.net Wed Nov 5 19:40:59 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 19:40:59 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0BF99ADBA8C94BCBB99330A53FE00C1C@OPTIPLEX> Sounds like inadequate experiments. Why use those old ones, when so many news ones have surfaced? Joanna K. ---------------------- -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Gary Gach am finishing my revision of section in my book on cognitive science anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then were surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down into alpha. or was it that they kept ringing the bell and the TM'ers eventually became used to it while the zennies heard it as fresh each time ?? OR ... am i conflating two similar experiments ??? (or what)+ -- Gary Gach http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach 1.415.771.77.93 may all beings be well _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From sfeite at adelphia.net Wed Nov 5 20:04:49 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 22:04:49 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 5, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Gary Gach wrote: > am finishing my revision of section in my book on cognitive science > > anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): > > Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then > were > surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves > remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for > the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), > registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down > into > alpha. > > > or was it that they kept ringing the bell and the TM'ers eventually > became > used to it while the zennies heard it as fresh each time ?? > > OR ... am i conflating two similar experiments ??? Gary, I'd be extremely careful in attributing any honest and scientific validity to any Transcendental Meditation Org research without independent replication or detailed analysis of the actual data. These people are and have been selling a product (meditation) for many years and simultaneously touting their own inside research at the same time. If you find that acceptable, I'd love to show you some R.J. Reynolds research on how cigarettes are actually good for you! I've been following meditational research since the 70's. The state of the art research in the recent _Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness_, which includes a detailed current synopsis of meditational research in general should give you a good idea of a c. 2004 "gold standard". Most old research was investigational or pilot in nature. Some was done under shady auspices or utilized poor statistical methodology like no falsifiability or "token" null hypotheses. *Caveat emptor*. Probably the most mind-blowing research was the recent replication of some old research, from the 50's (!) which showed a (at that time) bizarre phenomenon in Patanjali-tradition yogis who were in "samadhi". The EEG showed a heretofore (in healthy subjects) pattern of high- amplitude gamma coherence. It was so wildly unusual, the researchers thought it must be an anomaly or some sort of artifact. They checked their equipment, it seemed fine. So they published. Of course all their colleagues all cried "artifact". It was never replicated. Decades went by. Fade to the present day. A middle aged French Tibetan Buddhist monk undergoes the same experiment while in samadhi, which he apparently can go into not only at will, but for long swaths of time. Guess what: same pattern, high amp. gamma coherence across the scalp. Again, the researchers begin looking for an artifact, a reason other than the meditator. Nothing is found. Eventually they realize, they've just replicated the 1950's experiment on Hindu yogis also in samadhi. It's now been replicated at least 3 or 4 times (last I heard) by independent labs. It's also been replicated in different yogis. Within a couple of months, we'll see if it was replicated in the Shamatha Project in novices and also if it affects the actual aging process itself. I hope you're including this recent material. Best, Steve Feite From twin_oceans at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 21:36:37 2008 From: twin_oceans at yahoo.com (Katherine Masis) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 20:36:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <369890.42261.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi, Gary ? I think you?re referring to the famous Kasamatsu-Hirai study on habituation to noise: ? ?The Kasamatsu-Hirai study also revealed significant differences between four Zen masters and four control subjects in their response to repetitive click stimuli. Like the Zen masters, the controls exhibited a blocking of alpha when a click sound first occurred, but they gradually became habituated to such stimuli so that their brain-wave activity no longer responded when a click was made. The Zen masters, however, did not become habituated, but continued to exhibit blocking as long as the stimuli continued. This finding indicates that Zen practice promotes a serene, alert awareness that is consistently responsive to both external and internal stimuli (Kasamatsu et al., 1957; Hirai, 1960; and Kasamatsu and Hirai, 1963).? ? By Michael Murphy as quoted in http://www.noetic.org/research/medbiblio/ch1.htm ? If I remember correctly, there was a discussion on this list several months ago about some recent studies being done by Alan Wallace at Santa Barbara, California.? Nevertheless, these old studies from the 1950?s and 1960?s are true classics in the psychology-and-meditation literature. ? Katherine Masis From twin_oceans at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 22:09:08 2008 From: twin_oceans at yahoo.com (Katherine Masis) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 21:09:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] yogis and zennies Message-ID: <270048.70326.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi again, Gary ? The study comparing EEG patterns in yogis and Zen meditators is in Charles Tart?s *Altered States of Consciousness* (NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1969), pp. 489-506.? I had a hunch and, lo and behold, I found this reference cited in P. Kapleau?s *Zen: Dawn in the West* (Doubleday Anchor, 1980), p. 272. ? Hope this helps, Katherine Masis From rhayes at unm.edu Wed Nov 5 22:20:08 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:20:08 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1225948809.6225.1.camel@localhost> On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 18:00 -0800, Gary Gach wrote: > am finishing my revision of section in my book on cognitive science > > anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): > > Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then were > surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves > remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for > the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), > registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down into > alpha. A version of some experiment that I regaled my students with in the 1970s had seasoned Zen practitioners and a control group connected to an electrode. A bell rang, after which an electric shock was administered. This routine was repeated several times. The mad scientists discovered that the control group showed signs of anxiety after the bell rang, as they anticipated getting a shock, while the Zen people showed no such anxiety. I asked my students what conclusions they reached from the experiment. The most common (and therefore the correct) answer: meditation destroys one's ability to learn from one's experience. Does that experiment ring a bell? Do you find it shocking? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From shian at kmspks.org Thu Nov 6 02:18:15 2008 From: shian at kmspks.org ([DPD Web] Shen Shi'an) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 17:18:15 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> Message-ID: This is a good example of the skilful maintenance of "beginner's mind" in Zen meditation - that does not cling to preconceived ideas. -----Original Message----- From: Richard Hayes [mailto:rhayes at unm.edu] Sent: Thursday, 06 November, 2008 1:20 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 18:00 -0800, Gary Gach wrote: > am finishing my revision of section in my book on cognitive science > > anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): > > Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then were > surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves > remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for > the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), > registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down into > alpha. A version of some experiment that I regaled my students with in the 1970s had seasoned Zen practitioners and a control group connected to an electrode. A bell rang, after which an electric shock was administered. This routine was repeated several times. The mad scientists discovered that the control group showed signs of anxiety after the bell rang, as they anticipated getting a shock, while the Zen people showed no such anxiety. I asked my students what conclusions they reached from the experiment. The most common (and therefore the correct) answer: meditation destroys one's ability to learn from one's experience. Does that experiment ring a bell? Do you find it shocking? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From gary.gach at gmail.com Thu Nov 6 13:12:03 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:12:03 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] thank you for the brain citation Message-ID: <598baadd0811061212q50a446cfpc4e1cea84cee5530@mail.gmail.com> score two for buddha-l; first attribution for the wuthnow cadge and now this thank you, katherine. yes, it is an obg, oldie but goodie. which is why i'm using it, joanna ... ditto for the olde righte braine/lefte braine divide (similar to easte / weste?) along with : - mirror neurons - neuroplasticity - dan j. siegel's studies within a chapter also discussing - quantum physics - fuzzy logic - emergent behavior in complex sysems - remote viewing - prayer plus some bonus points i can't yet reveal ... all within context of Buddha Way, (and with exactly one week from start to finish, hence, steve, my inability to take better advantage of your suggestion: yes i'm aware of the high gamma tests but still not able to coherently 'explain' their contextual relevance other than perhaps (1) a higher 'set-point of meditators (which i've done in discussion neuroplasticity); (2) the positive effects of compassion meditation, 'tho apparently various techniques of meditation produce high gamma (from richard davidson's report, i think it was, i thought the tibetans were the first to exhibit such high marks, but like i say, i'm strapped for time and proportionate perspective on this whole puppy) oh and as to news item from our noble moderator, (unattributed, but it must be true 'cos it's on buddha-l) i'm not shocked about the zennies but rather about the person willing to (in the fashion of stanley milgram) knowingly torture other fellow life forms, no matter how bald their pointy pate ... simply shocked, i tell you ... shocked ... *[bbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]* g g /// http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach may all beings be well From dharmafarer at gmail.com Thu Nov 6 14:21:06 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 05:21:06 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> Message-ID: Ha ha, you didn't get it, did you. I did not, too. On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 5:18 PM, [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote: > This is a good example of the skilful maintenance of "beginner's mind" > in Zen meditation - that does not cling to preconceived ideas. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Hayes [mailto:rhayes at unm.edu] > Sent: Thursday, 06 November, 2008 1:20 PM > To: Buddhist discussion forum > Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies > > On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 18:00 -0800, Gary Gach wrote: > > > am finishing my revision of section in my book on cognitive science > > > > anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): > > > > Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then > were > > surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves > > remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for > > the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), > > registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down > into > > alpha. > > A version of some experiment that I regaled my students with in the > 1970s had seasoned Zen practitioners and a control group connected to an > electrode. A bell rang, after which an electric shock was administered. > This routine was repeated several times. The mad scientists discovered > that the control group showed signs of anxiety after the bell rang, as > they anticipated getting a shock, while the Zen people showed no such > anxiety. I asked my students what conclusions they reached from the > experiment. The most common (and therefore the correct) answer: > meditation destroys one's ability to learn from one's experience. > > Does that experiment ring a bell? Do you find it shocking? > > -- > Richard Hayes > Department of Philosophy > University of New Mexico > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From jkcowart at self-change.com Thu Nov 6 11:39:21 2008 From: jkcowart at self-change.com (J. Kingston Cowart) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:39:21 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.co m> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20081106185203.FKNQ29505.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net@fed1rmimpo03.cox.net> --------------------------------- At 06:00 PM 11/5/2008, Gary Gach wrote: >anyone remember the experiment (mid1970s?) (ekg?): > >Hindu (TM) and Zen practitioners went into a meditative state, then were >surprised by the sound of a bell. The Hindu meditators' brain waves >remained constant (Alpha? )))). The brain-wave chart for >the Zen meditators, showed their Alpha suddenly going into beta (?), >registering the fact of the bell, and then dipping right back down into >alpha. > > >or was it that they kept ringing the bell and the TM'ers eventually became >used to it while the zennies heard it as fresh each time ?? I concur with Katherine Masis that you are probably thinking of the Palo Alto Neuropsychiatric Institute study which is said to have reported that Zennists never habituated to an auditory stimulus and Yogic meditators' responses were extinguished in a very short time (Kasamatsu & Hirai, 1966). Perhaps this 2006 article from researchers at UCSD, the Scripps Research Institute, and the University of Zurich may be of some use: http://p300.scripps.edu/papers/58.pdf The abstract reads: Neuroelectric and imaging studies of meditation are reviewed. Electroencephalographic measures indicate an overall slowing subsequent to meditation, with theta and alpha activation related to proficiency of practice. Sensory evoked potential assessment of concentrative meditation yields amplitude and latency changes for some components and practices. Cognitive event-related potential evaluation of meditation implies that practice changes attentional allocation. Neuroimaging studies indicate increased regional cerebral blood flow measures during meditation. Taken together, meditation appears to reflect changes in anterior cingulate cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal areas. Neurophysiological meditative state and trait effects are variable but are beginning to demonstrate consistent outcomes for research and clinical applications. Psychological and clinical effects of meditation are summarized, integrated, and discussed with respect to neuroimaging data. Yours truly, John J. Kingston Cowart, M.S. San Diego, California www.self-change.com From sfeite at adelphia.net Thu Nov 6 15:25:01 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 17:25:01 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] thank you for the brain citation In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811061212q50a446cfpc4e1cea84cee5530@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811061212q50a446cfpc4e1cea84cee5530@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8E90D35C-82B0-47F9-B739-39FED429AAA3@adelphia.net> Hi Gary: On Nov 6, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Gary Gach wrote: > plus some bonus points i can't yet reveal > ... all within context of Buddha Way, > (and with exactly one week from start to finish, > hence, steve, my inability to take better advantage of your > suggestion: yes i'm aware of the high gamma tests but still > not able to coherently 'explain' their contextual relevance > other than perhaps (1) a higher 'set-point of meditators > (which i've done in discussion neuroplasticity); > (2) the positive effects of compassion meditation, 'tho > apparently various techniques of meditation produce high gamma > (from richard davidson's report, i think it was, i thought the > tibetans > were the first to exhibit such high marks, but like i say, i'm > strapped for > time > and proportionate perspective on this whole puppy) If you haven't had a chance to see it, check out the documentary _Monks In the Lab_. It's when they first 'rediscovered' this effect (on Tibetans as you indicate), the later *published* study I believe covered biochemist and HHDL translator Matthieu Ricard's contribution (both as a contributor and a participant). It would be short and sweet to say it is a neurological sign which appears to accompany samadhi. It remains as a side effect in the background even after the meditation session has ended. Unlike regular, alpha coherence that we all experience in our day to day and moment to moment lives, this type of coherence brings together different parts of the brain in synchrony while activating the brain centers associated with "a high level of activity in the parts of the brain that help to form positive emotions, such as: ? happiness, enthusiasm, joy, and self-control, ? a decreased level of activity in the parts of the brain related to negative emotions like depression, self- centeredness, and a lack of happiness or satisfaction, ? a calming of the section of the brain that acts as a trigger for fear and anger, ? the ability to reach a state of inner peace even when facing extremely disturbing circumstances, and ? an unusual capacity for empathy and attunement to emotions in other people." Best wishes for your work, Steve Feite From gary.gach at gmail.com Thu Nov 6 19:28:39 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 18:28:39 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin Message-ID: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> Here's a draft of my working definition, which I thought I'd share with you all, for its wonders: The *human brain *takes up 2% of the body's weight yet requires about 25% >> of its oxygen. The number of states the brain is capable of at any given >> moment is 1 followed by a million zeros. It contains more cells*(neurons) >> *than stars in the Milky Way, and each has app. 1,000 points of >> interconnection* (synapses) *with other brain cells, 100 trillion such >> path-points in all, each firing from 1-100 times/second, simultaneously, and >> with built-in feedback loops, enabling it to learn from experience and >> change its structure* (neuroplasticity). *This adaptive process is >> dependent on interaction with other brains, from early childhood development >> on throughout life, thus confirming our inextricable and profound >> interdependence. > > Gary From jkirk at spro.net Thu Nov 6 19:56:22 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 19:56:22 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <390F102C312F494F8F2A85DCE84ED548@OPTIPLEX> Bravo, Gary! A tour de neuro-force. JK =============================== Here's a draft of my working definition, which I thought I'd share with you all, for its wonders: The *human brain *takes up 2% of the body's weight yet requires about 25% >> of its oxygen. The number of states the brain is capable of at any >> given moment is 1 followed by a million zeros. It contains more >> cells*(neurons) *than stars in the Milky Way, and each has app. 1,000 >> points of >> interconnection* (synapses) *with other brain cells, 100 trillion >> such path-points in all, each firing from 1-100 times/second, >> simultaneously, and with built-in feedback loops, enabling it to >> learn from experience and change its structure* (neuroplasticity). >> *This adaptive process is dependent on interaction with other brains, >> from early childhood development on throughout life, thus confirming >> our inextricable and profound interdependence. > > Gary _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From sfeite at adelphia.net Fri Nov 7 05:19:49 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 07:19:49 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 6, 2008, at 9:28 PM, Gary Gach wrote: > Here's a draft of my working definition, which I thought I'd share > with you > all, for its wonders: > > The *human brain *takes up 2% of the body's weight yet requires > about 25% >>> of its oxygen. The number of states the brain is capable of at any >>> given >>> moment is 1 followed by a million zeros. It contains more >>> cells*(neurons) >>> *than stars in the Milky Way, and each has app. 1,000 points of >>> interconnection* (synapses) *with other brain cells, 100 trillion >>> such >>> path-points in all, each firing from 1-100 times/second, >>> simultaneously, and >>> with built-in feedback loops, enabling it to learn from experience >>> and >>> change its structure* (neuroplasticity). *This adaptive process is >>> dependent on interaction with other brains, from early childhood >>> development >>> on throughout life, thus confirming our inextricable and profound >>> interdependence. Very awe-inspiring and an attention grabber for your readers. From rhayes at unm.edu Fri Nov 7 10:18:31 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:18:31 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 18:28 -0800, Gary Gach wrote: > Here's a draft of my working definition, which I thought I'd share with you > all, for its wonders: > > The *human brain *takes up 2% of the body's weight yet requires about 25% > of its oxygen. I think it may be worth adding that the male body has enough blood to operate the brain or to erect the penis, but not enough to do both at the same time. -- Richard Hayes Department of Penology University of New Mexico From curt at cola.iges.org Fri Nov 7 10:30:14 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:30:14 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> Richard Hayes wrote: > > I think it may be worth adding that the male body has enough blood to > operate the brain or to erect the penis, but not enough to do both at > the same time. > > But that is by Design. The functioning of one interferes with the other - so it's a safety mechanism, really. Curt From jkirk at spro.net Fri Nov 7 10:44:01 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 10:44:01 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The neuro thing Message-ID: <5EDBE9CD8DE948F785AACD8BEFE4F29D@OPTIPLEX> Since we're talking about science these days, the articles in this issue of Science might be of interest re: behavior. Joanna ====================== Here is a link to the Introduction, "From Genes to Social Behavior." Below the introduction you'll find links to key stories. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/322/5903/891 From jayarava at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 11:43:33 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 10:43:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <495128.28413.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> --- On Fri, 7/11/08, Curt Steinmetz wrote: > But that is by Design. The functioning of one interferes > with the other > - so it's a safety mechanism, really. If ever there was an argument against 'intelligent' design this is it! What a bloody disaster! Is it any wonder the Buddha enjoined celibacy on the bhikkhus? And look at all the deviant ways they tried to get around that rule! JR From rhayes at unm.edu Fri Nov 7 11:47:23 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:47:23 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <200811071147.24109.rhayes@unm.edu> On Friday 07 November 2008 10:30, Curt Steinmetz wrote: > Richard Hayes wrote: > > I think it may be worth adding that the male body has enough blood to > > operate the brain or to erect the penis, but not enough to do both at > > the same time. > > But that is by Design. I am of the persuasion that all Design is by Accident. (Hence the passage in the scriptures that begins "And God goofed again..." > The functioning of one interferes with the other > - so it's a safety mechanism, really. I'm still trying to figure out just who is made safe by this mechanism. Seems to me it's one of the most dangerous mechanisms in the natural world. -- Richard Hayes Department of Foolosophy University of New Mexico From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Fri Nov 7 14:24:39 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:24:39 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Cheney-Bush last land grab for their Oil Bosses References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <01ba01c9411f$3e803130$2101a8c0@Dan> Warning: the only Buddhist content in this message is the explicit acknowledgement that it has no explicit Buddhist content. Cheney-Bush, finally doing what they planned to do from day 1 of the Bush administration (why the oil companies bought they White House for them in the first place) ... selling off national parks for oil exploration. This has been going on under the radar screen while Brittney's undies and Palin's wardrobe have dominated the headlines. This is where Cheney-Bush's attention has been, instead of a stimulus package for the rest of the economy. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/us/08lease.html?hp Meanwhile Ford and GM are about to go under: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/business/08auto.html?hp We'll be pouring our dinosaur remains into foreign import cars. Yay! Change.... Dan From franz at mind2mind.net Fri Nov 7 14:35:58 2008 From: franz at mind2mind.net (Franz Metcalf) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:35:58 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Cheney-Bush last land grab for their Oil Bosses In-Reply-To: <01ba01c9411f$3e803130$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> <01ba01c9411f$3e803130$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <68A33F86-DD67-4B78-B616-B23B19D1F5FC@mind2mind.net> Dan, You wrote, > Warning: the only Buddhist content in this message is the explicit > acknowledgement that it has no explicit Buddhist content. Hey, if Linji could do it, you can do it too. Franz (Who is fast coming down from his election night high) From jkirk at spro.net Fri Nov 7 14:45:15 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 14:45:15 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <495128.28413.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> <495128.28413.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > But that is by Design. The functioning of one interferes with the > other > - so it's a safety mechanism, really. ========= If ever there was an argument against 'intelligent' design this is it! What a bloody disaster! Is it any wonder the Buddha enjoined celibacy on the bhikkhus? And look at all the deviant ways they tried to get around that rule! JR ============= Hmmmm--don't the Tantric sex yoga traditions claim they get both simultaneously? JK ddha-l From curt at cola.iges.org Fri Nov 7 15:00:52 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:00:52 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <200811071147.24109.rhayes@unm.edu> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> <200811071147.24109.rhayes@unm.edu> Message-ID: <4914BA94.10102@cola.iges.org> Richard Hayes wrote: > > > I'm still trying to figure out just who is made safe by this mechanism. Seems > to me it's one of the most dangerous mechanisms in the natural world. > > OK - maybe its a Design Flaw - or maybe the Design was right, but something got lost in the implementation. Here's one possibility: the original Design was to allow blood to flow to the penis only so long as there is sufficient blood flowing to the brain. But whoever was taking notes at that meeting wasn't really paying attention and wrote down "only allow blood flow to the penis *or* to the brain." I think the Universe is Intelligently Designed, but poorly constructed. Curt From jkirk at spro.net Fri Nov 7 15:11:02 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:11:02 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] CFP International Journal of Asian Philosophical Association (IJAPA) - articles Message-ID: <1AD6B052535D4B2F91632F1356582FDC@OPTIPLEX> Originally posted by H-Net. This is an open access journal--such to be valued and encouraged. JK ========================================= Call for papers for _International Journal of the Asian Philosophical Association_ (IJAPA) ***************************************************************** ******* From: H-Net Announcements The International Journal of the Asian Philosophical Association (IJAPA) Call for Papers Date: 2009-02-06 Date Submitted: 2008-11-05 Announcement ID: 164996 The International Journal of the Asian Philosophical Association (IJAPA) - a full text, open access, interdisciplinary, online peer reviewed journal invites proposals for articles on the relationship between Asian literatures and Asian philosophies and religions. We know very well that at times philosophies and religions showed less tolerance to literature. Plato, for instance, associates the artist with dissent and prefers an ideal republic without the poet's presence; the Koran states in verse 26: 224 "and as for the poets those who are lost in grievous error would follow them." Of course, these views are circumstantial and contextual. We are interested in papers that explore the mutual relationship among philosophy, religion and literature and literary studies. Topics could include, but not limited to: Buddhism, Daoism, Hinduism, Islam, Interfaith dialogue in literature and Philosophy. Asian philosophies and literary genres. Asian Literature and Philosophy as dialogue builders among different cultures and civilizations. Asian Literature and Philosophy as non-violent paths to conflict resolution and peace building. Identity, gender, sexuality in the works of major Asian writers. Philosophizing and theorizing queerness in Asian literatures. Tolerance and cultural diversity in Asian literatures. Submissions should include a 250-word abstract, a brief bio data, and full contact information. Papers should be sent in MSWord attachments to vmansur at fatih.edu.tr . Articles submitted to the journal should not exceed 4000 words including notes and bibliographical data; should be original and not be under consideration elsewhere. Contributions are accepted in English only. Further information, including instructions for authors can be found at http://www.asianpa.net/ijapa/instructions.html In addition, the journal seeks qualified referees in the area of Asian philosophical and literary studies. Now refereeing is voluntary, but referees' names will be acknowledged on the cover pages of the journal as an attribution to their contribution to the journal. Those interested please send in a detailed CV to vmansur at fatih.edu.tr Prof. Dr. Visam Mansur Fatih University 34500 Buyukcekmece, Istanbul, Turkey Fax: 00902128663402 Email: vmansur at fatih.edu.tr Visit the website at http://www.asianpa.net/ijapa/journal.html From nelsonj at usfca.edu Sat Nov 8 12:59:37 2008 From: nelsonj at usfca.edu (John K Nelson) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:59:37 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] "Religion and Globalization in Asia" conference announcement Message-ID: <11CDFAEC-9316-4CA1-8A34-3E0D37C9BC5D@usfca.edu> Dear Buddha-L members, As program chair of the March 2009 conference on "Religion and Globalization in Asia: Prospects, Patterns, and Problems for the 21st Century," to be held at the University of San Francisco, I'd like to invite you to join us for what promises to be a memorable event. We already have our keynote speakers and paper presenters, but we'd love to have you as active participants in the audience. If you look at the conference presenters (copied below, as well as via our website at http://www.pacificrim.usfca.edu/ religionandglobalization.html. ), you'll note a keynote address (by Nayan Chanda, Yale) as well as several papers and a film on Buddhist- related topics. More broadly, the other two keynote speakers (Mark Juergensmeyer and Saskia Sassen) will provide critical reflections on the role of religion and society that will apply to any study of religion in the contemporary world. Registration is only $40, and will get you breakfast as well as a reception on the first evening. However, registration is limited to 120 participants. San Francisco is rich in Buddhist temples and centers from all major traditions. I might also mention that the city is just beautiful in mid-March, and we have one of the best collections of Asian art in North America, as well as a new museum dedicated to modern/world art (DeYoung) and the just-opened Academy of Sciences. Please contact me directly at nelsonj at usfca.edu if you have any questions . All the registration information, as well as a more detailed conference description, is on our website at http://www.pacificrim.usfca.edu/religionandglobalization.html. Hope to see you in San Francisco next March! Religion and Globalization in Asia: Prospects, Patterns, and Problems for the 21st Century March 13, 14, 2009 University of San Francisco A G E N D A FRIDAY, March 13 8:45 Registration opens Continental Breakfast 9:30 Welcome remarks, John Nelson, Conference Chair (University of San Francisco) Barbara Bundy (Executive Director, USF Center for the Pacific Rim) 9:45 ? 10:30 ?Religious Ambivalence to Globalization in Asia? Keynote address, Mark Juergensmeyer (UC Santa Barbara) 10:30 ? 10:50 Discussion (Note: Each presenter will have 40 minutes, divided into 25 minutes for the talk and the rest for discussion.) 11:00 ? 11:40 ?Political and Economic Possibilities for Religious Dialogue between China and India? Eric Hanson (Santa Clara University) 11:45 ? 12:25 ?Spiritual Economies: Islam and Globalization in Contemporary Indonesia? Daromir Rudnyckyj (University of British Columbia, Victoria) 12:30 ? 1:30 Lunch 12:45 ? 1:30 ?Happy Birthday Mazu: Empress of Heaven, Goddess of the Sea? [FILM] Introduction by filmmaker Jonathan H.X. Lee (UC Santa Barbara) (Please bring your lunch to this event) 1:40 ? 2:20 ? In Search of the Pure Land: Globalization and Buddhist Revival in Contemporary China? Keping Wu (University of Hong Kong) 2:30 ? 3:10 ?Globalizing the Religious Market in China: How Incoming Foreign Religions Affect State Religious Policy? Noam Urbach (University of Haifa) 3:15 ? 3:45 Break 3:45 ? 4:30 ?Buddhism and Globalization: The Rise of Early Asian Identity? Keynote address, Nayan Chanda (Yale University) 4:30 ? 4:50 Discussion 5:00 ? 5:45 ?Gender and Moral Visions in Indonesia? Rachel Rinaldo (Kiriyama Fellow, USF Center for the Pacific Rim) 6:00 ? 7:00 Reception SATURDAY, March 14 8:30 ? 9:00 Continental Breakfast 9:00 ? 9:45 ?The World?s Third Spaces: Novel Assemblages of Territory, Authority, and Rights? Keynote Address, Saskia Sassen (Columbia University) 9:45 ? 10:05 Discussion 10:10 ? 10:50 ?Localizing Global Patterns in Islamic Communities in China? Michael C. Brose (University of Wyoming) 10:55 ? 11:35 ?Globalization, Nationalism, and Korean Religion in the 21st Century? Don Baker (University of British Columbia, Vancouver) 11:40 ? 12:20 ?Asian New Religions and Global Soft Power? Nancy Stalker (University of Texas, Austin) 12:20 ? 12:30 Concluding Remarks, John Nelson, Conference Chair John Nelson Associate Professor Department of Theology and Religious Studies Director, Asian Studies Degree Program University of San Francisco 2130 Fulton St., San Francisco, CA. 94117 Office: 415-422-5093 Department: http://www.usfca.edu/artsci/fac_staff/N/nelson_john.html Asian Studies: http://www.pacificrim.usfca.edu/undergrad/asiamajor "Spirits of the State" documentary film: http:// www.pacificrim.usfca.edu/research/yasukuni.html From jehms at xs4all.nl Sun Nov 9 04:56:05 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 12:56:05 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <4914BA94.10102@cola.iges.org> References: <598baadd0811061828q4caf7d39k457ee539d5eda372@mail.gmail.com> <1226078311.5608.5.camel@localhost> <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> <200811071147.24109.rhayes@unm.edu> <4914BA94.10102@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <4916CFD5.2050206@xs4all.nl> Curt Steinmetz schreef: > Richard Hayes wrote: > >> I'm still trying to figure out just who is made safe by this mechanism. Seems >> to me it's one of the most dangerous mechanisms in the natural world. >> >> >> > > OK - maybe its a Design Flaw - or maybe the Design was right, but > something got lost in the implementation. > > Here's one possibility: the original Design was to allow blood to flow > to the penis only so long as there is sufficient blood flowing to the > brain. But whoever was taking notes at that meeting wasn't really paying > attention and wrote down "only allow blood flow to the penis *or* to the > brain." > Why? Dirty dreams? > I think the Universe is Intelligently Designed, but poorly constructed. > That was Plato not the Buddha! Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From jehms at xs4all.nl Sun Nov 9 04:59:26 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 12:59:26 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: References: <49147B26.3030605@cola.iges.org> <495128.28413.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4916D09E.7060100@xs4all.nl> jkirk schreef: > > > > > >> But that is by Design. The functioning of one interferes with >> > the > >> other >> - so it's a safety mechanism, really. >> > ========= > If ever there was an argument against 'intelligent' design this > is it! What a bloody disaster! Is it any wonder the Buddha > enjoined celibacy on the bhikkhus? And look at all the deviant > ways they tried to get around that rule! > > JR > ============= > Hmmmm--don't the Tantric sex yoga traditions claim they get both > simultaneously? > > JK > > > They draw this erroneous conclusion because they do both simultanously. That's karma! Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From jayarava at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 06:34:36 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2008 05:34:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] from our mutual noggin In-Reply-To: <4916CFD5.2050206@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <107754.73705.qm@web51411.mail.re2.yahoo.com> This discussion shows why the Buddha concentrated on relieving suffering - there is so much of it. jr From gary.gach at gmail.com Mon Nov 10 19:03:24 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:03:24 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] forgetfulness Message-ID: <598baadd0811101803r7abde280qb55988e24d39acbd@mail.gmail.com> Hey gang am asked by a fellow writer the following: is there a sanskrit / Buddhist word for Forgetfulness? >>> I think there's a Chinese word zuowang but it seems to mean >>> sitting forgetfulness. >>> >> Gary Gach http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach may all beings be well From dharmafarer at gmail.com Mon Nov 10 19:30:28 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:30:28 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] forgetfulness In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811101803r7abde280qb55988e24d39acbd@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811101803r7abde280qb55988e24d39acbd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Two possible words arer sati,sammosa (m) or mu.t.tha,sati (n), Piya On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Gary Gach wrote: > Hey gang > > am asked by a fellow writer the following: > > is there a sanskrit / Buddhist word for Forgetfulness? >>>> I think there's a Chinese word zuowang but it seems to mean >>>> sitting forgetfulness. >>>> >>> > Gary Gach > http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach > may all beings > be well > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From shian at kmspks.org Mon Nov 10 18:29:00 2008 From: shian at kmspks.org ([DPD Web] Shen Shi'an) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:29:00 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com><1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> <87f094787e05e6a4581833b36de498c3c711fcc1@localhost> Message-ID: Actually, the experiment illustrates not so much of Zen meditation destroying "one's ability to learn from one's experience", but how it can train the mind to "unlearn". Of course, this is dangerous if we don't learn to take precautions from potential dangers. However, a good Zennie in the experiment should had wisely run this thru his/her mind already, before the experiment began - "Hmmm... I'll be getting an electric shock whether I anticipate it in fear or not. If so, let me make peace with the inevitable by switching to 'beginner's mind' mode, which erases such useless fears, so as to accept the shock graciously, calmly." The mind that is wise unlearns the unnecessary, while not clinging to knowledge that is useful; merely taking it as a reference point - which can shift; unless it is some timeless truth like the 3 marks of existence. This reminds me of the Sallatha Sutta : http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.than.html , where the Buddha says its unwise for a person physically shot by an arrow to aggravate the pain mentally by clinging to it. In the case of the experiment below, there is clinging to the pain that was to come. Here are 6 more simple everyday cases of how suffering is optional even when pain is inevitable - http://tinyurl.com/65oa5h -----Original Message----- From: Piya Tan [mailto:dharmafarer at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 07 November, 2008 5:21 AM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Ha ha, you didn't get it, did you. I did not, too. On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 5:18 PM, [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote: > This is a good example of the skilful maintenance of "beginner's mind" > in Zen meditation - that does not cling to preconceived ideas. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Hayes [mailto:rhayes at unm.edu] > Sent: Thursday, 06 November, 2008 1:20 PM > To: Buddhist discussion forum > Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Snip > A version of some experiment that I regaled my students with in the > 1970s had seasoned Zen practitioners and a control group connected to an > electrode. A bell rang, after which an electric shock was administered. > This routine was repeated several times. The mad scientists discovered > that the control group showed signs of anxiety after the bell rang, as > they anticipated getting a shock, while the Zen people showed no such > anxiety. I asked my students what conclusions they reached from the > experiment. The most common (and therefore the correct) answer: > meditation destroys one's ability to learn from one's experience. > > Does that experiment ring a bell? Do you find it shocking? > > -- > Richard Hayes > Department of Philosophy > University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Mon Nov 10 22:24:09 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:24:09 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> <87f094787e05e6a4581833b36de498c3c711fcc1@localhost> Message-ID: <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 09:29 +0800, [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote: > Actually, the experiment illustrates not so much of Zen meditation > destroying "one's ability to learn from one's experience", but how it > can train the mind to "unlearn". That is a much more charitable interpretation than the one I would give. What I am inclined to say is that what the experiment illustrates is the penchant of psychologists to perform experiments that give us blinding insights into the obvious. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From jayarava at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 02:36:48 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 01:36:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <216777.81305.qm@web51410.mail.re2.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 11/11/08, Richard Hayes wrote: > That is a much more charitable interpretation than the one > I would give. What I am inclined to say is that what the experiment > illustrates is the penchant of psychologists to perform experiments that > give us blinding insights into the obvious. ... by torturing innocent people and animals. From sfeite at adelphia.net Tue Nov 11 06:40:15 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 08:40:15 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] New Bamiyan Buddha found amid destruction Message-ID: New Bamiyan Buddha find amid destruction by Danny Kemp and Sardar AhmadSun Nov 9, 12:39 am ET BAMIYAN, Afghanistan (AFP) ? "We got him!" screamed Afghan archaeologist Anwar Khan Fayez as he leapt from the pit beneath the towering sandstone cliffs, where the Bamiyan Buddhas once stood. Seven years after Taliban militants blew up the two 1,500-year-old statues in a fit of Islamist zealotry, a French-Afghan team in September uncovered a new, 19-metre (62-foot) "Sleeping Buddha" buried in the earth. The news that a third Buddha escaped the Taliban's wrath has caused excitement in this scenic valley, where the caverns that housed the ruined statues are an eerie reminder of Afghanistan's past and present woes. "It was a happy moment for all of us when the first signs appeared. Our years-long efforts had somehow paid off," Fayez told AFP. The team, led by France-based archaeologist Zemaryalai Tarzi, made the find while hunting for a lost 300-metre reclining Buddha mentioned in an account by seventh-century Chinese monk Xuan Zang. The Afghan-born Tarzi began mapping the site nearly 30 years ago but decades of conflict and the rise of the 1996-2001 Taliban regime put the search on hold. Then in March 2001 came the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas, until then the world's largest standing Buddha statues. Hewn into the cliffs in the sixth century by Buddhist pilgrims on the famed Silk Route, the statues had survived attacks by several Muslim emperors down the ages, while even Mongol conqueror Genghis Khan had spared them. But with the backing of Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda movement, Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar declared that they were idols that were against Islamic law. Defying international appeals, the Taliban spent a month using first anti-aircraft guns and then dynamite to obliterate them. Saddened but with renewed determination, Tarzi and his team returned soon after US-led forces and the Northern Alliance ousted the Taliban in late 2001 to renew their search for the giant missing Buddha. What they found instead, in September this year, were parts of a previously unknown, smaller Buddha figure, including a thumb, forefinger, palm, parts of its arm, body and the bed on which it lay. "This is the most significant find since we started here," Abdul Hameed Jalia, the director of monuments and historical sites for Bamiyan province, told AFP at the excavation site of the new 19-metre Buddha. "At first they found part of the leg but they weren't sure what it was," said Jalia. "But when they found more, Mr Fayez screamed out of happiness and ran to our office to find Mr Tarzi." Fayez said the head and other parts were largely destroyed, possibly by Arab invaders in the ninth century. "We have not found the whole statue. But we can tell from other parts that it appears to be 19-metres long," Fayez said. The site has now been covered with earth to protect the Buddha from both the ravages of the harsh Afghan winter and from the attention of antiquities thieves. Tarzi told AFP in an e-mail that he and a number of French colleagues aimed to return next summer to dig out the rest of the statue. Meanwhile, there are fresh clues about the 300-metre Buddha, officials say. What appear to be the remnants of a gate complex that may have led to the statue have been discovered under an apparently collapsed section of cliff between the two holes left by the Taliban. "Mr Tarzi's team has found signs that indicate that the big lying Buddha is there and has 70 percent hopes that they will find it," said Najibullah Harar, head of Bamiyan's information and culture department. Amid hopes that they could one day be rebuilt, Afghan, Japanese and German teams are also stabilising the sites of the destroyed statues -- the bigger 55-metre figure known as Salsal and the 38-metre statue known as Shahmama. Boulder-sized chunks of the Buddhas still lie where they fell, each individually labelled. Ghostly outlines of the two figures are still etched in the rockface and twisted metal shell casings litter the ground. Archaeologists' efforts have been helped by the fact that Bamiyan -- inhabited by Shia Muslims from the Hazara ethnic minority that was once persecuted by the Taliban -- has been a relative oasis of calm. But ongoing debate over whether to reconstruct the Buddhas reflects the uncertainties that haunt post-Taliban Afghanistan. "It is the desire and the wish of the Bamiyan people to see, if not both, then at least one rebuilt," Habiba Sorabi, the governor of Bamiyan province, told AFP in an interview at her office overlooking the statues. Rebuilding the Buddhas could help foster a tourist industry in the desperately poor region, which lies 200 kilometres (124 miles) northwest of the relatively prosperous capital Kabul, she said. UNESCO declared Bamiyan a World Heritage Site in 2003 and there have been discussions with international partners about using the process of anastylosis, by which ruined monuments are reassembled from old fragments and new materials. "But unfortunately the central government does not want to work on it," added Sorabi, who is the only female provincial governor in Afghanistan. "It is a shame." http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081109/wl_sthasia_afp/afghanistanarchaeologybuddhismunrest_081109053934 From curt at cola.iges.org Tue Nov 11 08:19:50 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:19:50 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> <87f094787e05e6a4581833b36de498c3c711fcc1@localhost> <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <4919A296.2090904@cola.iges.org> Richard Hayes wrote: > > That is a much more charitable interpretation than the one I would give. > What I am inclined to say is that what the experiment illustrates is the > penchant of psychologists to perform experiments that give us blinding > insights into the obvious. > > This is true as a general statement - but it deserves to be emphasized that it is especially true of any study that includes any of the following TLA's (Three Letter Acronyms): PET MRI EKG ECG EEG MEG MRS Curt From jhubbard at email.smith.edu Tue Nov 11 09:02:08 2008 From: jhubbard at email.smith.edu (Jamie Hubbard) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:02:08 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> <87f094787e05e6a4581833b36de498c3c711fcc1@localhost> <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <4919AC80.7050803@email.smith.edu> Richard Hayes wrote: > That is a much more charitable interpretation than the one I would give. > What I am inclined to say is that what the experiment illustrates is the > penchant of psychologists to perform experiments that give us blinding > insights into the obvious. > > I am team-teaching a course with a psychologist at the moment, and I must say that I often feel this way-- I tend to think of it as the "Bill Murray response" (at the beginning of Ghostbusters)-- that is, they just like to inflict twisted pain on college students (unless they are pretty). My colleague's explanation is that they need hard data, even to demonstrate the obvious. As such, he is quite skeptical of the usual studies done in the field of "positive psychology," typically dismissing them as "subjective accounts with no verifiability." So while "change your mind, change your brain" seems obvious to me, the whole blather over neuro-plasticity really does have everybody hot and bothered, doesn't it? Given our different approaches, then, one of the fun subjects we keep dealing with is the huge gap between the widely reported high levels of "happiness" (contentment, satisfaction, whatever) at all distributions of income, national/ethnic origin, gender, physical health, and the like, together with the idea of the "happiness set-point," versus the Buddhist pronouncement on the universal pervasiveness of dukkha. Interestingly, he tends to dismiss the studies showing people to be generally pretty satisfied as subjective reporting and hence unreliable whereas I tend to accept the studies--and my personal experience of the folks around me (other than American Buddhists)-- and thus dismiss the Buddhist diagnosis as simply false (at best) or a religious "bait and switch" at worse (agreeing with HHDL that everybody wants to be happy and avoid suffering is easy, but is really a slippery slope to shaving your head and leaving your "loved ones" behind). The "happiness" of the positive psych folks is not at all the same as the "awakening" or "dukkha-nirodha" of the Buddhists. Obviously we need to set up a well-funded "Institute of Happy Consciousness Studies" in order to figure it all out. . .maybe some penguins. . . In any case. To return to the truly scientific realm of anecdotal reporting, among the many Zen communities we have around here I used to often hire a few of the monks as "handy monks" to help out with painting and other stuff (helping them to fulfill their "day without work is a day without food" ethic while garnering merit for myself along the way). I long ago learned to *never* hire them within one week of any kind of sesshin-- they tended to drive their cars off the roads, knock over paint buckets, and other sorts of things that convinced me they just weren't responding to the outside world in a normal way. . . well, at least not in the way that I wanted. Jamie From jkirk at spro.net Tue Nov 11 09:12:01 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:12:01 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Bibliography of Buddhist Art and Iconography Message-ID: In case there are any art lovers on this list, x-posting this message. Joanna K. ============================================ Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 3:39 AM To: RISA Academic Discussion List Subject: [RISA-L] New Bib: Bibliography of Buddhist Art and Iconography Greetings All: Janet Gunn has compiled a bib list on "Buddhist Art and Iconography." Here is the link: http://www.montclair.edu/RISA/biblio/b-BuddhistArt.html Thanks to Aditya for putting it up. yours, Deepak RISA-L admin Dr. Deepak Sarma Associate Professor of Religious Studies Associate Professor of Philosophy Asian Studies Faculty Mailing Address: Department of Religious Studies 111 Mather House 11201 Euclid Avenue Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH 44106-7112 office: 216-368-4790 fax: 216-368-4681 deepak.sarma at case.edu From at8u at virginia.edu Tue Nov 11 10:06:21 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:06:21 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811110906r2a7dce8cs1696c4c70ce05a97@mail.gmail.com> Hi Jamie (and Richard), > Richard Hayes wrote: >> That is a much more charitable interpretation than the one I would give. >> What I am inclined to say is that what the experiment illustrates is the >> penchant of psychologists to perform experiments that give us blinding >> insights into the obvious. >> Jamie Hubbard replied: > My colleague's explanation is that they need hard data, even to > demonstrate the obvious. Sounds right to me. I've recently come across a study according to which happy people are less likely to commit suicide. Some may discard this as, er..., bleeding obvious but there's nothing like the imprimatur of science even on the obvious. And I'm not saying this tongue-in-cheek. There has been plenty of obvious knowledge in the past that has rightfully had to be discarded. I venture to think that folk-psychology is one of the realms in need of thorough examination. > Interestingly, he tends to dismiss the studies showing people to be > generally pretty satisfied as subjective reporting and hence unreliable > whereas I tend to accept the studies I don't know. [WARNING: what follows contains unsubstantiated claims formed by engaging in amateur, arm-chair psychology.] I wouldn't be at all surprised -and in fact am inclined to believe- that people tend to say they are happier than they are. I hope I'm not going to offend anyone but I find American society (where I've been living for some years now) as a whole to be particularly fake. That's, of course, a generalization against which I know plenty of individual exceptions. Hence -and for other reasons- I too am skeptical that people can and would report their level of happiness reliably and I have doubts about America ranking as one of the happiest countries on earth. Anyway, from my admittedly limited reading on happiness it seems that one of the most important and reliable factors that can have a substantial positive influence is regular, vigorous exercise. Since many people lack the time and determination to do both, it would be interesting to see whether and for whom meditation or exercise is most effective to reduce the amount of unhappiness we experience in life. Of course, while one may work for some, the other may be better suited for others. Best, Alberto Todeschini From aavuso at gmail.com Tue Nov 11 00:54:54 2008 From: aavuso at gmail.com (Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:54:54 +0200 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara Message-ID: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> Good day, I posed myself a question of how exactly the idea of 'remaining in Samsara to help others' originated in Buddhism, especially in Theravada. Evidently, among Theravadin countries, this started in the 8th century in Sri Lanka (see citations in the end of the message). Simultaneously there developed the cult of Lokesvara Natha (Sri Lankan version of Avalokitesvara). "The cult of Avalokitesvara also spread to Sri Lanka. This is a little surprising as Sri Lanka primarily follows Theravada Buddhism, while Avalokitesvara was originally a strictly Mahayana conception. In Sri Lanka, he is called Natha, which is an abbreviation of Lokesvaranatha, which means "Lord of the World". He has become identified with the bodhisattva Maitreya, the "future Buddha". He is also seen as being identical with several Hindu gods. Natha is seen as the guardian deity of Sri Lanka, and is reportedly worshipped primarily because he is regarded as a pragmatically useful source of advantages in the phenomenal world. Although I have been able to find very little information on it, apparently the cult of Natha has also spread with little change to other Theravada Buddhist countries, such as Cambodia and Burma. In Nepal, Avalokitesvara is conflated with the Brahman deity Matsyendranath. He is worshipped in elaborate rituals which are performed by a priestly caste. Ordination is handed down from father to son, with some important positions being sold to the highest bidder from within the caste. According to one reporter, the meanings behind the rituals have been largely forgotten. However, they continue to be performed because they are customary and are considered to bring luck." Avalokitesvara and Tibetan Contemplation, by Karen M. Andrews http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Avalokitesvara_and_Tibetan_Contemplation,_by_Karen_M._Andrews The name Natha, and the Avalokitesvara connection, points to the Nath (Mahasiddha) tradition. There we find the statements like: "According to a recent Nath Guru, Shri Gurudev Mahendranath, another aim was to avoid reincarnation. In The Magick Path of Tantra, he wrote about several of the aims of the Naths, "Our aims in life are to enjoy peace, freedom, and happiness in this life, but also to avoid rebirth onto this Earth plane. All this depends not on divine benevolence, but on the way we ourselves think and act." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nath "Mahasiddhas are a form of bodhisattva, meaning they not only have the spiritual abilities to enter nirvana whenever they please, but they are so compassionate they resolve to remain in samsara instead to help others." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahasiddha So it seems that the idea of remaining in Samsara emerged under the influence of such notion in Mahasiddha (Nath) tradition. Has any author explored this connection? Best regards, Dmytro "By the eighth century C.E., the amalgamation between the institution of kingship and bodhisattvas became even stronger. At this time, we find evidence of certain Theravaadin kings in Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand who openly declared themselves to be bodhisattvas. For example, King Ni`s`sanka Malla (1187-1196 C.E.) of Polonnaruva, Ceylon, states that "I will show my self in my [true] body which is endowed with benevolent regard for and attachment to the virtuous qualities of a bodhisattva king, who like a parent, protects the world and the religion." (38) In other epigraphical markings, there is a reference to King Paraakramabaahu VI as "Bodhisatva [sic] Paraakrama Baahu." (39) Finally, the conflation of kings and bodhisattvas on the island of Sri Lanka is established most strongly by King Mahinda IV, who not only referred to himself as a bodhisattva as a result of his bodhisattva-like resolute determination, (40) but who even went so far as to proclaim that "none but the bodhisattas would become kings of prosperous La^nkaa." (41) ... 51 - There is evidence that suggests that certain lay people living in Sri Lanka took bodhisattva vows to attain buddhahood. For example, we find that two Sri Lankans, after freeing their children and wives from slavery, dedicated the merit derived from these actions "for the.benefit of all beings" (Epigraphia Zeylanica, 4:133, nos. 1-4) as well as to their own attainment of "Buddhahood as desired" (ibid., 4:133, nos. 2-3). We also find a similar wish made by a "lay" person who lived between the fifth and eighth centuries and who sculpted or commissioned the sculpting of a rock in the shape of a stuupa. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha123.htm "In Sri Lanka, in the 10th Century, King Mahinda IV (956-972 AD.) in an inscription proclaimed that "none but the Bodhisattvas would become kings of Sri Lanka (Ceylon)". Thus it was believed that kings of Sri Lanka were Bodhisattvas. A Thera named Maha-Tipitaka Culabhaya who wrote the Milinda-Tika (about the 12th Century AD.) in the Theravada tradition of the Mahavihara at Anuradhapura, says at the end of the book in the colophon that he aspires to become a Buddha: Buddho Bhaveyyam "May I become a Buddha," which means that this author is a Bodhisattva. We come across at the end of some palm leaf manuscripts of Buddhist texts in Sri Lanka the names of even a few copyists who have recorded their wish to become Buddhas, and they too are to be considered as Bodhisattvas. At the end of a religious ceremony or an act of piety, the bhikkhu who gives benedictions, usually admonishes the congregation to make a resolution to attain Nirvana by realising one of the three Bodhis - Sravakabodhi, Pratyekabodhi or Samyaksambodhi - as they wish according to their capacity. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha126.htm "By about the tenth century, this belief had become so strong that the king of Sri Lanka had not only to be Buddhist but also a Bodhisatta. The Jetavanarama Slab Inscription of Mahinda IV (956-972 AD) proclaimed "None but the Bodhisatta would become kings of Sri Lanka ??.(who) .... received assurance (vyaran) from the Omniscent Buddha." http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/establishment.htm "The bodhisattva concept had its influence in the evolution of kingship in Sri Lanka, too. For some time between the fourth and the eleventh centuries CE, the kings of Sri Lanka began to be regarded not as ordinary human beings but as bodhisattvas. The Jetavanarama slab-inscription of Mahinda IV and the Pritidanakamanapa inscription of Nissanka Malla are instances where the rulers refer to themselves as bodhisattvas. The Rajatarangani (p. 470 and the Nikayasamgrahava, ed. Kumaranatunga, p. 24) also bear evidence to this. Parakramabahu II says that he would become a Buddha (Mahavamsa, ch. 86, stz. 7). http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha238.htm In Burma, the relationship between kings and bodhisattvas is exemplified with King Kyanzittha, who claimed himself to be "the bodhisatva [sic], who shall verily become a Buddha that saves (and) redeems all beings, who is great in love (and) compassion for all beings at all times... [and] who was foretold by the Lord Buddha, who is to become a true Buddha." (42) In another instance, King Alaungsithu wrote that he would like to build a causeway to help all beings reach "The Blessed City [i.e., nirvaa.na]." (43) Finally, kings `Srii Tribhuvanaaditya, Thilui^n Ma^n, Ca~nsuu I, and Naato^nmyaa all referred to themselves as bodhisattvas. (44) 42 - Epigraphia Burmanica, 1:146. 43 - P. M. Tin, "The Shwegugyi Pagoda Inscriptions, Pagan 1141 A.D.," The Journal of the Burma Research Society 10 (2) (1920): 72. 44 - T. Tun, "Religion in Burma, A.D. 100-1300," The Journal of the Burma Research Society 42 (1959): 53. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha123.htm After a war between the Mon and the Myanmar in which the Mon initially attacked and then conquered Ava itself, the Myanmar king Alaungpaya (1752-60), who believed himself a Bodhisatta, crushed Mon resistance once and for all. After Pago had fallen into his hands in 1756, Lower Myanmar was devastated and many of the Mon survivors fled to Thailand or were deported as slaves. ... Bodawpaya is also reputed to have been beset by a form of megalomania. He wanted to force the Sangha to confirm officially that he was the Bodhisatta of the next Buddha to come in this world cycle, the Buddha Metteyya. http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/lib/bps/wheels/wheel399.html In Thailand, a similar connection is drawn. One example of a Thai bodhisattva-king is Lu T'ai of Sukhothai who "wished to become a Buddha to help all beings... leave behind the sufferings of transmigration." (45) The relation between King Lu T'ai and bodhisattvahood is also manifested by the events occurring at his ordination ceremony that were similar to "the ordinary course of happenings in the career of a Bodhisattva." (46) http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha123.htm From jkirk at spro.net Tue Nov 11 11:21:36 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:21:36 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <4919AC80.7050803@email.smith.edu> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> <87f094787e05e6a4581833b36de498c3c711fcc1@localhost> <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> <4919AC80.7050803@email.smith.edu> Message-ID: <5D7BB645B9374EC5A2EB2F224C6861F4@OPTIPLEX> Excuse my ignorance, but what is a "happiness set-point" ?? Joanna K. ============ I am team-teaching a course with a psychologist at the moment, and I must say that I often feel this way-- I tend to think of it as the "Bill Murray response" (at the beginning of Ghostbusters)-- that is, they just like to inflict twisted pain on college students (unless they are pretty). My colleague's explanation is that they need hard data, even to demonstrate the obvious. As such, he is quite skeptical of the usual studies done in the field of "positive psychology," typically dismissing them as "subjective accounts with no verifiability." So while "change your mind, change your brain" seems obvious to me, the whole blather over neuro-plasticity really does have everybody hot and bothered, doesn't it? Given our different approaches, then, one of the fun subjects we keep dealing with is the huge gap between the widely reported high levels of "happiness" (contentment, satisfaction, whatever) at all distributions of income, national/ethnic origin, gender, physical health, and the like, together with the idea of the "happiness set-point," versus the Buddhist pronouncement on the universal pervasiveness of dukkha. Interestingly, he tends to dismiss the studies showing people to be generally pretty satisfied as subjective reporting and hence unreliable whereas I tend to accept the studies--and my personal experience of the folks around me (other than American Buddhists)-- and thus dismiss the Buddhist diagnosis as simply false (at best) or a religious "bait and switch" at worse (agreeing with HHDL that everybody wants to be happy and avoid suffering is easy, but is really a slippery slope to shaving your head and leaving your "loved ones" behind). The "happiness" of the positive psych folks is not at all the same as the "awakening" or "dukkha-nirodha" of the Buddhists. Obviously we need to set up a well-funded "Institute of Happy Consciousness Studies" in order to figure it all out. . .maybe some penguins. . . In any case. To return to the truly scientific realm of anecdotal reporting, among the many Zen communities we have around here I used to often hire a few of the monks as "handy monks" to help out with painting and other stuff (helping them to fulfill their "day without work is a day without food" ethic while garnering merit for myself along the way). I long ago learned to *never* hire them within one week of any kind of sesshin-- they tended to drive their cars off the roads, knock over paint buckets, and other sorts of things that convinced me they just weren't responding to the outside world in a normal way. . . well, at least not in the way that I wanted. Jamie _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From gary.gach at gmail.com Tue Nov 11 11:26:34 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:26:34 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] bibliography Message-ID: <598baadd0811111026m53779ddue2e12ca8f753a31@mail.gmail.com> In a forum in Buddhadharma, Charles Prebish stated: By summer 2008, the results of a survey that documents the publishing >>> choices of about 200 North American Buddhist Studies scholars will be >>> available, and it will be possible to see which scholarly presses, trade >>> publishers, and journals are favored by these Buddhist literati. >>> >> Has anyone seen said survey; know where it's available? And ... in addition to Franz' unbeatable title, do any denizens here have any recommendations of books for beginners (on any topic related to Dharma, from practice to precepts, parenting to photography) which might otherwise escape the butterfly net of this humble bibliographer? (Am substituting an annotated bibliography for the contextual timeline as appendix of revised edition of my guide book). p.s. Thanks. Gary Gach http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach may all beings be well From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 11 11:42:48 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:42:48 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811110906r2a7dce8cs1696c4c70ce05a97@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811110906r2a7dce8cs1696c4c70ce05a97@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1226428968.7833.22.camel@rhayes-desktop> On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 12:06 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > Sounds right to me. I've recently come across a study according to > which happy people are less likely to commit suicide. Some may discard > this as, er..., bleeding obvious but there's nothing like the > imprimatur of science even on the obvious. About ten years ago I had the good fortune to preside over a PhD thesis defense in which a psychologist earned his sheepskin by managing to show hard data suggesting that males between the ages of 19 and 22 become less inhibited when they have consumed the equivalence of four or five bottles of Canadian lager. I can't tell you how relieved I was to discover that science had finally confirmed another bit of folk-psychology that had previously been known only to poets, playwrights, country and western singer-songwriters, Baptist preachers and Therav?din monks. > I wouldn't be at > all surprised -and in fact am inclined to believe- that people tend to > say they are happier than they are. You don't need a psychologist. You need a philosopher who can help you understand that happiness does not exist at all except as a purely subjective state about which it is logically impossible to be mistaken. Of course people can lie about their subjective states. Men, for example, lie about being in love if telling such a lie may enhance their prospects of having an orgasm in the near future. But people do not lie unless they stand to earn either sex or money for it. Now it turns out there is no financial or sexual advantage in lying about one's happiness. On the contrary, one is more likely to get paid or laid if one feigns being a little depressed and in need of cheering up. Therefore, people do not lie about being happy. When someone says "I'm happy," you can believe it. > I hope I'm not going to offend anyone but I find American society > (where I've been living for some years now) as a whole to be > particularly fake. You find that American society is particularly fake because American society IS particularly fake. There is no authenticity at all in American society. That's because Americans watch TV. You don't need scientifically gathered data to show that there is a deep correlation between watching television and being incapable of any form of sincerity. > That's, of course, a generalization against which I > know plenty of individual exceptions. The exceptions are all illusions. The fact is that all television-watching Americans, without exception, are phony. > I have doubts about America ranking as one of > the happiest countries on earth. Why? It is well know that the single greatest source of genuine happiness is being insincere and inauthentic. So when Americans say they are happy, they are not only telling you the truth, but they are also showing you how to become happy yourself: become a charlatan. Richard From jkirk at spro.net Tue Nov 11 12:14:44 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:14:44 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226428968.7833.22.camel@rhayes-desktop> References: <66634efd0811110906r2a7dce8cs1696c4c70ce05a97@mail.gmail.com> <1226428968.7833.22.camel@rhayes-desktop> Message-ID: <777291FAF39D42EF829456C6531AA833@OPTIPLEX> Richard wrote: >"But people do not lie unless they stand to earn either sex or money for it. Now it turns out there is no >financial or sexual advantage in lying about one's happiness. On the contrary, one is more likely to get >paid or laid if one feigns being a little depressed and in need of cheering up." Lots of laughs here--but actually, people also lie to escape being shamed. In the case of being asked questions by a stranger researcher if they are happy, they are no doubt ashamed to admit they are not happy--since admitting that runs contrary to American ideas that we live in the best of all possible countries, plus ideas of how Jesus saves, especially if you put your trust in him and don't complain. In addition, sorry to say that feigning being a little depressed really helps nobody to get paid, unless you are out begging next to a supermarket! (Check current economic situation.) Joanna K. From franz at mind2mind.net Tue Nov 11 13:17:44 2008 From: franz at mind2mind.net (Franz Metcalf) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:17:44 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] bibliography In-Reply-To: <598baadd0811111026m53779ddue2e12ca8f753a31@mail.gmail.com> References: <598baadd0811111026m53779ddue2e12ca8f753a31@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Fellow denizens, Professor Prebish's latest survey data came out in a paper he gave at the International Association of Buddhist Studies conference last Summer, but I don't know if or how it's headed for publication. Sorry about that. Thanks, Gary, for continuing to like my old title, and of course anything I write is suitable only for beginners. But here's a few good books you might not have got to yet: Soren Gordhamer, _Just Say Om!_, Avon, MA: Adams Media Corporation, 2001. This is a great little handbook on life for teenagers. It covers a whole slew of issues with great aplomb and humor but also a charming sincerity deeply grounded in practice. John Makransky, _Awakening through Love: Unveiling your Deepest Goodness_, Boston: Wisdom, 2007. Professor Makransky's (aka Lama John's) book puts Dzogchen practice in the service of love. He is totally convincing in de-esotericizing this Tibetan stuff without seeming to undermine its power. I found the book both moving and challenging. Bhante Henepola Gunaratana, _Eight Mindful Steps to Happiness_, Boston: Wisdom, 2001. Bhante Gunaratana works through the eightfold path, unpacking it with a kind of graceful simplicity. I haven't read his _Mindfulness in Plain English_, to which this is a sequel. This book definitely stands on its own as in introduction to Theravadin practice for laypersons. Gunaratana's work on the eightfold path reminds me of Robert Aitken Roshi's work on the paramitas, _The Practice of Perfection_ (Washington: Counterpoint, 1994). But I won't say more about Aitken because you've already read all his brilliant and poetic oeuvre. Curious what other folks will recommend, Franz From bshmr at aol.com Tue Nov 11 13:24:06 2008 From: bshmr at aol.com (R B Basham) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:24:06 -0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <1226435046.5054.12.camel@aims110> Dear Concerned Friends, (non-Friends and Non-Concerneds), >??Richard Hayes: ... ?You don't need a psychologist. ...You find that American society is particularly fake because American society IS particularly fake. ... So when Americans say they are happy, they are not only telling you the truth, but they are also showing you how to become happy yourself: become a charlatan. > I appreciated more 'The Other Richard' as a proselytizing USAn Democrat. Is there a mantra or blessing to exorcise his clinging Conservative Republicanism? Richard Basham From jkirk at spro.net Tue Nov 11 13:35:26 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:35:26 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] bibliography In-Reply-To: References: <598baadd0811111026m53779ddue2e12ca8f753a31@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2080782FE5E14D56BB64864248626334@OPTIPLEX> Wisdom Pubs has some offerings: http://www.wisdompubs.org/Pages/c_young_adult.lasso From at8u at virginia.edu Tue Nov 11 15:33:47 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811111433ve201699xa59d260e90770aa3@mail.gmail.com> Dear Richard, Thanks for your thoughts. As often, I can't quite make out what parts of your reply are to be taken literally and which are in jest. I apologize if I'm mixing them up in what follows. > I can't tell you how relieved I was to > discover that science had finally confirmed another bit of > folk-psychology that had previously been known only to poets, > playwrights, country and western singer-songwriters, Baptist preachers > and Therav?din monks. The issue to which I referred about happy people being less likely to commit suicide is complex. There is the situation of some north European countries which have high level of different measures usually associated with happiness as well as self-reports about happiness but at the same time have a high suicide rate. So some countries allegedly have high happiness level but also high suicide levels. Many possible explanations have been put forward for this. There are also opposite cases with countries having low happiness but also low suicides. So what seems obvious at the individual level isn't obvious at the level of society. My point, which will probably sound like a platitude, is this: an issue that sounds absolutely obvious and unworthy of study may on closer examination prove to be surprising and worthy of further research. Of course, I agree that there are studies that are just uneventful. >> I wouldn't be at >> all surprised -and in fact am inclined to believe- that people tend to >> say they are happier than they are. > > You don't need a psychologist. You need a philosopher who can help you > understand that happiness does not exist at all except as a purely > subjective state about which it is logically impossible to be mistaken. Allow me to do a little reductionism: it is logically possible to agree to define happiness as a set of physiological states and be wrong about it. Just as people intoxicated with alcohol have the (documented) tendency to underestimate their level of intoxication ("No, officer, really, I am sober!!") I don't see why we can't agree on parameters about happiness and then be wrong about them. I'm not saying this isn't problematic. Philosophically speaking we can argue that 'to be happy' and 'to be under the influence of alcohol' are vague and yet the issue about alcohol intoxication, as far as the law is concerned, is dealt with easily and efficiently. So, if we can agree that to be under the influence of alcohol enough to be a danger when driving one has to have more than x milligrams of alcohol per liter of blood, I think something similar could *in theory* be done for happiness. Then we could be wrong about the state we are in. By this, of course, we would have supplemented the original meaning of 'happiness/to be happy' as referring to a subjective state with a new definition referring to an objective one. >> I hope I'm not going to offend anyone but I find American society >> (where I've been living for some years now) as a whole to be >> particularly fake. > > You find that American society is particularly fake because American > society IS particularly fake. You know, after some 8 year of Buddha-L I was almost certain that you would have commented on my remark. > There is no authenticity at all in > American society. That's because Americans watch TV. On average, almost 5 hours a day of it. The book where I found reference to the study about happy people and suicide also has a chapter on the relationship between watching TV and happiness. In case anyone is interested, here it is: _Happiness: A Revolution in Economics_ MIT Press, 2008. Just one quote from p.105: "On average, ceteris paribus, people who spend a lot of time watching television do indeed report lower lifer satisfaction." > become a charlatan. Well, for now I'm just trying to finish my PhD. It's possible that there's a relation there. Obligatory Buddhist reference: I'm interested in research on happiness for the same reason that I'm interested in Buddhism: I like the idea of reducing the amount of suffering that I and others encounter. Best, Alberto Todeschini From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 11 18:08:55 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:08:55 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226435046.5054.12.camel@aims110> References: <1226435046.5054.12.camel@aims110> Message-ID: <1226452135.6859.12.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 14:24 -0600, R B Basham wrote: > I appreciated more 'The Other Richard' as a proselytizing USAn > Democrat. > > Is there a mantra or blessing to exorcise his clinging Conservative > Republicanism? Sorry, but it is my duty to make life uncomfortable for whatever party is in power. Now that the Democrats have won a comfortable majority in both the Senate and the House and will soon have control of the White House, I must get ready to change the target of my vitriolic spewing and sputtering to Democrats. I'm quite confident they will have earned my scorn and contempt by the end of January 2009. But don't worry. As the Buddha never missed an opportunity to point out, nothing is permanent. I fully expect that the Republicans will be elected with an unprecedented amount of executive and congressional power again in 2012, and I will once again be a raving born-again Democrat spurting venom at President Palin. -- One Richard among many From twin_oceans at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 18:30:32 2008 From: twin_oceans at yahoo.com (Katherine Masis) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:30:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world Message-ID: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Alberto Todeschini wrote: ? ?I hope I'm not going to offend anyone but I find American society (where I've been living for some years now) as a whole to be particularly fake. That's, of course, a generalization against which I know plenty of individual exceptions. Hence -and for other reasons- I too am skeptical that people can and would report their level of happiness reliably and I have doubts about America ranking as one of the happiest countries on earth.? --------------------------------------------------- ? I?ll add to what you just said.? I?m bilingual, bicultural [American (Californian) mom and Costa Rican dad] and bi-national.? But in the 9 years that I lived in the U.S., I grew tired of that ?I?m doing great? mantra chanted out loud by so many folks 24/7.? I hope I?m not sounding judgmental?the habit just never clicked with me. ? Interesting statistics on the happiest countries in the world.? Denmark and Switzerland vie for first place.? Costa Rica, Malta and the Netherlands vie for 5th place.? The USA and several other countries vie for 6th place.? So those ?places? aren?t held by just one country. ? See the full list of countries, complete with world map, according to a study performed at University of Leicester. ? White, A. (2007). A Global Projection of Subjective Well-being: A Challenge to Positive Psychology?? Psychtalk 56, 17-20. ? http://www.le.ac.uk/users/aw57/world/sample.html ? Katherine Masis San Jos?, Costa Rica ? ? ? ? ? ? From dharmafarer at gmail.com Tue Nov 11 18:35:54 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:35:54 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world In-Reply-To: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: The first place for happiest country I think goes to Bhutan, which has GDH (gross domestic happiness) instead of GDP. The happiest place in Singapore in Jurong East, that's where I live :) Piya On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Katherine Masis wrote: > Alberto Todeschini wrote: > > "I hope I'm not going to offend anyone but I find American society > (where I've been living for some years now) as a whole to be > particularly fake. That's, of course, a generalization against which I > know plenty of individual exceptions. Hence -and for other reasons- I > too am skeptical that people can and would report their level of > happiness reliably and I have doubts about America ranking as one of > the happiest countries on earth." > --------------------------------------------------- > > I'll add to what you just said. I'm bilingual, bicultural [American > (Californian) mom and Costa Rican dad] and bi-national. But in the 9 years > that I lived in the U.S., I grew tired of that "I'm doing great" mantra > chanted out loud by so many folks 24/7. I hope I'm not sounding > judgmental?the habit just never clicked with me. > > Interesting statistics on the happiest countries in the world. Denmark and > Switzerland vie for first place. Costa Rica, Malta and the Netherlands vie > for 5th place. The USA and several other countries vie for 6th place. So > those "places" aren't held by just one country. > > See the full list of countries, complete with world map, according to a > study performed at University of Leicester. > > White, A. (2007). A Global Projection of Subjective Well-being: A Challenge > to Positive Psychology? Psychtalk 56, 17-20. > > http://www.le.ac.uk/users/aw57/world/sample.html > > Katherine Masis > San Jos?, Costa Rica > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 11 18:40:17 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:40:17 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811111433ve201699xa59d260e90770aa3@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811111433ve201699xa59d260e90770aa3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1226454017.6859.39.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 17:33 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > As often, I can't quite make out what parts > of your reply are to be taken literally and which are in jest. I rarely reveal my actual thoughts on anything. I learned as a child to keep my cards close to my jest. > I > apologize if I'm mixing them up in what follows. The odds are better than even that I am even more mixed up than you. > So some countries allegedly > have high happiness level but also high suicide levels. This is hardly paradoxical, unless the the very people who are most happy are the ones committing suicide. My guess (strictly amateurish, of course, since I have no familiarity at all with thinking professionally about anything) is that when everyone in the neighborhood is happy, one's own unhappiness is all the more intolerable. As the Buddha said: "Misery loves company. So join the Sangha." > My point, which will probably sound like a platitude, is this: an > issue that sounds absolutely obvious and unworthy of study may on > closer examination prove to be surprising and worthy of further > research. In a moment of uncharacteristic sobriety of spirit, I agree with you completely. > Allow me to do a little reductionism: it is logically possible to > agree to define happiness as a set of physiological states and be > wrong about it. Yes, but it is not logically possible to be mistaken about whether one feels happy. And since there is no fact to the matter of whether anyone actually IS happy, there can be no discrepancy between what one feels and what is actually the case. What one feels IS actually the case. > Just as people intoxicated with alcohol have the > (documented) tendency to underestimate their level of intoxication > ("No, officer, really, I am sober!!") There is no parallelism at all between feeling happy and thinking that one's blood alcohol level is above the legal limit. One can easily be mistaken about the later, but it does not follow from that that one can also be mistaken about the former. The case of blood alcohol level is a matter of objective testing, whereas feeling happy is nothing but a purely subjective feeling with no objective component whatsoever. It is untestable, and therefore both unverifiable and unfalsifiable. > You know, after some 8 year of Buddha-L I was almost certain that you > would have commented on my remark. As I am sure you have figured out by now, my only goal in life is to be completely predictable to everyone. Good to see I am enjoying a measure of success in achieving this goal. It makes me feel happy. Undeniably so. > On average, almost 5 hours a day of it. The book where I found > reference to the study about happy people and suicide also has a > chapter on the relationship between watching TV and happiness. In case > anyone is interested, here it is: _Happiness: A Revolution in > Economics_ MIT Press, 2008. Just one quote from p.105: "On average, > ceteris paribus, people who spend a lot of time watching television do > indeed report lower lifer satisfaction." I have no trouble at all believing that. The only times in my life when I have had suicidal thoughts have been immediately after watching Fox News and stepping by mistake into a Wal-Mart center. Television and shopping centers do not always make me suicidal, but they do plunge me into temporary states of deep melancholy bordering on despair. > Obligatory Buddhist reference: I'm interested in research on happiness > for the same reason that I'm interested in Buddhism: I like the idea > of reducing the amount of suffering that I and others encounter. I also like the idea of reducing the amount of suffering that sentient beings encounter, but approaching the matter systematically and scientifically strikes me as a very unpromising approach. Concocting operational definitions of what happiness is and then testing whether people (or laboratory mice) meet the criteria set up by those operational definitions is bad philosophy, bad science and bad Buddhism. If you want to reduce misery, learn to believe in blind luck and then go out and give food and shelter to homeless people you randomly encounter on the streets. I bet they'll thank you for it. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From marshallarts at bigpond.com Tue Nov 11 23:53:19 2008 From: marshallarts at bigpond.com (Kate Marshall) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:53:19 +1000 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world References: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006d01c94493$58fbd470$0300000a@katies> >The first place for happiest country I think goes to Bhutan, which has GDH >(gross >domestic happiness) instead of GDP... Speaking of Bhutan: Bhutan crowns a new king http://www.abc.net.au/news/photos/2008/11/07/2412732.htm Regards Kate From wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg Wed Nov 12 00:04:05 2008 From: wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg (Weng-Fai Wong) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 15:04:05 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world In-Reply-To: <006d01c94493$58fbd470$0300000a@katies> References: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <006d01c94493$58fbd470$0300000a@katies> Message-ID: IMHO, happiness is an over-sold commodity. The pursuit of happiness is just too stressful. W.F. Wong From cfynn at gmx.net Wed Nov 12 01:43:06 2008 From: cfynn at gmx.net (Christopher Fynn) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:43:06 +0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> Message-ID: <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko wrote: > Good day, > > I posed myself a question of how exactly the idea of 'remaining in > Samsara to help others' originated in Buddhism, especially in Theravada. > > Evidently, among Theravadin countries, this started in the 8th century > in Sri Lanka (see citations in the end of the message). Simultaneously > there developed the cult of Lokesvara Natha (Sri Lankan version of > Avalokitesvara). > "The cult of Avalokitesvara also spread to Sri Lanka. This is a little > surprising as Sri Lanka primarily follows Theravada Buddhism, while > Avalokitesvara was originally a strictly Mahayana conception. In Sri > Lanka, he is called Natha, which is an abbreviation of Lokesvaranatha, > which means "Lord of the World". He has become identified with the > bodhisattva Maitreya, the "future Buddha". He is also seen as being > identical with several Hindu gods. Natha is seen as the guardian deity > of Sri Lanka, and is reportedly worshipped primarily because he is > regarded as a pragmatically useful source of advantages in the > phenomenal world. Although I have been able to find very little > information on it, apparently the cult of Natha has also spread with > little change to other Theravada Buddhist countries, such as Cambodia > and Burma. Yes there is plenty of archaeological evidence (images) of Avalokiteshvara in Burma, Thailand, Cambodia etc. > In Nepal, Avalokitesvara is conflated with the Brahman deity > Matsyendranath. He is worshipped in elaborate rituals which are > performed by a priestly caste. Ordination is handed down from father to > son, with some important positions being sold to the highest bidder from > within the caste. According to one reporter, the meanings behind the > rituals have been largely forgotten. However, they continue to be > performed because they are customary and are considered to bring luck." "Matsyendranath" is one of the "84 siddhas" in the Buddhist Vajrayana tradition - it seems this siddha brought some lineages of Avalokiteshvara practice to Nepal and established the Red and White Matsyendranath temples. His name has just beome conflated with that of the Bodhisattva of whom he was probably seen as an emanation. The same Matsyendranath is also associated with the establishment of the Kadrinath temple in Mangalore, Karnataka which likewise contains an image of Avalokiteshvara. He is supposed to have come there from Kanchi which was at the time a major centre of Vajrayana Buddhism and is not far from Sri Lanka. The legend is he ran away with the daughter or Queen of the King of Kanchi. Her name was Mangal Devi hence the place got the name Mangalore. According to a professor I met at Mysore university in the hills behind this temple there are also ruins of Buddhist stupas and other images of Avalokiteshvara and Tara. > Avalokitesvara and Tibetan Contemplation, by Karen M. Andrews > http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Avalokitesvara_and_Tibetan_Contemplation,_by_Karen_M._Andrews > The name Natha, and the Avalokitesvara connection, points to the Nath > (Mahasiddha) tradition. There we find the statements like: > "According to a recent Nath Guru, Shri Gurudev Mahendranath, another aim > was to avoid reincarnation. In The Magick Path of Tantra, he wrote about > several of the aims of the Naths, > "Our aims in life are to enjoy peace, freedom, and happiness in > this life, but also to avoid rebirth onto this Earth plane. All this > depends not on divine benevolence, but on the way we ourselves think and > act." > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nath > "Mahasiddhas are a form of bodhisattva, meaning they not only have the > spiritual abilities to enter nirvana whenever they please, but they are > so compassionate they resolve to remain in samsara instead to help others." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahasiddha > > So it seems that the idea of remaining in Samsara emerged under the > influence of such notion in Mahasiddha (Nath) tradition. > > Has any author explored this connection? This connection is widely known about - IMO much of the Nath tradition arose from Buddhist tantrism not the other way round. The common figures are comparitively late in the enumerations of Buddhist teachers but near the beginning of the lineages in the Nath Tradition. Also places like Kadrinath in Karnatika were obviously once Buddhist but later became centres associated with the Nath tradition. While it undoubtedly existed, do you really need to look to an Avalokiteshvara cult in what are now Theravada countries for the idea of "remaining in Samsara to help others"? Hasn't Theravada Buddhism always had the idea of Samyaksambuddha which are distinguished from Arhats? Dr. U Rewatta Dhamma a highly respected Burmese monk who lived in the UK once told me there are - and always have been - some Theravada monks in Burma who take Boddhisattva vows to liberate all beings. - Chris == BTW In Tibetan Buddhism Natha (Tibetan "Gonpo") is the usual name used for the wrathful form of Avalokiteshvara, otherwise known as Mahakala. From cfynn at gmx.net Wed Nov 12 02:11:24 2008 From: cfynn at gmx.net (Christopher Fynn) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 15:11:24 +0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> Message-ID: <491A9DBC.3020105@gmx.net> Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko wrote: > In Nepal, Avalokitesvara is conflated with the Brahman deity > Matsyendranath. I think it is likely Matsyendranath was a person who became conflated with Avalokitesvara. In Tibetan Buddism he is associated with a tradition of teachings related to Avalokitesvara / Lokeshvara He is worshipped in elaborate rituals which are > performed by a priestly caste. Ordination is handed down from father to > son, with some important positions being sold to the highest bidder from > within the caste. According to one reporter, the meanings behind the > rituals have been largely forgotten. However, they continue to be > performed because they are customary and are considered to bring luck." The casteism in Newar Buddhism - and only handing down esoteric teachings from father to son within the Vajracarya caste - allegedly first arose for self protection at a time when Hindu Kings oppressed Buddhism in Nepal and these practices have continued since then. In much earlier times, these restrictions were apparently not the case. There are plenty of accounts of Tibetans receiving such esoteric Buddhist teachings from Newar teachers. The symbolism of the rituals in Newar Buddhism is pretty well identical to that in Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhism. In some cases the Newar rituals are more elaborate than those now used in Tibetan Buddhism. - Chris From cfynn at gmx.net Wed Nov 12 03:01:06 2008 From: cfynn at gmx.net (Christopher Fynn) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:01:06 +0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> Message-ID: <491AA962.9000405@gmx.net> Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko wrote: > "The cult of Avalokitesvara also spread to Sri Lanka. Two Mahayana works on Buddhist temple architecture and image making from Sri Lanka: Vastuvidyasastra: Ascribed to Manjusri ISBN: 81703019981 The Citrakarmasastra Ascribed to Manjusri (Volume II) ISBN: 8170302528 E.W. Marasinghe (tr. & ed.) The following book has a chapter on Avalokiteshvara in Burma: Nitharranjan Ray, "Sanskrit Buddhism in Burma". Leiden:1936. Reprint 2002: Orchid Press, Bangkok ISBN: 9748299813 Images: Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara: Sri Lanka; 8th - 9th century Standing four-armed Avalokiteshvara, the Bodhisattva of Infinite Compassion, ca. 9th century; Peninsular or Shrivijaya style Thailand Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara, 8th century Thailand: Buriram Province, Prakhon Chai, 700-799 Bronze Avalokiteshvara, the Bodhisattva of Infinite Compassion, Seated in Royal Ease Angkor period, Khmer style of Banteay Shrei,; fourth quarter of the 10th C. - Chris From at8u at virginia.edu Wed Nov 12 09:16:09 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:16:09 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world Message-ID: <66634efd0811120816i728e2de5n9a6f9569b433c5f1@mail.gmail.com> Dear Katherine, > But in the 9 years > that I lived in the U.S., I grew tired of that "I'm doing great" mantra > chanted out loud by so many folks 24/7. I hope I'm not sounding > judgmental? the habit just never clicked with me. Exactly. Best, Alberto Todeschini From rhayes at unm.edu Wed Nov 12 10:02:58 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:02:58 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <777291FAF39D42EF829456C6531AA833@OPTIPLEX> References: <66634efd0811110906r2a7dce8cs1696c4c70ce05a97@mail.gmail.com> <1226428968.7833.22.camel@rhayes-desktop> <777291FAF39D42EF829456C6531AA833@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: <200811121002.59093.rhayes@unm.edu> On Tuesday 11 November 2008 12:14:44 joanna kirkpatrick wrote: > Lots of laughs here--but actually, people also lie to escape > being shamed. In the case of being asked questions by a stranger > researcher if they are happy, they are no doubt ashamed to admit > they are not happy--since admitting that runs contrary to > American ideas that we live in the best of all possible > countries, plus ideas of how Jesus saves, especially if you put > your trust in him and don't complain. My informal studies show that there are far more Buddhists than Christians in America. At least, I know way more Buddhists than I know Christians, and I consider myself a typical American. Now Buddhists are ashamed to admit being happy, since such a declaration would surely be taken as a sign that one disputes the First Noble Truth. Or worse, it could be taken as a sign that one is shallow, since everyone knows that profoundly wise people are also profoundly miserable. The greatest single source of anxiety for undergraduates (who, according to my experience, make up about 88.3% of the American population) is a dread of being perceived as happy, since being perceived as happy would be construed by their peers as evidence of not having read Nietzsche (or worse, of not having their favourite performer lose on American Idol). I have no evidence for any of these claims, of course. I just know I'm right. When you know you're right, you need no evidence. Just ask any Republican. Or Democrat. And now I am compelled to tell about a Buddhist miracle. Yesterday was Armistice Day, the day when people remember all the people whose lives have been taken away from them by power-hungry governments waging unnecessary wars on the pretext of preserving freedom and other noble ideals. I was sitting in my office here in Albuquerque and remembering how at McGill University the custom is for everyone to stop whatever they are doing at 11:00 and to observe a minute of silence. In the building at McGill where I worked there was a chapel, and out of the depths of the chapel, as the minute of silence ended, a bagpipe would play a lament of such solemnity that it ripped one's heart into shreds and left one blubbering like a sentimental fool. No sound in the world is more mournful than a bagpipe. So here I was in Albuquerque feeling a deep longing to hear a bagpipe playing a lament. Now bear in mind that Albuquerque is millions of kilometers away from the nearest bagpipe, and that we have to settle for mariachi bands in lieu of pipes and drums. No sooner had I settled into a proper melancholy about the absence of bagpipes than I heard a sound coming from the plaza in front of the building where my office is located. It was the unmistakable sound of a bagpipe! I ran out onto the balcony and looked down to see a kilted gentleman pacing back and forth playing a lament on a bagpipe. It produced in me a state of profound sadness and grief for the tragic deaths of all those who have died in pointless wars, and I melted into a wordless and tearful despair. Never have I been more happy. -- Richard P. Hayes Department of Pipology University of New Mexico From aavuso at gmail.com Tue Nov 11 14:24:18 2008 From: aavuso at gmail.com (Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:24:18 +0200 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <8401814e0811111113w71978aacs15a882319cdeac5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> <8401814e0811111113w71978aacs15a882319cdeac5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4919F802.8020009@gmail.com> Dear Justin, Thank you for response. I have read this article by Jeffrey Samuels, and quoted it in my previous message. There's a detailed article about Dutthagamani at: http://www.vipassana.info/d/dutthagaamanii.htm This king did not use any 'Bodhisatta ideal', since there was not such a thing at that time. Jeffrey Samuels writes that "he appears to demonstrate certain bodhisattvic qualities", which is highly tenuous. Mahavamsa just states that Dutthagamani was reborn in Tusita heaven, to become later a chief disciple of Metteya. http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap032.html No 'remaining in Samsara to help others' involved. Mahavamsa was written still before the Bodhisattva cult was introduced in Sri Lanka. Best wishes, Dmytro Justin Whitaker ?????: > Dear Dmytro, > > You might want to read Jeffrey Samuels' 1997 article looking at the > Boddhisatt(v)a ideal: > > Samuels, Jeffrey. 1997. "The Bodhisattva Ideal in Therav?da Buddhist > Theory and Practice: A Reevaluation of the Bodhisattva-?r?vaka > Opposition" In /Philosophy East and West/ Vol. 47-3: pp. 399-416 > > > Available online at: > > http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/jeffrey2.htm > > He suggests that as early as 101-77 BCE the Bodhisatta ideal was being > used by Sri Lankan kings, namely Dutthagamani. > > (http://www.indopedia.org/Dutthagamani.html) > > "Though Du.t.tagaama.nii is not > referred to as a bodhisattva in the Mahaava.msa, he > appears to demonstrate certain bodhisattvic > qualities. Just as a bodhisattva renounces the > enlightenment of an arahant so that he could be > reborn countless times in this world of impermanence > and suffering out of compassion for all beings, so, > too, did King Du.t.tagaama.nii renounce the world of > the devas in order to return to this world of > suffering for the sake of the Buddhist doctrine and > out of compassion for all inhabitants on the island > of Sri Lanka." > > > - p. 405. > > Best wishes, > > Justin Whitaker > > -- > Justin Whitaker > PhD Candidate, Buddhist Ethics > Goldsmiths, University of London > > Administrative Officer > The Center for Ethics > The University of Montana-Missoula > > 2008/11/11 Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko > > > Good day, > > I posed myself a question of how exactly the idea of 'remaining in > Samsara to help others' originated in Buddhism, especially in Theravada. > > Evidently, among Theravadin countries, this started in the 8th century > in Sri Lanka (see citations in the end of the message). Simultaneously > there developed the cult of Lokesvara Natha (Sri Lankan version of > Avalokitesvara). > > "The cult of Avalokitesvara also spread to Sri Lanka. This is a little > surprising as Sri Lanka primarily follows Theravada Buddhism, while > Avalokitesvara was originally a strictly Mahayana conception. In Sri > Lanka, he is called Natha, which is an abbreviation of Lokesvaranatha, > which means "Lord of the World". He has become identified with the > bodhisattva Maitreya, the "future Buddha". He is also seen as being > identical with several Hindu gods. Natha is seen as the guardian deity > of Sri Lanka, and is reportedly worshipped primarily because he is > regarded as a pragmatically useful source of advantages in the > phenomenal world. Although I have been able to find very little > information on it, apparently the cult of Natha has also spread with > little change to other Theravada Buddhist countries, such as Cambodia > and Burma. > > In Nepal, Avalokitesvara is conflated with the Brahman deity > Matsyendranath. He is worshipped in elaborate rituals which are > performed by a priestly caste. Ordination is handed down from father to > son, with some important positions being sold to the highest bidder from > within the caste. According to one reporter, the meanings behind the > rituals have been largely forgotten. However, they continue to be > performed because they are customary and are considered to bring luck." > > Avalokitesvara and Tibetan Contemplation, by Karen M. Andrews > http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Avalokitesvara_and_Tibetan_Contemplation,_by_Karen_M._Andrews > > The name Natha, and the Avalokitesvara connection, points to the Nath > (Mahasiddha) tradition. There we find the statements like: > > "According to a recent Nath Guru, Shri Gurudev Mahendranath, another aim > was to avoid reincarnation. In The Magick Path of Tantra, he wrote about > several of the aims of the Naths, > > "Our aims in life are to enjoy peace, freedom, and happiness in > this life, but also to avoid rebirth onto this Earth plane. All this > depends not on divine benevolence, but on the way we ourselves think and > act." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nath > > "Mahasiddhas are a form of bodhisattva, meaning they not only have the > spiritual abilities to enter nirvana whenever they please, but they are > so compassionate they resolve to remain in samsara instead to help > others." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahasiddha > > So it seems that the idea of remaining in Samsara emerged under the > influence of such notion in Mahasiddha (Nath) tradition. > > Has any author explored this connection? > > Best regards, > Dmytro > > > > > > "By the eighth century C.E., the amalgamation between the institution of > kingship and bodhisattvas became even stronger. At this time, we find > evidence of certain Theravaadin kings in Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand > who openly declared themselves to be bodhisattvas. For example, King > Ni`s`sanka Malla (1187-1196 C.E.) of Polonnaruva, Ceylon, states that "I > will show my self in my [true] body which is endowed with benevolent > regard for and attachment to the virtuous qualities of a bodhisattva > king, who like a parent, protects the world and the religion." (38) In > other epigraphical markings, there is a reference to King > Paraakramabaahu VI as "Bodhisatva [sic] Paraakrama Baahu." (39) Finally, > the conflation of kings and bodhisattvas on the island of Sri Lanka is > established most strongly by King Mahinda IV, who not only referred to > himself as a bodhisattva as a result of his bodhisattva-like resolute > determination, (40) but who even went so far as to proclaim that "none > but the bodhisattas would become kings of prosperous La^nkaa." (41) > > ... > > 51 - There is evidence that suggests that certain lay people living in > Sri Lanka took bodhisattva vows to attain buddhahood. For example, we > find that two Sri Lankans, after freeing their children and wives from > slavery, dedicated the merit derived from these actions "for the.benefit > of all beings" (Epigraphia Zeylanica, 4:133, nos. 1-4) as well as to > their own attainment of "Buddhahood as desired" (ibid., 4:133, nos. > 2-3). We also find a similar wish made by a "lay" person who lived > between the fifth and eighth centuries and who sculpted or commissioned > the sculpting of a rock in the shape of a stuupa. > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha123.htm > > "In Sri Lanka, in the 10th Century, King Mahinda IV (956-972 AD.) in an > inscription proclaimed that "none but the Bodhisattvas would become > kings of Sri Lanka (Ceylon)". Thus it was believed that kings of Sri > Lanka were Bodhisattvas. > > A Thera named Maha-Tipitaka Culabhaya who wrote the Milinda-Tika (about > the 12th Century AD.) in the Theravada tradition of the Mahavihara at > Anuradhapura, says at the end of the book in the colophon that he > aspires to become a Buddha: Buddho Bhaveyyam "May I become a Buddha," > which means that this author is a Bodhisattva. > > We come across at the end of some palm leaf manuscripts of Buddhist > texts in Sri Lanka the names of even a few copyists who have recorded > their wish to become Buddhas, and they too are to be considered as > Bodhisattvas. At the end of a religious ceremony or an act of piety, the > bhikkhu who gives benedictions, usually admonishes the congregation to > make a resolution to attain Nirvana by realising one of the three Bodhis > - Sravakabodhi, Pratyekabodhi or Samyaksambodhi - as they wish according > to their capacity. > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha126.htm > > "By about the tenth century, this belief had become so strong that the > king of Sri Lanka had not only to be Buddhist but also a Bodhisatta. The > Jetavanarama Slab Inscription of Mahinda IV (956-972 AD) proclaimed > > "None but the Bodhisatta would become kings of Sri Lanka ??.(who) .... > received assurance (vyaran) from the Omniscent Buddha." > > http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/establishment.htm > > "The bodhisattva concept had its influence in the evolution of kingship > in Sri Lanka, too. For some time between the fourth and the eleventh > centuries CE, the kings of Sri Lanka began to be regarded not as > ordinary human beings but as bodhisattvas. The Jetavanarama > slab-inscription of Mahinda IV and the Pritidanakamanapa inscription of > Nissanka Malla are instances where the rulers refer to themselves as > bodhisattvas. The Rajatarangani (p. 470 and the Nikayasamgrahava, ed. > Kumaranatunga, p. 24) also bear evidence to this. Parakramabahu II says > that he would become a Buddha (Mahavamsa, ch. 86, stz. 7). > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha238.htm > > In Burma, the relationship between kings and bodhisattvas is exemplified > with King Kyanzittha, who claimed himself to be "the bodhisatva [sic], > who shall verily become a Buddha that saves (and) redeems all beings, > who is great in love (and) compassion for all beings at all times... > [and] who was foretold by the Lord Buddha, who is to become a true > Buddha." (42) In another instance, King Alaungsithu wrote that he would > like to build a causeway to help all beings reach "The Blessed City > [i.e., nirvaa.na ]." (43) Finally, kings `Srii > Tribhuvanaaditya, Thilui^n > Ma^n, Ca~nsuu I, and Naato^nmyaa all referred to themselves as > bodhisattvas. (44) > > 42 - Epigraphia Burmanica, 1:146. > > 43 - P. M. Tin, "The Shwegugyi Pagoda Inscriptions, Pagan 1141 A.D.," > The Journal of the Burma Research Society 10 (2) (1920): 72. > > 44 - T. Tun, "Religion in Burma, A.D. 100-1300," The Journal of the > Burma Research Society 42 (1959): 53. > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha123.htm > > After a war between the Mon and the Myanmar in which the Mon initially > attacked and then conquered Ava itself, the Myanmar king Alaungpaya > (1752-60), who believed himself a Bodhisatta, crushed Mon resistance > once and for all. After Pago had fallen into his hands in 1756, Lower > Myanmar was devastated and many of the Mon survivors fled to Thailand or > were deported as slaves. > > ... > > Bodawpaya is also reputed to have been beset by a form of megalomania. > He wanted to force the Sangha to confirm officially that he was the > Bodhisatta of the next Buddha to come in this world cycle, the Buddha > Metteyya. > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/lib/bps/wheels/wheel399.html > > In Thailand, a similar connection is drawn. One example of a Thai > bodhisattva-king is Lu T'ai of Sukhothai who "wished to become a Buddha > to help all beings... leave behind the sufferings of transmigration." > (45) The relation between King Lu T'ai and bodhisattvahood is also > manifested by the events occurring at his ordination ceremony that were > similar to "the ordinary course of happenings in the career of a > Bodhisattva." (46) > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha123.htm > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > From aavuso at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 02:42:15 2008 From: aavuso at gmail.com (Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:42:15 +0200 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> Message-ID: <491AA4F7.4000105@gmail.com> Hi Chris, > This connection is widely known about - IMO much of the Nath tradition > arose from Buddhist tantrism not the other way round. The common > figures are comparitively late in the enumerations of Buddhist teachers > but near the beginning of the lineages in the Nath Tradition. Also > places like Kadrinath in Karnatika were obviously once Buddhist but > later became centres associated with the Nath tradition. Yes. However I suppose that the Mahasiddha tradition originated from Shaiva Siddhanta http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaiva_Siddhanta http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddhar The interaction of it with Indian Budhism must have produced both Bodhisattva Buddhism and Nath tradition. This was a kind of Hindu reconquista of Buddhist temples. > While it undoubtedly existed, do you really need to look to an > Avalokiteshvara cult in what are now Theravada countries for the idea of > "remaining in Samsara to help others"? Hasn't Theravada Buddhism always > had the idea of Samyaksambuddha which are distinguished from Arhats? According to the suttas, Sammasambuddha is one who discovers the Path. One can't become Sammasambuddha by wish, and Buddha never recommended it. > Dr. U Rewatta Dhamma a highly respected Burmese monk who lived in the UK > once told me there are - and always have been - some Theravada monks in > Burma who take Boddhisattva vows to liberate all beings. The date and place when Bodhisattva's ideal was introduced in Theravada can be established by text where it first appears - A Treatise on the Paaramiis by Acariya Dhammapala, 6th century, Southeastern India. Dmytro BTW I wonder whether the Burmese Nat cult is connected with Nath tradition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(spirit) From lidewij at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 09:34:54 2008 From: lidewij at gmail.com (Lidewij Niezink) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:34:54 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226454017.6859.39.camel@localhost> References: <66634efd0811111433ve201699xa59d260e90770aa3@mail.gmail.com> <1226454017.6859.39.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <296141cb0811120834m1a5aaecci4c4f81fd558f1a1a@mail.gmail.com> Been offline for a few weeks but I want to thank you all for this great discussion on the usefulness of psychology. Being a social psychologist myself --yes, there is a gradation in uselessness of psychologist and I am inclined to think that we, social psychs, are the worst-- I can't help but agree with about everything which is said here. I myself for instance, got my PhD on the concept of empathy, as vague as happiness and as well known and thought through by 'folks' as any of the other obvious studies we seem to produce. Great!!! Long live empathy/sympathy/compassion/altruism. Unfortunately, after studying that topic for five years, I am much less knowledgeable than I thought I was on the topic itself... Another side effect of the wonderful world of psychology in particular and probably any field of knowledge in general (sorry for stating the obvious here, it's a professional deformation). "If you want to reduce misery, learn to believe in blind luck and then go out and give food and shelter to homeless people you randomly encounter on the streets. I bet they'll thank you for it." I keep wondering if the anticipation of reciprocity in the form of a 'thank you' might be reducing the happy effects (read: efficiency) of the reduction of misery... Thanks once again, Lidewij 2008/11/12 Richard Hayes > On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 17:33 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > > > As often, I can't quite make out what parts > > of your reply are to be taken literally and which are in jest. > > I rarely reveal my actual thoughts on anything. I learned as a child to > keep my cards close to my jest. > > > I > > apologize if I'm mixing them up in what follows. > > The odds are better than even that I am even more mixed up than you. > > > So some countries allegedly > > have high happiness level but also high suicide levels. > > This is hardly paradoxical, unless the the very people who are most > happy are the ones committing suicide. My guess (strictly amateurish, of > course, since I have no familiarity at all with thinking professionally > about anything) is that when everyone in the neighborhood is happy, > one's own unhappiness is all the more intolerable. As the Buddha said: > "Misery loves company. So join the Sangha." > > > My point, which will probably sound like a platitude, is this: an > > issue that sounds absolutely obvious and unworthy of study may on > > closer examination prove to be surprising and worthy of further > > research. > > In a moment of uncharacteristic sobriety of spirit, I agree with you > completely. > > > Allow me to do a little reductionism: it is logically possible to > > agree to define happiness as a set of physiological states and be > > wrong about it. > > Yes, but it is not logically possible to be mistaken about whether one > feels happy. And since there is no fact to the matter of whether anyone > actually IS happy, there can be no discrepancy between what one feels > and what is actually the case. What one feels IS actually the case. > > > Just as people intoxicated with alcohol have the > > (documented) tendency to underestimate their level of intoxication > > ("No, officer, really, I am sober!!") > > There is no parallelism at all between feeling happy and thinking that > one's blood alcohol level is above the legal limit. One can easily be > mistaken about the later, but it does not follow from that that one can > also be mistaken about the former. The case of blood alcohol level is a > matter of objective testing, whereas feeling happy is nothing but a > purely subjective feeling with no objective component whatsoever. It is > untestable, and therefore both unverifiable and unfalsifiable. > > > You know, after some 8 year of Buddha-L I was almost certain that you > > would have commented on my remark. > > As I am sure you have figured out by now, my only goal in life is to be > completely predictable to everyone. Good to see I am enjoying a measure > of success in achieving this goal. It makes me feel happy. Undeniably > so. > > > On average, almost 5 hours a day of it. The book where I found > > reference to the study about happy people and suicide also has a > > chapter on the relationship between watching TV and happiness. In case > > anyone is interested, here it is: _Happiness: A Revolution in > > Economics_ MIT Press, 2008. Just one quote from p.105: "On average, > > ceteris paribus, people who spend a lot of time watching television do > > indeed report lower lifer satisfaction." > > I have no trouble at all believing that. The only times in my life when > I have had suicidal thoughts have been immediately after watching Fox > News and stepping by mistake into a Wal-Mart center. Television and > shopping centers do not always make me suicidal, but they do plunge me > into temporary states of deep melancholy bordering on despair. > > > Obligatory Buddhist reference: I'm interested in research on happiness > > for the same reason that I'm interested in Buddhism: I like the idea > > of reducing the amount of suffering that I and others encounter. > > I also like the idea of reducing the amount of suffering that sentient > beings encounter, but approaching the matter systematically and > scientifically strikes me as a very unpromising approach. Concocting > operational definitions of what happiness is and then testing whether > people (or laboratory mice) meet the criteria set up by those > operational definitions is bad philosophy, bad science and bad Buddhism. > If you want to reduce misery, learn to believe in blind luck and then go > out and give food and shelter to homeless people you randomly encounter > on the streets. I bet they'll thank you for it. > > -- > Richard Hayes > Department of Philosophy > University of New Mexico > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- Lidewij Niezink, PhD http://www.linkedin.com/in/lniezink From shian at kmspks.org Tue Nov 11 19:15:19 2008 From: shian at kmspks.org ([DPD Web] Shen Shi'an) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:15:19 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <9af428c2834fa582aab6cf62bde8228be14b5e10@localhost> References: <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> <9af428c2834fa582aab6cf62bde8228be14b5e10@localhost> Message-ID: From: Jayarava [mailto:jayarava at yahoo.com] --- On Tue, 11/11/08, Richard Hayes wrote: >> That is a much more charitable interpretation than the one >> I would give. What I am inclined to say is that what the experiment >> illustrates is the penchant of psychologists to perform experiments that >> give us blinding insights into the obvious. > ... by torturing innocent people and animals. Er.... willing Zennies testing their meditation proficiency actually? :-] No animals are harmed in meditation experiments - cos they are usually assumed to be non-meditators! From shian at kmspks.org Wed Nov 12 00:19:35 2008 From: shian at kmspks.org ([DPD Web] Shen Shi'an) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 15:19:35 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world In-Reply-To: <62e4e222734dac3df81c3b57d4a495cb409a106d@localhost> References: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com><006d01c94493$58fbd470$0300000a@katies> <62e4e222734dac3df81c3b57d4a495cb409a106d@localhost> Message-ID: On the ironies of "the Pursuit of Happyness" in Samsara: http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=12,3821,0,0,1,0 : ... Throughout the story, Chris muses upon his pursuit of happiness - "And it was at that time that I thought about Thomas Jefferson writing that Declaration of Independence. Him saying that we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And I thought about how he knew to put the 'pursuit' in there, like no one can actually have happiness. We can only pursue it." Interesting. Most of us pursue happiness in its varied guises and assumed embodiments. But do we really get "it"? We see Chris physically running a lot in the film, as he rushes to makes ends meet, banging into one obstacle after another. He must have felt like he was chasing an elusive phantom carrot dangling on a stick before him. Here is the paradox - there is no need to run to grab the carrot. Just be still and hold it here and now. Unenlightened, happiness is a state of mind, conditioned but not determined by the material, but we trick ourselves into thinking otherwise. "True Happiness" contrasts with worldly happiness. The first is truly lasting, while the latter always fleeting. When we pursue worldly happiness, they will at best come... only to pass in due time. Mountains of wealth cannot buy True Happiness. Fantastic sex is just a brief high. Fame is always at the mercy of blame. Sumptuous meals can only be taken so much... You get the idea. Because worldly happiness is conditioned, it fades away when its conditions fall away. Because True Happiness is unconditioned, it requires nothing in particular to sustain it - though we need to cultivate our spirituality by perfecting our compassion and wisdom to attain it once and for all.... -----Original Message----- From: Weng-Fai Wong [mailto:wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg] Sent: Wednesday, 12 November, 2008 3:04 PM To: 'Buddhist discussion forum' Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world IMHO, happiness is an over-sold commodity. The pursuit of happiness is just too stressful. W.F. Wong _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From at8u at virginia.edu Wed Nov 12 10:40:44 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:40:44 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811120940m6d605b70oc97dbe902e693bf8@mail.gmail.com> Dear Richard, Thanks for taking time to reply. >> So some countries allegedly >> have high happiness level but also high suicide levels. > > This is hardly paradoxical, unless the the very people who are most > happy are the ones committing suicide. My guess (strictly amateurish, of > course, since I have no familiarity at all with thinking professionally > about anything) is that when everyone in the neighborhood is happy, > one's own unhappiness is all the more intolerable. As the Buddha said: > "Misery loves company. So join the Sangha." Don't quote me on this, but if memory serves one possible explanation put forward was that those north European countries also have a rather low religiosity. So it's possible that suicide is seen as more of an option than in more religious places where there is a strong belief that suicide is wrong. But yes, peer-pressure is a powerful, well-documented factor on our psychological well-being. >> Allow me to do a little reductionism: it is logically possible to >> agree to define happiness as a set of physiological states and be >> wrong about it. > > Yes, but it is not logically possible to be mistaken about whether one > feels happy. And since there is no fact to the matter of whether anyone > actually IS happy, there can be no discrepancy between what one feels > and what is actually the case. What one feels IS actually the case. Only on your definition of happiness. On the logically perfectly possible definition of happiness as an objectively measurable physical state your argument doesn't work. Once again, I'm not saying that a good definition of objectively measurable happiness is currently possible. >> Just as people intoxicated with alcohol have the >> (documented) tendency to underestimate their level of intoxication >> ("No, officer, really, I am sober!!") > > There is no parallelism at all between feeling happy and thinking that > one's blood alcohol level is above the legal limit. One can easily be > mistaken about the later, but it does not follow from that that one can > also be mistaken about the former. The case of blood alcohol level is a > matter of objective testing, whereas feeling happy is nothing but a > purely subjective feeling with no objective component whatsoever. It is > untestable, and therefore both unverifiable and unfalsifiable. Let me restate my argument: it is possible to give a definition of happiness as an objectively measurable physical state. This definition would be fundamentally different from the one you are employing. And I suspect that in the next few decades it will be not merely logically possible but also practically possible to give a half-decent and useful definition and to measure the parameters of such definition. I imagine there will be disagreement and that the definition will be refined over time. Of course, feel free to disagree on the technical feasibility of such thing or even on its desirability. Seen as a measurable physical state (I repeat, maybe not today but in the future), 'to be happy' is similar to 'to be tall' or 'to be obese'. The only difference is that we can form a reasonably accurate opinion about whether a person is tall or obese with our unaided senses. For happiness we will need some instruments. And just as there are different coexisting meanings of 'to be obese' (non-technical = 'to be very fat'; the technical one could be something like 'to have a body-fat mass above 30% of total body mass'. For the first you just need your eyes, for the second you need a measuring instrument) the same can (if not today, in the near future) happen with 'to be happy'. >> Obligatory Buddhist reference: I'm interested in research on happiness >> for the same reason that I'm interested in Buddhism: I like the idea >> of reducing the amount of suffering that I and others encounter. > > I also like the idea of reducing the amount of suffering that sentient > beings encounter, but approaching the matter systematically and > scientifically strikes me as a very unpromising approach. Concocting > operational definitions of what happiness is and then testing whether > people (or laboratory mice) meet the criteria set up by those > operational definitions is bad philosophy, bad science and bad Buddhism. It's not bad philosophy in so far as it isn't philosophy at all. Feel free to have a philosophical discussion about it, as this can help to clarify thoughts and has some entertainment value. It's not bad science but rather young science. The field is young *but* very promising. I don't think we should discard a field that is only some 10 years old. And I also have to disagree on it being bad Buddhim in so far as it isn't Buddhism at all. But the potential to increase people's well-being is phenomenal and that, I think, is close to Buddhism. I never claimed it to actually be Buddhism but just that I have an interest in both. Feel free to call it bad Buddhism, but I won't call it Buddhism to start with. I do think that science on happiness and Buddhism can enrich each other. Besides, a person can be a good Buddhist as she does research in this field, no? For instance, by being a good Buddhist when dealing with family, co-workers, fellow researchers and students. Basically, one has to start somewhere. I know that presently researchers have only started. But already psychologists have studied and documented several strategies that increase subjective happiness quite effectively. As I mentioned in my original post, one of the most recurring strategies in the literature is engaging in vigorous, regular physical exercise. Another is meditation. For all those who are interested here's a very accessible book: _The How of Happiness_ by Sonja Lyubomirsky, Penguin, 2008. > If you want to reduce misery, learn to believe in blind luck and then go > out and give food and shelter to homeless people you randomly encounter > on the streets. I bet they'll thank you for it. Or do both what you suggest and what I suggest. By the way, one of the well-documented activities that can effectively increase subjective happiness is precisely doing voluntary work and helping others. For all of science's problems, I have great faith in it. Perhaps here is our biggest disagreement. Best, Alberto Todeschini From at8u at virginia.edu Wed Nov 12 10:53:16 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:53:16 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811120953w4f0b05fct5a6b80ba9a12c146@mail.gmail.com> Dear Lidewij, > Unfortunately, after studying that topic for five years, I am much less > knowledgeable than I thought I was on the topic itself I should mention that I am a complete amateur with no formal training in psychology, if by 'formal' we mean sitting in a university class and being graded. Please feel free to correct the inevitable mistakes that creep in my postings. Richard Hayes already does a good job at finding faults in what I write, but more corrections are always welcome. > Thanks once again, You know, one of the reasons I've been airing my ideas for the past two days is to get them trashed and see what survives. I also have to thank those who have patiently followed the discussion between myself and Richard. Best, Alberto Todeschini From gary.gach at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 12:17:19 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:17:19 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddha-l Digest, Vol 45, Issue 16 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <598baadd0811121117s50fa52cajcafa134ae6ac12e7@mail.gmail.com> >>By the way, one of the well-documented activities that can effectively >> increase subjective happiness is precisely doing voluntary work and >> helping others Caro Alberto Not in any way to challenge the assertion but for purposes of my readership i wonder if you recall any documentation? (Bernie Siegel, for instance, documents how cancer patients in support groups have more favorable outcomes). Tante grazie! as for happiness, you may not but i sure find it interesting that Jefferson originally never put happiness in originally, but included it as an afterthought ... and (2) how often we hear of dukkha but so seldom of sukkha; is it 'cos it's so hard to translate into our lexicon? p.s. thanx for the citations, Franz; many are indeed complete surprises Gary Gach http://www.redroom.com/author/gary-g-gach may all beings be well From jhubbard at email.smith.edu Wed Nov 12 13:20:52 2008 From: jhubbard at email.smith.edu (Jamie Hubbard) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 15:20:52 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <5D7BB645B9374EC5A2EB2F224C6861F4@OPTIPLEX> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1c618f5de5829245595bf5b513e06b64015d21c4@localhost> <87f094787e05e6a4581833b36de498c3c711fcc1@localhost> <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> <4919AC80.7050803@email.smith.edu> <5D7BB645B9374EC5A2EB2F224C6861F4@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: <491B3AA4.3080707@email.smith.edu> jkirk wrote: > Excuse my ignorance, but what is a "happiness set-point" ?? > Joanna K. > The basic idea is that we all have a normal range of happiness, contentment, satisfaction or whatever we want to call it (and however falsely we might report it). This is very dependent on genetics, but of course also influenced by environment (nature and nurture working together). When bad/stressful/unpleasant things happen to us, we get sad/depressed/unhappy as a result, but within a more-or-less regular period of time we "bounce back" to the level of contentment that we normally carry. The same thing is true about good/pleasant/joyful things-- after a bit of heightened spirits, we return to our usual "set point." Really good things-- finding a loving partner, getting tenure, whatever-- have a longer lasting "up" effect than lesser events --finding a parking space, winning the lottery, getting a good grade-- but in the end we "even out" to our usual state of well-being (or the lack thereof). The "set point" varies for individuals and groups, of course. What is interesting is how even really traumatic events (losing a limb, for example), don't seem to change the set-point. This all seems quite reasonable according to my personal experience as well as what I observe among those around me, and of course is very well attested in all the "empirical" studies. The big deal in the Buddhist-Psycho dialogs, of course, are the various technologies from both sides that promise to actually *change* your set-point, and the notion that in doing so what is really happening is that the "hard wiring" in your brain is actually changing-- that is, neuro-plasticity. The recent Mind and Life Institute book by Sharon Begley ("Train your Mind, Change your Brain") is all about this, as are countless other tomes in this series and elsewhere. Again, this all seems common-sense to me, and what the Buddhist tradition has long taught. At the same time, fun questions continue to pop up-- for example, if you have a relatively high set-point-- that is, most of the time you feel pretty good about things and are able to rebound pretty well from unpleasant stuff-- why bother chasing the whole enchilada, that is, "awakening" or the "cessation of dukkha"? Why should I let somebody convince me that, contrary to my (incontrovertible) feeling, I really am suffering most of the time? Besides you in opposition to your own "experience" of things (reputable the best source of knowledge, according to the Buddhist camp) *and* putting you on that slippery slope to the monastic life, it just seems like a lot of hard work for relatively little return, especially if things are pretty good for you already. What, you are happy but you want more? You aren't satisfied with a reasonable amount of satisfaction in your life? You want to eliminate *all* unpleasant experience? You can see where this goes. . . to me, the only possible reason for chasing "complete cessation of suffering" or the "final elimination of all afflictive mental states (klesa)" would be the reality of rebirth forever until you do accomplish this task. Not finding this compelling, I am content to be lazy and remain how I am (at least vis-a-vis "happiness/suffering"), and leave my set-point alone. And that, of course, leads to the other interesting problem (which much of this cross-conversation politely steps around), and that is that for the complete cessation argument to be a reasonable motivation, rebirth needs to work, and for rebirth to work some sort of disembodied consciousness must be accepted. In other words, physicalism in all of its varieties must be denied.Otherwise Buddhism as therapy or therapy as Buddhism prevails--which, as you can imagine, I find quite OK (unlike some, I often agree with Richard--except when he refuses to be disagreeable, which he only does in person-- and so see Richard's page on "Psychotherapy and Religion: http://home.comcast.net/~dayamati/therapy.html#therapy; re. "set point," note his comments on resilience). Practically speaking, it seems to me that the more they figure out the brain/meat side of the happiness equation before long we will be able to tweak our minds by physically tweaking our brains (pharmaceutically and/or otherwise). Here I agree with Alberto Todeschini (and all of the neuroscience literature that I have been reading for this course) and his ideas about the possibilities of a physical (brain-level) reductionism, at least to some level. Actually, I think it has already come along quite a ways. Jamie From bankei at gmail.com Wed Nov 12 14:18:06 2008 From: bankei at gmail.com (Bankei) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:18:06 +1100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Nepal's Buddha Boy is back Message-ID: http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/devotees-flock-to-buddha-reincarnation-in-nepal/2008/11/13/1226318780198.html The teenage boy revered by many as a reincarnation of Buddha sat silently in the jungle as he blessed his devotees on Wednesday with a light tap on the head, which they consider the touch of the divine. His face was still, his long hair spilled over his white robe, and he never said a word. The followers of Ram Bahadur Bamjan, 18, believe he has been meditating without food and water since he was first spotted in the jungles of southern Nepal in 2005, when believers say he spent months without moving, sitting with his eyes closed beneath a tree. Bamjan re-emerged this week to meet his followers, who have come by the thousands to see him in the jungles of Ratanpur, about 160km south of Katmandu. "I got a chance to see God today," Bishnu Maya Khadka, a housewife, said after receiving Bamjan's blessing today. "They say he is Buddha, but for me he is just God." Bamjan was expected to address his followers on November 18 and then retreat again into the jungle for meditation, said Kamal Tamang, a Buddhist priest. Bamjan received the pilgrims from atop a podium covered in yellow cloth and placed before a massive tree. He looked healthy and strong and showed no signs of starvation or dehydration. Buddhism, which has about 325 million followers, mostly in Asia, teaches that every soul is reincarnated after death in another bodily form. But several Buddhist scholars have been skeptical of the claims that Bamjan is a reincarnation of Siddhartha Gautama, who was born in southwestern Nepal roughly 2,500 years ago and became revered as the Buddha, or Enlightened One. "Being Buddha means the last birth and the highest level that can be achieved. There can be no reincarnation of Buddha, even though Buddhists believe in life after death," said Rakesh, a Buddhist scholar in Kathmandu who goes by only one name. "Meditating without food does not prove that he is the reincarnation of Buddha," said Min Bahadur Shakya of the Nagarjuna Institute of Exact Methods, a Buddhist research centre in Kathmandu. "There is much study needed to be done." Bamjan has never addressed the subject in any of his speeches. The devotees who have flocked to visit him have fewer doubts. Colourful prayer flags fluttered and incense filled the air today as the pilgrims silently approached Bamjan, who was surrounded by a line of Buddhist monks. "I have no doubt in my mind he is a God," said Meg Bahadur Lama, a local farmer. "He has been meditating without food and water and no human can achieve such a feat. I used to hear about such miracles in the past but now I got to see one." From rhayes at unm.edu Wed Nov 12 14:40:51 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:40:51 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world In-Reply-To: References: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <006d01c94493$58fbd470$0300000a@katies> <62e4e222734dac3df81c3b57d4a495cb409a106d@localhost> Message-ID: <1226526051.18816.4.camel@rhayes-desktop> On Wed, 2008-11-12 at 15:19 +0800, [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote: > On the ironies of "the Pursuit of Happyness" in Samsara: > http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=12,3821,0,0,1,0 : > > ... Throughout the story, Chris muses upon his pursuit of happiness - > "And it was at that time that I thought about Thomas Jefferson writing > that Declaration of Independence. Him saying that we have the right to > life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And I thought about how he > knew to put the 'pursuit' in there, like no one can actually have > happiness. We can only pursue it." I have heard that in early drafts of the Declaration, the phrase was "life, liberty and the pursuit of property," which would have been a more accurate description of what America became after it foisted independence onto itself. Of course, if Dharmakirti had had a hand in writing the Declaration, he would have pointed out that there are properties but no property-possessors. Richard From rhayes at unm.edu Wed Nov 12 14:46:19 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:46:19 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Nepal's Buddha Boy is back In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1226526379.18816.7.camel@rhayes-desktop> On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 08:18 +1100, Bankei wrote: > The teenage boy revered by many as a reincarnation of Buddha sat silently in > the jungle as he blessed his devotees on Wednesday with a light tap on the > head, which they consider the touch of the divine. Hey wait! I thought the whole point of being a Buddha is to avoid any further incarnations. Does this mean the Buddha failed to attain Buddhahood? Should we be demanding our money back? Richard From jkirk at spro.net Wed Nov 12 20:05:51 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:05:51 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <491AA4F7.4000105@gmail.com> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> <491AA4F7.4000105@gmail.com> Message-ID: <987363E6B96A42D7B7988B6FDCFECCB4@OPTIPLEX> Hello Dmytro, I don't think that the Burman nat cults have a connection with Indian Nath traditions. The goals of the two are different. The goal of the Indian Naths (a jati as well as a religious community) is eventual non-rebirth as a result of living ethically, according to sila. The goals of Burman nat worship are material and pragmatic in the here and now: job success, making lots of money; and personal--relief from familial problems, getting husbands out of jail, etc. The term naat, meaning 'lord" might be a loan word from Sanskrit or neighboring Skt.-related languages. But the practice of nat pwes--shamanistic ceremonies commissioned by individuals or married couples as a means to beseech the nats for favors--more resemble those of S. E. Asia and Taiwan. Nat kadaws (shamans) are often transvestites in daily life, or gays (some are straights). They make a good living putting on these performances for their clients. As one gay nat kadaw said, in a film I've just screened for review ("Friends in High Places"), "If you're a woman, you can only serve as a female; if a man, only as a male, otherwise it won't work. If gay, you can do either." The shaman is 'married' to the nat, or nats. Here is a news article about a woman shaman in Taiwan. Her equipment and goals share many characteristics with the nats I viewed in the film: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/10/asia/shaman.php --the bottle of booze in one hand, the costume (here she impersonates a monk so her costume has color patches); advice and counseling given to devotees. Friends in High Places is a first-rate film, by the way--amazing in fact. The filmmaker is Anglo Burman. She was able to get right into the midst of the action, in extremely crowded circumstances. Buddhist content: the film begins with two sisters talking about nats to the filmmaker--one of them is a Buddhist, and she says, pointing to the sky, 'Buddha is up there, nats below'--her Christian sister says,'God is high up, nats are below God.' They both affirm that they believe in nats. During the film, a heavy-set middle-aged monk appears in the nat pwe audience, pays some currency bills to the presiding nat kadaw, then goes and sits to the side and is evidently enjoying the performance. The main nat kadaw in this film is exceptionally outstanding as a theatrical performer. You can see a trailer on the DER website by clicking the link found here: http://www.der.org/films/friends-in-high-places.html The wikipedia article is wrong to state that nat pwes are more often found in rural areas--today they are big right in Rangoon/Yangon, the big city. One way of dealing with the stress of living with the dictators. Cheers, Joanna ================== Dmytro BTW I wonder whether the Burmese Nat cult is connected with Nath tradition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_(spirit) _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From jayarava at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 03:06:48 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:06:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Nepal's Buddha Boy is back In-Reply-To: <1226526379.18816.7.camel@rhayes-desktop> Message-ID: <540268.11980.qm@web51402.mail.re2.yahoo.com> -- On Wed, 12/11/08, Richard P. Hayes wrote: >Should we be demanding our money back? Unfortunately due to the credit crunch the new Govt of Nepal has nationalised the Buddha Boy, and so far it is uncertain whether foreign investors will ever see fruition. They are still negotiating over whether scientists will be able to study his brain; however, he has confirmed the existence of nats. JR From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 13 09:14:52 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:14:52 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Nepal's Buddha Boy is back In-Reply-To: <540268.11980.qm@web51402.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <540268.11980.qm@web51402.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200811130914.52634.rhayes@unm.edu> On Thursday 13 November 2008 03:06:48 Jayarava wrote: > They are still negotiating over whether > scientists will be able to study his brain; however, he has confirmed the > existence of nats. The last (and only) time I was in Burma, it was swarming with gnats and mosquitoes. We really don't need a Nepalese Buddha boy, either with or without a brain, to confirm their existence. -- Richard P. Hayes Department of Entomology University of New Mexico From aavuso at gmail.com Thu Nov 13 11:48:10 2008 From: aavuso at gmail.com (Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:48:10 +0200 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> Message-ID: <491C766A.5040204@gmail.com> Dear Chris and all the honorable subscribers, > This connection is widely known about - IMO much of the Nath tradition > arose from Buddhist tantrism not the other way round. The common > figures are comparitively late in the enumerations of Buddhist teachers > but near the beginning of the lineages in the Nath Tradition. The first Theravadan text on Bodhisattva's path, A Treatise on the Paramis, by Acariya Dhammapala, borrows from Bodhisattvabhuumi, the fifteenth chapter of the Yogaacaarabhuumi, a voluminous text of the Yogaacaara school ascribed to Maitreya-naatha, the teacher of Asanga. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel409.html http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/37687/Asanga http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya-n%C4%81tha There's again a Nath trace. Best regards, Dmytro http://dhamma.ru/sadhu/ From Jackhat1 at aol.com Thu Nov 13 12:50:16 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:50:16 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: a message dated 11/12/2008 2:22:05 P.M. Central Standard Time, jhubbard at email.smith.edu writes: .Why should I let somebody convince me that, contrary to my (incontrovertible) feeling, I really am suffering most of the time? Besides you in opposition to your own "experience" of things (reputable the best source of knowledge, according to the Buddhist camp) *and* putting you on that slippery slope to the monastic life, it just seems like a lot of hard work for relatively little return, especially if things are pretty good for you already< -------- That's a good question. The Dalai Lama gave one answer as, if things are good for you, keep doing what you are doing and forget Buddhism. Two other answers. First, a daily meditation practice dealing with minor problems such as the pain in your knee teaches you to deal with the bigger problems we all have such as illness, death of a loved one, etc. Part of dealing with these minor problems involve recognizing them and delving into them. Second, most of us have instances of minor suffering everyday that causes us a problem but that we don't recognize as suffering. For instance, someone cuts in line in front of us at the grocery store; the phone rings while we are eating dinner; we have had a disagreement with a relative that has been in the background for years. It is like our having a medical problem such as a low grade tooth infection or some vitamin deficiency. We don't recognize we have it and also don't recognize what a healthy life feels like. Jack **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From Jackhat1 at aol.com Thu Nov 13 12:56:48 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:56:48 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/12/2008 2:22:05 P.M. Central Standard Time, jhubbard at email.smith.edu writes: >And that, of course, leads to the other interesting problem (which much of this cross-conversation politely steps around), and that is that for the complete cessation argument to be a reasonable motivation, rebirth needs to work, and for rebirth to work some sort of disembodied consciousness must be accepted.< === One could make the opposite argument. For the complete cessation argument to be a reasonable motivation, one shouldn't have the belief in rebirth. Buddhism says that our "I" doesn't last from moment to moment which includes after rebirth. So, we won't be around after physical death anyway so why should we do anything now to improve that life. Another argument is that if we believe in rebirth we have countless lives to get it right. Why bust our hump to get it right today? jack **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From selwyn at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 13 13:14:12 2008 From: selwyn at ntlworld.com (L.S. Cousins) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:14:12 +0000 Subject: [Buddha-l] Remaining in Samsara In-Reply-To: <491C766A.5040204@gmail.com> References: <49193A4E.5040309@gmail.com> <491A971A.4020403@gmx.net> <491C766A.5040204@gmail.com> Message-ID: <491C8A94.2070004@ntlworld.com> Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko wrote: > The first Theravadan text on Bodhisattva's path, A Treatise on the > Paramis, by Acariya Dhammapala, borrows from Bodhisattvabhuumi, the > fifteenth chapter of the Yogaacaarabhuumi, a voluminous text of the > Yogaacaara school ascribed to Maitreya-naatha, the teacher of Asanga. > Or, they are both borrowing from a common source. Lance Cousins From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 13 14:38:28 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:38:28 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <4919AC80.7050803@email.smith.edu> References: <598baadd0811051800s40a53d5at238c45edd47460ba@mail.gmail.com> <1226381049.5629.14.camel@localhost> <4919AC80.7050803@email.smith.edu> Message-ID: <200811131438.28911.rhayes@unm.edu> On Tuesday 11 November 2008 09:02:08 Jamie Hubbard wrote: > I am team-teaching a course with a psychologist at the moment, Gosh, Jamie, you have my condolences. > Interestingly, he tends to dismiss the studies showing people to be > generally pretty satisfied as subjective reporting and hence unreliable > whereas I tend to accept the studies--and my personal experience of the > folks around me (other than American Buddhists)-- and thus dismiss the > Buddhist diagnosis as simply false (at best) or a religious "bait and > switch" at worse (agreeing with HHDL that everybody wants to be happy > and avoid suffering is easy, but is really a slippery slope to shaving > your head and leaving your "loved ones" behind). Obviously, I am on your side in this debate. I have been trying really hard to understand why anyone would dismiss something that can only be subjective (namely, whether one feels happy) on the grounds that it is subjective. Whereas it is easy to see how one might be mistaken about whether he or she is healthy, obese, sober, good-looking to Italian homosexuals over the age of 45, capable of running a mile in less than seven minutes and in possession of an IQ over 78, it is not easy to see how one could be mistaken about whether one feels happy. To BE happy, it seems to me, can only mean to FEEL happy, and feelings by their very nature cannot possibly be misidentified. Feelings are precisely what they, well, FEEL that they are. Therein lies their difference from things that can be measured. It goes without saying, of course, that people (even those who are not Republicans) can lie about how they feel, but I see no reliable method to tell whether one is lying about feelings. In the absence of a reliable method of detecting lies about people's actual feelings, one has no alternative to believing what people say about their feelings. Philosophers (and not only Buddhist ones) are notorious for trying to convince people that they could be much happier than they are. Philosophers love to point out that people routinely settle for lesser degrees of happiness than they could have if they were more virtuous. No one disputes that someone who really enjoys a good meal is happy after being fed one (especially if the person reports such happiness); but someone might try to argue that a really fat person (such as myself) might be even happier if he forwent the pleasures of good meals in order to enjoy the even greater pleasures of being more healthy. This, it seems to me is pretty much what Buddhists have always done. They do not deny that people are really happy quite a bit of the time. Rather, they tend to say that most happiness does not last and therefore an even greater contentment would arise from opting out of the pursuit of happiness and learning to accept whatever comes one's way than arises from pursuing one transitory pleasure after another. Given the enormous complexity of life and human psychology, I think philosophers who argue that one could be even more happy if one were even more virtuous are pushing a dogma that can neither be verified or falsified. Almost all accounts of what makes one happy are simplistic, and most are based on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. (B followed A, therefore A must have caused B.) Buddhists are especially prone to this sort of fallacious reasoning. They take up meditation. They feel happy. And then they fallaciously conclude that practicing meditation made them feel happy. There is perhaps no great harm in this simple-mindedness. It is just one of the many declarations of blind faith that people are wont to make. My own tastes are such that I would probably rather see someone believe that meditation might make them happier than to believe that being a really effective suicide bomber might make them happier. Meditation may not make meditators happy but it does seem to make merchants of meditation supplies richer. Someone put a 56-age DharmaCrafts catalog in my mailbox. It is full of statues, bells, cushions, benches, mats, electric timers, incense holders, prayer shawls, tea cups, folding screens, paintings and framed inspiration sayings that are designed to enhance one's meditative experience. The more gadgets you buy, the better you'll meditate, and the better you mediate, the happier you'll be. (What's that sound? Did I just hear the Buddha doing some projective vomiting?) > The "happiness" of the > positive psych folks is not at all the same as the "awakening" or > "dukkha-nirodha" of the Buddhists. Psychologists (and their evil twins, sociologists) tend to operate on the fallacy that only measurable results are worthy of any kind of credence. They live in an impoverished intellectual world of data. Data, as any humanist knows, are inherently meaningless but can be given pseudo-meaning by those with an obsessive attachment to meaningfulness (itself an unmeasurable commodity). It's just a sad thing to witness someone who 1) believes in facts and then compounds that delusion with the further delusion that 2) data are facts. As sad as that is to witness, it is even sadder to see people who believe in data-facticity becoming the administrators of universities who drive everyone crazy with their feverish attempts to measure teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity and how their university compares with Smith College. I'm feeling ready to retire, Jamie. Just thinking about all the delusion that has taken root in our academic culture makes me momentarily unhappy. (Sorry, unless you can fit my corpulent corpse into an fMRI to see whether my neuronal activity shows that I'm REALLY unhappy or just laboring under some sort of confusion about my actual feelings, you'll have to take my word for it.) -- Richard P. Hayes Department of Common Sense University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 13 22:14:56 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:14:56 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1226639698.6194.0.camel@localhost> On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 14:56 -0500, Jackhat1 at aol.com wrote: > Another argument is that if we believe in rebirth we have countless lives to > get it right. Why bust our hump to get it right today? That's not an argument. It's rationalization for believing in something irrational. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From shian at kmspks.org Thu Nov 13 19:08:05 2008 From: shian at kmspks.org ([DPD Web] Shen Shi'an) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:08:05 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <3cdf684d5818962326c6ac9026bc7fa2198cebf9@localhost> References: <3cdf684d5818962326c6ac9026bc7fa2198cebf9@localhost> Message-ID: Because we might be reborn endlessly, rebirth can be an infinite "curse". Because we have endless rebirths to get it right, rebirth can be an infinite "blessing". So what is rebirth? Good or bad? Intrinsically empty of any fixed characteristics... (as usual) :-] -----Original Message----- From: Jackhat1 at aol.com [mailto:Jackhat1 at aol.com] > Another argument is that if we believe in rebirth we have countless lives to get it right. Why bust our hump to get it right today? jack From shian at kmspks.org Thu Nov 13 19:12:27 2008 From: shian at kmspks.org ([DPD Web] Shen Shi'an) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:12:27 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Methinks floor-seated meditation is overrated (though I do it); meditation can be done well seated on a chair with one's back straight too. It's quite crazy how many meditators spend years struggling with pain in the knees. Basic meditation is after all, mental cultivation - not like physical yoga. From: Jackhat1 at aol.com [mailto:Jackhat1 at aol.com] > ... First, a daily meditation practice dealing with minor problems such as the pain in your knee teaches you to deal with the bigger problems we all have such as illness, death of a loved one, etc. From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 13 22:35:44 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:35:44 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: <3cdf684d5818962326c6ac9026bc7fa2198cebf9@localhost> Message-ID: <1226640944.6194.16.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 10:08 +0800, [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote: > Because we have endless rebirths to get it right, > rebirth can be an infinite "blessing". It would be more of a blessing if we could remember in the next life what we had learned in the previous one. Starting all over with every life is very bad news. Just think of all the times I must have had to learn my Sanskrit verb paradigms over the millennia! > So what is rebirth? Good or bad? A silly story, mostly, fit for scaring infants into abject obedience. > Intrinsically empty of any fixed characteristics... (as usual) :-] Surely nothing is INTRINSICALLY empty. I should think that at best things are adventitiously empty (if there are any things at all). Well, as Jesus almost said, "Sufficient unto the day is the emptiness thereof." Que se sue?a con los angelitos. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 13 22:40:26 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:40:26 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1226641226.6194.21.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 10:12 +0800, [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote: > Methinks floor-seated meditation is overrated It beats buying furniture. > meditation can be done well seated on a chair with one's back straight > too. For that matter, meditation can be done quite well slouching in a chair. Or climbing a tree. > It's quite crazy how many meditators spend years struggling with > pain in the knees. You have to remember that the mantra that most Westerners were taught as children is "No pain, no gain." They think if something doesn't hurt, cost a lot of money or lead to a bitter divorce, it can't possibly have any spiritual payload. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From jehms at xs4all.nl Fri Nov 14 09:56:17 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 17:56:17 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <491DADB1.4030409@xs4all.nl> Jackhat1 at aol.com schreef: > a message dated 11/12/2008 2:22:05 P.M. Central Standard Time, > jhubbard at email.smith.edu writes: > > .Why should I let somebody convince me that, contrary to my > (incontrovertible) feeling, I really am suffering most of the time? > Besides you in opposition to your own "experience" of things (reputable > the best source of knowledge, according to the Buddhist camp) *and* > putting you on that slippery slope to the monastic life, it just seems > like a lot of hard work for relatively little return, especially if > things are pretty good for you already< > -------- > That's a good question. The Dalai Lama gave one answer as, if things are > good for you, keep doing what you are doing and forget Buddhism. > > Two other answers. First, a daily meditation practice dealing with minor > problems such as the pain in your knee teaches you to deal with the bigger > problems we all have such as illness, death of a loved one, etc. Part of dealing > with these minor problems involve recognizing them and delving into them. > Second, most of us have instances of minor suffering everyday that causes us a > problem but that we don't recognize as suffering. For instance, someone cuts in > line in front of us at the grocery store; the phone rings while we are > eating dinner; we have had a disagreement with a relative that has been in the > background for years. It is like our having a medical problem such as a low > grade tooth infection or some vitamin deficiency. We don't recognize we have it > and also don't recognize what a healthy life feels like. > > Jack > > Hi Jack, I'd like to elaborate on Richards remark about philosophers being sensitive to suffering. Schopenhauer tells us that we all suffer, but we can deny it as long as we keep ourselves occupied by trying to avoid suffering worse than the present feeling of uneasiness and restlessness. Heidegger analysed our dialy life and tells us that its structure is care (Sorge). If we don't take care thing can go terribly wrong. Sartre tells us that our relations with others is based on shame and being put up with our selfimage. So if you say happiness is being content with your life, most people will tell you that they are happy, because it could be a lot worse. But if ask them if there is something they need or want, they allways will come up with something that is lacking for them to be completely happy. Go to a gym and ask peple there if they're happy, most of them will say 'yes' and then listen to them groaning en and grasping for air when they do their workouts. Is that happiness? If we tell ourselves that we're happy, we're just lying. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From Jackhat1 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 10:04:32 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:04:32 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/14/2008 10:56:58 A.M. Central Standard Time, jehms at xs4all.nl writes: >>Go to a gym and ask peple there if they're happy, most of them will say 'yes' and then listen to them groaning en and grasping for air when they do their workouts. Is that happiness? If we tell ourselves that we're happy, we're just lying.<< === I'm very happy when I'm doing running workouts even though I might be groaning and grasping for air. Picture someone making love with contorted face and maybe groaning and grasping for air. Happy? I think so. Jack **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From jkirk at spro.net Fri Nov 14 13:24:46 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:24:46 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FDEEA53342740EABFE94EA9B98A39B0@OPTIPLEX> Yes, and in the current issue of Trycycle there's an article about just that--why not use a chair. (I finally succumbed to that mag's lower price, lower than when they started). Joanna =============== On Behalf Of [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:12 PM Methinks floor-seated meditation is overrated (though I do it); meditation can be done well seated on a chair with one's back straight too. It's quite crazy how many meditators spend years struggling with pain in the knees. Basic meditation is after all, mental cultivation - not like physical yoga. From: Jackhat1 at aol.com [mailto:Jackhat1 at aol.com] > ... First, a daily meditation practice dealing with minor problems such as the pain in your knee teaches you to deal with the bigger problems we all have such as illness, death of a loved one, etc. _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From at8u at virginia.edu Sat Nov 15 11:50:55 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:50:55 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811151050i3c3b52adp67b526d5da06a404@mail.gmail.com> Dear Erik and list-members, > Go to a gym and ask people there if they're > happy, most of them will say 'yes' and then listen to them groaning en > and grasping for air when they do their workouts. Is that happiness? If > we tell ourselves that we're happy, we're just lying. If you are interested, there's a fascinating chapter on a similar topic in Gregory Berns' _Satisfaction_. I can't remember what chapter it is, but anyway in it the author discusses ultra-marathon runners, whom he also assisted in a marathon. We are talking about people who run 100 or even 125 miles (yes, about 200 kilometers) non-stop in 15-30 hours running from the lowest to the highest point in California. As you can imagine the experience produces a lot of physical pain (bad knees and ankles, massive blisters as well as danger of various injuries) and is psychologically challenging and it is interesting in so far as it requires an enormous physical and emotional investment but goes way beyond what every doctor will tell you is sufficient for aiding good cardiovascular health. So one question is, if it's such a grueling experience, why do people do it? (you can discard monetary remuneration from the possible answers, I got the impression that they are all amateurs. It doesn't seem to be a professional sport.) The book discusses other interesting topics regarding the relationship between pain, suffering, happiness, satisfaction, etc. Unfortunately, the author is a scientist and even (gasp!) provides data. It's probably safer to leave matters such as these to arm-chair philosophers. Best, Alberto Todeschini From jehms at xs4all.nl Sat Nov 15 13:13:23 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 21:13:23 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811151050i3c3b52adp67b526d5da06a404@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811151050i3c3b52adp67b526d5da06a404@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <491F2D63.4090909@xs4all.nl> Alberto Todeschini schreef: > Dear Erik and list-members, > > >> Go to a gym and ask people there if they're >> happy, most of them will say 'yes' and then listen to them groaning en >> and grasping for air when they do their workouts. Is that happiness? If >> we tell ourselves that we're happy, we're just lying. >> > > If you are interested, there's a fascinating chapter on a similar > topic in Gregory Berns' _Satisfaction_. I can't remember what chapter > it is, but anyway in it the author discusses ultra-marathon runners, > whom he also assisted in a marathon. We are talking about people who > run 100 or even 125 miles (yes, about 200 kilometers) non-stop in > 15-30 hours running from the lowest to the highest point in > California. As you can imagine the experience produces a lot of > physical pain (bad knees and ankles, massive blisters as well as > danger of various injuries) and is psychologically challenging and it > is interesting in so far as it requires an enormous physical and > emotional investment but goes way beyond what every doctor will tell > you is sufficient for aiding good cardiovascular health. So one > question is, if it's such a grueling experience, why do people do it? > (you can discard monetary remuneration from the possible answers, I > got the impression that they are all amateurs. It doesn't seem to be a > professional sport.) > > The book discusses other interesting topics regarding the relationship > between pain, suffering, happiness, satisfaction, etc. > > Unfortunately, the author is a scientist and even (gasp!) provides > data. It's probably safer to leave matters such as these to arm-chair > philosophers. > > Best, > > Alberto Todeschini > I've not read the book off course, but it seems to me that much depends on what you call happiness and what pleasure. Most ancient philosophers as well as the Buddha as far as I can see thought happiness to be a more or less continuous state of wellbeing which is not or very little dependend on circumstances. According to this definition the body is not able to provide any happiness at all, because the way we experience our body depends very much on circumstances. Doing workouts or having sex entails manipulating physical circumstances. In both cases moreover some brainfunctions are off line. This doesn't rule out I think the possibility that some physical experiences like a jhana changes ones look on the world in such a way that it triggers happiness. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From Jackhat1 at aol.com Sat Nov 15 13:46:03 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:46:03 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/15/2008 2:13:51 P.M. Central Standard Time, jehms at xs4all.nl writes: I've not read the book off course, but it seems to me that much depends on what you call happiness and what pleasure. Most ancient philosophers as well as the Buddha as far as I can see thought happiness to be a more or less continuous state of wellbeing which is not or very little dependend on circumstances. === Aristotle carried as far as saying that one could be happy or unhappy while dead. Happiness depended on a virtuous life. One had to wait until life was over to determine if one lived a virtuous life. This weighing of virtue could change after death because of the effect some of one's actions while alive might change. ================== According to this definition the body is not able to provide any happiness at all, because the way we experience our body depends very much on circumstances. Doing workouts or having sex entails manipulating physical circumstances. In both cases moreover some brainfunctions are off line. ================== Buddhist practices aims at creating happiness beyond circumstances, including circumstances involving body sensations. jack This doesn't rule out I think the possibility that some physical experiences like a jhana changes ones look on the world in such a way that it triggers happiness. **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From jkirk at spro.net Sat Nov 15 13:52:52 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:52:52 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] FW: buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <4858D0EAB20F462E8E9E6FB04CA753E1@OPTIPLEX> Ok, now that this topic has led to extreme running for pain/pleasure, let us not overlook the masochists of the world who get pleasure from feeling emotional and physical pain. Like the runners Alberto noted, these folks are usually obsessive, and they usually do not want to overcome/get rid of their special predilection. Same goes for their sadist enablers. Luckily, the early Buddhists didn't have to deal with the likes of these. Joanna =========================================== If you are interested, there's a fascinating chapter on a similar topic in Gregory Berns' _Satisfaction_. I can't remember what chapter it is, but anyway in it the author discusses ultra-marathon runners, whom he also assisted in a marathon. We are talking about people who run 100 or even 125 miles (yes, about 200 kilometers) non-stop in 15-30 hours running from the lowest to the highest point in California. As you can imagine the experience produces a lot of physical pain (bad knees and ankles, massive blisters as well as danger of various injuries) and is psychologically challenging and it is interesting in so far as it requires an enormous physical and emotional investment but goes way beyond what every doctor will tell you is sufficient for aiding good cardiovascular health. So one question is, if it's such a grueling experience, why do people do it? (you can discard monetary remuneration from the possible answers, I got the impression that they are all amateurs. It doesn't seem to be a professional sport.) The book discusses other interesting topics regarding the relationship between pain, suffering, happiness, satisfaction, etc. Unfortunately, the author is a scientist and even (gasp!) provides data. It's probably safer to leave matters such as these to arm-chair philosophers. Best, Alberto Todeschini _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 15 15:37:11 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:37:11 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811151050i3c3b52adp67b526d5da06a404@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811151050i3c3b52adp67b526d5da06a404@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1226788632.9117.8.camel@localhost> On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 13:50 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > Unfortunately, the author is a scientist and even (gasp!) provides > data. It's probably safer to leave matters such as these to arm-chair > philosophers. Well, there are questions that are best to philosophers. Unanswerable and meaningless questions, for example. Questions that are well formed and answerable by data collection are best left to data collectors. Where confusion arises is when questions are so poorly formulated that data are meaningless. Questions about happiness fall into that category. The book you mention on Satisfaction sounds like an excellent example of presenting meaningless data. Contrary to popular belief, philosophers almost never discuss armchairs. (I have quite a lot of data to prove that claim.) -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 15 15:40:18 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:40:18 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1226788818.9117.11.camel@localhost> On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 15:46 -0500, Jackhat1 at aol.com wrote: > This doesn't rule out I think the possibility that some physical > experiences like a jhana changes ones look on the world in such a way > that it triggers happiness. I would say much the same thing about eating a bowl of green chile. (A wise person, of course, eats only the chile, not the bowl.) -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 15 15:41:42 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:41:42 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] FW: buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <4858D0EAB20F462E8E9E6FB04CA753E1@OPTIPLEX> References: <4858D0EAB20F462E8E9E6FB04CA753E1@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: <1226788903.9117.13.camel@localhost> On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 13:52 -0700, jkirk wrote: > Ok, now that this topic has led to extreme running for > pain/pleasure, let us not overlook the masochists of the world > who get pleasure from feeling emotional and physical pain. Like > the runners Alberto noted, these folks are usually obsessive, and > they usually do not want to overcome/get rid of their special > predilection. Same goes for their sadist enablers. > Luckily, the early Buddhists didn't have to deal with the likes > of these. Yeah, he just had to deal with pussycats like Angulimala. -- Richard From jkirk at spro.net Sat Nov 15 19:20:20 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:20:20 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] FW: buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226788903.9117.13.camel@localhost> References: <4858D0EAB20F462E8E9E6FB04CA753E1@OPTIPLEX> <1226788903.9117.13.camel@localhost> Message-ID: Angulimala chose to get rid of his problem, suggesting that he wasn't an obsessive about it, intending to cling to it forever. Joanna -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Richard Hayes Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 3:42 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] FW: buddhism and brain studies On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 13:52 -0700, jkirk wrote: > Ok, now that this topic has led to extreme running for pain/pleasure, > let us not overlook the masochists of the world who get pleasure from > feeling emotional and physical pain. Like the runners Alberto noted, > these folks are usually obsessive, and they usually do not want to > overcome/get rid of their special predilection. Same goes for their > sadist enablers. > Luckily, the early Buddhists didn't have to deal with the likes of > these. Yeah, he just had to deal with pussycats like Angulimala. -- Richard _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From dharmafarer at gmail.com Sat Nov 15 19:36:30 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:36:30 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms Message-ID: Richard, I am preparing some study-notes for my Sutta Discovery classed, that is, an introductory essay on "Language and Discourses". I notice two of the 6 chapters of Dignaga's Pramaa.na Samuccaya are (with translations from Keown's Dictionary of Buddhism) as follows: Svaartha anumaa.na (Inference for one's own benefit) Paraartha anumaa.na (Inference for another's benefit) Is it possible to render svaartha here as "self-meaning," that is, inherent sense, ie without reference to other things; and paraartha as "other-meaning," ie, a contextual sense. Or, is the Dictionary of Buddhism's rendition the best one. Piya Tan -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 15 21:55:17 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 21:55:17 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1226811317.11388.5.camel@localhost> On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 10:36 +0800, Piya Tan wrote: > I notice two of the 6 chapters of Dignaga's Pramaa.na Samuccaya are > (with translations from Keown's Dictionary of Buddhism) as follows: > > Svaartha anumaa.na (Inference for one's own benefit) > Paraartha anumaa.na (Inference for another's benefit) > > Is it possible to render svaartha here as "self-meaning," that is, inherent > sense, ie without reference to other things; and > paraartha as "other-meaning," ie, a contextual sense. I have never seen those words with those meanings. Usually svaartha is glossed as svahita, beneficial to oneself. The terms are used in discussion of karma. The best karma is that action which benefits both oneself and others. Dignaaga uses the terms in those senses also. He says the Buddha's teaching was good both for the Buddha and for this disciples. And the Buddha was a pramaa.na. So a pramaa.na is ideally good both for the one who has the knowledge and those to whom knowledge is communicated. An inference that yields knowledge useful to oneself is svaarthaanumaana. When one articulates the knowledge to someone else with convincing argumentation, then it becomes beneficial to another. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 23:10:20 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:10:20 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms References: <1226811317.11388.5.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <00af01c947b2$01be76a0$2101a8c0@Dan> If I can piggyback on Richard's thoughtful answer, there is at least one important additional distinction between svaartha inference and paraartha inference for Dignaga, a distinction that, I believe, is no longer operative (at least in the same way) with Dharmakirti and his subsequents. This additional distinction is often overlooked in the secondary literature because it is primarily laid out in Dignaga's Nyaayamukha, which only survives in Chinese (two translations), and people who work on pramanavada tend to deal with Tibetan and Sanskrit, not Chinese. (I haven't seen the relevant portions of the Jinendrabuddhi text that would deal with this yet, so don't know if/how they modify what Nyayamukha says.) For Dignaga a pramana provides knowledge, but in certain specific senses. First, a specific pramana provides knowledge that cannot be provided by any other means or pramana. Thus, the knowledge gained by perception cannot be gained from inference and vice versa. There is no inferential argument that can settle whether the moon is round -- that knowledge can only be gained by perception; to attempt an inference addressing that would be automatically fallacious. Second, a pramana only provides new knowledge, something not known before. Hence what "knowledge" means in this context is not a storehouse or set of accumulated facts, but something realized in the moment. Hence when two people are arguing with inferences, one is trying to convince the other of something the first person already (thinks he) knows. For him, the argument is not a pramana, just an inference. If he is successful in awakening knowledge in the second person, then the inference served as a pramana for the second person, but not for the one proferring the argument. That is paraartha anumaa.na. When one is reasoning inferentially to figure out something one doesn't know yet, and is successful in acquiring that knowledge, that is svaartha anumaa.na. Knowledge once acquired no longer involves pramana. The turning point, perhaps, is the moment one reaches a ni"scaya -- a decisive judgement concerning some matter. Perception, since always novel from moment to moment, is a perpetual pramana -- but only if one takes cognizance of it (svasa.mvitti). If Richard (or anyone else) understands Dignaga differently, I'd be interested to hear an explanation. Dan From dharmafarer at gmail.com Sun Nov 16 01:57:13 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:57:13 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms In-Reply-To: <00af01c947b2$01be76a0$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <1226811317.11388.5.camel@localhost> <00af01c947b2$01be76a0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: Thanks Richard & Dan, The reference comes from the Oxford Dictionary of Buddhism (ed Damien Keown et al): Oxford Dictionary of Buddhism Richard's answer helps to explains the sense of the two terms to me. Thanks. Dan's exposition is really help for my follow-up reading. Thanks, again. Piya Tan On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > If I can piggyback on Richard's thoughtful answer, there is at least one > important additional distinction between svaartha inference and paraartha > inference for Dignaga, a distinction that, I believe, is no longer > operative > (at least in the same way) with Dharmakirti and his subsequents. > > This additional distinction is often overlooked in the secondary literature > because it is primarily laid out in Dignaga's Nyaayamukha, which only > survives in Chinese (two translations), and people who work on pramanavada > tend to deal with Tibetan and Sanskrit, not Chinese. (I haven't seen the > relevant portions of the Jinendrabuddhi text that would deal with this yet, > so don't know if/how they modify what Nyayamukha says.) > > For Dignaga a pramana provides knowledge, but in certain specific senses. > First, a specific pramana provides knowledge that cannot be provided by any > other means or pramana. Thus, the knowledge gained by perception cannot be > gained from inference and vice versa. There is no inferential argument that > can settle whether the moon is round -- that knowledge can only be gained > by > perception; to attempt an inference addressing that would be automatically > fallacious. > > Second, a pramana only provides new knowledge, something not known before. > Hence what "knowledge" means in this context is not a storehouse or set of > accumulated facts, but something realized in the moment. Hence when two > people are arguing with inferences, one is trying to convince the other of > something the first person already (thinks he) knows. For him, the argument > is not a pramana, just an inference. If he is successful in awakening > knowledge in the second person, then the inference served as a pramana for > the second person, but not for the one proferring the argument. That is > paraartha anumaa.na. > > When one is reasoning inferentially to figure out something one doesn't > know > yet, and is successful in acquiring that knowledge, that is svaartha > anumaa.na. > > Knowledge once acquired no longer involves pramana. The turning point, > perhaps, is the moment one reaches a ni"scaya -- a decisive judgement > concerning some matter. > > Perception, since always novel from moment to moment, is a perpetual > pramana -- but only if one takes cognizance of it (svasa.mvitti). > > If Richard (or anyone else) understands Dignaga differently, I'd be > interested to hear an explanation. > > Dan > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From jehms at xs4all.nl Sun Nov 16 03:37:52 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 11:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <491FF800.7040600@xs4all.nl> Jackhat1 at aol.com schreef: > In a message dated 11/15/2008 2:13:51 P.M. Central Standard Time, > jehms at xs4all.nl writes: > > I've not read the book off course, but it seems to me that much depends > on what you call happiness and what pleasure. Most ancient philosophers > as well as the Buddha as far as I can see thought happiness to be a > more or less continuous state of wellbeing which is not or very little > dependend on circumstances. > === > Aristotle carried as far as saying that one could be happy or unhappy while > dead. Happiness depended on a virtuous life. One had to wait until life was > over to determine if one lived a virtuous life. This weighing of virtue could > change after death because of the effect some of one's actions while alive > might change. > > This is an interesting reading of Aristotle, which I'm not familiar with. Can you mention a source? -- Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From at8u at virginia.edu Sun Nov 16 06:56:23 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 08:56:23 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49202687.6070302@virginia.edu> Joanna wrote: > Ok, now that this topic has led to extreme running for > pain/pleasure, let us not overlook the masochists of the world > who get pleasure from feeling emotional and physical pain. Like > the runners Alberto noted, these folks are usually obsessive, and > they usually do not want to overcome/get rid of their special > predilection. Same goes for their sadist enablers. > Luckily, the early Buddhists didn't have to deal with the likes > of these. Hi Joanna, Funny you should mention this. In that book the author also dedicated a chapter to S/M practices. Of course, in the name of science, he also spent an evening in a S/M club. Best, Alberto From at8u at virginia.edu Sun Nov 16 07:54:10 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:54:10 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49203412.1020701@virginia.edu> Dear Erik, Thank you for your comments. > Most ancient philosophers > as well as the Buddha as far as I can see thought happiness to be a > more or less continuous state of wellbeing which is not or very little > dependent on circumstances. According to Sonja Lyubomirsky, whose book I mentioned yesterday, circumstances account for 10%. Then there's a 50% set point (which was explained by Jamie Hubbard recently) and a 40% due to intentional activity. Lest anyone (*cough* Richard Hayes *cough*) criticizes me for this, I should mention that I find these precise figures highly suspicious. But let's forget about the exact figures and look at what is interesting: that very little depends on circumstances (such as a professor getting tenure; owning a large BMW or Sarah Palin becoming president in 2012 AND 2016) even though we regularly overestimate the impact circumstances have on our wellbeing. And that there is great scope (Lyubomirsky's 40%) to change how happy we are. Below are some of the thinking and behavior patterns that according to Lyubomirsky characterize the happiest people. She's basing her remarks on contemporary science, but I'm sure those familiar with Buddhism or ancient philosophy will find much unsurprising: the happiest people - devote a lot of time to family and friends; - are comfortable expressing gratitude; - are often the first to help coworkers and passersby; - think optimistically about the future; - savor life's pleasure and live in the present moment; - engage in regular physical exercise; - are committed to lifelong goals and ambitions; - cope well with challenges. Sure, most of these sound obvious. But let's notice some omissions, such as any reference to wealth. And yet, how many people devote their existence to making money and acquiring material goods? Best, Alberto Todeschini From jehms at xs4all.nl Sun Nov 16 08:37:37 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:37:37 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <49203412.1020701@virginia.edu> References: <49203412.1020701@virginia.edu> Message-ID: <49203E41.4020309@xs4all.nl> Alberto Todeschini schreef: > Dear Erik, > > Thank you for your comments. > > >> Most ancient philosophers >> as well as the Buddha as far as I can see thought happiness to be a >> more or less continuous state of wellbeing which is not or very little >> dependent on circumstances. >> > > According to Sonja Lyubomirsky, whose book I mentioned yesterday, > circumstances account for 10%. Then there's a 50% set point (which was > explained by Jamie Hubbard recently) and a 40% due to intentional activity. > > > Hi Alberto, these figures come from interviews with average people, it's not impossible that interviews with exceptional people like the Buddha and his arhats or famous ancient philosophers like Socrates or Epicure would render different results. Let's see if the list below fits: > the happiest people > - devote a lot of time to family and friends; > there you go: the Buddha left his family and Socrates spent most of his days on the marketplace. > - are comfortable expressing gratitude; ok > - are often the first to help coworkers and passersby; > ok, perhaps rather a result then a cause > - think optimistically about the future; > doesn't fit: all happiness heroes were very much aware of their mortality > - savor life's pleasure and live in the present moment; > ok > - engage in regular physical exercise; > undecided > - are committed to lifelong goals and ambitions; > ok, if the commitment to have no commitment counts > - cope well with challenges. > ok > Sure, most of these sound obvious. But let's notice some omissions, such > as any reference to wealth. And yet, how many people devote their > existence to making money and acquiring material goods? > > > Perhaps they prefer goods to happiness. There is something else that I observed. The ancient idea of happiness is that it is a more or less natural state of mind. If you have no worries you're happy. I explain this sometimes as existential happiness, the happiness of just being there. When christendom took over it taught the people that this is not real happiness. Real happiness is not yours naturally. If you think this, you're just proud and pride is the worst of all sins. Only God can give you real happiness and you have to believe in order to recieve. When God eventually died, this idea of happiness stayed. So now people tend to believe that you cannot just be happy, you need something to become happy. And so becoming happy has become an industry and amounts to hard labour. Even finding out what happiness is has become a real drag. In the sixties this was still unproblematic for most, how was it... drop out, turn on tune in or something like that? Nowadays people are lost. If you can you should watch Adam Curtis's documentary 'The age of the Self'. -- Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From Jackhat1 at aol.com Sun Nov 16 09:06:17 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 11:06:17 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/16/2008 4:40:28 A.M. Central Standard Time, jehms at xs4all.nl writes: === > Aristotle carried as far as saying that one could be happy or unhappy while > dead. Happiness depended on a virtuous life. One had to wait until life was > over to determine if one lived a virtuous life. This weighing of virtue could > change after death because of the effect some of one's actions while alive > might change. > > This is an interesting reading of Aristotle, which I'm not familiar with. Can you mention a source? === On Happiness by Aristotle, Book 1. Here are some quotes. "We are unwilling to call the living happy because changes may befall them and because we believe that happiness haws permanence and is not amenable to change under any circumstances." "For it seems that to some extent good and evil really exist for a dead man, just as they may exist for a man who lives without being conscious of them, for example honors and disgraces, and generally the successes and failures of his children and descendents." Another quote, "Happiness, as we have said, requires completeness in virtue as well as a complete lifetime." Jack **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From at8u at virginia.edu Sun Nov 16 09:18:19 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 11:18:19 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <492047CB.6010207@virginia.edu> Richard Hayes wrote: > Well, there are questions that are best to philosophers. Unanswerable > and meaningless questions, for example. Questions that are well formed > and answerable by data collection are best left to data collectors. > Where confusion arises is when questions are so poorly formulated that > data are meaningless. Questions about happiness fall into that category. As for the last sentence: sure, that's your opinion. I happen to disagree. > The book you mention on Satisfaction sounds like an excellent example of > presenting meaningless data. Actually, no, not really. Perhaps if you were to read it you would discard it as that. To others such as its author or myself the data is not only meaningful but also useful. Of course, you can argue that we are both deluded. But we aren't really getting anywhere with this discussion. > Contrary to popular belief, philosophers almost never discuss armchairs. I kid you not, an acquaintance of mine here at UVA was put off philosophy because of a discussion he had about chairs with a philosophy professor during a dinner. I wasn't present so I don't know what they actually said but it was something to do with skeptical doubts about the existence of the chair they used as example. Best, Alberto Todeschini From jehms at xs4all.nl Sun Nov 16 09:56:52 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:56:52 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <492050D4.5090601@xs4all.nl> Jackhat1 at aol.com schreef: > In a message dated 11/16/2008 4:40:28 A.M. Central Standard Time, > jehms at xs4all.nl writes: > > === > >> Aristotle carried as far as saying that one could be happy or unhappy >> > while > >> dead. Happiness depended on a virtuous life. One had to wait until life >> > was > >> over to determine if one lived a virtuous life. This weighing of virtue >> > could > >> change after death because of the effect some of one's actions while >> > alive > >> might change. >> >> >> > This is an interesting reading of Aristotle, which I'm not familiar > with. Can you mention a source? > === > On Happiness by Aristotle, Book 1. Here are some quotes. "We are unwilling > to call the living happy because changes may befall them and because we > believe that happiness haws permanence and is not amenable to change under any > circumstances." "For it seems that to some extent good and evil really exist for > a dead man, just as they may exist for a man who lives without being > conscious of them, for example honors and disgraces, and generally the successes and > failures of his children and descendents." Another quote, "Happiness, as we > have said, requires completeness in virtue as well as a complete lifetime." > > Jack > > Sorry Jack for being so persistent, but I fail to find references to a book written by Aristotle called 'On happiness'. It would be in Greek called 'Peri Eudemonia' I suppose? Where did you find it? All articles and references to Aristotle's view on happiness I found tell me that he saw it as excellent funcioning of the soul and that he's very uncertain about the whereabouts of the soul after death. -- Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From Jackhat1 at aol.com Sun Nov 16 10:35:30 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:35:30 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/16/2008 10:57:26 A.M. Central Standard Time, jehms at xs4all.nl writes: Sorry Jack for being so persistent, but I fail to find references to a book written by Aristotle called 'On happiness'. It would be in Greek called 'Peri Eudemonia' I suppose? Where did you find it? All articles and references to Aristotle's view on happiness I found tell me that he saw it as excellent funcioning of the soul and that he's very uncertain about the whereabouts of the soul after death. == Sorry, I was sloppy. Too early on a Sunday morning. "On Happiness" and these quotes are found in "The Nichomachean Ethics." Book 1. jack **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From jkirk at spro.net Sun Nov 16 10:39:33 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:39:33 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <49203412.1020701@virginia.edu> References: <49203412.1020701@virginia.edu> Message-ID: : the happiest people - devote a lot of time to family and friends; - are comfortable expressing gratitude; - are often the first to help coworkers and passersby; - think optimistically about the future; - savor life's pleasure and live in the present moment; - engage in regular physical exercise; - are committed to lifelong goals and ambitions; - cope well with challenges. Sure, most of these sound obvious. But let's notice some omissions, such as any reference to wealth. And yet, how many people devote their existence to making money and acquiring material goods? Best, Alberto Todeschini ========================= As some have noticed over the past century, industrial capitalist society is based on delusion. Its economy is based on greed and material consumption only (see, e.g., Sulak Sivaraksa, David Loy). Now that greed has caused economic disintegration, what are the official remedies being sought? They are: How to create more production/consumption....as though the world contains unlimited resources. More delusion. Cheers, Joanna From gary.gach at gmail.com Sun Nov 16 11:53:24 2008 From: gary.gach at gmail.com (Gary Gach) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:53:24 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] happiness Message-ID: <598baadd0811161053o7b46e8abg43f18b2d89d5974e@mail.gmail.com> next week i'll be attending this conference: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/16/LV6A142BRN.DTL Gary Gach may all beings be well From rhayes at unm.edu Sun Nov 16 16:12:48 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:12:48 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <492047CB.6010207@virginia.edu> References: <492047CB.6010207@virginia.edu> Message-ID: <1226877168.5688.20.camel@localhost> On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 11:18 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > > The book you mention on Satisfaction sounds like an excellent example of > > presenting meaningless data. > > Actually, no, not really. Perhaps if you were to read it you would > discard it as that. Why would a sane man spend his time reading a book that he knows from the outset is meaningless (unless, of course, a pursuit of meaninglessness makes him happy)? Needless to say, I hope, I have no objection to anyone else finding anything interesting. Being interested is a highly personal thing---and, incidentally, a subjective thing that, like happiness, cannot in any way be measured or determined by external behavior. All I am saying is that as a Buddhist and as an amateur philosopher, I am not especially interested in the findings of people who try to measure things that by their very nature cannot be measured. > But we aren't really getting anywhere with this discussion. Of course not. There is no discussion taking place, because we cannot find a common ground on which to begin an inquiry that would settle a question. In short, there is no truth to the matter of whether happiness is, to at least some extent, an objective state or a purely subjective one. Where on stands on the question of the nature of happiness is purely a matter of taste, not a question of well-defined questions that can be decided by an appeal to carefully and impartially gathered data. > > Contrary to popular belief, philosophers almost never discuss > armchairs. > > I kid you not, an acquaintance of mine here at UVA was put off > philosophy because of a discussion he had about chairs with a philosophy > professor during a dinner. Anyone who talks about philosophy while having dinner is objectively off-putting. Spoiling a good meal with discussions of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, theology or aesthetics is just plain boorish. And that's a fact. (I can send you the data if you'd like.) Of course, talking about chairs is another matter. It can be useful to have some method of determining who will sit in which chair at the dinner table. But any ruffian who tries to use chairs as a philosophical prop after the food is served should be sent to bed without supper. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Sun Nov 16 16:44:49 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:44:49 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity Message-ID: <1226879089.5688.51.camel@localhost> In Canada they have a very quaint custom of allowing intellectuals to speak on the radio. The Canadian Broadcast Corporation has a series known as The Massey Lectures (named after the family of the famous Canadian actor, Raymond Massey, who played Abraham Lincoln), which appear annually on a CBC radio program called Ideas. In 1991 the Massey Lectures were given by a Canadian political philosopher named Charles Taylor. Taylor's Massey lectures were entitled "The Malaise of Modernity." In them he explored three themes that, he argued, lead to a deep sense of unhappiness in modern society. The three themes he spotted were 1) individualism, 2) instrumental reasoning and 3) powerlessness, the perceived loss of a sense of having control over what matters in life. Individualism, he claimed, has resulted in an increased focus on self, which almost any philosopher would argue is a prescription for discontent. Instrumental reasoning, as Taylor uses the term, is a kind of rationality in which we draw on calculations of data with the hopes of determining the most efficient means to a given end. The focus on data, and the closely related focus on technological solutions, not only "disenchant" life but almost always oversimplify questions so that the solutions to problems reached turn out not to be practical solutions at all. (Taylor's prime examples are medical and psychological research.) The focus on individualism and instrumental reasoning, he claims, have contributed to a kind of pseudo-democracy in which people believe that they are allowed to express their views and that their views will be heeded but where in fact most decisions are made by data-driven experts who pay very little real attention to what anyone actually thinks or feels. (The third point is quite a bit more subtle than that, but I think I have more or less captured the gist of his claim.) Taylor is influence by Alexis de Toqueville, who predicted that American democracy was headed toward a form of what he called soft despotism, a culture in which a mild and apparently benevolent government will create an illusion of power being with the people, when in fact power will be in the hands of those with money and the resultant ability to manipulate public opinion. When I first read Taylor's lectures (eventually published as a book), I involuntarily uttered the mantra "Bingo!" Nothing that I have witnessed in American since that time have convinced me that Taylor was wrong in his analysis. Moreover, for a few years I used "The Malaise of Modernity" in my Buddhist philosophy courses; now I used various writings by David Loy, who says much the same sort of thing. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Mon Nov 17 07:04:30 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:04:30 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy References: <1226879089.5688.51.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> Tibetan Exiles Meet on Strategy NYTimes: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/world/asia/18tibet.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin (Excerpt) Political moderation is the norm in this corner of the Tibetan world. A steady flow of ethnic Han Chinese tourists has lifted incomes in recent years. Farmers convert old homes into guesthouses. Monasteries are erecting new buildings. Perhaps nowhere is there a better example of the "middle way" attitude promoted by the Dalai Lama, the exiled Buddhist avatar who advocates a nonviolent movement for Tibetan autonomy within China but not outright independence. "Whatever he does, we do," said Tashi, a driver who keeps a portrait of the Dalai Lama on his dashboard even though such images are banned in China. "We don't want to make trouble." But the calm here could soon crumble, depending on the outcome of a six-day meeting of Tibetan exiles that began Monday in India. The conclave is the first of its kind since 1991. The Dalai Lama has called for hundreds of Tibetans to gather in the Himalayan town of Dharamsala, the seat of the Tibetan government in exile, to help decide on a new strategy for Tibet. --- Dan From wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg Mon Nov 17 07:22:43 2008 From: wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg (Weng-Fai Wong) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:22:43 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy In-Reply-To: <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <20081117142245.432952457E@postfix1.comp.nus.edu.sg> Unfortunately all the cards are on China's side. Esp. with this financial tsunami, all eyes are on how China will use its vast reserves to directly and indirectly help them out. The Tibetans have very little room for maneuver. W.F. Wong -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Dan Lusthaus Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 10:05 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy Tibetan Exiles Meet on Strategy From curt at cola.iges.org Mon Nov 17 07:29:08 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:29:08 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy In-Reply-To: <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <1226879089.5688.51.camel@localhost> <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <49217FB4.20802@cola.iges.org> "Policy Shift not a focus of exile Tibetans' Meeting" by Phurbu Thinley (from www.phayl.com) Dharamsala, November 17: Tibetan leaders and representatives from all over the world on Monday began a historic ?special meeting? in Dharamsala, the seat of the Tibetan government-in-exile, to discuss the future course of action on Tibet as dialogues with Beijing to address the sufferings of the Tibetan people and improve the current situation inside the Himalayan region failed to make any progress. Some 581 Tibetan representatives from all over the world are taking part in the six-day meeting, making it the largest political meeting of Tibetan exiles ever held since coming into exile in 1959. More than 17,000 Tibetans in Tibet have also contributed their say on the meeting, and a summary of their opinion and views have been prepared and would be discussed during this important ?special meeting?. According to the Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-exile Karma Chophel, the summary of their opinion, procured by the Kashag (Tibetan Cabinet), showed some 8000 Tibetans willing to follow the direction and decision taken by the Dalai Lama, more than 5000 of them opting for ?complete independence? and almost 3000 of them showing support to the middle-way approach. Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government-in-exile Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche, however, in his today?s speech, ruled out the prospect of any change in policy from the meeting and said that the meeting should not turn out into a ?debate between political organisations and rigid political ideologies?. ?Any change in policy need not come from this meeting,? Prof. Rinpoche said. Rinpoche argued that the present policy, adopted by his government that seeks genuine autonomy for Tibetan people within the constitutional framework of the People?s Republic of China, has public mandate and added that there was no reason to seek further public support for it. Rinpoche said his administration?s policy was in par with a unanimous resolution adopted by the Tibetan parliament on 18 Sept. 1997, which offered His Holiness the Dalai Lama full mandate to decide on the policy and direction of the Tibetan struggle, from time to time, keeping the global trend and other factors into consideration. To carry out any change in basic policy, Rinpoche said, it should be done in a democratic process with the mandate of the Tibetan people. While clarifying ?many speculations and misunderstandings? about the purpose of holding the special meeting, the Tibetan PM said his administration had no ?hidden agenda and plan? behind it. He said his administration had also clearly instructed the CTA (Central Tibetan Administration) officials attending the meeting to freely raise their concerns and express their views, irrespective of the CTA?s standpoint and policy. He said the Kalons (cabinet ministers) even requested that they be excused from attending the group discussions to avoid overwhelming the conference with his administration?s view and policies, but said their permission was not granted. ?As such this meeting is an opportunity for the Kalons to listen rather than voice its thoughts,? Rinpoche said. He emphasized that meeting must instead concentrate on making efforts ?to find a solution to the issue of Tibet? by taking into consideration the ?seriousness of the situation in Tibet and the unspeakable sufferings of Tibetans in Tibet since March this year.? ?At this Meeting, by taking into account the urgent situation in Tibet, the current world situation and the behavior of the PRC's leadership, we should be able to understand the views and aspiration of the common Tibetans on what would be the best course of future actions beneficial to the Tibetan cause,? Prof. Rinpoche said. ?Under such dire circumstances, Tibetans in Tibet pinned all their hopes on fellow Tibetans in the free world. It is needless for us to mention that, at such times, we cannot be insensitive to their cries; we must show solidarity with our brethrens and we must do whatever is in our means to improve their situation,? Rinpoche said. Rinpoche outlined that the main objectives of the meetings are to have open and frank discussions on the issues of Tibet by the general Tibetan masses at this critical point in time, to invite views and comments on the CTA?s policies and strategies that being expressed in media and on forums, and to provide official platform to receive critical views and opinions regarding the CTA?s policies. While describing the meeting as being ?timely and the need of the hour? and an important event in the history of the Tibetan movement, Rinpoche maintained that any stand decided for the future of the Tibet, should have the clear mandate of the people, and expressed hope that the united efforts of the Tibetan people should be visible on the international stage. Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-exile Karma Chophel, in his opening speech, said the special meeting was called by the Dalai Lama in light of the recent upheavals and sufferings of the Tibetan people in Tibet. ?So everybody will discuss Tibetan issue in light of the recent upheavals in Tibet and the sufferings of the Tibetan people there, and to suggest what best could be done in future,? Chophel said. Commenting on the Kashag?s decision not to influence the course of meeting, Speaker Chophel said, ?They don?t want to influence the genuine feelings and opinions of the Tibetan people from being expressed during the meeting.? ?Even His Holiness (the Dalai Lama) decided not to attend the meeting for the same reasons,? Chophel added, saying ?His Holiness wants the Tibetan representatives to engage in a free and frank discussions on all possible issues regarding the future actions over Tibet.? Chophel said the meeting was called on to hear from the Tibetan masses on how to deal with the situation in Tibet in the face of Chinese government?s failure to mitigate the sufferings of the Tibetan people inside Tibet. Chophel said instead of addressing the anguishes and resentments expressed by Tibetans in Tibet, China continues to unleash unprecedented crackdowns on Tibetan expressions. When asked, if the meetings would have any implications on the policy of the exiled Government, the Tibetan speaker said it would depend on the Dalai Lama?s consideration on the summary of the outcomes of the meeting. He said the organising committee of the meeting has formed fifteen sub-committees to oversee the discussions in the coming days would come up with written suggestions and opinions of the participants of the meeting. Karma said those suggestions and views would then be discussed and analyzed during a preliminary session on Nov. 21, and on the final concluding day of the meeting on Nov 22, the suggestions would be reviewed and consolidated into a final summary to be submitted to the Dalai Lama for his considerations. After that the Dalai Lama might redirect the next step depending on his observation based on the context and contents of the summary, Karma said. ?If His Holiness the Dalai Lama issues direction to discuss the matter in the parliament, it would be discussed in parliamentary session and accordingly, based on the subject matter, it could influence our government?s policy,? Karma told Phayul. Dan Lusthaus wrote: > Tibetan Exiles Meet on Strategy > > NYTimes: > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/world/asia/18tibet.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin > > > From curt at cola.iges.org Mon Nov 17 07:38:22 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:38:22 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy In-Reply-To: <49217FB4.20802@cola.iges.org> References: <1226879089.5688.51.camel@localhost> <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> <49217FB4.20802@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <492181DE.7010903@cola.iges.org> Curt Steinmetz wrote: > "Policy Shift not a focus of exile Tibetans' Meeting" > by Phurbu Thinley (from www.phayl.com) > > Oops - that should have by "from www.phayul.com" - here is the link: http://www.phayul.com/ There are lots of articles there concerning the debates among Tibetans about how best to deal with the Chinese occupation. Curt From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Mon Nov 17 07:41:30 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:41:30 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy References: <1226879089.5688.51.camel@localhost><006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> <49217FB4.20802@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <008001c948c2$94b25420$2101a8c0@Dan> >"Policy Shift not a focus of exile Tibetans' Meeting" >by Phurbu Thinley (from www.phayl.com) >?Any change in policy need not come from this meeting,? Prof. Rinpoche said. This is discussed in the full NY Times article, including the same quote, but the Times frames it as the Tibetan PR machine downplaying what is going on so as not to appear too provocative. We'll see. Dan From at8u at virginia.edu Mon Nov 17 08:35:46 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:35:46 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811170735r47e32e5yb31a8e322f3ccca9@mail.gmail.com> Hi Erik, > And so becoming happy has become an industry and amounts > to hard labour. Even finding out what happiness is has become a real > drag. That's right. And as far as I can gather from my limited reading on the subject, scientists researching happiness are well aware of several possible pitfalls. One of them is that trying too hard will actually make matters worse or at least not improve them. I think there is a parallel to nutrition. There is the perfectly respectable and worthy science of nutrition with its well-meaning, honest and qualified specialists. But then you also get all different sorts of unqualified people, amateurs, charlatans and quacks. The result is that there is a lot of good information out there but also fads, fashionable dietary advice which is actually bad for people, etc. > In the sixties this was still unproblematic for most, how was > it... drop out, turn on tune in or something like that? As you know, a considerable amount of Western Buddhists of a certain age come straight from that movement. Of course half of them are university professors now :) > Nowadays people > are lost. If you can you should watch Adam Curtis's documentary 'The age > of the Self'. Sounds interesting and I trust your judgment. I'll look it up. Thanks, Alberto From at8u at virginia.edu Mon Nov 17 08:54:54 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:54:54 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811170754v22ea0589oed75024836ad10cd@mail.gmail.com> Richard wrote: > Of course not. There is no discussion taking place, because we cannot > find a common ground on which to begin an inquiry that would settle a > question. My thoughts exactly. But you know what, I found the non-discussion interesting anyway, so thanks for taking part in it. Also, I think that for external observers there can be something somewhat comical or even endearing in seeing people talk past each other (as, e.g., in the yearly Buddha-L discussion on vegeterianism). I hope we have, at least, entertained rather than bored other list members. Regards, Alberto Todeschini From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 17 09:09:25 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:09:25 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy In-Reply-To: <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <1226879089.5688.51.camel@localhost> <006001c948bd$69b72980$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: "Buddhist avatar"---a word that arrived with virtual reality games and needs to disappear when referring to real reality. Yikes & aaaaargh Joanna ===================== Tibetan Exiles Meet on Strategy NYTimes: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/world/asia/18tibet.html?_r=1&hp &oref=slogin (Excerpt) Political moderation is the norm in this corner of the Tibetan world. A steady flow of ethnic Han Chinese tourists has lifted incomes in recent years. Farmers convert old homes into guesthouses. Monasteries are erecting new buildings. Perhaps nowhere is there a better example of the "middle way" attitude promoted by the Dalai Lama, the exiled Buddhist avatar who advocates a nonviolent movement for Tibetan autonomy within China but not outright independence. "Whatever he does, we do," said Tashi, a driver who keeps a portrait of the Dalai Lama on his dashboard even though such images are banned in China. "We don't want to make trouble." But the calm here could soon crumble, depending on the outcome of a six-day meeting of Tibetan exiles that began Monday in India. The conclave is the first of its kind since 1991. The Dalai Lama has called for hundreds of Tibetans to gather in the Himalayan town of Dharamsala, the seat of the Tibetan government in exile, to help decide on a new strategy for Tibet. --- Dan _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From at8u at virginia.edu Mon Nov 17 09:09:54 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:09:54 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity Message-ID: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> Richard Hayes wrote: > Taylor's Massey lectures were entitled "The Malaise of Modernity." In > them he explored three themes that, he argued, lead to a deep sense of > unhappiness in modern society. The three themes he spotted were 1) > individualism, 2) instrumental reasoning and 3) powerlessness, the > perceived loss of a sense of having control over what matters in life. What kind of time-frame was he referring to with 'modernity'? The word's meaning can be quite nebulous. Best, Alberto Todeschini From rhayes at unm.edu Mon Nov 17 11:00:28 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:00:28 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu> On Monday 17 November 2008 09:09:54 Alberto Todeschini wrote: > What kind of time-frame was he referring to with 'modernity'? The > word's meaning can be quite nebulous. As one of my logic professors used to remind me, there is a proper occasion for using vague terms, namely, when one does not see a need to be more precise. Judging from the kinds of things Taylor talks about in the book, he is talking in broad strokes about the culture that has evolved in North America under the influence of values promoted during what is sometimes called the European Enlightenment. Taylor's concern with instrumental reasoning is that data collection about such things as physical health and psychological well-being tends to focus on parts and to ignore the whole person. Applying Taylor's concern to the question that has been under discussion here, happiness might best be seen as an individual's overall assessment of her entire being, whereas most kinds of data collection would be focused on particular aspects of an individual's state of being, and especially on those aspects that can somehow be measured. Now if the data collected is simply a record of responses to the question "Are you happy?" there is nothing wrong with those data. They are recording whether people are happy, and those data can then be statistically correlated to responses to other questions. (Why anyone would do that escapes me, but I am sure it could be done.) Where investigation goes off the rails is when measurements of physical states are taken and used to question the truthfulness of the answer to the question "Are you happy?" When someone says something like "Well, you may THINK you're happy, but your theta waves and blood pressure would suggest otherwise," then we have left science behind and descended into the realm of a potentially dangerous sort of witchcraft. (I have nothing against crafty witches, mind you, so long as they don't claim to be doing viable scientific research.) Another aspect of giving primacy to instrumental reasoning is that it tends to devalue other kinds of evidence. Why, for example, would the testimony of thousands of philosophers, poets and prophets not be taken as sufficient evidence that an accumulation of wealth is not likely to make a person happy? Surely, they are making observations based on their own experience and the reported experience of others. Surely their observations are sufficient to verify the claim that wealth is neither necessary nor sufficient for happiness. Here is an area where we learn nothing new when someone collects data on people's reports of their level of happiness and correlates them with data about their financial security. What do these data prove? That all those philosophers and poets were right after all, and that before the data were analysed the philosophers and poets were just voicing an ungrounded prejudice? Bah! -- Richard P. Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From jhubbard at email.smith.edu Mon Nov 17 11:53:35 2008 From: jhubbard at email.smith.edu (Jamie Hubbard) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:53:35 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Happiest countries in the world In-Reply-To: References: <827866.13390.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com><006d01c94493$58fbd470$0300000a@katies> <62e4e222734dac3df81c3b57d4a495cb409a106d@localhost> Message-ID: <4921BDAF.5080402@email.smith.edu> [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an quoted: > http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=12,3821,0,0,1,0 : > > "True Happiness" contrasts with worldly happiness. The first is truly > lasting, while the latter always fleeting. When we pursue worldly > happiness, they will at best come... only to pass in due time. Mountains > of wealth cannot buy True Happiness. Fantastic sex is just a brief high. > Fame is always at the mercy of blame. Sumptuous meals can only be taken > so much... You get the idea. Because worldly happiness is conditioned, > it fades away when its conditions fall away. Because True Happiness is > unconditioned, it requires nothing in particular to sustain it - though > we need to cultivate our spirituality by perfecting our compassion and > wisdom to attain it once and for all.... > And this, of course is the problem (or rather, the bait-and-switch). After brilliantly declaring the impermanence of all things and the difficulties awaiting those that impossibly cling to the ever-changing world in which we live (difficulties which most sane people wouldn't actually have, since fretting over the transience of what is so obviously transient doesn't seem an affliction of most people I know), we get sold a bill of goods about a truly lasting, permanent happiness. . . oh wait, it is capitalized: "True Happiness." Unconditioned happiness that doesn't fade away and requires nothing to sustain it. . . except (and, after the bait, here comes the switcheroo) we have to: "cultivate our spirituality by perfecting our compassion and wisdom to attain it once and for all...." (see some of the later messages in this thread that one way or the other also opined in favor of, eg, "happiness beyond circumstances,including circumstances involving body sensations" from Jackhat1) I've read a number of things over the years about "unconditioned," and I still don't get it-- other than the need to sneak some ultimate back into the tradition. Perhaps there is also some logical entailment that leads to it, but it seems silly to me. Jamie From jhubbard at email.smith.edu Mon Nov 17 11:55:23 2008 From: jhubbard at email.smith.edu (Jamie Hubbard) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:55:23 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4921BE1B.2000103@email.smith.edu> Jackhat1 at aol.com wrote: > a message dated 11/12/2008 2:22:05 P.M. Central Standard Time, > jhubbard at email.smith.edu writes: > > .Why should I let somebody convince me that, contrary to my > (incontrovertible) feeling, I really am suffering most of the time? > Besides you in opposition to your own "experience" of things (reputable > the best source of knowledge, according to the Buddhist camp) *and* > putting you on that slippery slope to the monastic life, it just seems > like a lot of hard work for relatively little return, especially if > things are pretty good for you already< > -------- > That's a good question. The Dalai Lama gave one answer as, if things are > good for you, keep doing what you are doing and forget Buddhism. > This makes good sense, except that I see no need to "forget Buddhism." I even hanker after the monastic life sometimes, and the rest of the package is sublime as well. You don't need to be suffering or dis-satisfied to enjoy sitting quietly up in Barre or down in Nilambe. And the art, philosophy, food, rituals, manuscripts, and crazy folks are all way more enjoyable than most other things one could do. . . hard to believe they pay me to do this. . . > > Two other answers. First, a daily meditation practice dealing with minor > problems such as the pain in your knee teaches you to deal with the bigger > problems we all have such as illness, death of a loved one, etc. Part of dealing > with these minor problems involve recognizing them and delving into them. > Of course recognizing problems is the first step to solving them. So I would suggest that sitting in a chair (if you must sit) would be kinda an obvious solution to the minor problem, but I don't see much of a connection between solving lots of minor problems and being able to handle the really big ones, at least in terms of "training." > Second, most of us have instances of minor suffering everyday that causes us a > problem but that we don't recognize as suffering. For instance, someone cuts in > line in front of us at the grocery store; the phone rings while we are > eating dinner; we have had a disagreement with a relative that has been in the > background for years. It is like our having a medical problem such as a low > grade tooth infection or some vitamin deficiency. We don't recognize we have it > and also don't recognize what a healthy life feels like. > Well, unless the low-grade annoyances really drive you nuts, I would suggest that replacing the occasional annoyance at the grocery store with a huge meditation practice schedule is a bit overkill. Again, this is just anecdotal but I don't know too many people who get too overly bothered by the sorts of things you mention. Returning to the set-point theory, even the big disasters that befall folks usually don't make 'em crazy. I mean-- haven't you known innumerable people that have lost a loved one or gotten terminally ill yet came back and continued on? Among my family and friends, birth, old age, and sickness is an entirely normal sequence, and only the idiot would think that either a) they should get upset (suffer) about it, and b) only a bigger idiot would think that they could beat the rap. . . if you are born, the sentence is old age, sickness, and death. Live with it :) Jamie From jehms at xs4all.nl Mon Nov 17 13:11:31 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:11:31 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> Alberto Todeschini schreef: > Richard Hayes wrote: > > >> Taylor's Massey lectures were entitled "The Malaise of Modernity." In >> them he explored three themes that, he argued, lead to a deep sense of >> unhappiness in modern society. The three themes he spotted were 1) >> individualism, 2) instrumental reasoning and 3) powerlessness, the >> perceived loss of a sense of having control over what matters in life. >> > > What kind of time-frame was he referring to with 'modernity'? The > word's meaning can be quite nebulous. > > Best, > > Alberto Todeschini > I happen to disagree with Richards reading of Taylor. The bottom of the line is he wants to defend the modernist views of the Catholic church against postmodernism and therefore he tries make grounds for a revisited modernism. Don't forget that christendom introduced indivdualism, because truth was something between you and God, so you didn't need society anymore. Taylor calls Michel Foucault a source of evil, which is ridiculous. I find him a very mediocre philosopher who always comes with shallow patches because he cannot come to the bottom of the problems. He comes nowhere near the Frankfurters or Baudrillard, Foucault, Bourdieu or Bauman. For me reading him was a waste of time, but if you really want a tast you should read 'Sources of the self'. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From jehms at xs4all.nl Mon Nov 17 13:18:21 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:18:21 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4921D18D.2030807@xs4all.nl> Jackhat1 at aol.com schreef: > In a message dated 11/16/2008 10:57:26 A.M. Central Standard Time, > jehms at xs4all.nl writes: > > Sorry Jack for being so persistent, but I fail to find references to a > book written by Aristotle called 'On happiness'. It would be in Greek > called 'Peri Eudemonia' I suppose? Where did you find it? All articles > and references to Aristotle's view on happiness I found tell me that he > saw it as excellent funcioning of the soul and that he's very uncertain > about the whereabouts of the soul after death. > == > Sorry, I was sloppy. Too early on a Sunday morning. "On Happiness" and these > quotes are found in "The Nichomachean Ethics." Book 1. > > > jack > > You're even more sloppy than you thought. :-) Aristotle has the habit of first quoting opinions of former writers and if you read more of the book you'll find that in the passages you refer to he quotes Solon and later rejects this view, because happines is not a conclusiuon but something you do. -- Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From rhayes at unm.edu Mon Nov 17 15:59:02 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:59:02 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <200811171559.02401.rhayes@unm.edu> On Monday 17 November 2008 13:11:31 Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > > I happen to disagree with Richards reading of Taylor. Do you think I misrepresented what he says, or do you disagree with my evaluation of his worth? You clearly disagree with my evaluation, but I'm not sure whether you think I have misrepresented his views in The Malaise of Modernity. > The bottom of the > line is he wants to defend the modernist views of the Catholic church > against postmodernism and therefore he tries make grounds for a > revisited modernism. Yes, Taylor makes the point in various ways that no one should celebrate the demise of modernity. He says modernity is untenable, but he finds nothing to rejoice about in its untenability, and he thinks postmodernism is a complete disaster. His Catholic influence shows in his favoring a communitarian ethic over individualism. He does not hold Catholic authoritarianism or dogmatism in high esteem, but he does think that the Catholic emphasis on the individual's value consisting in potential and actual contributions to the human community is preferable to the Protestant emphasis on each individual's being inherently valuable because of a relationship with God. I tend to agree with him on all these issues. Incidentally, I think his positions are quite consistent with Buddhism as I understand it. Perhaps that's why I value him highly; I value Buddhism highly and find him to be quite Buddhist in tone if not at all in terminology. > For me reading him was a waste of time, but if you really want a > tast you should read 'Sources of the self'. Sources of the Self is a long, detailed and rather difficult book written for philosophers, whereas Malaise of Modernity is a short and accessible book written for the general public. I would recommend reading his more accessible book first and then diving into Sources of the Self for a much more substantial read. -- Richard P. Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From baopiguy at ca.rr.com Sun Nov 16 21:34:31 2008 From: baopiguy at ca.rr.com (BP) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:34:31 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia Message-ID: <4920F457.5050903@ca.rr.com> Does this beat a grilled cheese picture of the Virgin Mary? *Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia * Agence France-Presse First Posted 11/16/2008 PHNOM PENH--Hundreds of devout Cambodians have flocked to see five unusually shaped termite nests that look like seated figures of Buddha, witnesses said Sunday. The iconic insect homes appeared on the cement floor of 56-year-old Kuong Keo Ry's house near Phnom Penh, shortly before a traditional death festival held in October when she was mourning her late husband. "I am happy that my house has been chosen. After other people and I pay respect to the Buddha shapes, we all feel content," the widow told AFP by telephone. She said she first became curious about the nests in October because she would sweep them away every day -- but that the wood-munching bugs would rebuild them overnight. Over the past month around 50 to 60 people had come to her house every day to view the Buddhas, Kuong Keo Ry said. A journalist who went to see the termite Buddhas said he was "thrilled" by them. "It's like a miracle to me," said Sok Samnang, who hosts a Cambodian television show. "One night after we put jasmine ornaments around the five Buddha shapes, they became higher. Each of them is 50 centimeters (19 inches) tall and looks exactly like a seated Buddha," he said. Cambodian Buddhist scholars have said that the Buddha shapes represent apparitions of deities. "I've never seen anything like this before in my life. I believe the termites are trying to bring us a message from God," said devout Buddhist San Son, 60, who visits the nests regularly to pray. Buddhism permeates all aspects of culture in Cambodia, despite attempts to eradicate it by the former Khmer Rouge regime. From at8u at virginia.edu Mon Nov 17 16:34:13 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:34:13 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity Message-ID: <66634efd0811171534x3f0bb79br2a8680b40ce3219e@mail.gmail.com> Richard Hayes wrote: > Applying Taylor's concern to the question that has been under discussion here, > happiness might best be seen as an individual's overall assessment of her > entire being, Look at definitions of happiness scientists use. Many will agree with Taylor. > whereas most kinds of data collection would be focused on > particular aspects of an individual's state of being, and especially on those > aspects that can somehow be measured. As far as I can tell, this would not be a good description of what's happening. To be sure, there are scientists studying things like patterns of use of different areas of the brain in association with different psychological states and they have noticed that people who report to be happy have an area of the brain particularly active. But not everyone is doing this. And from what I can see, people are careful not to say "see those neurons? That's the happiness center." One *does* see similar statements made by the mass media but I've never seen a scientist say that. > Now if the data collected is simply a record of responses to the question "Are > you happy?" there is nothing wrong with those data. And this is precisely what a large part of the field is based on. > Where investigation goes off the rails is when measurements of physical states > are taken and used to question the truthfulness of the answer to the > question "Are you happy?" Please note that this is what I said could *theoretically* be done and only on a particular definition of happiness, not what scientists say. I didn't say this would be desirable. Furthermore, the point of it all wouldn't be to say whether one is wrong or not. And I repeatedly asserted that it may be a long while before reliable and hence potentially useful assessments of the relevant physiological states are possible. I know, you disagree, but how many times do we need to come back to this? > Why, for example, would the testimony of > thousands of philosophers, poets and prophets not be taken as sufficient > evidence that an accumulation of wealth is not likely to make a person happy? Never heard anyone suggest anything like this and certainly that was not my point. I apologize if I gave this idea. Interestingly, every single book-length work on happiness that I have read, though written by scientists, mentions a variety of ancient Greek and European philosophers as well as HH the Dalai Lama, who seems to be very popular with the happiness crowd. One also finds frequent quotations of artists, composers, writers, etc. So your question may suggest a rift that isn't actually there. Anyway, scientists have added a lot of details and have vastly increased our understanding of the relationship between wealth and happiness. Some examples: - there actually is a *small* increase in reported happiness with increase in wealth; - in the case of people below the poverty line, they do report *significantly* lower happiness level; - relative wealth as opposed to absolute wealth *is* strongly correlated with happiness. For instance (I'm making the numbers up, but it's the idea that counts) people tend to be happier if they earn $50000 a year when their peers earn $30000 than if they make $100000 when their peers make $500000. See? We understand the relationship between reported happiness and wealth better than ever and if this influences public policy so much the better. One obvious policy would be to encourage the conditions under which the redistribution of wealth is possible, for instance by taxing the wealthiest and improving the financial lot of the poorest. Again, this sounds obvious to left-leaning, liberally-educated, middle-class Americans or Europeans. Others will find a quotation from a scientific study more convincing than a quote from the Dhammapada. > Surely their observations are sufficient to verify the claim that wealth is neither necessary nor sufficient for > happiness. Apart from the argument about science having added to and corrected the picture (see above), for whom are those observations sufficient? What if you are a politician or civil servant? Are you going to tell your colleagues or your constituency that your policy is worthy because of something the Buddha or Heinrich von Kleist said? > Here is an area where we learn nothing new when someone collects > data on people's reports of their level of happiness and correlates them with > data about their financial security. In light of the examples above this is incorrect. There are plenty more cases. > What do these data prove? That all those > philosophers and poets were right after all, That, sure enough, they had great insight into human nature and that they were fairly correct overall but with some omissions and mistakes (depending on whom we are talking of and on her definition of wealth). This doesn't prevent us (or me, at least) from appreciating their insight. If anything, I'm more and more amazed at how many things the Buddha, for instance, got right. > and that before the data were > analysed the philosophers and poets were just voicing an ungrounded > prejudice? Never heard anyone suggest this. See above. What scientists have done is offer a much improved understanding of both the whole picture and of the details. Sure, we can still improve both. And sure enough, the scientists involved are at pain to improve what they do. In general, I'd say that it is a mistake to underestimate the degree of sophistication, self-scrutiny, the awareness of flaws and problems as well as the ability to see both the whole picture as well as the details of the scientists involved in researching happiness. Having said this, I'm am sure that there will be occasional embarrassing mistakes, blind-alleys and perhaps even revolutions in the field. Best, Alberto Todeschini From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 17 16:57:00 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:57:00 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: Erik wrote: "Don't forget that christendom introduced individualism, because truth was something between you and God, so you didn't need society anymore." Hmm--Isn't the above a Protestant revolt idea? I was under the (maybe erroneous) impression that for Roman Catholics truth was between you, then the priest, and if you were lucky, God. They weren't even allowed to read the Bible for a long time. Right? or wrong? Joanna ================================ > I happen to disagree with Richards reading of Taylor. The bottom of the line is he wants to defend the modernist views of the Catholic church against postmodernism and therefore he tries make grounds for a revisited modernism. Don't forget that christendom introduced indivdualism, because truth was something between you and God, so you didn't need society anymore. Taylor calls Michel Foucault a source of evil, which is ridiculous. I find him a very mediocre philosopher who always comes with shallow patches because he cannot come to the bottom of the problems. He comes nowhere near the Frankfurters or Baudrillard, Foucault, Bourdieu or Bauman. For me reading him was a waste of time, but if you really want a tast you should read 'Sources of the self'. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 17 17:10:54 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:10:54 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia In-Reply-To: <4920F457.5050903@ca.rr.com> References: <4920F457.5050903@ca.rr.com> Message-ID: <5E34F58B9A8E4CF2B6D3B476F5B34EF9@OPTIPLEX> "I believe the termites are trying to bring us a message from God," said devout Buddhist San Son.." I always wonder what people in SE Asia mean when they say such things as message from God. Cambodians aren't the only ones. Who do they think God is? Buddha? Brahma? Jesus? Piously yours, Joanna ============ To: Baopiguy Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia Does this beat a grilled cheese picture of the Virgin Mary? *Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia * Agence France-Presse First Posted 11/16/2008 PHNOM PENH--Hundreds of devout Cambodians have flocked to see five unusually shaped termite nests that look like seated figures of Buddha, witnesses said Sunday. The iconic insect homes appeared on the cement floor of 56-year-old Kuong Keo Ry's house near Phnom Penh, shortly before a traditional death festival held in October when she was mourning her late husband. "I am happy that my house has been chosen. After other people and I pay respect to the Buddha shapes, we all feel content," the widow told AFP by telephone. She said she first became curious about the nests in October because she would sweep them away every day -- but that the wood-munching bugs would rebuild them overnight. Over the past month around 50 to 60 people had come to her house every day to view the Buddhas, Kuong Keo Ry said. A journalist who went to see the termite Buddhas said he was "thrilled" by them. "It's like a miracle to me," said Sok Samnang, who hosts a Cambodian television show. "One night after we put jasmine ornaments around the five Buddha shapes, they became higher. Each of them is 50 centimeters (19 inches) tall and looks exactly like a seated Buddha," he said. Cambodian Buddhist scholars have said that the Buddha shapes represent apparitions of deities. "I've never seen anything like this before in my life. I believe the termites are trying to bring us a message from God," said devout Buddhist San Son, 60, who visits the nests regularly to pray. Buddhism permeates all aspects of culture in Cambodia, despite attempts to eradicate it by the former Khmer Rouge regime. _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From pvera at health.usf.edu Mon Nov 17 18:01:38 2008 From: pvera at health.usf.edu (Vera, Pedro L.) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:01:38 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl>, Message-ID: <33C44E04D25FE54C906EB61FBAA4B9CD7339189F02@MAILSERVER3.hscnet.hsc.usf.edu> Joanna: I think you are correctt. Erik's point about individualism, in my opinion, applies more to the protestant brand of christianity both during the Reformation and certainly now in fundamentalist churches (at least in America) where personal salvation directly establishing a connection between God and the individual (not mediated by priests, sacraments or a church) is stressed. Best regards, Pedro ________________________________________ From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of jkirk [jkirk at spro.net] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 6:57 PM To: 'Buddhist discussion forum' Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity Erik wrote: "Don't forget that christendom introduced individualism, because truth was something between you and God, so you didn't need society anymore." Hmm--Isn't the above a Protestant revolt idea? I was under the (maybe erroneous) impression that for Roman Catholics truth was between you, then the priest, and if you were lucky, God. They weren't even allowed to read the Bible for a long time. Right? or wrong? Joanna ================================ > I happen to disagree with Richards reading of Taylor. The bottom of the line is he wants to defend the modernist views of the Catholic church against postmodernism and therefore he tries make grounds for a revisited modernism. Don't forget that christendom introduced indivdualism, because truth was something between you and God, so you didn't need society anymore. Taylor calls Michel Foucault a source of evil, which is ridiculous. I find him a very mediocre philosopher who always comes with shallow patches because he cannot come to the bottom of the problems. He comes nowhere near the Frankfurters or Baudrillard, Foucault, Bourdieu or Bauman. For me reading him was a waste of time, but if you really want a tast you should read 'Sources of the self'. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From rhayes at unm.edu Mon Nov 17 19:17:37 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:17:37 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811170735r47e32e5yb31a8e322f3ccca9@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811170735r47e32e5yb31a8e322f3ccca9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1226974657.5767.7.camel@localhost> On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 10:35 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > That's right. And as far as I can gather from my limited reading on > the subject, scientists researching happiness are well aware of > several possible pitfalls. One of them is that trying too hard will > actually make matters worse or at least not improve them. "Those who strive for nirvana as a reality will never get beyond samsara." (Candrakirti, quoting some Mahayana Sutra) > I think there is a parallel to nutrition. There is the perfectly > respectable and worthy science of nutrition with its well-meaning, > honest and qualified specialists. But then you also get all different > sorts of unqualified people, amateurs, charlatans and quacks. The > result is that there is a lot of good information out there but also > fads, fashionable dietary advice which is actually bad for people, > etc. True. And don't forget that a lot of what turns out to be bad information stems from the findings of well-meaning scientists in hot pursuit of data that turned out to give only a partial picture of a highly complex phenomenon. I think Bertrand Russell gave the best advice on diet than anyone has given. He said that if you wish to be healthy, choose your parents very carefully, then eat exactly what you feel like eating, but in moderation. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 17 19:36:26 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:36:26 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <1226974657.5767.7.camel@localhost> References: <66634efd0811170735r47e32e5yb31a8e322f3ccca9@mail.gmail.com> <1226974657.5767.7.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <17976CA55A5B487EB310DA1A5B1B6B16@OPTIPLEX> I think Bertrand Russell gave the best advice on diet than anyone has given. He said that if you wish to be healthy, choose your parents very carefully, then eat exactly what you feel like eating, but in moderation. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico --------------------------------------------------------- Or consider George Bernard Shaw on food. He is alleged to have said (no source): Everything I eat has been proved by some doctor or other to be a deadly poison, and everything I don't eat has been proved to be indispensable for life. But I go marching on." and (for obligatory Buddhist content): "A vegetarian is not a person who lives on vegetables, any more than a Catholic is a person who lives on cats." Respectfully yours, Joanna From curt at cola.iges.org Mon Nov 17 19:43:36 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:43:36 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia In-Reply-To: <5E34F58B9A8E4CF2B6D3B476F5B34EF9@OPTIPLEX> References: <4920F457.5050903@ca.rr.com> <5E34F58B9A8E4CF2B6D3B476F5B34EF9@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: <49222BD8.4000205@cola.iges.org> It is unlikely that San Son speaks English. Whatever it was he said in Cambodian would almost certainly be more accurately translated as "a message from the Divine." In Asian (Indian, Chinese, Indo-Chinese, etc) religions personal and impersonal conceptions of the Divine are often impossible to disentangle. The same is true among westerners - but we are less likely to recognize it because the image of a "personal" God who is literally a white bearded old man is so pervasive in our culture. Curt Steinmetz jkirk wrote: > "I believe the termites are trying to bring us a message from > God," said devout Buddhist San Son.." > > I always wonder what people in SE Asia mean when they say such > things as message from God. > Cambodians aren't the only ones. Who do they think God is? > Buddha? Brahma? Jesus? > > Piously yours, > Joanna > > ============ > To: Baopiguy > Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia > > Does this beat a grilled cheese picture of the Virgin Mary? > > > > > *Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia * > > Agence France-Presse > First Posted 11/16/2008 > > PHNOM PENH--Hundreds of devout Cambodians have flocked to see > five unusually shaped termite nests that look like seated figures > of Buddha, witnesses said Sunday. > > The iconic insect homes appeared on the cement floor of > 56-year-old Kuong Keo Ry's house > 2531/Buddha-shaped-termite-nests-in-Cambodia#> > near Phnom Penh, shortly before a traditional death festival held > in October when she was mourning her late husband. > > "I am happy that my house has been chosen. After other people and > I pay respect to the Buddha shapes, we all feel content," the > widow told AFP by telephone. > > She said she first became curious about the nests in October > because she would sweep them away every day -- but that the > wood-munching bugs would rebuild them overnight. > > Over the past month around 50 to 60 people had come to her house > every day to view the Buddhas, Kuong Keo Ry said. > > A journalist who went to see the termite Buddhas said he was > "thrilled" > by them. > > "It's like a miracle to me," said Sok Samnang, who hosts a > Cambodian television show. > > "One night after we put jasmine ornaments around the five Buddha > shapes, they became higher. Each of them is 50 centimeters (19 > inches) tall and looks exactly like a seated Buddha," he said. > > Cambodian Buddhist scholars have said that the Buddha shapes > represent apparitions of deities. > > "I've never seen anything like this before in my life. I believe > the termites are trying to bring us a message from God," said > devout Buddhist San Son, 60, who visits the nests regularly to > pray. > > Buddhism permeates all aspects of culture in Cambodia, despite > attempts to eradicate it by the former Khmer Rouge regime. > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > From rhayes at unm.edu Mon Nov 17 19:58:51 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:58:51 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811171534x3f0bb79br2a8680b40ce3219e@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811171534x3f0bb79br2a8680b40ce3219e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1226977131.5767.40.camel@localhost> On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 18:34 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > > Now if the data collected is simply a record of responses to the question "Are > > you happy?" there is nothing wrong with those data. > > And this is precisely what a large part of the field is based on. So it would seem a large part of the field of scientists agrees with my claim that the only meaningful measure of happiness is a person's report of feelings. This suggests that happiness is a purely subjective state about which it is impossible for a person to be mistaken. So long as no one out there is making the dreadful mistake of saying something like "Devadatta THINKs he is happy, but he is mistaken in this thought," I am happy. What makes me happiest is reading Sanskrit texts, so I'll get back to doing that and leave those who gain pleasure from studying questionnaires to pursue happiness in their own way. > - relative wealth as opposed to absolute wealth *is* strongly > correlated with happiness. For instance (I'm making the numbers up, > but it's the idea that counts) people tend to be happier if they earn > $50000 a year when their peers earn $30000 than if they make $100000 > when their peers make $500000. Yes, I have seen these conclusions (and most of the others you have reported). > One obvious policy would be to encourage the conditions > under which the redistribution of wealth is possible, for instance by > taxing the wealthiest and improving the financial lot of the poorest. Do social scientists note that about 85% of American people call such a policy Socialism, a word that immediately induces convulsive jerking of the knees accompanied by projectile vomiting? My favorite politcal scientist was Mort Sahl, who observed that liberals feel ashamed of their wealth, while conservatives feel that they fully deserve everything they have stolen. > What if you are a politician or civil servant? Under those circumstances, I commit suicide. > Are you going to tell > your colleagues or your constituency that your policy is worthy > because of something the Buddha or Heinrich von Kleist said? No, I usually tell my colleagues that reality is so complex that no policy would be workable if it were devised by someone as simpleminded as I. > If anything, I'm more and more amazed at how many things the > Buddha, for instance, got right. How do you know he got things right? All you are in a position to know is that you agree with him about some things and that you also agree with scientists who say approximately the same things. In short, you know what you believe, and nothing more. > Never heard anyone suggest this. See above. What scientists have done > is offer a much improved understanding of both the whole picture and > of the details. If you are talking about physicists and chemists and biologists and geologists, I could not agree with you more. (In other words, I share their prejudices.) If you are talking about pseudo-scientists, such as sociologists and social psychologists, I remain unconvinced that they have much insight at all into either the big picture or the significance of details. Were it not for the fact that I know that universities are run by used care salesmen and retired football stars who have no understanding at all of the intellectual life, it would amaze me that universities actually pay sociologists. (In other words, I do not share their prejudices.) Another big mistake that universities make, by the way, is to pay philosophers. Anyone who accepts money for what they should be doing for free is obviously too dishonest to be paid anything at all. > In general, I'd say that it is a mistake to underestimate the degree > of sophistication, self-scrutiny, the awareness of flaws and problems > as well as the ability to see both the whole picture as well as the > details of the scientists involved in researching happiness. I assure you, I am not mistaken in underestimating their value. In fact, on careful reflection, I am pretty sure that by dint of discussing them at all I have overestimated their value. Bear in mind, I have never read anything by a sociologist, but I did have a friend once who read something by a sociologist. When I discovered that, I immediately terminated our friendship. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 17 20:05:43 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:05:43 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Did he really say that? Message-ID: The Dalai Lama on Food "Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon." -- the 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso. In case not, here's one from, perhaps, a Buddhist-manqu?: Vladimir Ilyich Lenin on food "I am a bad, wicked man, but I am practising moral self-purification; I don't eat meat any more, I now eat rice cutlets." From jkirk at spro.net Mon Nov 17 20:28:04 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:28:04 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <1226977131.5767.40.camel@localhost> References: <66634efd0811171534x3f0bb79br2a8680b40ce3219e@mail.gmail.com> <1226977131.5767.40.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <11AD6F34A34F441BACC90420F7989E96@OPTIPLEX> Richard: So it would seem a large part of the field of scientists agrees with my claim that the only meaningful measure of happiness is a person's report of feelings. This suggests that happiness is a purely subjective state about which it is impossible for a person to be mistaken. So long as no one out there is making the dreadful mistake of saying something like "Devadatta THINKs he is happy, but he is mistaken in this thought," I am happy. ----------- This is meaningful only if you recognise that what a person reports as his feelings might not necessarily be a truth report...he REPORTS that he is happy, but really he feels like shit. Joanna K. From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Mon Nov 17 22:57:22 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:57:22 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu> Message-ID: <004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan> > Taylor's concern with instrumental reasoning is that data collection about > such things as physical health and psychological well-being tends to focus on > parts and to ignore the whole person. You mean he is anti-Buddhist? Preferring the myth of "whole person" (a type of atmavada) to breaking a person (pudgala) down into its causative components (skandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, etc.)? Dan From rhayes at unm.edu Mon Nov 17 23:15:35 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:15:35 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu> <004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <1226988936.8461.6.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 00:57 -0500, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > > Taylor's concern with instrumental reasoning is that data collection about > > such things as physical health and psychological well-being tends to focus > on > > parts and to ignore the whole person. > > You mean he is anti-Buddhist? Preferring the myth of "whole person" (a type > of atmavada) to breaking a person (pudgala) down into its causative > components (skandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, etc.)? The more I think about it, the clearer it is that there is nothing at all anti-Buddhist about the notion of the whole person. It is no more a fiction than are the skandhas, ?yatanas and dh?tus. I see no good reason to endorse either ?tmav?da or an?tmav?da. They are both sticks good only for stirring up shit. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Tue Nov 18 00:22:30 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:22:30 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com><200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu><004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan> <1226988936.8461.6.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <00a401c9494e$6ad91c60$2101a8c0@Dan> > I see no good reason > to endorse either ?tmav?da or an?tmav?da. They are both sticks good only > for stirring up shit. Ah, so finally in your old age you are moving ever more closer to Nagarjuna. He reached the same conclusion. (cf. MMK 18:6) Dan From jehms at xs4all.nl Tue Nov 18 03:42:07 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:42:07 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <49229BFF.6010102@xs4all.nl> jkirk schreef: > Erik wrote: > "Don't forget that christendom introduced individualism, because > truth was something between you and God, so you didn't need > society anymore." > > Hmm--Isn't the above a Protestant revolt idea? I was under the > (maybe erroneous) impression that for Roman Catholics truth was > between you, then the priest, and if you were lucky, God. They > weren't even allowed to read the Bible for a long time. > Right? or wrong? > Joanna > > ================================ > Maybe neither. The priest represents the Pope and he represents God, but it's still you who is doing the soul searching and the confessions. So all evil is interiorised. I'm not saying Protestantism is not individualised, perhaps even more than Catholicism, but that doesn't mean Catholicism is not invividualistic at all. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From jehms at xs4all.nl Tue Nov 18 03:51:42 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:51:42 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <200811171559.02401.rhayes@unm.edu> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> <200811171559.02401.rhayes@unm.edu> Message-ID: <49229E3E.5080001@xs4all.nl> Richard P. Hayes schreef: > On Monday 17 November 2008 13:11:31 Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > >> I happen to disagree with Richards reading of Taylor. >> > > Do you think I misrepresented what he says, or do you disagree with my > evaluation of his worth? You clearly disagree with my evaluation, but I'm not > sure whether you think I have misrepresented his views in The Malaise of > Modernity. > I think your account of Taylors view is correct. > >> The bottom of the >> line is he wants to defend the modernist views of the Catholic church >> against postmodernism and therefore he tries make grounds for a >> revisited modernism. >> > > Yes, Taylor makes the point in various ways that no one should celebrate the > demise of modernity. He says modernity is untenable, but he finds nothing to > rejoice about in its untenability, and he thinks postmodernism is a complete > disaster. His Catholic influence shows in his favoring a communitarian ethic > over individualism. He does not hold Catholic authoritarianism or dogmatism > in high esteem, but he does think that the Catholic emphasis on the > individual's value consisting in potential and actual contributions to the > human community is preferable to the Protestant emphasis on each individual's > being inherently valuable because of a relationship with God. I tend to agree > with him on all these issues. Incidentally, I think his positions are quite > consistent with Buddhism as I understand it. Perhaps that's why I value him > highly; I value Buddhism highly and find him to be quite Buddhist in tone if > not at all in terminology. > I'm not sure that reviving the inquisition is an effective way of resolving our problems these days. I'm not sure either if you can save Taylor by giving him a new label. In my view his strategy of save values and going back to the old days when the Pope ruled the civilised world does hold water. Taylor has no idea of the ways the world has changed since the globalisation and mass reproduction economy. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From cfynn at gmx.net Tue Nov 18 06:23:01 2008 From: cfynn at gmx.net (Christopher Fynn) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:23:01 +0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Tibetan Exiles Meeting Over Strategy In-Reply-To: <20081117142245.432952457E@postfix1.comp.nus.edu.sg> References: <20081117142245.432952457E@postfix1.comp.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <4922C1B5.8010604@gmx.net> Weng-Fai Wong wrote: > Unfortunately all the cards are on China's side. Esp. with this financial > tsunami, all eyes are on how China will use its vast reserves to directly > and indirectly help them out. The Tibetans have very little room for > maneuver. > > W.F. Wong Yes - An example is that, for the first time, the British Foreign Secretary recently said "Like every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China". Previously the UK position was that "Tibet had never been fully part of China." This change of policy is significant as the UK was one of the few countries which formerly had relations with Tibet and had signed agreements with Tibet. I hardly think it is just a coincidence that this change of policy came at the same time PM Gordon Brown was begging China to contribute some of it's huge stash of dollars to bail out the international financial system. - Chris From at8u at virginia.edu Tue Nov 18 07:24:10 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:24:10 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity Message-ID: <66634efd0811180624r3fb4a805kcdbf91fd2ff70f00@mail.gmail.com> Richard Hayes wrote: > If you are talking about physicists and chemists and biologists and > geologists, I could not agree with you more. (In other words, I share > their prejudices.) If you are talking about pseudo-scientists, such as > sociologists and social psychologists....., Wow Richard, there is one *glaring* omission here. How about economists with their big, bulgy formulas? There is nothing that inspires as much faith but deserves as little. As we were told in a philosophy of science class, economics suffers from a severe case of science envy. Best, Alberto Todeschini From Jackhat1 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 08:33:29 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:33:29 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/17/2008 2:18:46 P.M. Central Standard Time, jehms at xs4all.nl writes: You're even more sloppy than you thought. :-) Aristotle has the habit of first quoting opinions of former writers and if you read more of the book you'll find that in the passages you refer to he quotes Solon and later rejects this view, because happines is not a conclusiuon but something you do. == I suggest we both reread those passages. I believe I am right. He does quote Solon but the sentences I quoted in an earlier post (see below) stand alone from his reaction to Solon. Jack >>On Happiness by Aristotle, Book 1. Here are some quotes. "We are unwilling to call the living happy because changes may befall them and because we believe that happiness haws permanence and is not amenable to change under any circumstances." "For it seems that to some extent good and evil really exist for a dead man, just as they may exist for a man who lives without being conscious of them, for example honors and disgraces, and generally the successes and failures of his children and descendents." Another quote, "Happiness, as we have said, requires completeness in virtue as well as a complete lifetime." << **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From at8u at virginia.edu Tue Nov 18 07:14:29 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:14:29 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: <66634efd0811180614sc05d549y3d01e9cf4847409e@mail.gmail.com> >> I think there is a parallel to nutrition. There is the perfectly >> respectable and worthy science of nutrition with its well-meaning, >> honest and qualified specialists. But then you also get all different >> sorts of unqualified people, amateurs, charlatans and quacks. The >> result is that there is a lot of good information out there but also >> fads, fashionable dietary advice which is actually bad for people, >> etc. > > True. And don't forget that a lot of what turns out to be bad > information stems from the findings of well-meaning scientists in hot > pursuit of data that turned out to give only a partial picture of a > highly complex phenomenon. One thing that happens is this: a scientists says something like "we have some preliminary evidence that a diet rich in Vitamin C can reduce the incidence of cancer Y in male individuals over the age of 65. Come back in a few years for more details." Then someone comes along and says "Oh My Gosh! Then the lemon diet prevents cancer! Have to eat only lemon for a week!" I think people do the same with yoga and meditation, where among the well-meaning, sensible people you find others jumping from trendy retreat to trendy retreat and trendy fad to trendy fad. It's a bit sad, really. Somewhat related: I remember Namkhai Norbu gently mocking people who collect initiations but don't really do practice in between. Regards, Alberto Todeschini From Jackhat1 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 10:24:12 2008 From: Jackhat1 at aol.com (Jackhat1 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:24:12 EST Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies Message-ID: In a message dated 11/17/2008 12:56:10 P.M. Central Standard Time, jhubbard at email.smith.edu writes: >>Of course recognizing problems is the first step to solving them. So I would suggest that sitting in a chair (if you must sit) would be kinda an obvious solution to the minor problem, but I don't see much of a connection between solving lots of minor problems and being able to handle the really big ones, at least in terms of "training."<< ==== A short answer is that during my daily meditation practice, I encounter minor problems and practice letting them be without letting them bother me. Over time I have gotten better at dealing with bigger problems by using the same technique. =================== [snip] >>Well, unless the low-grade annoyances really drive you nuts, I would suggest that replacing the occasional annoyance at the grocery store with a huge meditation practice schedule is a bit overkill. This is just anecdotal but I don't know too many people who get too overly bothered by the sorts of things you mention.<< ==== I think most people get upset over little things like that. And, in a day there are lots of little instances like that that add up to someone who goes through life not feeling at ease.. = >>Returning to the set-point theory, even the big disasters that befall folks usually don't make 'em crazy. I mean-- haven't you known innumerable people that have lost a loved one or gotten terminally ill yet came back and continued on? Among my family and friends, birth, old age, and sickness is an entirely normal sequence, and only the idiot would think that either a) they should get upset (suffer) about it, << === I must know a lot of idiots because most people I know get upset over the pains of old age and sickness let alone people who have lost a loved one of gotten terminally ill. =============== and b) only a bigger idiot would think that they could beat the rap. . . if you are born, the sentence is old age, sickness, and death. Live with it :) ===== I think one of the points of Buddhist practice is exactly that, living with it, finding a peace with it. jack **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 18 11:37:38 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:37:38 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <00a401c9494e$6ad91c60$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu><004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan> <1226988936.8461.6.camel@localhost> <00a401c9494e$6ad91c60$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <1227033458.7211.4.camel@rhayes-desktop> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 02:22 -0500, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > Ah, so finally in your old age you are moving ever more closer to Nagarjuna. I wouldn't say that. When I was twenty-five I was convinced that N?g?rjuna had offered the best possible analysis of every metaphysical, ethical and epistemological issue. In the thirty-eight years since then nothing has made be change that assessment. So I would say that I'm still M?dhyamika after all these years. (Didn't Paul Simon write a song with that title?) -- Richard From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 18 12:00:10 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:00:10 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <49229E3E.5080001@xs4all.nl> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <4921CFF3.1080202@xs4all.nl> <200811171559.02401.rhayes@unm.edu> <49229E3E.5080001@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <1227034810.7211.25.camel@rhayes-desktop> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 11:51 +0100, Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > I'm not sure that reviving the inquisition is an effective way of > resolving our problems these days. Well, on that point you and Taylor and I are in full agreement. As I mentioned before, he has said repeatedly that no one should rejoice at the demise of modernity. What he says he means by that is that the values of modernity made steps in the direction of liberating people from such social ills as the inquisition, the crusades, systematic anti-Semitism, the doctrine of the divine right of kings and so on. His fear is that the demise of modernity could result in a return to pre-modern ways of thinking and acting, and that such a return would be the worse thing we could endure. (And he said that even BEFORE George W. Bush demonstrated what a disaster can result from discarding the values of the European Enlightenment.) Taylor is essentially a modernist who would like to preserve the best features of modernity while discarding those features that cause the malaise he talks about in his book. > In my view his strategy of save values > and going back to the old days when the Pope ruled the civilised world > does hold water. I have attended quite a few lectures by Taylor and have had several conversations with him, and I have never detected anything even slightly like that in his thinking. I'm pretty confident that he would agree fully with you that going back to the old days when the Pope ruled the civilized world does not hold water. > Taylor has no idea of the ways the world has changed > since the globalisation and mass reproduction economy. Again, I see no evidence that that is the case. On the contrary, I think he is profoundly aware of all the changes that have been taking place, and he sees a raft of intricate problems to which there are no obvious solutions. At the same time, he recognizes (rightly, I think) that just shrugging and doing nothing to try to address all these intricate problems is no solution. We have no alternative to trying and facing the very real possibility of failure. No doubt his life-long enterprise of finding a satisfactory solution to the so-called Quebec problem in Canada (how to make a single country of two distinct nations that have a long history of mutual hostility) is a testimony to his willingness to work to find at least a partial solution to a problem that many people deem insoluble and unworthy of any further thought. His analysis of that issue shows a thorough familiarity with the way the world has changed in same ways and yet cannot change in other ways because people hang on doggedly to ways of thinking that no longer have validity. -- Richard P. Hayes University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 18 12:07:39 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard P. Hayes) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:07:39 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies In-Reply-To: <66634efd0811180614sc05d549y3d01e9cf4847409e@mail.gmail.com> References: <66634efd0811180614sc05d549y3d01e9cf4847409e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1227035259.7211.32.camel@rhayes-desktop> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 09:14 -0500, Alberto Todeschini wrote: > I think people do the same with yoga and meditation, where among the > well-meaning, sensible people you find others jumping from trendy > retreat to trendy retreat and trendy fad to trendy fad. It's a bit > sad, really. Yes, on this we are in full agreement. I find it sad that people go on any retreats at all, instead of taking a nice walk in the park for free. > Somewhat related: I remember Namkhai Norbu gently mocking people who > collect initiations but don't really do practice in between. I'm one ahead of him. I mock people who take initiations at all. Richard From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Tue Nov 18 13:56:25 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:56:25 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com><200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu><004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan><1226988936.8461.6.camel@localhost><00a401c9494e$6ad91c60$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227033458.7211.4.camel@rhayes-desktop> Message-ID: <00ae01c949c0$1ed47b80$2101a8c0@Dan> > So I would say that I'm > still M?dhyamika after all these years. (Didn't Paul Simon write a song > with that title?) I think he modified the title for a western audience: Still Cratylus after all these years. Dan From rhayes at unm.edu Tue Nov 18 16:56:47 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:56:47 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] The Malaise of Modernity In-Reply-To: <00ae01c949c0$1ed47b80$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <66634efd0811170809x5fbc6cd9t3933926ac90b9ec1@mail.gmail.com> <200811171100.28900.rhayes@unm.edu><004e01c94942$86c0a0d0$2101a8c0@Dan> <1226988936.8461.6.camel@localhost><00a401c9494e$6ad91c60$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227033458.7211.4.camel@rhayes-desktop> <00ae01c949c0$1ed47b80$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <1227052607.5646.15.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 15:56 -0500, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > > So I would say that I'm > > still M?dhyamika after all these years. (Didn't Paul Simon write a song > > with that title?) > > I think he modified the title for a western audience: Still Cratylus after > all these years. I think the first version I heard was the Chinese one: Still Kueizi... -- Lichi From jmp at peavler.org Wed Nov 19 10:59:52 2008 From: jmp at peavler.org (Jim Peavler) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:59:52 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddha-shaped termite nests in Cambodia In-Reply-To: <5E34F58B9A8E4CF2B6D3B476F5B34EF9@OPTIPLEX> References: <4920F457.5050903@ca.rr.com> <5E34F58B9A8E4CF2B6D3B476F5B34EF9@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: <4699B4A2-BEEA-48AB-99B1-F87CAC48FC2E@peavler.org> On Nov 17, 2008, at 5:10 PM, jkirk wrote: > . Who do they think God is? > Buddha? Brahma? Jesus? Bugs? Jim Peavler jmp at peavler.org From jmp at peavler.org Wed Nov 19 11:08:34 2008 From: jmp at peavler.org (Jim Peavler) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:08:34 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Did he really say that? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3EC23B17-AFA0-47DD-A0DC-A4FBCDDB7ACA@peavler.org> On Nov 17, 2008, at 8:05 PM, jkirk wrote: > > Vladimir Ilyich Lenin on food > > "I am a bad, wicked man, but I am > practising moral self-purification; > I don't eat meat any more, > I now eat rice cutlets." > That pretty much confirms it. I am a Trotskyite after all. Jim Peavler jmp at peavler.org From baopiguy at ca.rr.com Wed Nov 19 13:02:37 2008 From: baopiguy at ca.rr.com (BP) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:02:37 -0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand Message-ID: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> Report Released Warning Tourist of Fake Monks in Thailand by Andy of HoboTraveler.com Travel Blog /Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand./ Bangkok, Thailand (PRWEB ) November 19, 2008 -- Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand. The report explains how normal Buddhist Monks from Thailand do not collect money donations, then explains the differences between a real Monks and a fake Monks in photo and video expose. Read full post with pictures and video by Andy of HoboTraveler.com Travel Blog on this link: http://www.hobotraveler.com/2008/11/mafia-of-fake-monks-prey-on-thailand.html From jehms at xs4all.nl Wed Nov 19 13:35:11 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:35:11 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> Message-ID: <4924787F.1010309@xs4all.nl> BP schreef: > Report Released Warning Tourist of Fake Monks in Thailand by Andy of > HoboTraveler.com Travel Blog > > /Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how > fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San > Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand./ > > Bangkok, Thailand (PRWEB ) November 19, 2008 -- > Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how > fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San > Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand. > > The report explains how normal Buddhist Monks from Thailand do not > collect money donations, then explains the differences between a real > Monks and a fake Monks in photo and video expose. > > Read full post with pictures and video by Andy of HoboTraveler.com > Travel Blog on this link: > http://www.hobotraveler.com/2008/11/mafia-of-fake-monks-prey-on-thailand.html > A few months ago I saw also in Saigon monks begging for money. Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From curt at cola.iges.org Wed Nov 19 14:26:57 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:26:57 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> Message-ID: <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> I think this entry in the Hobotraveler blog looks like an exaggeration or even a hoax being perpetuated to discourage tourists from giving donations to Buddhist monks and temples - and encouraging tourists to generally view Buddhist monks with suspicion. Or it could just be some publicity stunt designed to drive traffic to the hobotraveler website. The "hobotraveler" entry cites "stickmanweekly.com" as a source. That site, in turn, appears to be primarily devoted to promoting the sex-trade business in Bangkok. Here are a few of the other "stories" featured at stickmanweekly.com site: "The Bargirl's Ten Commandments" "Naughty Boys and Digital Cameras" "The advantages of being white" "Drug & Alcohol Rehab in Thailand" "The 10 Biggest mistakes western men make with Thai women" "The dangers of drug smuggling in Thailand" "Meeting Thai women: back to basics" "The adventures of an online voyeur" The other link in the original post is to "prweb.com" which is site that will publish absolutely anything - it's basically just a random selection of unrelated junk from the internet. In July of 2007, there were two articles that appeared in the "Straits Times", a Singapore newspaper, about fake monks *from* Thailand plying their trade in Singapore. According to those stories this had already been going on for at least two years. Here is a link to an article from, of all people, the "Gay Buddhist Fellowship" of Singapore: http://heartlandsg.org/2007/07/15/fake-monks-in-singapore/ Can you imagine anyone in the US pretending to be a Buddhist monk as a way to make money? Curt BP wrote: > Report Released Warning Tourist of Fake Monks in Thailand by Andy of > HoboTraveler.com Travel Blog > > /Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how > fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San > Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand./ > > Bangkok, Thailand (PRWEB ) November 19, 2008 -- > Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how > fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San > Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand. > > The report explains how normal Buddhist Monks from Thailand do not > collect money donations, then explains the differences between a real > Monks and a fake Monks in photo and video expose. > > Read full post with pictures and video by Andy of HoboTraveler.com > Travel Blog on this link: > http://www.hobotraveler.com/2008/11/mafia-of-fake-monks-prey-on-thailand.html > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > From lidewij at gmail.com Thu Nov 20 20:29:20 2008 From: lidewij at gmail.com (Lidewij Niezink) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 04:29:20 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> I don't know if this hobotraveler entry is an exaggeration but i have encountered the same problem in Hong Kong last March. The first time, a monk came up to me, offering me a little golden colored, plastic, Chinese picture of the Buddha. Smiling friendly he then asked for money. While pulling my wallet, a Hong Kong business man walked up to me and told me "Do not give this man money, this is not a real monk." The monk turned around and disappeared. After that incident, during the subsequent four weeks i was there, many monks kept doing the same type of thing. It sounds like a nice way to make a quick buck. What has been surprising me too was the amount of money donated to, -and accepted by- Tibetan monks in Kathmandu, Nepal. I was doing my khoras during Saka Dawa in Boudhanath, early in the morning. The place was overcrowded with Tibetans walking their turns and monks holding their begging bowls. Thousands of rupees disappeared in those bowls by the people qeueuing to donate. When i donated the monks and nuns tibetan bread and coconut cookies i got the weirdest looks from them. What is it with money and monastics these days? Lidewij 2008/11/19 Curt Steinmetz > I think this entry in the Hobotraveler blog looks like an exaggeration > or even a hoax being perpetuated to discourage tourists from giving > donations to Buddhist monks and temples - and encouraging tourists to > generally view Buddhist monks with suspicion. Or it could just be some > publicity stunt designed to drive traffic to the hobotraveler website. > > The "hobotraveler" entry cites "stickmanweekly.com" as a source. That > site, in turn, appears to be primarily devoted to promoting the > sex-trade business in Bangkok. Here are a few of the other "stories" > featured at stickmanweekly.com site: > > "The Bargirl's Ten Commandments" > "Naughty Boys and Digital Cameras" > "The advantages of being white" > "Drug & Alcohol Rehab in Thailand" > "The 10 Biggest mistakes western men make with Thai women" > "The dangers of drug smuggling in Thailand" > "Meeting Thai women: back to basics" > "The adventures of an online voyeur" > > The other link in the original post is to "prweb.com" which is site that > will publish absolutely anything - it's basically just a random > selection of unrelated junk from the internet. > > In July of 2007, there were two articles that appeared in the "Straits > Times", a Singapore newspaper, about fake monks *from* Thailand plying > their trade in Singapore. According to those stories this had already > been going on for at least two years. Here is a link to an article from, > of all people, the "Gay Buddhist Fellowship" of Singapore: > http://heartlandsg.org/2007/07/15/fake-monks-in-singapore/ > > Can you imagine anyone in the US pretending to be a Buddhist monk as a > way to make money? > > Curt > > BP wrote: > > Report Released Warning Tourist of Fake Monks in Thailand by Andy of > > HoboTraveler.com Travel Blog > > > > /Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how > > fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San > > Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand./ > > > > Bangkok, Thailand (PRWEB ) November 19, 2008 -- > > Andy of HoboTraveler.com released a video and photo report showing how > > fake Monks from China are collecting money donations in the Khao San > > Road tourist area of Bangkok, Thailand. > > > > The report explains how normal Buddhist Monks from Thailand do not > > collect money donations, then explains the differences between a real > > Monks and a fake Monks in photo and video expose. > > > > Read full post with pictures and video by Andy of HoboTraveler.com > > Travel Blog on this link: > > > http://www.hobotraveler.com/2008/11/mafia-of-fake-monks-prey-on-thailand.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > buddha-l mailing list > > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- Lidewij Niezink, PhD http://www.linkedin.com/in/lniezink From brburl at charter.net Fri Nov 21 04:03:53 2008 From: brburl at charter.net (Bruce Burrill) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:03:53 -0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Good and interesting essays In-Reply-To: <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.co m> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20081121050242.038b4990@charter.net> Here is a collection of good and interesting essays by young Buddhist scholar monk: http://wisdom.buddhistdoor.com/huifeng/ From curt at cola.iges.org Fri Nov 21 07:58:10 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:58:10 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> Lidewij Niezink wrote: > When i donated the monks and nuns tibetan bread and coconut cookies > i got the weirdest looks from them. What is it with money and monastics > these days? > If you were in a Chistian church in America and you put some Kraft macaroni and cheese (a culturally appropriate food offering) into the collection tray as it was passed around - what kind of looks do you think you would get? Curt Steinmetz From jehms at xs4all.nl Fri Nov 21 08:36:37 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:36:37 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> Curt Steinmetz schreef: > Lidewij Niezink wrote: > >> When i donated the monks and nuns tibetan bread and coconut cookies >> i got the weirdest looks from them. What is it with money and monastics >> these days? >> >> > > If you were in a Chistian church in America and you put some Kraft > macaroni and cheese (a culturally appropriate food offering) into the > collection tray as it was passed around - what kind of looks do you > think you would get? > > Not comparable Curt. I remember in my wild days doing mantras on the steps behind the Mahabodhitemple together with Tibetan lamas and monks and sometimes benefactors treated us with slices of white bread or cookies. Only in exceptional cases rupee notes were passed around. If there was a bBang or initiation you offered bisquits to the lama. I don't remember having heard of people putting slices of bread into the church's collection bag. Well, times change of course, but if the moneycrises lasts a few months longer things may return to the practices of the old days. :-) Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From curt at cola.iges.org Fri Nov 21 11:12:07 2008 From: curt at cola.iges.org (Curt Steinmetz) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:12:07 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > Not comparable Curt. I remember in my wild days .... > > In the example at hand everyone else was giving money. So the two cases are quite comparable. Curt From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 22 08:42:50 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:42:50 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <1227368570.6208.3.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 09:58 -0500, Curt Steinmetz wrote: > If you were in a Chistian church in America and you put some Kraft > macaroni and cheese (a culturally appropriate food offering) into the > collection tray as it was passed around - what kind of looks do you > think you would get? Probably none at all, although someone might suggest that you put the offering into the box for collecting food for the homeless and the poor that nearly every Christian church has in its vestibule. -- Richard From lidewij at gmail.com Fri Nov 21 20:08:12 2008 From: lidewij at gmail.com (Lidewij Niezink) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:08:12 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> <4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> Message-ID: <296141cb0811211908s69c301f0i8d57edef62897c00@mail.gmail.com> Yeah, silly me... i was still under the impression that monks are not supposed to handle money and that laypeople are supposed to offer the best they can for the sake of offering.... But hey, we're living in the 21st century now! How about sticking that money in your own pocket as well while you're at it. What that has to do with American churches i do not know. As far as i understand, those collection trays exist to collect money which is not the case for begging bowls. But i know little about Christianity and even less about American habits. 2008/11/21 Curt Steinmetz > Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > > > Not comparable Curt. I remember in my wild days .... > > > > > > In the example at hand everyone else was giving money. So the two cases > are quite comparable. > > Curt > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- Lidewij Niezink, PhD http://www.linkedin.com/in/lniezink From jkirk at spro.net Sat Nov 22 09:41:31 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 09:41:31 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <296141cb0811211908s69c301f0i8d57edef62897c00@mail.gmail.com> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org><296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com><4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl><4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811211908s69c301f0i8d57edef62897c00@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5A79C80E1467447EA46767ECA9C93059@OPTIPLEX> Lidewij Niezink wrote: "As far as I understand, those collection trays exist to collect money, which is not the case for [Buddhist] begging bowls." As tradition goes, or went, you are right. Too bad some of our list folk living in Thailand haven't replied to this thread...I would love to know what the national Thai Sangha has to say about monks and money, and especially if money is now allowed to be donated into their alms bowls on begging rounds. Joanna -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Lidewij Niezink Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 8:08 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand Yeah, silly me... i was still under the impression that monks are not supposed to handle money and that laypeople are supposed to offer the best they can for the sake of offering.... But hey, we're living in the 21st century now! How about sticking that money in your own pocket as well while you're at it. What that has to do with American churches i do not know. As far as i understand, those collection trays exist to collect money which is not the case for begging bowls. But i know little about Christianity and even less about American habits. From bankei at gmail.com Mon Nov 24 03:23:00 2008 From: bankei at gmail.com (Bankei) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:23:00 +1100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: <5A79C80E1467447EA46767ECA9C93059@OPTIPLEX> References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> <4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811211908s69c301f0i8d57edef62897c00@mail.gmail.com> <5A79C80E1467447EA46767ECA9C93059@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: Nearly all monks in Thailand use and accept money. It would be considered unusual for a monk not to. Monks sometimes receive money on 'bindabart' (alms round), with the money usually in an envelop. They alms receive money at ceremonies such as funerals, ordinations etc. The national Thai sangha would approve of all this. I hear the Thai King provides a monthly allowance to all monks above a certain rank and most preceptors even insist on a large donation for ordination ceremonies - US$100 approx is the going rate. Bankei. 2008/11/23 jkirk > Lidewij Niezink wrote: > > "As far as I understand, those collection trays exist to collect > money, which is not the case for [Buddhist] begging bowls." > > As tradition goes, or went, you are right. Too bad some of our > list folk living in Thailand haven't replied to this thread...I > would love to know what the national Thai Sangha has to say about > monks and money, and especially if money is now allowed to be > donated into their alms bowls on begging rounds. > > Joanna > > > -----Original Message----- > From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com > [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Lidewij > Niezink > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 8:08 PM > To: Buddhist discussion forum > Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand > > Yeah, silly me... i was still under the impression that monks are > not supposed to handle money and that laypeople are supposed to > offer the best they can for the sake of offering.... But hey, > we're living in the 21st century now! How about sticking that > money in your own pocket as well while you're at it. > What that has to do with American churches i do not know. As far > as i understand, those collection trays exist to collect money > which is not the case for begging bowls. But i know little about > Christianity and even less about American habits. > > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > From dharmafarer at gmail.com Mon Nov 24 03:51:35 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:51:35 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> <4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811211908s69c301f0i8d57edef62897c00@mail.gmail.com> <5A79C80E1467447EA46767ECA9C93059@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: Since we are talking about monks and money, we should not miss the silver lining: http://pipalatree.blogspot.com/2008/10/ajahn-brahm_20.html Even God desperately approves of Ajahn Brahmavamso: http://www.blogpastor.net/2008/10/13/is-the-god-of-jesus-speaking-through-a-buddhist-monk/ Piya Tan On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Bankei wrote: > Nearly all monks in Thailand use and accept money. It would be considered > unusual for a monk not to. Monks sometimes receive money on 'bindabart' > (alms round), with the money usually in an envelop. They alms receive money > at ceremonies such as funerals, ordinations etc. > > The national Thai sangha would approve of all this. I hear the Thai King > provides a monthly allowance to all monks above a certain rank and > most preceptors even insist on a large donation for ordination ceremonies - > US$100 approx is the going rate. > > Bankei. > > 2008/11/23 jkirk > > > Lidewij Niezink wrote: > > > > "As far as I understand, those collection trays exist to collect > > money, which is not the case for [Buddhist] begging bowls." > > > > As tradition goes, or went, you are right. Too bad some of our > > list folk living in Thailand haven't replied to this thread...I > > would love to know what the national Thai Sangha has to say about > > monks and money, and especially if money is now allowed to be > > donated into their alms bowls on begging rounds. > > > > Joanna > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com > > [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Lidewij > > Niezink > > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 8:08 PM > > To: Buddhist discussion forum > > Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand > > > > Yeah, silly me... i was still under the impression that monks are > > not supposed to handle money and that laypeople are supposed to > > offer the best they can for the sake of offering.... But hey, > > we're living in the 21st century now! How about sticking that > > money in your own pocket as well while you're at it. > > What that has to do with American churches i do not know. As far > > as i understand, those collection trays exist to collect money > > which is not the case for begging bowls. But i know little about > > Christianity and even less about American habits. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > buddha-l mailing list > > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From dharmafarer at gmail.com Mon Nov 24 10:06:00 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:06:00 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand In-Reply-To: References: <492470DD.9040006@ca.rr.com> <492484A1.8070201@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811201929j468b255bo631dc98b5737c17d@mail.gmail.com> <4926CC82.9040708@cola.iges.org> <4926D585.4070006@xs4all.nl> <4926F9F7.1050006@cola.iges.org> <296141cb0811211908s69c301f0i8d57edef62897c00@mail.gmail.com> <5A79C80E1467447EA46767ECA9C93059@OPTIPLEX> Message-ID: Since we are talking about monks and money, we should not miss the silver lining: http://pipalatree.blogspot.com/2008/10/ajahn-brahm_20.html Even God desperately approves of Ajahn Brahmavamso: http://www.blogpastor.net/2008/10/13/is-the-god-of-jesus-speaking -through-a-buddhist-monk/ Piya Tan On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Piya Tan wrote: > > Since we are talking about monks and money, we should not miss the silver > lining: > > http://pipalatree.blogspot.com/2008/10/ajahn-brahm_20.html > > Even God desperately approves of Ajahn Brahmavamso: > > http://www.blogpastor.net/2008/10/13/is-the-god-of-jesus-speaking-through-a-buddhist-monk/ > > Piya Tan > > > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Bankei wrote: >> >> Nearly all monks in Thailand use and accept money. It would be considered >> unusual for a monk not to. Monks sometimes receive money on 'bindabart' >> (alms round), with the money usually in an envelop. They alms receive money >> at ceremonies such as funerals, ordinations etc. >> >> The national Thai sangha would approve of all this. I hear the Thai King >> provides a monthly allowance to all monks above a certain rank and >> most preceptors even insist on a large donation for ordination ceremonies - >> US$100 approx is the going rate. >> >> Bankei. >> >> 2008/11/23 jkirk >> >> > Lidewij Niezink wrote: >> > >> > "As far as I understand, those collection trays exist to collect >> > money, which is not the case for [Buddhist] begging bowls." >> > >> > As tradition goes, or went, you are right. Too bad some of our >> > list folk living in Thailand haven't replied to this thread...I >> > would love to know what the national Thai Sangha has to say about >> > monks and money, and especially if money is now allowed to be >> > donated into their alms bowls on begging rounds. >> > >> > Joanna >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com >> > [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Lidewij >> > Niezink >> > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 8:08 PM >> > To: Buddhist discussion forum >> > Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Fake Monks in Thailand >> > >> > Yeah, silly me... i was still under the impression that monks are >> > not supposed to handle money and that laypeople are supposed to >> > offer the best they can for the sake of offering.... But hey, >> > we're living in the 21st century now! How about sticking that >> > money in your own pocket as well while you're at it. >> > What that has to do with American churches i do not know. As far >> > as i understand, those collection trays exist to collect money >> > which is not the case for begging bowls. But i know little about >> > Christianity and even less about American habits. >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > buddha-l mailing list >> > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com >> > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> buddha-l mailing list >> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com >> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > > > -- > The Minding Centre > Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) > Singapore 650644 > Tel: 8211 0879 > Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com > Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From jayarava at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 11:29:54 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:29:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta Message-ID: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Richard, I'm exploring the use to which the Sabba Sutta has been put and our friend Kalupahana has made much of it. I've found your "Gotama Buddha and Religious Pluralism", J. of Religious Pluralism 1:65-96 (1991), in which you critique the view that he justifies using the Sabba Sutta. In his 1976 book - Buddhist Philosophy - Kalupahana includes an appendix on epistemology in which he makes the case that the Buddha's empiricism was similar to the Positivist rejection of metaphysics. You argue that other views expressed by the Buddha - largely value judgements - run counter to the spirit of Positivism. The context is a discussion of the Buddha's silence, and it seems that your pointing out the Buddha's own answer is a killer argument. However I have a question. You write "Wisdom consists in the ability to discriminate those actions of the body, speech and thought that are competent from those that are not. But such discrimination is a matter of judgement, and judgement necessarily goes beyond any knowledge that can be acquired immediately through the senses". p.8 (you miss this bit out in your Appreciation of Nagarjuna which largely repeats the argument p.358 f.). I read Kalupahana as including the mind sense in his empiricism. Surely discrimination is a function of, and wisdom is acquired through, the mind sense? Doesn't this contradict what you are saying? Kalupahana has of course rewritten that book - A History of Buddhist Philosophy, 1992 - and has dropped that appendix and the reference to Positivism. However he retains the view that the physical senses and the mind are the only possible sources of knowledge (here of course he cites the Sabba Sutta). He insists that Insight/Wisdom cannot be completely divorced from the senses (he again includes the mind I think). (p.112) Have you an opinion on Kalupahana's newer version of the Buddha's empiricism? Do we, from an early Buddhist point of view, have sources of knowledge other than the physical senses and the mind? Best wishes Jayarava From jkirk at spro.net Tue Nov 25 19:14:54 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:14:54 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Sri panditas, May I ask what might be an irrelevant question--but it's based on my perplexity for some time over the concept of the alaya vijnana. Does the alaya vij. function in any way as a contributor to anything we might construe as perception, discrimination, judgment, as a precursor to knowledge? If not, what is it's functions? (Please don't refer me to the literature on this function, which I find to be as impenetrable as reading pomo critiques. You should be able to put your reply into plain Engrish.) Thanks, Joanna K. =========================================== Richard, I'm exploring the use to which the Sabba Sutta has been put and our friend Kalupahana has made much of it. I've found your "Gotama Buddha and Religious Pluralism", J. of Religious Pluralism 1:65-96 (1991), in which you critique the view that he justifies using the Sabba Sutta. In his 1976 book - Buddhist Philosophy - Kalupahana includes an appendix on epistemology in which he makes the case that the Buddha's empiricism was similar to the Positivist rejection of metaphysics. You argue that other views expressed by the Buddha - largely value judgements - run counter to the spirit of Positivism. The context is a discussion of the Buddha's silence, and it seems that your pointing out the Buddha's own answer is a killer argument. However I have a question. You write "Wisdom consists in the ability to discriminate those actions of the body, speech and thought that are competent from those that are not. But such discrimination is a matter of judgement, and judgement necessarily goes beyond any knowledge that can be acquired immediately through the senses". p.8 (you miss this bit out in your Appreciation of Nagarjuna which largely repeats the argument p.358 f.). I read Kalupahana as including the mind sense in his empiricism. Surely discrimination is a function of, and wisdom is acquired through, the mind sense? Doesn't this contradict what you are saying? Kalupahana has of course rewritten that book - A History of Buddhist Philosophy, 1992 - and has dropped that appendix and the reference to Positivism. However he retains the view that the physical senses and the mind are the only possible sources of knowledge (here of course he cites the Sabba Sutta). He insists that Insight/Wisdom cannot be completely divorced from the senses (he again includes the mind I think). (p.112) Have you an opinion on Kalupahana's newer version of the Buddha's empiricism? Do we, from an early Buddhist point of view, have sources of knowledge other than the physical senses and the mind? Best wishes Jayarava _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From brburl at charter.net Wed Nov 26 03:37:43 2008 From: brburl at charter.net (Bruce Burrill) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 04:37:43 -0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> Here is Bill Waldron's direct response (via me, since I asked to respond to jkirk's msg) to the Alaya-vijnana question: The mode of nonconscious mental processes called Alaya-vijnana influence perception in a variety of indispensable ways, all of which are expressed in the traditional literature using traditional technical jargon. This means that other ways of expressing this are all interpretations, useful but not quite the same. Alaya-vijnana is thought to underlie and support ordinary, conscious experience insofar as this level of nonconscious mental processes provide an elaborate basis for any cognition, any perception, to occur at all. Alaya-vijnana is a name we give to these supporting processes. Think of everything that must be happening in your brain/mind in order for you to perceive, say, a flower, or to understand language. We are conscious of only the slightest part of these processes. The rest are outside of our awareness, but they must be occurring ?this is a safe and attested inference? in order for us to re-cognize anything. To be more specific, when we cognize a flower, we recognize that it is a ?flower? because we have had previous experience with flowers, which laid ?impressions? in the brain/mind, that are triggered when we see ?flowers? again. Included in these impressions are names and concepts that help us cognize and re-cognize 'flowers.' When we hear a language we know, we typically focus on the meaning rather than, say, the phonemes, the morphemes or the syntax (sounds, words, grammar). As with perception, all of this?for the most part?operates automatically, unconsciously,, and without special effort. By contrast, a new-born baby does not have the capacity to distinguish shapes, to cognize objects or to understand words. The neural networks created through visual experience take time; our visual faculties are trained, as it were, to see certain visual configurations and eventually cognize them as specific ?objects.? Language?naming and concepts?refers to to and reinforces such re-cognitions. The capacity to perceive ?flowers? is thus a learned capacity, and ?flowers? are a complex product of physical and mental processes, processes whose enabling capacities have been built up over time and which operate automatically and simultaneously in every perception. These underlying processes are a bit like the roots of a plant, which are in constant and supporting interaction with the leaves above ground. Perceived objects, in this sense, are complex products, rather than simple causes, of perceptual processes. The underlying (or subliminal ?below the threshold?) cognitive processes that support and underlie perception in this fashion are what are referred as Alaya-vijnana. This analysis of perception is based upon the Samdhinirmocanca Sutra and the Yogacarabhumi, and is largely in accord with prevailing analyses in cognitive science, such as found in Antonio Damasio's work, for example. If you want even simpler English (but less direct exposition) read Thich Nhat Hanh's Understanding the Mind. Bill Waldron From jkirk at spro.net Wed Nov 26 06:11:02 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:11:02 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> Message-ID: <47D31A557DD34CABB92ED8498FE0C05A@OPTIPLEX> Thanks Bruce and Bill~~~~~~it's a lot clearer now. Bill wrote: "...is largely in accord with prevailing analyses in cognitive science, such as found in Antonio Damasio's work, for example." Is there one term from cognitive science for these processes comparable to the one-term 'alaya vijnana'? Or does cognitive science propose a collection of terms for the same processes? Joanna -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Burrill Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 3:38 AM Here is Bill Waldron's direct response (via me, since I asked to respond to jkirk's msg) to the Alaya-vijnana question: The mode of nonconscious mental processes called Alaya-vijnana influence perception in a variety of indispensable ways, all of which are expressed in the traditional literature using traditional technical jargon. This means that other ways of expressing this are all interpretations, useful but not quite the same. Alaya-vijnana is thought to underlie and support ordinary, conscious experience insofar as this level of nonconscious mental processes provide an elaborate basis for any cognition, any perception, to occur at all. Alaya-vijnana is a name we give to these supporting processes. Think of everything that must be happening in your brain/mind in order for you to perceive, say, a flower, or to understand language. We are conscious of only the slightest part of these processes. The rest are outside of our awareness, but they must be occurring -this is a safe and attested inference- in order for us to re-cognize anything. To be more specific, when we cognize a flower, we recognize that it is a "flower" because we have had previous experience with flowers, which laid "impressions" in the brain/mind, that are triggered when we see "flowers" again. Included in these impressions are names and concepts that help us cognize and re-cognize 'flowers.' When we hear a language we know, we typically focus on the meaning rather than, say, the phonemes, the morphemes or the syntax (sounds, words, grammar). As with perception, all of this-for the most part-operates automatically, unconsciously,, and without special effort. By contrast, a new-born baby does not have the capacity to distinguish shapes, to cognize objects or to understand words. The neural networks created through visual experience take time; our visual faculties are trained, as it were, to see certain visual configurations and eventually cognize them as specific "objects." Language-naming and concepts-refers to to and reinforces such re-cognitions. The capacity to perceive "flowers" is thus a learned capacity, and "flowers" are a complex product of physical and mental processes, processes whose enabling capacities have been built up over time and which operate automatically and simultaneously in every perception. These underlying processes are a bit like the roots of a plant, which are in constant and supporting interaction with the leaves above ground. Perceived objects, in this sense, are complex products, rather than simple causes, of perceptual processes. The underlying (or subliminal "below the threshold") cognitive processes that support and underlie perception in this fashion are what are referred as Alaya-vijnana. This analysis of perception is based upon the Samdhinirmocanca Sutra and the Yogacarabhumi, and is largely in accord with prevailing analyses in cognitive science, such as found in Antonio Damasio's work, for example. If you want even simpler English (but less direct exposition) read Thich Nhat Hanh's Understanding the Mind. Bill Waldron _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg Wed Nov 26 08:15:37 2008 From: wongwf at comp.nus.edu.sg (Weng-Fai Wong) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:15:37 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> Message-ID: <492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg> I am curious... is the alaya-vijnana specific to individuals or is it the same underlying entity for all beings or groups of beings. I am thinking "collective consciousness"... W.F. Wong Bruce Burrill wrote: > Here is Bill Waldron's direct response (via me, > since I asked to respond to jkirk's msg) to the Alaya-vijnana question: > > > From twin_oceans at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 17:55:41 2008 From: twin_oceans at yahoo.com (Katherine Masis) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:55:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering Message-ID: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Dear List, ? It almost feels rude to change the subject on the current threads so abruptly, but I just received a forwarded e-mail that I find?extremely discouraging and depressing.??The ethical implications are staggering.? As Buddhists, what can we say about genetically mass-produced animals (yes, animals) with a programmed?life span of 1 to 3 years and chemically controlled behavior?? Take a look at this grotesque link.? Isn't this, at the very least,?a violation of international law?? Was any thought given to the suffering produced in this way?? Isn't there a way to start an international boycott of this horribly grotesque practice?? Brave New World, you arrived long ago! ? http://www.genpets.com/meet.php ? Katherine From brburl at charter.net Wed Nov 26 18:14:45 2008 From: brburl at charter.net (Bruce Burrill) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:14:45 -0600 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> <492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net> Again from Bill Waldron, answering the two alaya questions: there is no single term in cognitive science that corresponds with alaya-vijnana other than, perhaps, 'cognitive unconscious,' which is probably about right, since in my view alaya-vijnana is not a single process at all, but rather a categorical term for a variety of processes. As Asanga says, "although it continuously arises in a stream of moments, it is not singular (ekatva)." Yogacarabhumi, Derge, #4038 , 4a.5; T.31.1606.580a18. Hence, it can hardly count as an entity, either. In fact, strictly speaking, in the Buddhist view there are no entities at all. But there are mental processes that are not conscious, some of which are strictly individual and some of which have shared qualities or characteristics, not unlike the fact that sugar tastes sweet to most people, so if they all eat something sweet then their experiences will be similar. Extrapolate this to other aspects of human life---such as speaking a common language, having similar emotional responses to cultural symbols, or imagining similar things about one's own cultural, ethnic or national group---and you end up with a sense of common or collective awareness that is nevertheless, like all of us eating something sweet, still based in our individual sense faculties. I am quite certain that this is also what Jung, for example, had in mind with his 'collective unconscious.' That such collective illusions as nationalism or ethnic identity are illusory does not, unfortunately, make them any less effective nor any less pernicious. They are the illusions we all, to a greater or lesser degree, labor under and whose broader and long-term consequences determine much of our collective lives. Bill Waldron From sfeite at adelphia.net Wed Nov 26 18:18:46 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:18:46 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear Katherine: While clearly a spoof (I hope!) it does raise the question I've long followed: isn't DNA our honest karmic footprint as homo sapiens and as a sentient life-form? And if "yes" what does that say about "cut and pasting" ancient karmic fragments of differing sentient beings for our egoic satisfaction? Need a tomato that will never freeze during a frost? Why not take the DNA of a flounder (which can be froze solid and survive) with a common tomato? [You laugh. This was done and had been in your supermarket, most likely unlabeled, for years now]. Puhleeze give me the fortitude to keep my hands away from the necks of these maniacs I say. Demand GMO labeling laws NOW. S.A. Feite Bucksport, Maine On Nov 26, 2008, at 7:55 PM, Katherine Masis wrote: > Dear List, > > It almost feels rude to change the subject on the current threads so > abruptly, but I just received a forwarded e-mail that I find > extremely discouraging and depressing. The ethical implications are > staggering. As Buddhists, what can we say about genetically mass- > produced animals (yes, animals) with a programmed life span of 1 to > 3 years and chemically controlled behavior? Take a look at this > grotesque link. Isn't this, at the very least, a violation of > international law? Was any thought given to the suffering produced > in this way? Isn't there a way to start an international boycott of > this horribly grotesque practice? Brave New World, you arrived long > ago! > > http://www.genpets.com/meet.php From alex at chagchen.org Wed Nov 26 18:24:12 2008 From: alex at chagchen.org (Alex Wilding) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 12:24:12 +1100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c9502e$e0db5cc0$a2921640$@org> Dear Katherine, Google is your friend. Just put it "genpets". ????????????????????????????? ????? All the best Alex Wilding From jkirk at spro.net Wed Nov 26 18:31:52 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:31:52 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com><7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net><492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg> <7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net> Message-ID: Wow--brilliant exposition! It all makes sense. Thanks! That Asanga was one smart guy. Cheers, Joanna ===================== -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Burrill Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 6:15 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta Again from Bill Waldron, answering the two alaya questions: there is no single term in cognitive science that corresponds with alaya-vijnana other than, perhaps, 'cognitive unconscious,' which is probably about right, since in my view alaya-vijnana is not a single process at all, but rather a categorical term for a variety of processes. As Asanga says, "although it continuously arises in a stream of moments, it is not singular (ekatva)." Yogacarabhumi, Derge, #4038 , 4a.5; T.31.1606.580a18. Hence, it can hardly count as an entity, either. In fact, strictly speaking, in the Buddhist view there are no entities at all. But there are mental processes that are not conscious, some of which are strictly individual and some of which have shared qualities or characteristics, not unlike the fact that sugar tastes sweet to most people, so if they all eat something sweet then their experiences will be similar. Extrapolate this to other aspects of human life---such as speaking a common language, having similar emotional responses to cultural symbols, or imagining similar things about one's own cultural, ethnic or national group---and you end up with a sense of common or collective awareness that is nevertheless, like all of us eating something sweet, still based in our individual sense faculties. I am quite certain that this is also what Jung, for example, had in mind with his 'collective unconscious.' That such collective illusions as nationalism or ethnic identity are illusory does not, unfortunately, make them any less effective nor any less pernicious. They are the illusions we all, to a greater or lesser degree, labor under and whose broader and long-term consequences determine much of our collective lives. Bill Waldron _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From twin_oceans at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 18:45:13 2008 From: twin_oceans at yahoo.com (Katherine Masis) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:45:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering Message-ID: <584287.97938.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Oh?dear, I am so embarrassed! ?The website is a hoax!? I found that out at the PETA site.? A guy named Adam Brandejs designed it.? My sincere apologies. http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/genpets.asp http://www.brandejs.ca/index.php But the questions I raised still stand? Katherine From jkirk at spro.net Wed Nov 26 19:25:07 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:25:07 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6DD104C7C1C3443D96659400BF1CB432@OPTIPLEX> "Puhleeze give me the fortitude to keep my hands away from the necks of these maniacs I say. Demand GMO labeling laws NOW." Agreed. For engaged Buddhistic action, contact and use their action emails: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/ Best, Joanna -----Original Message----- From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com [mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of S.A. Feite Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 6:19 PM To: Buddhist discussion forum Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering Dear Katherine: While clearly a spoof (I hope!) it does raise the question I've long followed: isn't DNA our honest karmic footprint as homo sapiens and as a sentient life-form? And if "yes" what does that say about "cut and pasting" ancient karmic fragments of differing sentient beings for our egoic satisfaction? Need a tomato that will never freeze during a frost? Why not take the DNA of a flounder (which can be froze solid and survive) with a common tomato? [You laugh. This was done and had been in your supermarket, most likely unlabeled, for years now]. Puhleeze give me the fortitude to keep my hands away from the necks of these maniacs I say. Demand GMO labeling laws NOW. S.A. Feite Bucksport, Maine On Nov 26, 2008, at 7:55 PM, Katherine Masis wrote: > Dear List, > > It almost feels rude to change the subject on the current threads so > abruptly, but I just received a forwarded e-mail that I find extremely > discouraging and depressing. The ethical implications are staggering. > As Buddhists, what can we say about genetically mass- produced animals > (yes, animals) with a programmed life span of 1 to > 3 years and chemically controlled behavior? Take a look at this > grotesque link. Isn't this, at the very least, a violation of > international law? Was any thought given to the suffering produced in > this way? Isn't there a way to start an international boycott of this > horribly grotesque practice? Brave New World, you arrived long ago! > > http://www.genpets.com/meet.php _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From jkirk at spro.net Wed Nov 26 19:42:07 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:42:07 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] FW: Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering Message-ID: <74088FC3B08D42BA9B789A81084078BC@OPTIPLEX> Not to worry: the same people that recently speculated about cloning a mammoth elephant from its hair remainder DNA, slowly modifying its DNA so as to plant an embryo in the womb of a regular contemporary elephant, have also begun talking about cloning a Neanderthal human, by modifying some recently perhaps viable DNA to conform to a chimpanzee as host mother. These kinds of experiments and greedy ego-trip attachments are outrages and should be outlawed, especially given the way humans are endangering animal species and the environment on a daily basis with no effective hindrance--not to ignore the obvious ethical violations that would affect the victims of such experiments. No cheers, Joanna -------------------------------- Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 6:45 PM Oh?dear, I am so embarrassed! ?The website is a hoax!? I found that out at the PETA site.? A guy named Adam Brandejs designed it.? My sincere apologies. http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/genpets.asp http://www.brandejs.ca/index.php But the questions I raised still stand Katherine _______________________________________________ buddha-l mailing list buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l From elihusmith at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 19:57:42 2008 From: elihusmith at yahoo.com (Elihu Smith) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:57:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] re gen pets Message-ID: <276275.63868.qm@web81908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Wed Nov 26 22:16:35 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:16:35 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com><7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net><492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg><7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net> Message-ID: <001301c9504f$51debc80$2101a8c0@Dan> If I can add a few cents to the sabba sutta cum alayavijnana discussion... The sabba sutta is one of the most important of the Pali suttas since Buddha explicitly states that everything we know to be the case we know through our six senses. Anyone who claims there is anything beyond that is lying or making up crap. The mental sense is similar to the five sense-fields, in that it consists of an organ (manas), a corresponding sense field (dharmas, vi.saya, the vocabulary expands over time), and when the organ and its corresponding sense-field (gocara) come into contact, a corresponding consciousness (vijnana) arises. It is different from the other five in various ways, explained differently by different Buddhist schools and texts. For instance, unlike the five, each of which is isolated from the others (e.g., the eye sees visibles, but not audibles; one can be blind and still hear, etc.), the mental sense can take the cognitions of the other five as its own sense-object. We can mentally think about what we see, hear, etc. There is a great deal of discussion and debate about how that works, with a variety of different theories. For instance, for Sarvastivada (and some other schools), there is a momentary time-delay between one of the five senses having its cognition and the mano-vijnana picking up on it. Mental cognizance of a sensation is always, in other words, a moment behind the actual sensation. Enter Yogacara. Now there is no longer just one mental realm on time delay from the five senses, but two additional mental activities, viz. manas and the 8th c'ss. There are lots of debates on whether the manas has direct access to external entities, or whether it gets information on them filtered through the lower six, whether it gets such information after it has been processed by the 6th c'ss (manovijnana), or whether it only takes the 8th c'ss as its object (with different schools and texts holding each of those positions, while attempting to refute the others). Bill Waldron no doubt has his reasons for wishing to label the alayavijnana as "non-conscious" and "unconscious," but I think this can be misleading. For virtually all medieval Indian Buddhists, every vijnana -- by definition -- must have an alambana (cognitive-object support) and an asraya (aa"sraya; a sense-base). Sthiramati, in his bhasya to Vasubandhu's Trimsika, understands that in order for the alaya- to be called an vijnana, it must have an alambana. But what serves as alambana for the 8th c'ss? Sthiramati explains its alambana is "indistinct" (aparicchinna). Based on his discussion, it would probably be better to say that the alayavijnana's type of cognition is "subliminal" rather than either "non-conscious" or "unconscious." There is an indistinct cognitive background (a sensibility, a mood, a tendency, etc.) that is not usually apparent during more explicit cognitions (recognizing a tree as a tree) but is nonetheless always present. To the question of whether the alayavijnana is restricted to a single individual, or whether there is a "collective unconscious" a la Jung, the Yogacara texts themselves categorically deny the latter, and insist on the former. Each of us has our own alayavijnana. There is no group alayavijnana we share. Bill's response to this sounds like he has been doing apologetic recastings for nonspecialists for too long, since there is something to what he says, but the details in the Yogacara texts themselves are not as vague or as amorphous as his account. To appreciate the Yogacara take on this, we need to add one additional factor. From the time of earliest Buddhism, one of the five skandhas was samskara, embodied karmic conditioning. This is what carries over from one life to the next, and is developed from pleasure-pain conditioning. As Buddhist analysis grew more sophisticated and complex, the samskaras became the most important category, so that when one looks at the abhidharma lists of dharmas (e.g., the so-called 75 dharmas of the Kosa, or the 100 dharmas of Yogacara), aside from the unconditioned dharmas and the other four skandhas, *all* other dharmas are explicitly called types of samskaras. The 8th c'ss has many names -- alayavijnana is only one of them. The earliest major name was aadaana-vijnana (appropriating consciousness), since the 8th appropriates a body on birth, and leaves it on death. It also impels the individual to appropriate experience, sensation, etc. Other names for the 8th are vipaaka-vijnana (karmic maturing consciousness), sarva-biijaaka-vijnana (all seeds consciousness), and muula-vijnana (root consciousness). Vipaka and sarvabijaka are descriptors of the 8th as samskaras; mula indicates it as the indistinct underpinning for our other cognitions, and alayavijnana (warehouse consciousness) attempts to conflate all of these (the c'ss in which the seeds mature, influencing other cognitions, in acts of appropriation). There are, according to Vasubandhu in his Twenty Verses (Vimsatika), "own seeds" and "seeds from others." Our own seeds are our own samskaric conditioning, which is why we are born with senses that taste certain things sweet and others not (while, for instance, pretas would find sugar's taste repulsive). Seeds from others are conditioning we acquire through contact with others. E.g., having read Bill's account, even though passed through intermediaries, his ideas have entered your thinking (consciousness) as seeds, that may take root and grow there. In other words, we influence each other, at times profoundly. Seeds are karmic byproducts. So those who have undergone similar experiences, will tend to congregate together, attracted to the same types of things, angered and repelled by the same types of things. Humans usually find feces repulsive because of past karmic similarities; flies see feces as a scrumptuous lunch, based on their past karma. This also applies to this-life collectivities. At a KKK meeting everyone not only thinks but "sees" blacks as inferior and dangerous. Buddha-l tends to attract anti-Republicans. So, while each of us has our own alayavijnana, it is being influenced not only by our own past, but we are influencing each other, continuously. That engenders a type of collective karma (but not collective unconscious, except in the most imprecise terms). Dan Lusthaus From rhayes at unm.edu Wed Nov 26 22:43:37 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:43:37 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] re gen pets In-Reply-To: <276275.63868.qm@web81908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <276275.63868.qm@web81908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1227764617.5624.2.camel@localhost> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 18:57 -0800, Elihu Smith wrote: > Do not believe everything on the internet. Do you expect us to believe that? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Wed Nov 26 23:35:16 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:35:16 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1227767716.5970.46.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 10:29 -0800, Jayarava wrote: > Richard, I'm exploring the use to which the Sabba Sutta has been put > and our friend Kalupahana has made much of it. I've found your "Gotama > Buddha and Religious Pluralism", J. of Religious Pluralism 1:65-96 > (1991), in which you critique the view that he justifies using the > Sabba Sutta. I have forgotten what I wrote in 1991. But just recently I forced my students to read a few chapters from Kalupahana's book on Buddhist causality. I'm teaching an upper-level undergraduate course on Indian Buddhism, and this year decided to make the central topic dependent arising as it is discussed in the suttas, in adhidhamma, in Sanskrit abhidharma and by N?g?rjuna. We also ploughed through a fair amount of secondary literature, hence the Kalupahana readings. > In his 1976 book - Buddhist Philosophy - Kalupahana includes an > appendix on epistemology in which he makes the case that the Buddha's > empiricism was similar to the Positivist rejection of metaphysics. You > argue that other views expressed by the Buddha - largely value > judgements - run counter to the spirit of Positivism. Yes, I think a Positivist, or even empiricist, reading of the Buddha is quite untenable. What I find intriguing about Kalupahana's treatment of causality is that as an empiricist Kalupahana wants to agree with Hume that no one actually ever observes a causal event; all we observe is things taking place, and on these events we imagine patterns of similarity by ignoring differences. On the other hand, Kalupahana also wants to say that the Buddha had profound insights into karma and its ripening, which of course is an example of precisely the sort of causality that a Humean empiricist would say is impossible. To resolve this tension, Kalupahana invokes---quite emphatically---the Buddha's paranormal powers. So for ordinary blokes like us (and Hume), observing causality actually happening is impossible. But for a Buddha, who can see the past and the future as clearly as the present and who can observe features that ordinary beings cannot observe, the workings of karma and its consequences are perfectly observable. In other words, the Buddha was a strict empiricist in his observation of the sorts of things that would be metaphysical claims if anyone else made them. Kalupahana's attempt to preserve the Buddha's reputation as an empiricist is crafty, but I suspect it would not be terribly convincing to a real empiricist. Any self-proclaimed empiricist who privileges the observational capacities of a special being, such as God or an omniscient buddha, hardly qualifies as an empiricist of the likes of Locke or Hume, and is certainly unlike any Positivist I have ever encountered. On the other hand, Kalupahana's position is perhaps not much more bizarre that Bishop Berkeley's. > I read Kalupahana as including the mind sense in his empiricism. > Surely discrimination is a function of, and wisdom is acquired > through, the mind sense? Doesn't this contradict what you are saying? No, I don't think so. The function of manas is to observe states that are internal. Manas observes the aggregates: vedan?, samj?? and sansk?ra. Wisdom is one of the sansk?ras, so it is an object that manas observes. But wisdom itself is a form of judgement that operates in ways that cannot possibly be described in a perfectly empirical manner, because one cannot directly observe, even with manas, whether an action is going to be productive or counterproductive of expected results. So at the time of acting, one is in no position to know whether an action is going to be karmically successful. To do that requires rather more than any empiricist epistemology can provide. > Kalupahana has of course rewritten that book - A History of Buddhist > Philosophy, 1992 - and has dropped that appendix and the reference to > Positivism. However he retains the view that the physical senses and > the mind are the only possible sources of knowledge (here of course he > cites the Sabba Sutta). He insists that Insight/Wisdom cannot be > completely divorced from the senses (he again includes the mind I > think). (p.112) > > Have you an opinion on Kalupahana's newer version of the Buddha's empiricism? I still think he is trying to have his empiricism and eat it too. That he has given up on using the Positivist label is a good sign, but I think a better sign would be abandon the absurd claim that the Buddha was an empiricist. He was clearly a dogmatist (in a Kantian sense). There is just no way to make canonical Buddhism (which is the only kind that Kalupahana seems to accept as legitimate Buddhism) into a way of acqiring knowledge that is consistent with scientific method. Canonical Buddhism is very much a pre-modern kind of dogmatism. > Do we, from an early Buddhist point of view, have sources of knowledge > other than the physical senses and the mind? According to Kalupahana, we have the authority of the omniscient Buddha whose capacities to know things are unlike those of any ordinary mortal. So if you like the idea of an omniscient God, you'll love Kalupahana's Buddha. I personally do not much like either the idea of an omniscient God or of a buddha who has paranormal powers. Of course this means I have to be very selective (some would say much TOO selective) in which parts of the canon I take seriously as a source of personal inspiration. I pretty much have to skip over all the narratives of the Buddha manifesting his abhinormal powers and write them off as the gross exaggerations of later devotees whose critical faculties have been undermined by a saturation with fawning piety. I'm afraid the Buddhist canon in my hands would look a bit like Thomas Jefferson's ferociously edited Bible; not much would remain but some pretty good advice of the sort that would can find pretty much everywhere in the sayings of thoughtful and reflective people. Oddly enough, that is still plenty for me. In fact it is more than enough for me, in that I am a miserable failure at following even the pretty good advice of the Buddha and other sages like him. -- Dh. Day?mati From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 27 00:00:13 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:00:13 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <001301c9504f$51debc80$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net> <492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg> <7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net> <001301c9504f$51debc80$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <1227769213.5970.71.camel@localhost> On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 00:16 -0500, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > To the question of whether the alayavijnana is restricted to a single > individual, or whether there is a "collective unconscious" a la Jung, the > Yogacara texts themselves categorically deny the latter, and insist on the > former. Actually, so does Jung. He regretted using the term "collective unconscious," because so many people took it to mean some sort of spooky shared psyche of which our individual minds are a manifestation. Jung found the idea of a shared psyche ridiculous. In clarifying what he meant by the term "collective unconscious" Jung later wrote that he had in mind something like instincts that members of a species are born with. Surely, he argued, not all our neuroses come from our individual childhood experiences of stumbling into our parent's bedroom and catching them in flagrante delicto. Rather, he suggested, we are innately predisposed as human beings to have many of the same traits our ancestors had and on account of which they survived long enough to have offspring. We are born, he claimed, with propensities to form certain habits, and these propensities take certain archetypal forms, such as an ego, that are psychologically active but of which we are mostly unaware. And some of those tendencies that have supported the survival of our ancestors are what make us neurotic. The Jungian theory of archetypes (which Waldron gets right) is not so different from the classical Buddhist idea of anusayas---deeply latent tendencies of which a person tends to be unaware that keep manifesting as karma (deliberate action). It is because the anusayas are so deep, and so outside our ordinary awareness, that it takes strong medicine to eliminate them. The Buddha, like Aristotle, was quite aware of akrasia and had a pretty good account for why it happens. > So, while each of us has our own alayavijnana, it is being influenced not > only by our own past, but we are influencing each other, continuously. That > engenders a type of collective karma (but not collective unconscious, except > in the most imprecise terms). As I understand Waldron, that is pretty much exactly how he sees it. (And I think Jung was pretty much on the same page.) As for me, I'm inclined to agree with Conze's assessment of the ?layavij??na as one of the most hideous conceptual monstrosities in all of Buddhism. But what the hey, what else would a M?dhyamika say on this topic? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 27 00:09:49 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:09:49 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 20:18 -0500, S.A. Feite wrote: > isn't DNA our honest karmic footprint as homo sapiens and as > a sentient life-form? And if "yes" what does that say about "cut and > pasting" ancient karmic fragments of differing sentient beings for our > egoic satisfaction? If one is going to believe in something like karma in the first place, then it should not be too difficult to believe that when the karmic fragments of beings are mixed, the mixing itself is one of the natural consequences of the kind of karma done by the beings so mixed. > Puhleeze give me the fortitude to keep my hands away from the necks of > these maniacs I say. Demand GMO labeling laws NOW. Oh give me a break! This precious concern with GMO is one of the most absurd manifestations of paranoia to hit the post-hippy generation. It deserves about as much credence as the law in Leviticus against mixing types of fibre in the same piece of cloth. Let's leave GMO hand-wringing to biblical fundamentalists who believe that God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh and to neo-Daoists who took way too much LSD while reading their Laozi. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Thu Nov 27 01:15:12 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 03:15:12 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com><7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net><492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg><7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net><001301c9504f$51debc80$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227769213.5970.71.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <005301c95068$4577a6a0$2101a8c0@Dan> > On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 00:16 -0500, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > > > To the question of whether the alayavijnana is restricted to a single > > individual, or whether there is a "collective unconscious" a la Jung, the > > Yogacara texts themselves categorically deny the latter, and insist on the > > former. Richard Hayes replies > Actually, so does Jung. He regretted using the term "collective > unconscious," because so many people took it to mean some sort of spooky > shared psyche of which our individual minds are a manifestation. Well, this is Jung performing a bit of retroactive revisionism on his own writings. It was not that people were getting him wrong, he is simply dishonestly admitting that *he* got it wrong. If one reads his position papers for the Nazis, he himself used his own notion of collective unconscious as a *racial* unconscious to argue the inferiority of Jews as a collective race, and other non-Aryans, to the sparkling blue-eyed, blond aryans who shared a better collective unK. And, yes, that shit is really spooky! After the war -- like many other Germans... Heidegger comes to mind -- he never owned up to what Daddy was doing before and during the war, and took numerous steps to obfuscate his past (and his hidden present). This is part of that makeover. > The Jungian theory of archetypes (which Waldron gets right) is not so > different from the classical Buddhist idea of anusayas---deeply latent > tendencies of which a person tends to be unaware that keep manifesting > as karma (deliberate action). No need to drag Jung into this. I much prefer Padmasiri de Silva's exposition of the anusayas, etc., in his seemingly forgotten treasures: _An Introduction to Buddhist Psychology_, and, where he extends his analysis into a lucid, compelling comparison with Freud, _Buddhist and Freudian Psychology_. Nothing wooky or spooky or obscure in his spot on account. Should be required reading for anyone interested in Buddhism. > I'm > inclined to agree with Conze's assessment of the ?layavij??na as one of > the most hideous conceptual monstrosities in all of Buddhism. Conze was clueless when it came to Yogacara -- he simply parroted DT Suzuki's misinformed opinions. That's kind of like relying on Dick Chaney to understand the First Amendment. Dan Lusthaus From jayarava at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 02:21:49 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:21:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <1227767716.5970.46.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <100753.97662.qm@web51411.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi Richard, Thanks for this clarification. --- On Thu, 27/11/08, Richard Hayes wrote: > What I find intriguing about Kalupahana's treatment of > causality is that as an empiricist Kalupahana wants to > agree with Hume that no one actually ever observes a causal event; > all we observe is things taking place, and on these events we imagine > patterns of similarity by ignoring differences. On the other hand, > Kalupahana also wants to say that the Buddha had profound insights into > karma and its ripening, which of course is an example of precisely the > sort of causality that a Humean empiricist would say is impossible. This is quite helpful. I'll have to look up the Hume for beginners or something - my undergrad degree was in chemistry and Hume didn't come up - fumes, but no Humes. Is Kalupahana's view also known as 'phenomenalism'? > In other words, the Buddha was a strict empiricist in his observation of > the sorts of things that would be metaphysical claims if anyone else > made them. Yes. He kind of sneaks abhi??? in as a kind of cognition on a par with other kinds of cognition, and hence a function of the mind. He focuses on ?savakkhaya but seems to gloss of the other abhi??? - like levitation and clairvoyance. He's quite ambivalent about these. > Any self-proclaimed empiricist who privileges the observational > capacities of a special being, such as God or an > omniscient buddha, hardly qualifies as an empiricist of the > likes of Locke or Hume, and is certainly unlike any Positivist I > have ever encountered. On the other hand, Kalupahana's position > is perhaps not much more bizarre that Bishop Berkeley's. Hmmm. Kalupahana notes that it is only (unspecified or possibly Saravastivadin) later Buddhist metaphysicians [sic] who claim omniscience for the Buddha - in Pali the Buddha denies this (have checked and he does). Omniscience is a Jain claim, although a yakkha does refer to Gotama as sabbavidu? (Sn 177). However, Kalupahana invokes the Sabba Sutta precisely at this point - if the Buddha did know *everything*, then the only kind of everything he could know would be delimited by the senses six. He goes on to quote passages to the effect that samm?sambuddha is not completely divorced from the senses. > Manas observes the aggregates: vedan?, samj?? and > sansk?ra. Wisdom is one of the sansk?ras, so it is an > object that manas observes. But wisdom itself is a form of judgement > that operates in ways that cannot possibly be described in a perfectly > empirical manner, because one cannot directly observe, even with manas, > whether an action is going to be productive or counterproductive of > expected results. Sticking with Kalupahana's later view he has added that in addition to knowing what is empirically verifiable, the Buddha's knowledge (because of the knowledge of ?savakkhaya) extends to what is "morally significant". Why can one not possibly empirically know the moral significance of an action? Aren't you just making an a priori claim to knowledge yourself here? (I get the feeling that playing advocatus diaboli for Kaluphana is going to weary me quite quickly, but I'm still trying to understand what he is saying). Is it because Kalupahana is simply taking the textual stories about abhi??? at face value? Or is there a definite reason why it can never be true? > There is just no way to make canonical Buddhism (which is > the only kind that Kalupahana seems to accept as legitimate Buddhism) > into a way of acqiring knowledge that is consistent with scientific > method. Canonical Buddhism is very much a pre-modern kind of dogmatism. I tend to see it as a pre-modern pragmatism - but that is another argument. Actually I see no reason that scientific method could not be invoked here quite successfully - all it would require is someone who has experienced ?savakkhaya. They could predict the consequences of actions, and the scientists could follow up to see if the prediction was correct. Is there a Buddha in the house? This seems to be why Buddhists are interested in Quantum Mechanics and brain scans - they hold out the possibility of scientific verification of religious conviction. As if that would make them happy, eh? One of the ironic things about Kalupahana is that he is arguing for empiricism on the basis of conjecture, not empiricism - ie he argues from belief, textual sources, and inference; but never from his own experience! > According to Kalupahana, we have the authority of the > omniscient Buddha whose capacities to know things are unlike > those of any ordinary mortal. So if you like the idea of an omniscient > God, you'll love Kalupahana's Buddha. To be fair you are misrepresenting Kalupahana here. He does not (in what I'm reading anyway) claim omniscience for the Buddha and is dismissive of claims to omniscience in the sense of the English word. He does accept that the Buddha had the higher knowledge, but this is not all-knowledge. The other user of the Sabba Sutta I'm interested in is Sue Hamilton - more of a pragmatist. Minor mentions go to Peter Harvey who quotes it in The Selfless Mind, and Glen Wallis translates it in his Basic Teachings. Anyone know of other substantial uses of the Sabba Sutta? > In fact it is more than enough for me, in that I am a miserable failure > at following even the pretty good advice of the Buddha and other sages > like him. "Only the true messiah denies his divinity" - Life of Brian. Thanks for rescuing my hijacked thread by the way! Best wishes Jayarava From jkirk at spro.net Thu Nov 27 06:55:45 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 06:55:45 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <1227769213.5970.71.camel@localhost> References: <370983.4640.qm@web51406.mail.re2.yahoo.com><7.0.1.0.2.20081126043455.06168d58@charter.net><492D6819.9020604@comp.nus.edu.sg><7.0.1.0.2.20081126191337.0604c6c0@charter.net><001301c9504f$51debc80$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227769213.5970.71.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <1F8D21E7C56142E29629D593345772D2@OPTIPLEX> As for me, I'm inclined to agree with Conze's assessment of the ?layavij??na as one of the most hideous conceptual monstrosities in all of Buddhism. But what the hey, what else would a M?dhyamika say on this topic? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico ===================== It does seem to me that this concept, ?layavij??na, represents the creation of yet another "thing", another name, to cover or to enable convenient talk about a whole bunch of interacting processes that the sutta writers intuited but could not observe; still they needed something to express their intuition of the invisible operations of mind-body. Today's neuro- and cognitive-scientists are still trying to figure these out. Joanna From sfeite at adelphia.net Thu Nov 27 09:08:03 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 11:08:03 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> Message-ID: On Nov 27, 2008, at 2:09 AM, Richard Hayes wrote: > On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 20:18 -0500, S.A. Feite wrote: > > >> Puhleeze give me the fortitude to keep my hands away from the necks >> of >> these maniacs I say. Demand GMO labeling laws NOW. > > Oh give me a break! This precious concern with GMO is one of the most > absurd manifestations of paranoia to hit the post-hippy generation. It > deserves about as much credence as the law in Leviticus against mixing > types of fibre in the same piece of cloth. Let's leave GMO hand- > wringing > to biblical fundamentalists who believe that God created the world in > six days and rested on the seventh and to neo-Daoists who took way too > much LSD while reading their Laozi. Thanks for the news from Podunk U. Richard. It sounds like a course in human biology may be in order. It probably wouldn't hurt to take a class in Bioethics while you're at it... From elihusmith at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 09:56:14 2008 From: elihusmith at yahoo.com (Elihu Smith) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:56:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] buddha-l Digest, Vol 45, Issue 39 Message-ID: <928625.179.qm@web81905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 18:57 -0800, Elihu Smith wrote: > Do not believe everything on the internet. Do you expect us to believe that? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico No. From jehms at xs4all.nl Thu Nov 27 13:10:37 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:10:37 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <584287.97938.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <584287.97938.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <492EFEBD.5070701@xs4all.nl> Katherine Masis schreef: > Oh dear, I am so embarrassed! The website is a hoax! I found that out at the PETA site. A guy named Adam Brandejs designed it. My sincere apologies. > http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/genpets.asp > http://www.brandejs.ca/index.php > But the questions I raised still stand? > Katherine > > > Let's begin with reconsidering the Buddhist appreciation of the first case of gentech: Ganesha. :-) And how should we evaluate the existence of creatures with four heads or even thousand arms for crying out loud? Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From jkirk at spro.net Thu Nov 27 19:03:53 2008 From: jkirk at spro.net (jkirk) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:03:53 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <492EFEBD.5070701@xs4all.nl> References: <584287.97938.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <492EFEBD.5070701@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <1925DF9893634E73B194DCA039FCC141@OPTIPLEX> > Let's begin with reconsidering the Buddhist appreciation of the first case of gentech: Ganesha. :-) And how should we evaluate the existence of creatures with four heads or even thousand arms for crying out loud? Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl ====================== What creatures? Where? Joanna From sfeite at adelphia.net Thu Nov 27 20:05:56 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <492EFEBD.5070701@xs4all.nl> References: <584287.97938.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <492EFEBD.5070701@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <9040DEBA-B7B4-486B-ADEA-BB244886A383@adelphia.net> On Nov 27, 2008, at 3:10 PM, Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > Let's begin with reconsidering the Buddhist appreciation of the > first case of gentech: Ganesha. :-) > And how should we evaluate the existence of creatures with four > heads or even thousand arms for crying out loud? Well, let's keep in mind these aren't *physical* beings. OK? Perhaps we should consider that non-physical beings are expressions of the "coiled-one", the "spiritual" DNA, kuNDalini. After all "yathA piNde, tathA brahmANde": "As the human body, so the multiverse". Maybe there's something to that... Steve Feite Bucksport, maine From dharmafarer at gmail.com Thu Nov 27 21:15:45 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:15:45 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms In-Reply-To: References: <1226811317.11388.5.camel@localhost> <00af01c947b2$01be76a0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: Dear Richard, Dan or anyone who knows Dharmakirti, I often come across this sort of note in reference works on Dharmakirti: Dharmakirti also introduced a threefold distinction of valid middle terms: the middle (hetu) must be related to the major premises either by iden?tity ("This is a tree because it is a bodhi"), or as cause and effect ("This is fiery because it is smoky"), or the middle is a non-perception from which the absence of the major could be inferred. Are the two examples correct? What about the third example where "the middle is a non-perception from which the absence of the major could be inferred". Could you give me an example? Thanks, Piya Tan On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Piya Tan wrote: > > Thanks Richard & Dan, > > The reference comes from the Oxford Dictionary of Buddhism (ed Damien > Keown et al): > > Oxford Dictionary of Buddhism > > Richard's answer helps to explains the sense of the two terms to me. Thanks. > Dan's exposition is really help for my follow-up reading. Thanks, again. > > Piya Tan > > > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Dan Lusthaus wrote: >> >> If I can piggyback on Richard's thoughtful answer, there is at least one >> important additional distinction between svaartha inference and paraartha >> inference for Dignaga, a distinction that, I believe, is no longer operative >> (at least in the same way) with Dharmakirti and his subsequents. >> >> This additional distinction is often overlooked in the secondary literature >> because it is primarily laid out in Dignaga's Nyaayamukha, which only >> survives in Chinese (two translations), and people who work on pramanavada >> tend to deal with Tibetan and Sanskrit, not Chinese. (I haven't seen the >> relevant portions of the Jinendrabuddhi text that would deal with this yet, >> so don't know if/how they modify what Nyayamukha says.) >> >> For Dignaga a pramana provides knowledge, but in certain specific senses. >> First, a specific pramana provides knowledge that cannot be provided by any >> other means or pramana. Thus, the knowledge gained by perception cannot be >> gained from inference and vice versa. There is no inferential argument that >> can settle whether the moon is round -- that knowledge can only be gained by >> perception; to attempt an inference addressing that would be automatically >> fallacious. >> >> Second, a pramana only provides new knowledge, something not known before. >> Hence what "knowledge" means in this context is not a storehouse or set of >> accumulated facts, but something realized in the moment. Hence when two >> people are arguing with inferences, one is trying to convince the other of >> something the first person already (thinks he) knows. For him, the argument >> is not a pramana, just an inference. If he is successful in awakening >> knowledge in the second person, then the inference served as a pramana for >> the second person, but not for the one proferring the argument. That is >> paraartha anumaa.na. >> >> When one is reasoning inferentially to figure out something one doesn't know >> yet, and is successful in acquiring that knowledge, that is svaartha >> anumaa.na. >> >> Knowledge once acquired no longer involves pramana. The turning point, >> perhaps, is the moment one reaches a ni"scaya -- a decisive judgement >> concerning some matter. >> >> Perception, since always novel from moment to moment, is a perpetual >> pramana -- but only if one takes cognizance of it (svasa.mvitti). >> >> If Richard (or anyone else) understands Dignaga differently, I'd be >> interested to hear an explanation. >> >> Dan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> buddha-l mailing list >> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com >> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > > > > -- > The Minding Centre > Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) > Singapore 650644 > Tel: 8211 0879 > Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com > Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 27 21:37:11 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:37:11 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <1227847031.5605.6.camel@localhost> On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 11:08 -0500, S.A. Feite wrote: > It probably wouldn't hurt to take a > class in Bioethics while you're at it... What light would a course on bioethics shed on GMO? That is quite simply not an ethical issue. Getting excited about genetic modifications is a profound failure to grasp the fundamental essenceless of things. It is a matter of clinging to old views that God gave everything an essential nature and that it is evil to tamper with God's work. It is also a matter of clinging to a false dichotomy between human activity and nature. Sorry, but Buddhists have no time for superstitions about God or for fallacy of false dichotomy. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 27 21:44:55 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:44:55 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms In-Reply-To: References: <1226811317.11388.5.camel@localhost> <00af01c947b2$01be76a0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <1227847495.5605.14.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 12:15 +0800, Piya Tan wrote: > What about the third example where "the middle is a non-perception > from which the > absence of the major could be inferred". Could you give me an example? There is no elephant in my closet, because if there were, I would be able to see it. (This illustrates the most basic form of anupalabdhi, namely, that the failure to observe something that would be observed if present indicates that the thing in question is absent.) There is no feeling of cold in that heretic who is burning at the stake, because fire is incompatible with cold. (This illustrates the principle that if one observes something that is incompatible with another thing, then the second thing cannot be present where the thing incompatible with it is observed.) -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From dharmafarer at gmail.com Thu Nov 27 21:49:03 2008 From: dharmafarer at gmail.com (Piya Tan) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:49:03 +0800 Subject: [Buddha-l] Pramana terms In-Reply-To: <1227847495.5605.14.camel@localhost> References: <1226811317.11388.5.camel@localhost> <00af01c947b2$01be76a0$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227847495.5605.14.camel@localhost> Message-ID: Thanks, Richard, for those warmly humorous examples. Piya On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Richard Hayes wrote: > On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 12:15 +0800, Piya Tan wrote: > >> What about the third example where "the middle is a non-perception >> from which the >> absence of the major could be inferred". Could you give me an example? > > There is no elephant in my closet, because if there were, I would be > able to see it. (This illustrates the most basic form of anupalabdhi, > namely, that the failure to observe something that would be observed if > present indicates that the thing in question is absent.) > > There is no feeling of cold in that heretic who is burning at the stake, > because fire is incompatible with cold. (This illustrates the principle > that if one observes something that is incompatible with another thing, > then the second thing cannot be present where the thing incompatible > with it is observed.) > > -- > Richard Hayes > Department of Philosophy > University of New Mexico > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > -- The Minding Centre Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr) Singapore 650644 Tel: 8211 0879 Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.googlepages.com Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com From rhayes at unm.edu Thu Nov 27 22:15:05 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:15:05 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta Message-ID: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost> Dan Lusthaus wrote: > Richard Hayes replies > > > Actually, so does Jung. He regretted using the term "collective > > unconscious," because so many people took it to mean some sort of spooky > > shared psyche of which our individual minds are a manifestation. > > Well, this is Jung performing a bit of retroactive revisionism on his own > writings. The regret that Jung expressed was in a piece written in 1936. He had earlier written about the collective unconscious in 1902. It was that work that had been misunderstood. In 1954 we wrote pieces in which he presented refinements on his theory of archetypes. I see no hint of any intellectual dishonesty in any of this. On the contrary, I think that refining one's theories in the light of criticism and further research and reflection is a pretty good sign. > After the war -- like many other Germans... Heidegger comes to mind -- he > never owned up to what Daddy was doing before and during the war, and took > numerous steps to obfuscate his past (and his hidden present). This is part > of that makeover. Actually, I think a bit of research would uncover that Jung was Swiss, nor German. Switzerland, like all sensible nations, was neutral during the Second World War. For some reason, I have never been able to ascribe to the notion that a human being must be perfect in every respect before credence can be given to any of his ideas. Jung was flawed in many respects, often distressingly so. In this he was not so unique. Despite his flaws he came up with some good psychological insights and improved dramatically on some of Freud's theories by showing just how bankrupt they were. Like Waldron, I think that some of Jung's insights are congruent with some aspects of Buddhist psychological theory. > No need to drag Jung into this. I much prefer Padmasiri de Silva's > exposition of the anusayas, etc. Granted, there is no *need* to mention Jung, but there is also no harm in doing so when doing so shed light on a difficult subject. Preferences (even yours) are simply a matter of taste. My tastes have room for Jung, and I also have a high regard for de Silva. I also think very highly of Waldron's work. > Conze was clueless when it came to Yogacara If a person must be clueless about something, I think Yog?c?ra is a very good choice. The more I have learned about it, the more I have regretted the time wasted looking into it. But that is purely my preference. Preferences (even mine) are simply a matter of taste. Taste, of course, can always be improved by genetic modification. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Fri Nov 28 00:51:48 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 02:51:48 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta References: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <002901c9512e$2af27cd0$2101a8c0@Dan> Richard wrote: > The regret that Jung expressed was in a piece written in 1936. He had > earlier written about the collective unconscious in 1902. It was that > work that had been misunderstood. In 1954 we wrote pieces in which he > presented refinements on his theory of archetypes. I see no hint of any > intellectual dishonesty in any of this. On the contrary, I think that > refining one's theories in the light of criticism and further research > and reflection is a pretty good sign. You sure you didn't work as Press Secretary for the Bush White House? This is dervish-level spin. We needn't rehash Jung's well-documented antisemitism (something blatantly and disturbingly apparent to Freud on their first meeting, which he tried, unsuccessfully, to encourage Jung to overcome). Nor that Jung was using his own "racial" interpretation of the collective unconscious well after 1936. > > After the war -- like many other Germans... Heidegger comes to mind > Actually, I think a bit of research would uncover that Jung was Swiss, > nor German. Switzerland, like all sensible nations, was neutral during > the Second World War. Yes, he was Swiss, or more precisely, Swiss-German (Schweizer-deutsch). He functioned in the Germanic intellectual orbit. The myth of Swiss neutrality during the war is another story. Which is why the Swiss-German Jung was writing position papers for the Nazis in the 1930s; the Swiss forcibly returning to Germany Jewish refugees attempting to flee from the Germans (fascist Spain was a safer destination); the Swiss financial industry's knowing complicity in stockpiling and hiding pilfered Jewish assets for the Nazis, some of which are only starting to be accounted for (i.e., admitted) in the last couple of years; etc. Very sensible... very neutral... > For some reason, I have never been able to ascribe to the notion that a > human being must be perfect in every respect before credence can be > given to any of his ideas. Perfection is one thing. Watching how someone deploys their own ideas, how they themselves think those ideas should be applied in the real world (like "collective unconscious" to racial theories) is another. The former is immaterial, the latter often goes to the heart of the matter. >Jung [...]improved dramatically > on some of Freud's theories by showing just how bankrupt they were. That's another myth, one very popular in New Agey pop-psych circles. That's more of Jung's spin, since he was also dishonest about the causes and the nature of the rift between himself and Freud. He pretended it was over theories; Freud's diaries show, to the contrary, it was rooted in Jung's antisemitism. My guess is -- whether because of taste or for some other reason -- you have read more voraciously in Jung than Freud, and thus have become predisposed to side with your hero. There is little that is bankrupt in Freud. It was a vogue amongst the neurobiologists up to a few years ago to declare Freud's theories obsolete and silly. The latest brain research, however, is reversing those trends, and leading voices at the cutting edge are now discovering that their research is providing a biological basis for many of Freud's theories -- something, incidentally, Freud, early in the 20th century, predicted would eventually be the case. >I also think very highly of > Waldron's work. Me, too. I've been a supported of Bill and his work since his Madison days, before he could find employment. We disagree on some minor points about Yogacara, but agree on much more. I'd like to see him develop the comparisons with science even more -- the Lamarck-Darwin contrast contains many parallels to Yogacara debates about the nature of the alaya-vijnana (bijas vs vasanas, etc.), and some of the recent work in DNA studies also seem like replays of 1500 year old Yogacara debates. Lots of potential research there... > If a person must be clueless about something, I think Yog?c?ra is a very > good choice. The more I have learned about it, the more I have regretted > the time wasted looking into it. In part, that's because it doesn't seem to have sunk in that Dignaga and Dharmakirti were Yogacaras. I would agree that whatever it is that you seem to imagine Yogacara is would be a great waste of time to dwell on. Dan From jehms at xs4all.nl Fri Nov 28 04:01:42 2008 From: jehms at xs4all.nl (Erik Hoogcarspel) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:01:42 +0100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <9040DEBA-B7B4-486B-ADEA-BB244886A383@adelphia.net> References: <584287.97938.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <492EFEBD.5070701@xs4all.nl> <9040DEBA-B7B4-486B-ADEA-BB244886A383@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <492FCF95.9030304@xs4all.nl> S.A. Feite schreef: > On Nov 27, 2008, at 3:10 PM, Erik Hoogcarspel wrote: > > >> Let's begin with reconsidering the Buddhist appreciation of the >> first case of gentech: Ganesha. :-) >> And how should we evaluate the existence of creatures with four >> heads or even thousand arms for crying out loud? >> > > > Well, let's keep in mind these aren't *physical* beings. OK? > > Perhaps we should consider that non-physical beings are expressions of > the "coiled-one", the "spiritual" DNA, kuNDalini. After all "yathA > piNde, tathA brahmANde": "As the human body, so the multiverse". Maybe > there's something to that... > > Steve Feite > Bucksport, maine > There's no need to discriminate against our virtual fellow creatures some of them like Jesus or Allah do a great job, they have more employees than Microsoft or Google. And to say that they are twisted is uncalled for. :-) Anyway I think guys like Chenrezig and Ganesh just set a bad example, fyiscal or not. Read http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html Erik Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl From sfeite at adelphia.net Fri Nov 28 06:34:47 2008 From: sfeite at adelphia.net (S.A. Feite) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:34:47 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <1227847031.5605.6.camel@localhost> References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> <1227847031.5605.6.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <60B20D78-8B97-45D6-8FE2-E8BE303EF46A@adelphia.net> On Nov 27, 2008, at 11:37 PM, Richard Hayes wrote: >> It probably wouldn't hurt to take a >> class in Bioethics while you're at it... > > What light would a course on bioethics shed on GMO? That is quite > simply > not an ethical issue. Getting excited about genetic modifications is a > profound failure to grasp the fundamental essenceless of things. It > is a > matter of clinging to old views that God gave everything an essential > nature and that it is evil to tamper with God's work. It is also a > matter of clinging to a false dichotomy between human activity and > nature. Sorry, but Buddhists have no time for superstitions about > God or > for fallacy of false dichotomy. Taking an absolute POV and ignoring relative distinctions is falling into an extreme, and thus not the Middle Way. Since sentience of some sort or another is the very basis for awakening, sentience--esp. human embodiment, with it's unique self- reflective capabilities, is vitally important. In extenso, other sentient forms as well. Such capabilities did not arise through the egoic, greed-driven intervention of gene splicers, they came into being by a process of natural selection over millions and billions of years of simple trial and error. We are suddenly wise enough to assess this billion year old database which we still don't fully understand, esp. in regards to the interdependent relationships in this relatively closed ecosystem of Earth? For genetic engineers to manipulate the very basis of this sentience is potentially the most dangerous development in not just human history--but because all sentient life in inextricably linked--it may represent the greatest danger to all sentient carbon-based life-forms and collective awakening. Most people are not even aware that patented genetic life-forms can be patented by corporations. It really has nothing to do with an imaginary creator god at all. Steve From jmp at peavler.org Fri Nov 28 09:55:20 2008 From: jmp at peavler.org (Jim Peavler) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:55:20 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <8A807E87-E3C6-4ABF-9A5B-A30B2C01969A@peavler.org> I don't know. There is a considerable range of opinion about etics and science both when it comes to genetic research. Usually the inserted gene has no measurable effect on the new organism other than the one feature being studied or manipulated. For example, the spider gene in one strain of goats makes it possible to make an incredibly strong fiber from goat's milk and does very little else. And what are the ethical manifestations of developing a food grain that can thrive in brackish water to the starving people of Bangladesh or India? And what is the sense of the furor over insect resistant corn in Mexico? All corn is highly hybridized for centuries. All that has really changed in this case is the speed of the hybridization. And genes don't pass through the digestive tract into the ingesting organism at all well. It is certainly possible to create monsters, and the monster are likely to suffer, and this raises ethical an scientific questions. But I have a difficult time becoming hysterical over genetic manipulation ans study in and of itself. Of course I am also pro-nuclear power, having worked on nuclear waste management (which, by the way, is not difficult to achieve at the present time) for most of my life. You mustn't trust my opinion. I am a scientific humanist and voted for Obama. On Nov 27, 2008, at 9:08 AM, S.A. Feite wrote: > > On Nov 27, 2008, at 2:09 AM, Richard Hayes wrote: > >> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 20:18 -0500, S.A. Feite wrote: >> >> >>> Puhleeze give me the fortitude to keep my hands away from the necks >>> of >>> these maniacs I say. Demand GMO labeling laws NOW. >> >> Oh give me a break! This precious concern with GMO is one of the most >> absurd manifestations of paranoia to hit the post-hippy generation. >> It >> deserves about as much credence as the law in Leviticus against >> mixing >> types of fibre in the same piece of cloth. Let's leave GMO hand- >> wringing >> to biblical fundamentalists who believe that God created the world in >> six days and rested on the seventh and to neo-Daoists who took way >> too >> much LSD while reading their Laozi. > > > Thanks for the news from Podunk U. Richard. It sounds like a course in > human biology may be in order. It probably wouldn't hurt to take a > class in Bioethics while you're at it... > > > _______________________________________________ > buddha-l mailing list > buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com > http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l > Jim Peavler jmp at peavler.org From jayarava at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 13:58:39 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:58:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <100753.97662.qm@web51411.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <145933.63020.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> In case anyone is interested David Montalvo has written a lovely paper on Buddhist Empiricism. He explains that he is not a Positivist or an Empiricist, but he is able to present those views, citing the main proponents (Hume, Locke, Ayer and others) in an easily digestible manner. He shows that Buddhism completely fails to meet the kind of criteria that Empiricism would demand, without rubbing it in, or repeating himself too much. He mainly focuses on the earlier Kalupahana work I mentioned, but does include the later one. He also goes beyond both to other manifestations of the same idea. It's a well written and quite comprehensive article - exemplary in many ways. I do like to celebrate good academic writing as it is so rare! Montalvo, David. 1999. The Buddhist empiricism thesis : an extensive critique. Asian Philosophy. 9(1) 51:70. Best wishes Jayarava From at8u at virginia.edu Fri Nov 28 17:59:30 2008 From: at8u at virginia.edu (Alberto Todeschini) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:59:30 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering Message-ID: <66634efd0811281659m2dd06b99q6ed7654ed0987189@mail.gmail.com> Dear Jim, > I don't know. There is a considerable range of opinion about etics and > science both when it comes to genetic research. Usually the inserted > gene has no measurable effect on the new organism other than the one > feature being studied or manipulated. For example, the spider gene in > one strain of goats makes it possible to make an incredibly strong > fiber from goat's milk and does very little else. And what are the > ethical manifestations of developing a food grain that can thrive in > brackish water to the starving people of Bangladesh or India? And what > is the sense of the furor over insect resistant corn in Mexico? I was told that some of the seeds developed by Monsanto are engineered to be resistant to their weed-killer (Roundup), so that it can be sprayed safely and in large amounts (as far as the crop is concerned) while destroying everything else (one of my brothers is a farmer and he uses it). Unfortunately, recent studies found that Roundup isn't anywhere near as innocuous as it was meant to be and that it can accumulate to dangerous levels (don't ask for references. Maybe I read it in Scientific American, maybe in the New Scientist, maybe elsewhere. I can't remember). Another problem with Monsanto's GM crop is its Terminator technology, meaning that seeds which are so modified cannot be used for planting new crop. If I remember correctly, it makes financial sense to use Monsanto seeds for large farms but not for small farmers, who are better off using a small part of their crop as next-years seeds. Unfortunately, in some parts of the world Monsanto seeds are all farmers can find, so, as often, small independent farmers are in trouble. A third problem is that the companies patenting GM technology have successfully sued people who unknowingly used seeds contaminated with pollen from GM plants, in what can only be described as a greedy abuse of the law. In other words, the technology has great potential, for good *and* for bad. If left in the hands of corporations whose duty it is to maximize profit for shareholders, we can reasonably expect that a lot of people and the environment will be negatively affected. > I have a difficult time becoming hysterical over genetic manipulation > as study in and of itself. I agree. > You mustn't trust my opinion. I am a scientific humanist and voted for > Obama. And you be careful not to trust mine. I am a scientific humanist who, not being US citizen, couldn't vote for Obama. Best, Alberto Todeschini From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 29 08:46:19 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:46:19 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <002901c9512e$2af27cd0$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost> <002901c9512e$2af27cd0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <1227973579.6145.4.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 02:51 -0500, Dan Lusthaus wrote: Now that you have demonstrated that turning to you for reliable information on Jung is, to paraphrase your words, like turning to Dick Cheney for reliable information on the first amendment, let's remember that buddha-l was not designed for fulminating against people whose professional careers do not meet your (or anyone else's) approval. > > If a person must be clueless about something, I think Yog?c?ra is a very > > good choice. The more I have learned about it, the more I have regretted > > the time wasted looking into it. > > In part, that's because it doesn't seem to have sunk in that Dignaga and > Dharmakirti were Yogacaras. That's an interesting claim, for which I have yet to see any evidence. And now I see that turning to Dan Lusthaus for reliable information about Dignaga is like turning to Dan Lusthuas for reliable information about Freud and Jung. -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 29 08:55:15 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:55:15 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Buddhist ethics and genetic engineering In-Reply-To: <60B20D78-8B97-45D6-8FE2-E8BE303EF46A@adelphia.net> References: <207183.59202.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <1227769789.5970.80.camel@localhost> <1227847031.5605.6.camel@localhost> <60B20D78-8B97-45D6-8FE2-E8BE303EF46A@adelphia.net> Message-ID: <1227974115.6145.12.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 08:34 -0500, S.A. Feite wrote: > Taking an absolute POV and ignoring relative distinctions is falling > into an extreme, and thus not the Middle Way. So you are now admitting that saying you would like to wring the necks of those who do experiments in genetic modification was an extreme absolutlist position and unworthy of a Buddhist. It is good that we have found a point of agreement. > Since sentience of some sort or another is the very basis for > awakening, sentience--esp. human embodiment, with it's unique self- > reflective capabilities, is vitally important. Sentience also creates all the problems on account of which we need awakening. It is highly overrated, in my opinion. > Such capabilities did not arise through the > egoic, greed-driven intervention of gene splicers, they came into > being by a process of natural selection over millions and billions of > years of simple trial and error. Yes, changes came about through billions of years of random mutations. That does not entail that change cannot also come about through systematic mutations done under controlled conditions. Nor does it follow that "simple trial and error" (as you mistakenly call what would better be called random mutations) is inherently more pure, more natural or morally better than controlled trial and error. > Most people are not even aware that patented genetic life-forms can > be patented by corporations. I am aware of this. It does not alarm me. Should it? -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From C.Rocha at uws.edu.au Wed Nov 26 16:20:35 2008 From: C.Rocha at uws.edu.au (Cristina Rocha) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:35 +1100 Subject: [Buddha-l] Journal of Global Buddhism Message-ID: <3239A306F7C8F24693698F633C37BE54FF2D11@VALLE.AD.UWS.EDU.AU> Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce a special issue of the Journal of Global Buddhism. "Buddhists and Scholars of Buddhism: Blurred Distinctions in Contemporary Buddhist Studies" aims to tackle current and pressing questions of blurred boundaries and genres: What is the place of advocacy or 'theology' in Buddhist Studies? Where is it implicit in contemporary scholarship? Should the study of Buddhism remain 'distanced' and 'non-aligned'? Is there a definite line demarcating the two modes of scholarship? How does this distinction apply in different cultural locations? The Journal of Global Buddhism is an on-line, open access, refereed publication http://www.globalbuddhism.org/toc.html . The table of contents is as follows: Introduction: Buddhists and Scholars of Buddhism: Blurred Distinctions in Contemporary Buddhist Studies Cristina Rocha and Martin Baumann Buddhism and the Perils of Advocacy Ian Reader The Emergence of Buddhist Critical-Constructive Reflection in the Academy as a Resource for Buddhist Communities and for the Contemporary World John Makransky At Ease in Between: The Middle Position of a Scholar-Practitioner Duncan Ry?ken Williams with best wishes, Cristina Rocha & Martin Baumann Dr. Cristina Rocha ARC Postdoctoral Fellow Centre for Cultural Research University of Western Sydney Tel: (+61 2) 9685 9535 Fax: (+61 2) 9685 9610 Mob: 0410 324971 Author of "Zen in Brazil: The Quest for Cosmopolitan Modernity", Hawaii University Press, 2006. Managing Editor: Journal of Global Buddhism www.globalbuddhism.org http://www.uws.edu.au/research/researchcentres/ccr/ccrpeople/rocha From lodru at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 11:58:46 2008 From: lodru at yahoo.com (eric zsebenyi) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:58:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] =?utf-8?q?Conze=27s_=E2=80=9CBuddhism_and_Asian_Societ?= =?utf-8?b?eeKAnQ==?= Message-ID: <153205.63855.qm@web53507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> I am attempting to locate a?copy of Edward Conze's article Buddhism and Asian Society. According to the bibliography in Conze's Memoirs it was published in the Shambhala Review of Books and Ideas, V 1-2, 1976, 15-19. Conze describes it as follows: ? ?Last year?I wrote an article in the Shambhala Review which incensed the Golden Mountain Monastery in San Francisco so much that they dubbed me the 'Demon King'.? (Memoirs Pt II, pg 6) ? He adds, ?commercially rewritten this also exists in: Buddhism, Family of Man, V 67, 1975, 1869-1876? (Memoirs Pt I, pg 157). ? He also mentions in the bibliography to the Memoirs the following review: ? The Threefold Lotus Sutra ('Fastidious Old-timers may well moan') Codex Shambhala IV 3, September 1975, 6-7 ? I have not been able to locate these publications?in a library or rare periodicals dealers, and have been told by someone at?Shambhala Publications that they do not appear to be in Shambhala's archives. ? If anyone has any of these publications, and would be willing to send me?a copy, please contact me off list at ? lodru at yahoo.com I am still looking for the great gter ma of Buddhist Studies, Part III of Conze's Memoirs. If anyone has any information regarding this manuscript (additional to the postings made on this list in October 2005 and the H-Buddhism?list?in November 2001), please let me know. From rhayes at unm.edu Sat Nov 29 20:55:34 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 20:55:34 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <145933.63020.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <145933.63020.qm@web51405.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1228017334.5758.13.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 12:58 -0800, Jayarava wrote: > In case anyone is interested David Montalvo has written a lovely paper on Buddhist Empiricism. Thanks for this reference. I have never seen this article (perhaps because I have never read or even heard of the journal Asian Philosophy), but I might be able to get it through interlibrary loan. > It's a well written and quite comprehensive article - exemplary in > many ways. I do like to celebrate good academic writing as it is so > rare! Yes, good academic is rare and is destined to become even more so. That is because the idiots who determine academic salaries have no idea how to decide who should be paid what amounts. (The right answer: every professor should get exactly the same salary, and that salary should be exactly the same as the salaries of all janitors, groundskeepers, secretaries, clerks and parking lot attendants.) So the bean counters have invented a charade of assessing the value of publications and effectiveness at teaching. But no one has the slightest idea how to assess the value of publications (and rightly so, since publications have no intrinsic value at all and are worth something only to the people who find some value in them for some reason) or the effectiveness of a teacher. Consequently, professors get paid by the ham-fisted method of counting publications. Whoever says the most wins the most dollars. Now the average professors has about one good article in her, if she's really really lucky. But anyone who stops after writing her one good article, or who waits until she is smart enough to write a good article, is sure to be fired, so professors just keep churning out crap and publishing it everywhere they can. Groundskeepers and janitors tend not to publish anything, so they get paid very little around a university. Sorry to have to be so truthful so close to bedtime. -- Still waiting to write my one good article, I remain Yours truly, Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico From jayarava at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 00:41:36 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 23:41:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <1228017334.5758.13.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <7258.32128.qm@web51403.mail.re2.yahoo.com> --- On Sun, 30/11/08, Richard Hayes wrote: > Thanks for this reference. I have never seen this article > (perhaps because I have never read or even heard of the journal > Asian Philosophy), but I might be able to get it through > interlibrary loan. I got it from EBSCO Academic Search - your library has this (I checked) so you can probably call up the article on your desktop! >... so professors just keep churning out > crap and publishing it everywhere they can. Yes... I notice you recycle your argument against Kalupahana in both the articles I mention, with very little change ;-) > Groundskeepers and janitors tend not to publish anything, > so they get paid very little around a university. It's a damn shame because the grounds are the most important thing in a Uni, along with the library of course. "If you want to get laid, go to college. If you want to get an education, go to the library!" - Frank Zappa Best wishes Jayarava From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Sun Nov 30 02:39:49 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 04:39:49 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta References: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost><002901c9512e$2af27cd0$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227973579.6145.4.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <009701c952cf$96c01b50$2101a8c0@Dan> Richard Hayes wrote: >let's remember > that buddha-l was not designed for fulminating against people whose > professional careers do not meet your (or anyone else's) approval. Absolutely right. And since everything I said about Jung is well documented and admitted by the leading practicing Jungians today, there is no need for me to document that any further here. For anyone unsure of what I said, check out the Bollingen edition of Jung's lectures on Nietzsche's Zarathustra (if you can find a copy -- they made it unaffordable for mere mortals, unlike the rest of the Jung corpus which remains perpetually in print at affordable, paperback prices; to their credit, however, at least they published it). > > In part, that's because it doesn't seem to have sunk in that Dignaga and > > Dharmakirti were Yogacaras. > > That's an interesting claim, for which I have yet to see any evidence. Bhavaviveka thought so (see ch. 5 of his Madhyamakah.rdaya and the corresponding Tarkajvala commentary). He devotes a major portion of his refutation of Yogacara to Dignaga's theories. David Eckel's splendid translation of that chapter (and the Sravaka chapter), with detailed annotations, has just come out from Harvard University Press. So did Candrakirti (who criticizes Dignaga as part of his refutation of Yogacara in ch. 6 of Madhyamakaavatara). So, for that matter, did Jinendrabuddhi in his commentary of Dignaga's Pramanasamuccaya. So did Xuanzang, Yijing, and all their contemporaries. So did the Yogacara author(s) of the Buddhabhumyupade"sa. The list goes on and on and on... Apparently all those poor devils lacked Prof. Hayes' profound understanding of what Yogacara really is, and so were profoundly mistaken in their unanimous opinion. > And now I see that turning to Dan Lusthaus for reliable information > about Dignaga is like turning to Dan Lusthuas for reliable information > about Freud and Jung. Willful ignorance fails to recognize the reliable. Dan the Reliable From jayarava at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 07:41:08 2008 From: jayarava at yahoo.com (Jayarava) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 06:41:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Buddha-l] =?utf-8?q?Conze=27s_=E2=80=9CBuddhism_and_Asian_Societ?= =?utf-8?b?eeKAnQ==?= In-Reply-To: <153205.63855.qm@web53507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <282034.57964.qm@web51408.mail.re2.yahoo.com> -- On Fri, 28/11/08, eric zsebenyi wrote: > I am still looking for the great gter ma of Buddhist > Studies, Part III of Conze's Memoirs. If anyone has any > information regarding this manuscript (additional to the > postings made on this list in October 2005 and the > H-Buddhism?list?in November 2001), please let me know. In June 2007 I was on retreat with Sangharakshita who was friendly with the Conzes. There were rumours circulating that Sangharakshita might have a copy of the manuscript of the infamous Vol III of the memoirs, I vaguely recall talking to someone who I recall saying that he had seen one in Sangharakshita's library. I took the opportunity to ask him about the rumour which he dismissed. He said that he thought that perhaps a couple of hundred were printed, but that Mrs Conze burnt them all when Edward died. I don't think it would count a terma. An embittered old man rudely slagging off his contemporaries is hardly likely to be very edifying or informative. Vol I is bad enough! The University of Bristol has the Conze archives (41 boxes of them!) http://www.archiveshub.ac.uk/news/03121102.html Suggest you contact them. Best wishes Jayarava From rhayes at unm.edu Sun Nov 30 15:51:12 2008 From: rhayes at unm.edu (Richard Hayes) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 15:51:12 -0700 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <009701c952cf$96c01b50$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost> <002901c9512e$2af27cd0$2101a8c0@Dan> <1227973579.6145.4.camel@localhost> <009701c952cf$96c01b50$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <20081130155112.1347c393.rhayes@unm.edu> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 04:39:49 -0500 "Dan Lusthaus" wrote: > Absolutely right. And since everything I said about Jung is well documented > and admitted by the leading practicing Jungians today, there is no need for > me to document that any further here. No one has disputed the claims you made. They are, as you have said, very well know to scholars of Jung. They are also completely irrelevant to any of the topics we have been discussing. You have simply used the mention of Jung as an opportunity to make gratuitous attacks on him, and in so doing have derailed what might have been an interesting discussion on a various ways of understanding the notion of the collective unconscious. > > > In part, that's because it doesn't seem to have sunk in that Dignaga and > > > Dharmakirti were Yogacaras. > > > > That's an interesting claim, for which I have yet to see any evidence. > > Bhavaviveka thought so What interests me is what Dign?ga thought. All the people you cite wrote centuries after Dign?ga had left the scene. It is well know what later people believed. Beliefs, I have learned, are not always good indications of what is actually the case. > So, for that matter, did Jinendrabuddhi in his commentary of Dignaga's > Pramanasamuccaya. > Apparently all those poor devils lacked Prof. Hayes' profound understanding > of what Yogacara really is, and so were profoundly mistaken in their > unanimous opinion. I have no understanding at all of Yog?c?ra except what I have read in your book and in Prof. Schmithausen's work, and of course the Sanskrit and Tibetan texts of Vasubandhu. From what I have seen in those works, there is hardly anything that Dign?ga has in common with the allagedly Yog?c?ra ideas presented there. He strikes me as quite an independent thinker with perhaps more of an affinity for Sautr?ntika and Madhyamaka than any other schools. But I see no need to assign any labels at all on either Dign?ga or Dharmakirti. They were both free thinkers, not party hacks. And so I am still in the condition I was when I originally said that I see no evidence for the claim that these gentlemen were Yog?c?rins. > Willful ignorance fails to recognize the reliable. It is a better course, I find, to doubt everyone who is commonly thought to be reliable, until one finds good evidence for the veracity of what they say. (In this, I have discovered that I have unwittingly been following follow Dign?ga's example.) -- Richard Hayes Department of Philosophy University of New Mexico http://dayamati.blogspot.com http://dayamati.home.comcast.net http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes From vasubandhu at earthlink.net Sun Nov 30 23:05:32 2008 From: vasubandhu at earthlink.net (Dan Lusthaus) Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 01:05:32 -0500 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta References: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost><002901c9512e$2af27cd0$2101a8c0@Dan><1227973579.6145.4.camel@localhost><009701c952cf$96c01b50$2101a8c0@Dan> <20081130155112.1347c393.rhayes@unm.edu> Message-ID: <005a01c9537a$d1dc21b0$2101a8c0@Dan> Richard Hayes wrote: > No one has disputed the claims you made. They are, as you have said, > very well know to scholars of Jung. Forgive me for thinking that when what I wrote about Jung is labeled "unreliable" I take that to mean that I am making unwarranted claims. Apparently in your vocabulary "unreliable" does not mean unreliable. It means you don't like what I said, or wish I hadn't said it. > From what I have seen in those works, > there is hardly anything that Dign?ga has in common with the allagedly > Yog?c?ra ideas presented there. Awhile back, we conducted a Yogacara Seminar at the AAR. Seminars (as opposed to Groups, Consultations, etc.) have a five-year life span, a limited membership, and are supposed to allow scholars working on a common project to meet and discuss that project. I was the respondent to a group of fine papers the first year, papers on Ratnakirti, Sthiramati, Tsongkhapa, and Vasubandhu. As part of my response, and in subsequent email discussion after the meeting, I suggested the following: --- In my response I suggested that it may be time to replace the standard 'textbook' synopsis of Yogacara - namely, an enumeration of 8 consciousnesses and 3 svabhaavas - and instead develop something that I argue is structurally at the core of each of the papers, to wit: Starting with the assumption that (1) some sort of untainted cognitive activity free from erroneous qualities is accessible to humans - the nature and characteristics of which may or may not differ across the papers (2) various sorts of discriminations and linguistic-conceptual additions are introduced that complicate cognitive activity, so much so that (3) the problems these complications produce must be overcome. (4) The method or recommendations for overcoming these problems, again, may or may not be the same for all the texts and thinkers presented or represented by these papers, but one problem that emerges with the discriminative, linguistic-conceptual problems is the notion - and even phenomenological experience - of externality. Is this a better structural introduction to Yogacara than the 8 consciousnesses and 3 svabhavas? (i.e., does it explain why they develop those - and all the additional categories, from 100 dharmas abhidharma, to vijnapti-matra, to rigorous epistemology and logic, etc. - in the first place?) ---- Was I being crazy or unreliable to propose this, or might there be some justification? In the group discussion that responded, part of Charles Muller's reply was: --- ... it is clear that there are Yogacara scholars of solid reputation who prefer to introduce Yogacara with an approach much closer to that espoused by Dan. Just grabbing a copy of Takasaki Jikido's Yuishiki nyuumon (Introduction to Consciousness-only) off of my shelf, I see that he has arranged his presentation with the following structure of chapters and subtopics: I. What is mistaken discrimination? a. The Madhyaanta-vibhaaga b. Mistaken discrimination and emptiness of nature c. The subjective and objective views d. The middle way and the three natures e. The nature of emptiness and existence. II. The Structure of Cognition a. The manifestation of consciousness b. From delusion to awakening c. The three natures d. The role of emptiness in consciousness-only III. The Process of Awakening a. The entry into enlightenment through the mark of nothingness. b. The attainable and the unattainable IV. Consciousness and dependent origination a. The essence of false discrimination b. The two kinds of consciousness (alaya and transforming) c. Dependent origination within the consciousnesses. d. Consciousness and atman V. The operation of Consciousness. (the sub-sections of which deal extensively with the alaya) a. The transformation of consciousness b. The functions of consciousness c. The continuity of the individual and transmigration VI. Theories of religious cultivation in Consciousness-only. a. The stages of practice. b. The possibility of enlightenment. c. Madhyamika's critique of Yogacara. As we can see, Takasaki does not get to the topic of the eight consciousnesses until fairly late in the work--and Yogic practice, not until the end. On the other hand, the three natures are introduced relatively early. ---- In terms of Dignaga and Dharmakirti, I would add that one of the earliest serious discussions of hetuvidyaa in Buddhist texts occurs in Asanga's Yogacarabhumi (and a related, but modified discussion in the Abhidharmasamuccaya). Tucci, back in 1929, in his study of those portions of Asanga's text concluded that they are clear precursors of Dignaga (including Trairupya, etc.). We all know that Dignaga was influenced by Vasubandhu's hetuvidya writings, though exactly in what ways is not fully understood, since most of them are no longer extant, or only fragments remain (which hasn't prevented a great deal of speculation on the topic). I would suggest going back to Asanga, since we at least have his texts (in Skt, Ch & Tib). For instance, Dignaga's fourfold structure of pratyaksa (5 senses, mano-dhatu, svasamvitti of the klesas, and yogin-pratyaksa) is lifted almost verbatim from Asanga, and I suggested in one of my papers at the recent IABS that this reflects, respectively, panca-vijnana-kaya, manovijnana, manas and alayavijnana. Dignaga, as is evident from how he incorporates the notion of prasiddha into his sadhanas, is seeking an ecumenical vehicle in which all participants are encouraged to participate by leaving their sectarian commitments at the door. Hence his Yogacara-leanings are necessarily veiled, as Jinendrabuddhi understood. As for the Buddhists I mentioned being "centuries" after the fact, that's not quite the case. Bhavaviveka was within a century of Dignaga; that he groups Dignaga with the Yogacaras is significant. More telling (date-wise) is Xuanzang and Yijing. Xuanzang was in India from ca. 630-644, and never once mentions Dharmakirti, though he does discuss Dignaga (and translated some into Chinese subsequently). Yijing arrived in India a quarter of a century later and informs that Dharmakirti has become an important component of the curriculum at Nalanda. That indicates that Dharmakirti rose to prominence in the interim between Xuanzang's and Yijing's visits to India. Yijing is thus reporting virtually contemporaneously with Dharmakirti (he tells us Dharmakirti had died recently), informing us that Dharmakirti revitalized hetuvidya studies, and that Dharmakirti was a Yogacara. Since, unlike Xuanzang, Yijing did not identify himself as a Yogacara, he should not be suspected of sectarian bias in that matter. He probably would have preferred Dharmakirti could be claimed by a different school. In short, the evidence is there. If you choose not acknowledge it, that's another story. Dan Lusthaus From stroble at hawaii.edu Sun Nov 30 19:13:22 2008 From: stroble at hawaii.edu (James A Stroble) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:13:22 -1000 Subject: [Buddha-l] Sabba Sutta In-Reply-To: <005a01c9537a$d1dc21b0$2101a8c0@Dan> References: <1227849305.10155.20.camel@localhost> <20081130155112.1347c393.rhayes@unm.edu> <005a01c9537a$d1dc21b0$2101a8c0@Dan> Message-ID: <200811301613.23184.stroble@hawaii.edu> On Sunday 30 November 2008 20:05, Dan Lusthaus wrote: > Richard Hayes wrote: > > No one has disputed the Hey, everyone, Morpheus is fighting Neo!! Or, I mean, Richard is fighting Lusthaus!! Do you think that is air you're breathing? -- James Andy Stroble University of Hawai'i, Leeward Community College