The Buddhist Hour Radio Broadcast Archives

Buddhist Hour
Radio Broadcast on Hillside 88.0 FM
Script 359 for Sunday 12 December 2004CE
2547 Buddhist Era


This script is titled:
Personal Self Habit, Phenomenal Self Habit. (Part 1)

Today we continue in a series of recorded teachings given by Buddha Dhamma Teacher John D. Hughes during a five day meditation course held at the Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd in June 1988.

The authors apologise for any errors or misunderstanding that may have occurred in the process of transcribing talk from the original audio tape recording. The talk begins with a commentary on a meditation that was being taught during the course.

So the Meditation brings you to quickly realize that there is no difference between the dead body in the cemetery and your own body, except your body is moving.

Therefore when you realise that strongly enough, the mind moves into arupa meditation. The first one would be infinite space, space is infinite. The next one would be knowledge is infinite, but that's worldly knowledge, there's not much lokutara knowledge always there. But you can find out a lot of things.

But where you want to be is in the third arupa jhana, Sunyata, and because the... you've established convincingly that your body is already dead, that's there's no distinction between it and a dead body, any movements in the body you discount; you stop being fascinated with. So a dead body of course is destructive, it can do whatever it likes.

So we get to the third arupa jhana and we have to develop; that has eighteen levels in the sphere of Nothingness and we have got to overcome the fascination that when the two parts of the mind strike there is a display of, could be anything. So it is the... the two parts we want to examine are the personal self habit and the phenomenal self habit, and these two minds, the personal self habit and the phenomenal self habit striking together produce all the phenomena.

So the base is, the base of what is mis-knowledge, not understood, is the two, these two types of self habit minds. Now when the phenomena occurs by the mind getting contact with something obviously because of the karma... or something will arise. We keep saying, because of our mis-knowledges, that something that is arising through our constant contact is a self. But in the Sunyata we are going to examine why we think it is a self.

But we are not going to look at the phenomena. Where you sit in the present is a space, in that space the past karma is hitting and interacting with the future karma. So the present is unreal.

In this meditation the past is real, because it has a long long history and the future is real because it has a long, long history yet to come, but the present is just like one thought moment, one thought moment, one thought moment, one thought moment. The present is so infinitesimal that we say the present is unreal. The past is real, the future is real and when we sit on this mind there's merely the past hitting the future.

And that hitting point, what you could call the present, is where the phenomena is being produced. And that phenomena, spectacular as it is, we think is a self; but it's not. It's just phenomena only.

So as to the manner of this restatement, this... because there is continual phenomena in the mind, and it's continually arising out of the striking of phenomena; it is the habitual sense that things are intrinsically objective. We think this is the way it is, because it's a habitual sense of saying “this is the way it is”, “this is the way it is”.

We also think we are intrinsically identifiable, because we have always thought like that. And we think there is an intrinsically real status. To detune the reality we say the present is unreal.

The past is real, the future is real, the present is unreal. It's like a wave on a water. The wave moves across the water. Water is water. If the water takes the shape of a wave we are so fascinated by the wave we forget what we are really looking at is water. And we say what do you see. And you say “I see a wave moving across the water” and I say “look at the water”; “water is water”.

And there is another one in the Buddhist texts which says “if you make out of gold a rupa image, like a body of Buddha, and you mistake the shape or form of the rupa, as a Buddha image, a golden Buddha, you might sit and look at it and then come to the view, a view that that is a real Buddha image. But it is gold, if that is melted down gold flows back to gold. So out of that gold we can make any shape or form we like. And out of that habitual karma; driven by habitual karma we make shapes.

So sometimes we have human shape. Sometimes we have animal shape. Depending on our positive and negative karma. Sometimes we have hungry ghost shape. Sometimes we have hell being shape. Sometimes we have deva shape, various heavens, sixteen worlds. And then sometimes we have no shape because we are born arupa. And then out of our arupa birth comes, we fall back and then we have, ... so we are carried along, driven by the past into the future through this unreal present. Because we say everything is intrinsically objective. But it is just phenomena of karmic disposition from two things. Personal self habit and phenomenal self habit.

Now lets look at the personal self habit. The past strikes the future, an idea appears, some phenomena, “I think I'll offer flowers to the Buddha”. Because I've done that a lot, I've trained myself to do it, naturally that thought appears...”I offer flowers to the Buddha”. Naturally.

It is not natural for a lot of other people to do that. So they're trained to do it and then it becomes natural. So then people say, I say, “offering flowers to the Buddha only because of past practice of dana”. That is the truth. Other people say 'you', meaning they think I'm a self, are offering flowers to the Buddha, who in turn they think is a self. So a lot of errors occur.

It's just the fact is the flowers were there, them mind contacted them, what to do with the flowers. Now today I went around the altar here, the altar there, I put some dead flowers in the bin, I went into the garden and picked some fresh flowers. That is a thing I have done many times. Out of contact the dead flowers were put away. Having contacted the dead flowers thinking flower, flower, flower, flower, this dead body, which is identical to a dead body, was set to work to go out in the garden, secateurs, snip, snip twice cut flowers, offered to Buddha habitually. So it is my personal self habit inescapably driven by my karma to offer flowers to Buddha. Mind strikes light, I offer light to Buddha.

However knowing that is habitual and this body like dead body, is there anything better I can do?

If I have developed stingy self habits, mean self habits, jealous self habits, negative self habits, they have to be destroyed.

If you like I amuse myself. I'm amused, I'm content enough to keep doing offerings to Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha. When will this offering stop. When I have had enough. Then I will stop. I have never had enough yet. Never had enough offerings to Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha. Although I've done vast offerings. Never had enough yet. So I know I've never had enough as a knowledge.

So I continue on until the time is correct, when the conditions arise I will go to higher meditation, so called higher, just different meditation, and then I won't interrupt my meditation to move my dead body around to go and pick flowers. Because in higher meditation sitting in higher meditation with the body sitting like it is dead and cultivating the mind powerfully it would be walking away from the powerful meditation with something trivial to offer flowers to Buddha.

So therefore, until the minds are clean enough and have had enough I'll just keep doing the good things with the confidence, with the certainty that sooner or later I'll sit in the forest and do something.

So the personal self habit in this case, isn't too harmful to other beings, because normally, if I'm teaching someone, I wouldn't just stop teaching and run out and go and get flowers, so when I'm not getting flowers, people walk in the door with flowers anyway.

So which is the highest? Not to teach and walk out in the garden and pick the flowers and offer I also offered red candles, I also offered water. Which is the highest self-habit? To do those dana, or to teach the Dhamma, which is the highest?

Well, strangely enough, we couldn't say, it's an indeterminate question. Although in a conditional Dhamma we would teach Dhamma dana is higher than offering flowers or water. As a conditional Dhamma we teach like that, but at a higher level we would say indeterminate. Why? Because, what is there to praise about habitual personal self habit?

And then you examine the personal self habit and find it is empty of any sort of existence. The personal self habit is like a dead man. We haven't got the equivalent in English. We can certainly draw the parallel of dead body and this moving body, moving body dead body. But, in English we haven't got language sufficient to distinguish between the mental personal self habit of dana, by a living mind, because we know, or we think we know that a dead mind doesn't do that. However, we are completely deluded in this area, because even in death the mind reappears, driven by the personal self habit.

So for example, I was down [in] a shop looking at a woman in a flower shop, I can't remember where it was, might have been Knox City, perhaps, I don't know, no, it was at Boronia. And I saw in this shop a couple of devas in the shop, that's what drew my attention to it, and I looked in the shop, I was over there with Roger..... and there was one human woman, who runs the shop. She had been an old deva come to human birth and was still tending the flowers, but had to use a living dead body, a moving living dead body to do it. Whereas, as a tree deva, she could just watch the flowers grow, much different.

Is picking nails the best meditation you've ever done? Leave that dead body alone, don't touch it. Leave that dead body alone. I'm not training dead bodies, I'm not teaching you to play with your dead bodies that still walks around, why do you do that? Why? You'll never learn anything if you do that. Wrong mind.

So therefore don;t move your body, just get it in and leave it there, it's dead it'll experience all those feelings, that's the property of dead bodies. Just ignore it, doesn't matter what it feels like. Dead body... terrible, doesn't matter. That's the property of a dead body, doesn't matter.

Now this phenomenal self habit, this, well we've got a personal self habit, is an absolute, complete mis-knowledge. It is allowed to run on but you'll never examine the base of it. Because you are so impressed with the resultant phenomena, the resultant phenomena of the personal self habit clashing with the phenomenal self habit, where this dead body runs out, brings flowers offers to Buddha.

Duped by the phenomena, duped by the motion which had to happen there's no effort ever being made, to look at the two parts, the personal self habit and the phenomenal self habit. Therefore ignore all phenomena. Now the personal self habit is formed out of Karma.

There is nothing special about that, because everything you've ever done for an infinite number of lives, going back to the infinite past is formed out of karmic action. Going into the infinite future where you'll suffer suffer suffer again, be born again die again. As far as the eye can see backwards, there was no intent to investigate personal self habit as a mind. The was no intent to investigate phenomenal self habit as a mind, or as phenomena.

Now, water runs down a hill; phenomenal self habit. Every time we look at a waterfall we say how beautiful, how beautiful, how beautiful.

Which is which? The phenomenal self habit is water runs down the hill makes the waterfall. The personal self habit says beautiful, beautiful, beautiful. Yet, if we put our dead body into the river at the top and it crashed to death down the bottom what would we say then? Would we say that water running downhill is beautiful? When it has just smashed our body onto the rocks below. Or we change our view about it then. What will we say then?

Well if we then died then took rebirth and came back to the same waterfall we would say out of personal self habit and phenomenal self habit this is a creepy place, this waterfall, it scares me. And if we stood at the top of the waterfall we'd probably get vertigo, or some psychosomatic things. Or we would withdraw from the top of the waterfall because that's where we, this moving dead body died last time.

Now we would warn other people, don't go near the edge!, driven by personal self habit.

A few lives later on, we forget. We go back to the same waterfall we say how beautiful, how beautiful, how beautiful, how beautiful. We have lost our fear through the erosion of time of our personal self habit. We go to the top of the waterfall we look down we say how beautiful, how beautiful, how beautiful.

But what is beautiful? The water is not a self. It's the phenomenal self habit of the fact that water runs down the hill. But what are we admiring? Water is water. If the topology of the land is such, the water must flow down the waterfall. We don't see water running up hill; we don't see uphill waterfalls because they don't occur as phenomenal self habit. What are we admiring? Water is water. If the topology of the land is such the water must flow down the waterfall. We don't see water running uphill. We don't see uphill waterfalls because they don't occur as phenomenal self habit. What are we admiring. The fact is we are admiring nothing in particular, but our personal self habit says beautiful, beautiful, beautiful, beautiful of an empty phenomena in the phenomenal self habit side of the samsara.

Water runs downhill, if we knock over the milk, water runs downhill and spills over our kitchen floor. Do we say beautiful, beautiful, beautiful phenomenon? No we don't. Same phenomena. Water runs downs a hill, empty of, without any motive. There is no motive in the water, there is no meaning. The water doesn't say I will run down the hill... it just happens that way. We spill the milk on the floor, we say, a white milk waterfall would probably look quite nice if we could get it in the right spot, we don't say beautiful, beautiful, beautiful. We say we don't like, we don't like the phenomenal self habit of water running down the hill.

If we cut out arm and blood pours out and drips down our arm we don't say we like the phenomenal habit of the liquid that which is our blood to run down our arm.

What are we admiring? We are admiring something that is absolutely empty. And whether we say we like or we don't like, it is personal self habit.

Therefore our ideas and views of opinions, our likes and dislikes if you like... are empty. Because they are pure personal self habit. So the phenomena, the phenomenal self habit of water or fire, we look at the fire we say fire is beautiful, because the wood is there, heat is there wood must burn, totally empty of any intention. We admire the fire, we admire the fire say what a beautiful you've got there Spike, what a beautiful fire. Nice to see a fire.

If on the other hand, in our last life we had been burnt to death in bush fire or had that happen repeatedly we'd walk in a room and say I fear that fire, I fear that fire. Our thoughts and opinions, our self chatter is personal self habit arising through striking phenomenal self habit.

Our personal self habit is empty. Our phenomenal self habit is empty.

The two interacting together produce a whole new set of anythings, yet we are blinded by the anythings and we don't look back to see our personal self habit as of the nature of sunyata. And as long as we have personal self habit, and we'll always have one or another or another or another or another. And as long as were in the phenomenal self habit, another or another, doesn't matter where we run, it is the same. So were in the samsara, our personal self habit appears hits the phenomenal self habit of the rupa, and we get phenomenal, mental phenomena, whatever you like. If we stop looking at the mental phenomena produced by the striking of the two and meditate again, we haven't got a word that says, like we could easily graphically get into your mind a picture, of the corpse walking, walking corpse, but what can we say about the personal self habit mind. (Can we get, can we get it...tape ended here)

So we continue on with the Tsong-ka-pa text.

So the question is; how do we view this personal self habit... and the problem was that we haven't got a word like dead body as the antithesis of what this personal self habit is.

So we can look at it this way; whatever Tsong-ka-pa says. The Buddha states that things are established by force of mental construction... the Buddha states that things are established by force of mental construction. And then he gives a reference to a text in the question of Upali and this is a quote. This is one way of translating [it].

“The very delights of blossoming flowers, the pleasure of the glitter of a golden palace, these things have no intrinsic function. But are there on the strength of our constructs. The whole cosmos is constructed by force of thought.”

So it's the results of good and bad karma or wholesome and unwholesome karma if you like... intentional action karma that makes our lives different.

Now what you produce through your intentional self habit doesn't have to be forever what you produce. In other words Buddhism is not fatalism. It's not like a religion where you are powerless to do anything. When you say it's my kamma...you are already wrong... what you should be saying is it's my vipaka... we use Pali. The action done in the timeless past comes into the present, which as we said is unreal. And then its forms the future. If you don't alter or attend to the nature of your intentional self habit, your troubles will never come to an end.

If you keep doing the same as you have always done you will get the same result. So let's, because we haven't got a word, we'll invent a method to demonstrate.

Let's suppose there are two people. One is perfectly sane and one, if you will pardon the pun, is perfectly insane. They both look at a waterfall, I'll use the waterfall as an example, and they both make the statement 'this waterfall is beautiful'.

The perfectly sane person contacts the waterfall which is the outside self habit of samsara. Makes the statement 'this waterfall is beautiful'. The perfectly, if you will pardon the pun, insane person looks at the same waterfall and says 'this waterfall is beautiful'. Now at that level, at the superficial level it seems like the two people are, are both the same. But... we set up the postulate... one is sane and the other is insane.

So what the sane person says with profound wisdom is this... this mind driven by kamma has brought this external object into my vision. I know this external object has the nature of water to run down hill, and I know that the water has no intention, is empty of the idea of harming. For example: water doesn't set out to drown people. Or if you use the example earlier if you fell over the waterfall and your body was smashed on the rocks below the water had no intention of killing you. Nor did the phenomena of the habit of the way things work.

So you can't say 'I was killed by the waterfall'. Because there was no intention of the waterfall to do you in.

But of course if you see the waterfall you say 'it is beautiful'. The sane person knows if the contact between that the sane persons rupa, body or form intensified. If the contact, if the attraction became more powerful... and each time the person saw the waterfall... it would only be a matter of time, because of the intentional action, where the person would actually be in the waterfall and then the body of the person would be killed.

But the same person can say, knowing all that, without attraction, without desire, without grabbing, I see and having seen I know I've seen. The movement of the samsara, I know to be the self habit of the samsara, the water moves, the waterfall runs down the hill. I know that is the nature, and I know that the nature of the nature is unintentional, it has no intention.

Therefore, although I see the waterfall as a potential for great danger, able to break bodies, as long as I lighten my gaze, and neither increase nor decrease my attraction for the waterfall... I can look at it again and again with safety. I will never be drawn into the waterfall to be destroyed, my rupa form that is, be destroyed.

The insane person fantasizes that the display becomes the stimulus. The insane person says 'wouldn't it be fun to put my body in that water and to shoot over the waterfall, just imagine the sensation. The sensuality of the movement, if I put my body in the waterfall, just imagine the sensation of flying over the rocks like Rambo. 'Wouldn't that be a fun thing, wouldn't that provide the ultimate in body stimulation'. 'Wouldn't it be great', then that person makes intentional action, and then sooner or later, if they keep repeating that, the mad person, sooner or later they will come to a waterfall.

One day they will sit at a waterfall feeling miserable. 'I feel very miserable, I feel very unhappy'. And they might say 'I'm so miserable I wish I could kill this body'. Because of the past kamma, the past intentional action, they would throw themselves into the waterfall and that would be the way they suicided, they kill their body.

If however, the sane person, at some future time came to the waterfall, and say had a touch of the 'blues' if you like. The sane person would look at the waterfall and think 'that is beautiful, I would be silly, I would be mad if I destroyed my body so that I couldn't see such beautiful things again'.

Now if the insane person could be taught the dhamma, and say 'have long life, have long life, have long life', have long life, don't destroy that human body so hard to find. Because if you can become sane you will be able to examine the base of the samsaric self existence and you will be able to examine the base of your habitual self grabbing.

So the goal is don't destroy yourself. Be sane. Increase your sanity.

So the Buddha, in the question of Upali cited by Tsong-ka-pa says:

“the various delights of blossoming flowers [anything you delight in]
the pleasure of the glitter of a golden palace, these things have no intrinsic function.”

They have no function whatever. They are not there, gold doesn't say 'I am here so you can delight in my colour. Flowers don't blossom to say 'I want you to admire me'. There is no intention on the phenomenal self habit to please you or displease you on that side. But personal self habit, being duped by the flowers, colour or form or shape, takes delight in something that is natural. The natural.... the flower has got no other choice but to be a beautiful flower. The gold has no other choice but to be a beautiful gold. The golden palace has no other choice but to be a golden palace.

So its not... the Buddhist meditation is not to change the nature of the phenomenal self habit... you leave that alone, you don't try to change the outside world. But what you do, you meditate without taking no notice of the phenomena... you meditate on the personal self habit. And it is the personal self habit striking the phenomenal self habit that constructed, which is a mental process, which constructed whatever the phenomena was.

So as the Buddha says the whole cosmos is constructed by force of thought.

I heard second hand, but I believe it to be true. One student asked one of the Tibetan Lamas 'what would happen to the world if everybody simultaneously became enlightened at once? And the Lama said that 'the world would vanish'. And that is quite true. But since every being is not going to become simultaneously enlightened at once, the world exists.

The next one Tsong-ka-pa quotes is Nagajuna.

Nagajuna states in his philosophical “Sixty”, quote: “The perfect Buddhas do declare mis knowledge is the condition of the world.” So why should it be wrong to say this world is a mental construct?

Nagajuna says: “Why should it be wrong to say this world is a mental construct?” and Tsong-ka-pa says, quoting Chandrakirti's comments, 'that this means that the worlds are not objectively established but are merely constructed by conceptual thought'.

And again Ariyadeva states in his “Four Hundred” 'since there is nothing existent in desires, feelings, memories they're all empty, and so on, without mental constructs, what intelligent person adheres to quote “sure objects” and quote “constructs” ?

Chandrakirti comments and explanations that desires, memories, all the mental phenomena, are like a snake imagined, you know like, often they say 'you see a rope you think it's a snake'.

There's a guy that came into the pub [hotel] shaking, he said “give us a beer”.

He [the publican] said, “You look upset. What happened?” He said “I was walking along the road... and I stood on a stick... and I thought it was a big snake”. He [the publican] said “Well, why did that upset you?' He said 'that didn't upset me, but I picked up a stick to kill this imagined snake with and I made an error, the stick I picked up was a snake”. So that's why he was shattered.

So like a snake imagined in a rope, in so far as they are mentally constructed, while not existing objectively, we imagine something in error, because our personal self habit strikes the phenomenal self habit and they together constitute mis-knowledge.

So if you get someone who is fearful, like paranoid, it doesn't matter where you put them, every, their paranoia mind, their personal self habit mind of that type, strikes the phenomenal self habit, the outside world, and produces fearsome things. So for example: If they were walking along, say the back of a house and there was a piece of pipe say on the roof, the paranoid person would look at the piece of pipe and think it is a gun barrel. Someone is aiming a gun at me.

Their paranoia mind, their mis-knowledge mind... very bad, very bad... would strike the reality of the piece of metal pipe and instead of saying that is a piece of metal pipe, would see a gun barrel.

Then the paranoid person runs up to someone and says “there is a man on the roof with a gun aimed at me”. The same man then takes this mad man back, takes him to the roof where he saw the bit of pipe, picks up the bit of pipe and shows him. “This is a bit of pipe, it is not a gun barrel”.

Now depending on the intentional action of the past... the paranoid person will say 'you are duping me... I really did see a man with a gun. And you are in this conspiracy too.'

One of the funny things if you like, if you've got a sense of humour, its funny from my viewpoint but its not funny from the paranoid persons viewpoint, is that paranoid people I've met tell me of hundreds and hundreds of people who conspire together and they are really out to kill them.

And when I say to the paranoid person 'how do you think all these hundreds of people who are out to get you, who pays them, how do they live?

And then they say 'they pay them'... and I say...' well... you know...professional gunman might, you know, might charge $5000 dollars a week.

And professional phone tappers might charge $2000 dollars a week and I add them all together and.... you know... you can say it, so the net result of all these people persecuting you is people are spending a million dollars a week to come and get you.

Why are you so valuable that people would waste that sort of money?”

Of course if anyone's got any sense of humour, their sense of humour might break their paranoia.

You know the old quote: “just because you're paranoid don't think they're not out to get you.”

Now the phenomenal self habit of the samsara has no intention. It is empty of any intention. And similarly, when you sit in Sunyata, the Sphere of Nothingness, you might realise that the karmic return of your personal self habit is also empty, Sunyata, empty of any intention. But the personal self habit striking the phenomenal self habit is like a steal and a flint stone will produce a spark ... you're fascinated with the spark.

Stop looking at the phenomena and look at the personal self habit. It is empty of phenomena. Empty. It is empty of phenomena. However that, not knowing it to be empty. If something is empty of phenomena, empty of intention, your own, your own personal self habit karmically returning to your vipaka, empty of intention comes and strikes the samsara, the phenomenal self habit which has its own forms. If empty strikes empty, the phenomena, the sparks themselves are like an accident, they themselves are empty. There's two empty things striking together must produce an empty phenomena.

So this world is a mental construct.

Chandrakirti comments that this means the worlds are not objectively established but merely constructed by conceptual thought. Conceptual thought, the one you can think of, is your personal self habit thought.

Again Ariyadeva states in his “Four Hundred” since there is nothing [existent] in desires and so on, whatever mental objects re-appear, there's nothing existent without mental constructs. What intelligent person adheres to so called true objects? There is no true objects in the mental... there's nothing true because they're empty, empty of self, empty of function, empty of desire and so on.

And the clashing of your personal self habit, which is your vipaka, the clashing of that, the unskillful hitting of that on the phenomenal self habit, on the samsara, the outside world... naturally produces something. It must produce something. Because when two things come together, as the Buddha points out, once you get contact, phasa [pali language], contact, things arise.

So they're like a snake, that the phenomena that you place so much importance in is like a snake imagined in a rope. And similarly the very personal self habits are equally empty. They have no use anywhere. They're useless. The outside samsara is useless... because it goes it's way. Your personal self habits are useless and yet the two strike together, there must be some phenomena.

You're so fascinated with the phenomena. Bring your attention back to the stream of personal self habit which is your vipaka, the kammic return and examine that.

So ...like a snake imagined in a rope... in so far as they are mentally constructed while not existing objectively, they have no inherent existence. No inherent existence.

As existence itself goes only with mental construction since a rupa form has no existence, it is just rupa... existence, the becoming, the becoming, the becoming this becoming that, the striking again and again, the ever changing phenomena, that great kaleidoscope of events which you call my life, my life, my happiness, my events, my this my that. That... has no objective status in things because its not rupa. Just like a snake imagined in a striped rope.

We conclude this talk given by Buddha Dhamma Teacher John D Hughes during a five day meditation course held at the Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd in June 1998.

The MP3 file of the recording of this teaching will be available online at www.edharma.org during January 2005.

Thank you very much.

May you not be duped by your phenomenal self habit and personal self habit.

May you be blessed by the Triple Gem.

May you be well and happy.

May all beings be well and happy


The script was transcribed, prepared and edited by Anita Hughes, Julian Bamford, Frank Carter, Andrew Pilskalns, Julie O'Donnell, Alec Sloman, Helen Costas and Evelin Halls.

Disclaimer

As we, the Chan Academy Australia, Chan Academy being a registered business name of the Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd., do not control the actions of our service providers from time to time, make no warranty as to the continuous operation of our website(s). Also, we make no assertion as to the veracity of any of the information included in any of the links with our websites, or another source accessed through our website(s).

Accordingly, we accept no liability to any user or subsequent third party, either expressed or implied, whether or not caused by error or omission on either our part, or a member, employee or other person associated with the Chan Academy Australia (Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd.)

This Radio Script is for Free Distribution. It contains Buddha Dhamma material and is provided for the purpose of research and study.

Permission is given to make printouts of this publication for FREE DISTRIBUTION ONLY. Please keep it in a clean place.

"The gift of Dhamma excels all other gifts".

For more information, contact the Centre or better still, come and visit us.

© 2002. Copyright. The Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd.

Back to Top