The triangulation of Samādhi

Sometimes, when we study literature about Buddhist meditation, it can seem very technical and … almost artificial. One of the great benefits of having such a structured and methodical approach to mental cultivation can become a hindrance on the path- exactly at the point where we lose sight of the fact that whatever we do study, learn and discuss was born out of someone’s meditation practice f o r   t h e   s o l e  purpose of getting us exactly there: a step ahead in our own meditation practice.*

Take for example the so called “5 factors” of  jhāna (or dhyāna or Chan or ZEN) meditation. While the Theravada tradition has  c o n s e r v e d  the Buddha’s early recognition of certain mental or psychological changes occurring when one endeavours into deeper states of concentration it is false to believe that jhāna or concentration meditation is something like a gearbox with five wheels. Even if commentaries and scholastic books sometimes evoke that picture, the process of concentration is something much more fuzzy but (unlike a blueprint in a book) something real! **

The Buddha was a master in the art of observation. As such, it was easy for him to expound his insights in new terms and similes in order to guide his disciples (forest hermits, monastery monks and lay people alike) to the same experiences.

However, quite in contrast to the scholasticism and mental proliferation which the “Buddhist philosophy” very soon after his demise was struck with (think ‘Abhidhamma’ and the natural human tendency to roam in thoughts***) the Buddha himself was quite emancipated from his own concepts.

After all, he being freed from the confinements of names and forms did not mistake signs for “real things”.

And so, to come back from our initial observation about the four jhāna, it is no wonder, that we find a healthy variety of descriptions, by the Buddha himself, for the deeper states of concentration.

In the following few examples we can peek back through time and picture a lively meditation tradition, from whichexperiential insights and experiences shaped the concepts and ideas of centuries of Buddhist and Hindu philosophy to come.

For the current day meditator it might be beneficial as well to see, how the various definitions given by the Buddha about the same deep concentration states allow a certain “triangulation”: Seeing the Buddha as a meditation teacher with alternate descriptions on samādhi might help us to gain confidence about our own experiences and findings. Some descriptions might fit our experience closer than others. We only need a couple of matches to take a step back and suddenly see our own path match the Buddha’s path.

Exhibit A – The most frequent definition:

Just a link. Please read here if you are not familiar with the standard definition of the Jhānas.

Exhibit B – What keeps you away from deeper concentration states (Moggallāna-Saṃyutta):

kāmasahagatā saññāmanasikārā samudācaranti. … vitakkasahagatā saññāmanasikārā samudācaranti. … pītisahagatā saññāmanasikārā samudācaranti … sukhasahagatā saññāmanasikārā samudācaranti.

On the way to the first jhāna Ven. Moggallāna had “encountered perceptions and attention of things related to the sensual pleasures”. Then, in the first jhana on his way to the second jhana, he encountered “perception and attention of thought related” things. Eventually it was bliss which disturbed him and finally even the attention towards happiness (sukha) was keeping him back from moving on.

Exhibit C, the Buddha on the jhanas in a verse (from Snip, v. 1112-3)

‘‘Pahānaṃ kāmacchandānaṃ, domanassāna cūbhayaṃ;

Thinassa ca panūdanaṃ, kukkuccānaṃ nivāraṇaṃ.

‘‘Upekkhāsatisaṃsuddhaṃ, dhammatakkapurejavaṃ;

Aññāvimokkhaṃ pabrūmi, avijjāya pabhedanaṃ’’

The giving up of desire for sensual pleasures as well as giving up melancholy

The removal of tiredness, and the removal of the hindrance of worrying

The cleaning of equanimity and witnessing/mindfulness, the putting a Dhamma-thought as a for-runner

(This) I proclaim the realization of freedom, the destruction of delusion.

(This, BTW, was the entire Buddhist training path in 4 verses – there are summaries of the Tipitaka, after all and the Buddha came up with the most precise ones…

And here the next free-style reference on the jhānas, this time from the Nidāna-Saṃyutta:

saddhūpanisaṃ pāmojjaṃ, pāmojjūpanisā pīti, pītūpanisā passaddhi, passaddhūpanisaṃ sukhaṃ, sukhūpaniso samādhi, samādhūpanisaṃ yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ, yathābhūtañāṇadassanūpanisā nibbidā, nibbidūpaniso virāgo, virāgūpanisā vimutti…

Based on trust is confidence. Based on confidence is bliss. Based on bliss is stilling. Based on stilling is happiness. Based on happiness is absorption. Based on absorption is seeing and knowing as it has become. Based on seeing and knowing as it has become is weariness. Based on weariness is  disenchantment. Based on disenchantment is freedom.

By now it is easy to see the pattern: On the one end is kāma or desire for sensual pleasures. On the other end of the scale is samādhi,  upekkha – a clear (samsuddha) calm observing (upekkha) and alert mind.

We have a period of kāma (normal life), then refined vitakka (a mental topic you apply yourself too, your meditative theme). After that we encounter first pīta some blissful experience followed by sukha (a deeper happiness) culminating in deep neutral observing concentration.

At this point, you are might want to look for dozens of more very interesting references. Just fire up your CST4 and type in the following search string:

pīti* sukha* samādhi*

But, lets get practical, shall we?

First, pick your favorite meditation theme, for instance a simple personal thought of loving kindness: “may all beings be well and happy”. Next, stick to this meditation topic, don’t change it every day or week.

Next, commit yourself to that single, simple mental thought of focus and try to glide on it, like a bird in the sky would on a current of rising warm air.

Finally, check your progress against some of the way pointers given by the Buddha above, triangulate yourself or just send me an email,

Idaṃ vuccati nekkhammasukhaṃ pavivekasukhaṃ upasamasukhaṃ sambodhasukhaṃ, āsevitabbaṃ, bhāvetabbaṃ, bahulīkātabbaṃ; ‘na bhāyitabbaṃ etassa sukhassā’ti vadāmi. MN 66

This is called a happiness of renunciation, a happiness of solitude, a happiness of peace, a happiness of awakening. It has to be practiced, it has to be developed, it needs to be repeated frequently. “Do not fear this happiness”, I say. MN66

======================

* see Snip, v. 331, (one of my favorites):

Viññātasārāni subhāsitāni, sutañca viññātasamādhisāraṃ;

Na tassa paññā ca sutañca vaḍḍhati, yo sāhaso hoti naro pamatto.

Well spoken words have understanding as their essence

And what you heard and understood – it all has concentration as its essence.

But neither knowing nor learning grow,

For that man who is superficial and negligent.

** It more likely resembles the cultivation (bhāvanā) of a seedling or the flight of an eagle.

*** Snip once more, v. 1115 – “Nandisaṃyojano loko, vitakkassa vicāraṇaṃ” – (Sense) delight is the world bondage, and  thought is its roaming around.

The scent of “am”

Have you ever wondered what an Anāgāmī (a non-returner) needs to do or work on in order to attain Arahantship (or final and complete realization of Nirvana)?

Or, for that matter, how – if there are any necessary changes – does one have to adjust one’s meditation practice after attaining to the first stage of the path of enlightenment? Is there a difference in the methods applied by a stream enterer versus a non returner when it comes to their meditation objects? Does the Buddha talk about these things?

For those fascinated with such (admittedly) rather ‘advanced’ but none the less exciting topics – there is an enlightening (pun intended) sutta in the Khandha-Samyutta, called “Khemaka” which addresses exactly this particular question.

It relates the story of a sick monk who had reached the stage of an Anagami. At least that is what he had experienced. The other monks knowing that he was seriously ill were curious about his spiritual development. So they sent another monk as a go-between and asked a couple of questions. Lets have a quick look:

This is the first question they ask to find out about his “attainments”:

“Go to the monk Khemaka and on arrival say to him, ‘The elders, friend Khemaka, say to you, “Concerning these five heaps of identification (or grasping/clinging) described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a heap of identification, feeling as heap of identification, perception as a heap of identification, fabrications as a heap of identification, consciousness as a heap of identification: Do you assume anything with regard to these five identification groups to be self or belonging to self? (kiñci attaṃ vā attaniyaṃ vā samanupassatī”ti)“‘” [en | pi ]

The Venerable Khemaka replies that he does not regard any of those groups or heaps (khandha) of identification (literally ‘taking+up’ or upādāna* ) as self or belonging to a self (na kiñci attaṃ vā attaniyaṃ vā samanupassāmī”’ti.)

When the other elders hear this answer, they immediately believe him to be an Arahant, a fully enlightened one. Especially when we look at the verb samanupassati, we could come to a similar conclusion. Here is why:  This particular verb is used a lot in early canonical contexts where later pali texts and commentaries would prefer to use vipassanā, or “to see clearly”. Both imply a sense of thorough observation. In the Anguttara-Commentary we find samanupassati** defined as:

Samanupassatīti ñāṇena passati.

“Observe” means to see with knowledge.

The question now would be how can you see something with knowledge? The answer to that would throw us back to our previous discussions on the usage of a short marker (sallakha) or label to add a flavor of knowing to the process of seeing, helping the mind to avoid getting drawn into the stream of experience  (i.e. identifying). One example list of observations in this regard can be found in various chapters of the Samyutta Nikaya and other places listing them modes of thorough observation:

124. ‘‘Cattārome, bhikkhave, puggalā santo saṃvijjamānā lokasmiṃ. Katame cattāro? Idha, bhikkhave, ekacco puggalo vivicceva kāmehi…pe… paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati. So yadeva tattha hoti rūpagataṃ vedanāgataṃ saññāgataṃ saṅkhāragataṃ viññāṇagataṃ, te dhamme aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato samanupassati. So kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā suddhāvāsānaṃ devānaṃ sahabyataṃ upapajjati. Ayaṃ, bhikkhave, upapatti asādhāraṇā puthujjanehi.

These four, o monks, people are found in the world. Which four? Here, o monks, a person dwells in the first jhana, having abandoned sensual pleasure etc.. Whatever there is of kinds of form, feeling, perception, intention or (discriminative) consciousness, these things he observes  as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. [AN, IV.]

So, from the above, we could gather that the monks who listened to Ven. Khemakas answer, had reason to believe that he indeed had achieved full realization of Nibbana, and, because he stated that he does not see a self or nothing belonging to self in anything (na kiñci) that he is an accomplished insight meditator of the highest order. However, this is not (yet) the case, as the Ven. Khemaka himself clarifies in his next response:

…na camhi arahaṃ khīṇāsavo; api ca me, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu ‘asmī’ti adhigataṃ, ‘ayamahamasmī’ti na ca samanupassāmī’’ti

With regard to these five groups of clinging, there is nothing I assume to be self or belonging to self, and yet I am not an arahant.  Because there  is in me, o friends, with regard to these five groups of identification a residual lingering (adhi-gata, lit. over-coming) although I don’t assume that ‘I am this.’” [en| pi]

This answer of Ven. Khemaka however, completely bewildered the questioning monks. They are curious however, as they know they talk to someone who seems to be very knowledgeable as to the peculiar “psychological nature” of his attainments:

“Come, friend Dasaka. Go to the monk Khemaka and on arrival say to him, ‘The elders, friend Khemaka, say to you, “Friend Khemaka, this ‘I am’ of which you speak: what do you say ‘I am’? Do you say, ‘I am form,’ or do you say, ‘I am something other than form’? Do you say, ‘I am feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness,’ or do you say, ‘I am something other than consciousness’? This ‘I am’ of which you speak: what do you say ‘I am’?”‘”

At this point in the conversation, Ven. Khemaka felt for the poor messenger monk and said:

“Enough, friend Dasaka. What is accomplished by this running back & forth? Fetch me my staff. I will go to the elder monks myself.”

On arrival he explains the situation of an Anagami with the help of some very interesting similes:

“Friends, it’s not that I say ‘I am form,’ nor do I say ‘I am something other than form.’ It’s not that I say, ‘I am feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness,’ nor do I say, ‘I am something other than consciousness.’ With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, ‘I am’ has not been overcome, although I don’t assume that ‘I am this.’

If someone were to call it the scent of a petal or the scent of the color or the scent of a filament, would he be speaking correctly?”

“No, friend.”

“Then how would he describe it if he were describing it correctly?”

“As the scent of the flower: That’s how he would describe it if he were describing it correctly.”

This  is a great explanation. The elders tried to narrow down what part of his insight observation he still considers as self nor not self. But his remark show that the notion of “am” which is part of his experience, cannot be determined or backtracked to any of the five groups of grasping as such. The remaining “am” notion seems to be nothing more than an echo or shadow which the mechanics of the five groups of grasping invoke – however, when he does look and observe them with insight observation, there is nothing which he could bind his “I am this” against. As you can see, from the stage of an innocent first time meditator via stream entry towards the experience of a once returner, one seems to first shed the dogmas, views and concepts related to an ego or soul. They stand in stark contrast to experiential reality. Eventually what remains is a scent of “(I) am”. And even that will fade away, as Ven. Khemaka continues to explain:

‘‘Kiñcāpi, āvuso, ariyasāvakassa pañcorambhāgiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni bhavanti, atha khvassa hoti – ‘yo ca pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu anusahagato asmīti māno, asmīti chando, asmīti anusayo asamūhato. So aparena samayena pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassī viharati – “iti rūpaṃ”, “iti rūpassa samudayo”, “iti rūpassa atthaṅgamo”; iti vedanā… iti saññā… iti saṅkhārā… iti viññāṇaṃ, iti viññāṇassa samudayo, iti viññāṇassa atthaṅgamo ’  ti. Tassimesu pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassino viharato yopissa hoti pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu anusahagato ‘asmī’ti, māno ‘asmī’ti, chando ‘asmī’ti anusayo asamūhato, sopi samugghātaṃ gacchati.

“Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five groups of identification a going-along ‘I am’, an ‘I am’ measuring, an ‘I am’ impulse, an ‘I am’ tendency which is not eradicated.

But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five clinging-aggregates: ‘Such is form, such its rising, such its disappearance. Such is feeling… Such is perception… Such are fabrications… Such is consciousness, such its rising, such its disappearance.’ As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five groups of identification, the along-going ‘I am’ , the ‘I am’ measuring, the ‘I am’ impulse, the tendency which was not eradicated will be fully obliterated.

Now one of the reasons for quoting this text was of course (again) the obvious construction of using direct speech/thought as an example for applying insight meditation. The above example is so vividly depicted that you could almost think of it as a guided meditation. Close your eyes (dive into a jhana and you can almost right away apply this instruction to your experience – with the caveat that a certain amount of concentration will be helpful, as the amount of sense stimulation would otherwise overwhelm any beginning insight meditator. Let’s see how Ven. Khemaka finishes his beautiful simile:

“Just like a cloth, dirty & stained: Its owners give it over to a washerman, who scrubs it with salt earth or lye or cow-dung and then rinses it in clear water. Now even though the cloth is clean & spotless, it still has a lingering residual scent of salt earth or lye or cow-dung. The washerman gives it to the owners, the owners put it away in a scent-infused wicker hamper, and its lingering residual scent of salt earth, lye, or cow-dung is fully obliterated.

“In the same way, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five clinging-aggregates a lingering residual ‘I am’ conceit, an ‘I am’ desire, an ‘I am’ obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five clinging-aggregates: ‘Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance. Such is feeling… Such is perception… Such are fabrications… Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.’ As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, ‘I am’ obsession is fully obliterated.”

When this was said, the elder monks said to Ven. Khemaka, “We didn’t cross-examine Ven. Khemaka with the purpose of troubling him, just that [we thought] Ven. Khemaka is capable of declaring the Blessed One’s message, teaching it, describing it, setting it forth, revealing it, explaining it, making it plain — just as he has in fact declared it, taught it, described it, set it forth, revealed it, explained it, made it plain.”

That is what Ven. Khemaka said. Gratified, the elder monks delighted in his words.

And while this explanation was being given***, the minds of sixty-some monks, through no clinging, were fully released from fermentations — as was Ven. Khemaka’s. [en | pi]

So here we have a very clear indication of how an Anagami explains himself to his fellow monks. He has overcome all 5 lower fetters, including greed and hatred which are gone and do not appear anymore. But there is still that faint “(i) am” notion/feeling/echo which is not gone yet.

Particular interesting in this regard is the fact that before he breaks apart all possible life experience into the 5 groups of grasping saying that he is not looking at any of those as his self or own. But nevertheless this “adhigatam” of a notion  lit. over-coming of “(I) am” does not leave (yet). But he knows what needs to be done.

It is just a continuation of the same insight meditation principles we read and hear about in other instances:

But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five clinging-aggregates: ‘Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance. Such is feeling… Such is perception… Such are fabrications… Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.’ As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual ‘I am’ conceit, ‘I am’ desire, ‘I am’ obsession is fully obliterated.”

Observation of the 5 groups of grasping and seeing their rising and falling. Eventually, this is what this important lesson is all about, even this “am” notion will disappear.

Ergo: As in the beginning of ones practice towards realization of the four noble truth and gaining of the realization so it continues. The mode of observation and the topic of observation stay the same for the accomplished practitioner: The five groups / six sense sphere’s moment to moment experience and a keen detached knowing observation:

akiñcanaṃ anādānaṃ etaṃ dīpaṃ anāparaṃ

Having nothing, clinging to no thing: That is the island, there is no other. [en]

—————————-

Notes:

*) upādāna … One of those fundamental terms the Buddha uses to describe our relationship to the world. Rendered “identification” because when we do “take + up” one of the five groups (a thorough classification of the building blocks of our six sense experience) this results in an identification, a tam-mayatā. Once identified, we become what we identify with or took up. From that moment on, death is near.

**) samanupassati … lit. sam (together) + anu (following) + passati (to see). To observe, watch – with a slight connotation of “finding” and/or “assuming/regarding”. Its generally interesting to see how this word was used in the context of insight meditation:  Examples

***) If you interpret the little meditation instruction literally it is clear that a “native pali” speaker, esp. when he was a monk eager to attain Nirvana could have embarked on “noting” the rising and disappearing of all five groups right during the discourse itself. In fact, that would have been the most proper way to respond to an instruction like this. In fact, many people honored Buddha’s teaching efforts in this – the most perfect way – and seem to have applied his instructions immediately while listening. One of the greatest hallmarks of the Dhamma: its pragmatism!

Seven Suns vs Civilizational Conceit

One way our ego and conceit expresses itself is the infatuation with

this will or should go on forever, it will not change. at least not now, when it is, or should be, the way I want it to be…

i.e. anicca, dukkha, anatta

And so born out of an untrained perception of life, thirst (tanha) grows into conceit (mana) and conceit meshes into views (ditthi) which sooner or later clash with reality.

For us to get a clearer picture of our fragile situation and in order to arise a sense of urgency and make best use of the opportunity of our short human life, the Buddha suggested the contemplation of the 4 elements:

Now there comes a time, friends, when the external liquid property is provoked, and at that time the external earth property vanishes. So when even in the external earth property — so vast — inconstancy will be discerned, destructibility will be discerned, a tendency to decay will be discerned, changeability will be discerned, then what in this short-lasting body, sustained by clinging, is ‘I’ or ‘mine’ or ‘what I am’? It has here only a ‘no.’

Now there comes a time, friends, when the external liquid property is provoked and washes away village, town, city, district, & country. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean drops down one hundred leagues, two hundred… three hundred… four hundred… five hundred… six hundred… seven hundred leagues. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean stands seven palm-trees deep, six… five… four… three… two palm-trees deep, one palm-tree deep. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean stands seven fathoms deep, six… five… four… three… two fathoms deep, one fathom deep. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean stands half a fathom deep, hip-deep, knee-deep, ankle deep. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean is not even the depth of the first joint of a finger… [MN 28]

Famous also the following apocalyptic description, from times where the universe catches up with our slow-motion activities and ego-centric perspectives:

I heard thus. At one time The Blessed One was living in Ambapali’s mango orchard. The Blessed One addressed the monks from there:

“Monks, formations are impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be released from all formations.

Monks, the highest peak of the Himalayas, is eighty four thousand yojanas high from sea level. Eighty four thousand yojanas in breadth. It is eighty four thousand yojanas deep down in the sea. Monks, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of years there comes a time when it does not rain. When it does not rain, all seed and vegetation born plants such as medicinal grass, plants trees and forests dry up and wither and are no more. Monks, thus formations are impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be released from all formations.

…the great ponds maintained by the great rivers such as Anotatta, Sihapapata, Rathakara, Kannamunda, Kunala, Chadanta and Mandakini dry up and wither, they become no more. Monks, thus formations are impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be released from all formations.

…the water in the great ocean recedes one hundred yojanas, two hundred yojanas three hundred yojanas, five hundred yojanas, six hundred yojanas and seven hundred yojanas. The water recedes to the height of seven, six, five, four, three, two palms and even one palm. The water recedes to the height of seven, six, five, four, three, two men, or even one man. It recedes to half the height of a man. It recedes to the knee depth of a man, to the ankle depth of a man. ….there would not be water in the ocean to wet the fingers up to the knots. Monks, thus formations are impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be released from all formations.

…the great earth and the peak of the Himalayas blazes and catch fire. When the great earth and the peak of the Himalayas blaze and catch fire, flames tossed by the winds reach up to the world of Brahma. When the peak of the Himalaya mountain burns, peaks as high as a hundred yojanas, two hundred yojanas, three hundred yojanas, four hundred yojanas and five hundred yojanas crumble.

Monks, thus formations are impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be released from all formations. Monks, when the earth and the Himalaya peak is burning, whatever divine sayings and beliefs be, they also get burnt and are no more, would attained right view remain?

Monks, in the past, there was a Teacher called Sunetta, one free of greed who helped to cross the ford. The Teacher Sunetta had innumerable hundreds of disciples. This Teacher taught, to be born in the world of Brahma. Those who completely knew the dispensation of Sunetta, after death, were born in a good state in the world of Brahma. Some of those who did not know the complete dispensation of Sunetta, after death, were born with lower devine realms. Others were born with high clans of warriors, Brahmins and householders.

Then it occurred to the Teacher Sunetta. `It is not suitable for me to be born in the same plane as my disciples, after death, what if I develop loving kindness further.’

Then the Teacher Sunetta developed loving kindness for seven years. Having developed loving kindness for seven years, he did not come to this world for seven forward and backward world cycles. During the forward world cycles he was born a radiant god and during the backward world cycles was born in an empty Brahma palace. There he was Brahma the supreme Lord, not conquered with sure insight wielding authority

There, he was Brahma, Brahma the great, the unconquered lord and master with sure insight, holding authority for seven times. Thirty six times he was Sakka the king of gods. Innumerable hundreds of times he was the righteous universal monarch, winning the four directions and establishing states. Monks, he was endowed with these seven jewels, such as the jewel of the wheel, the elephant, the horse, the jewel, the woman, the householder and the advisor. Monks, he had over a thousand courageous sons with valiant figures, for crushing foreign armies. They lived ruling over the earth righteously, without weapons as far as the limit of the ocean. Monks, that Teacher Sunetta with long life and long standing was not released from birth, decay, death, grief, lament, unpleasantness and displeasure, I say not released from unpleasantness.

What is the reason? For not realizing and experiencing four things. What four?

Not realizing and experiencing the virtues, concentration, wisdom and release of the noble ones. Now he has realized and experienced the virtues, concentration, wisdom and release of the noble ones. The craving to be is uprooted, the leader of being is destroyed. Now he has no more birth. The Blessed One further said:

Famous Gotama, has realized noble virtues, concentration, wisdom and release

And declaring the Teaching to end unpleasantness is mindfully extinguished.

[AN, 7.66 The Seven Suns]

A nice visualization of the impermanence of our Earth and the fragile conditions of civilization below:

Did you catch that nice comment?

“I thought we have more time”

At the same time, this trailer shows us another point, intrinsically linked with seeing reality as it is: The power of pictures, sounds, sights etc… as the source of our mind’s own cinematic movie creation. May you free yourself in this very life from the samsaric screen!

Handa dāni, bhikkhave, āmantayāmi vo, vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādethā”ti. Ayaṃ tathāgatassa pacchimā vācā.

“Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!”

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

[DN, 16]

Understanding Vipassanā

Is the practice of vipassanā the application of viriya (energy), sati (mindfulness), samadhi (concentration) but only when it generates wisdom (paññā), more specifically ñāṇadassana (knowing and seeing)?

Introduction

The Sutta-Pitaka has a couple of texts which are not the word of the Buddha but close reporters. They originated and developed during the first 100 to 300 years after the parinibbana of the Buddha, such as the Theragatha, Culla- and Mahaniddesa, Patisambhidhamagga, Nettipakarana, Petakopadesa and Milindapanha. Although traditionally considered “canonical” they show traces of further developing pali, new terminology and efforts of systematization.

Thus they shed a very profound light on the early teachings of the Buddha as they supplement the Buddha’s own explanations from different angles with additional expressions, explanations. In fact they contain the understanding of Buddhism as present during the first few generations of “Buddhist meditation masters”. This is very helpful, because the more explanations on some of the profound concepts  in the teachings of the Buddha we can get the better we can understand their implications and meaning.

In the Cullaniddesa (which is a thesaurus style commentary on another text from the discourses of the Buddha), for instance, we read this beautiful passage. It is a comment on the Parayana-vagga of the Sutta-Nipata:

The Pali Text

1041.

‘‘Yāni sotāni lokasmiṃ, Sati tesaṃ nivāraṇaṃ;

Sotānaṃ saṃvaraṃ brūmi,paññāyete pidhiyyare’’.

Whatever streams there are in this world, mindfulness hinders them;

I tell you what blocks them, it is through wisdom that they are stopped.

The paraphrasing early commentary explains:

Sati tesaṃ nivāraṇanti. Satīti yā sati anussati paṭissati sati saraṇatā dhāraṇatā apilāpanatā asammussanatā sati satindriyaṃ satibalaṃ sammāsati satisambojjhaṅgo ekāyanamaggo – ayaṃ vuccati sati. Nivāraṇanti āvaraṇaṃ nīvaraṇaṃ saṃvaraṇaṃ rakkhanaṃ gopananti – sati tesaṃ nivāraṇaṃ.

“Mindfulness hinders them”. “Mindfulness”, is that mindfulness which is an observation, returning attention, mindfulness, carrying, non-floating [altern. repetition], un-forgetfulness, mindfulness, faculty of mindfulness, power of mindfulness, mindfulness as component of awakening, the direct path – this is called mindfulness.

Paññāyete pidhiyyareti. Paññāti yā paññā pajānanā vicayo pavicayo dhammavicayo sallakkhaṇā upalakkhaṇā paccupalakkhaṇā paṇḍiccaṃ kosallaṃ nepuññaṃ vebhabyā cintā upaparikkhā bhūrī [bhūri (ka.)] medhā pariṇāyikā vipassanā sampajaññaṃ patodo paññā paññindriyaṃ paññābalaṃ paññāsatthaṃ paññāpāsādo paññāāloko paññāobhāso paññāpajjoto paññāratanaṃ amoho dhammavicayo sammādiṭṭhi. Paññāyete pidhiyyareti – paññāyete sotā pidhīyanti pacchijjanti na savanti na āsavanti na sandanti nappavattanti. ‘‘Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā’’ti jānato passato paññāyete sotā pidhīyanti pacchijjanti na savanti na āsavanti na sandanti nappavattanti. ‘‘Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti jānato passato paññāyete sotā pidhīyanti pacchijjanti na savanti na āsavanti na sandanti nappavattanti. ‘‘Sabbe saṅkhārā anattā’’ti jānato passato paññāyete sotā pidhīyanti pacchijjanti na savanti na āsavanti na sandanti nappavattanti. ‘‘Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā’’ti jānato passato paññāyete sotā pidhīyanti pacchijjanti na savanti na āsavanti na sandanti nappavattanti. ‘‘Saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇa’’nti…and so forth

“It is through wisdom ( knowing) that they are stopped”. “Wisdom”, that is the wisdom which is a knowing, examination, breaking apart, un-heaping the things  (see Thag 593), marking, up-marking (tagging), back-marking, skill, proficiency, experience, expertise, thought, on-looking, wisdom, wiseness, insight, clear-sight,  clear comprehension (lit. “together-knowing”), a spur, a knowing , the faculty of knowing, the power of knowing, the skill of knowing, confidence of knowing, the light of knowing, the shining of knowing, the lamp of knowing, the jewel of knowing, the unbewilderedness, the unheaping of things, the right view.

“It is through knowing that they are stopped” – it is through knowing that these streams are shut down, come asunder, do not flow, do not rush on, do not proceed, do not continue. “All formations are impermanent” thus knowing and seeing for such a one through wisdom these streams are shut down, they come asunder, do not flow, do not rush on, do not proceed, do not continue. “All formations are painful”, “All formations are impermanent”, “Ignorance based are the formations”, “Formation based is consciousness”…[dependent origination]….thus knowing and seeing for such a one through wisdom these streams are shut down, they come asunder, do not flow, do not rush on, do not proceed, do not continue.

[CullaNiddesa - Parayanavagga, pi]

A very enlightening paragraph, IMHO…here we can see that “sati” is defined as  the faculty of staying with an object and the concept of paññā is brought in (as a separate additional notion) and points towards the actual insight creating part of insight meditation!

Such a differentiation between sati and paññā would explain why the suttas see sati so close to the concept of samadhi.

Sati, most commonly translated as “mindfulness”, serves more or less as a foundation – together with viriya (energy) and samadhi (concentration) for ultimately the development of paññā (or “wisdom”, “knowing reality as it is”), as indicated in the above quote.

We could then take a step further and think of the paññā- or knowing-part in our vipassana practice as the actual “labelling” or “noting” activity which identifies the object, “tags” or “marks” it (sallakkheti) so to speak, to facilitate a seeing of the frames instead of the motion picture of existence, while sati just makes the mind stay with this mode of observation, holding it back from sinking or immersing into the storyline again, the identification, the creation of mental proliferation (papañcā) in varying degrees (understood as taṇhā, māna, diṭṭhi).

In other words:

Sati, as a faculty of memory appears in the early pali texts and commentaries as the ability to stay with an object (“saraṇatā dhāraṇatā apilāpanatā asammussanatā, i.e. “remembering, keeping, non-floating or repetition, non-loosing”).

Together with viriya, or energy, it allows the mind to raise concentration or samādhi. These three forces are said to be standing on the shoulders of each other* – which is also represented in the way we find them listed in the noble eightfold path.

Here it is sati’s only function not to immerse or sink into an object but to continuously follow it or carry it.

The identification with an object leads to the “floating with” objects and happens when we loose our awareness (sammosa), i.e. we become forgetful of the task at hand, forget to repeat. In this case our effort in an ongoing attention at the setup of experience itself, not its content. (Very much unlike concentration, where it is sati which keeps the attention one one particular object of concentration, a sense object. In insight meditation the attention is not at one particular sense object at the expense of all others – the attention is at the process itself, disecting it forcefully with applied paññā, i.e. sam+pajaññā). So in vipassanā we have shifted from the “normal” state of mind, which is attending ANY of the six sense objects’ content via concentration which meant attending only ONE selected sense object to now attending to the PROCESS of experience itself.

However, in order to do that – and to loosen the compelling story-telling force of the six sense objects (including thinking!!) we need paññā here in form of tagging/marking of some sort to quickly “know”, “recognize” something as what it is, “see” it and let go of it immediately. If we were to attend to any of these objects longer than necessary we are already proliferating inside the context of a content provided (even if we think in thoughts of the Dhamma) and thereby miss the actual role of paññā: seeing anything(!) as coming, going, painful in its unreliable nature, void of control, self-less, fake.

When we get carried away by the “story” the sense objects tell us (in our vipassana meditation), we therefore first loose our wisdom (paññā), then our concentration on the process, then our sati and eventually our energy. In fact, you could also view it the other way round: each of these mental skills developed props up the other one. Only by aligning them properly, paññā is able to do its job.

Therefore sati is said to be the power of observation, of not slipping into the objects but to be constantly aware of one (samatha) or their process (vipassana). An ability which first is trained, then mastered and eventually comes natural to (and in increasing amounts via Stream-Entry up to) the Arahant due to his freedom.

Here is the most fascinating aspect though: While this is probably no new information, the role of paññā as indicated in this text is separately defined from mindfulness.

Here, paññā is not just a mere synonym for sati or mindfulness! Yes, it almost looks as if sati alone is not the factor per se developing wisdom and enlightenment – at least according to the interpretation of a passage as quoted above.

Here, it appears, that in a sequence of strengthening faculties such as effort, mindfulness and concentration eventually a certain form of knowing or paññā has to be established in order to “realize” the four noble truth. This distinction between sati as support for concentration and sati with regard to a mode of observation leading to wisdom could be the reason for so much confusion with regard to the role of samātha vs. vipassanā meditation. Both need make use of the last three members of the noble eightfold path, but especially vipassana goes beyond in directing the developed (and concentrated) mind to the source of suffering in order to achieve wisdom.

That determining of the source and elements of existance is not something – or so it seems – that “just” happens to appear by mere observation of the conventional content and storyline our senses present to us as the finished product of their activity.

In the Buddha’s words, we might add, it is “yoniso” manasikāro not just “manasikāro” which is essential. It is the attention which goes to the source (yoni, lit. womb) of existence not simply attention (manasikāra) or even worse an attention which is a-yoniso – basically that kind of attention we use all day long, when we drive our cars, speak to other people, etc. There to “sati” and “manasikāra” are at work, but they further the delusion of permanence and personality.

So it is true, both samathā or concentration meditation and insight meditation need mindfulness: Both of them need ongoing observation. However, while the samathā meditation needs sati to stay with its one object (not necessarily applying paññā), the vipassana practice does not generate wisdom merely by utilizing sati.

Now that is a problem (for certain circles of vipassanā practice, especially in the weakened, wisdom-stripped form we find in the West). If sati alone would make us enlightened then sati would be the last member in the noble eightfold path, not samadhi. If samadhi alone would make us enlightened then there would be no mentioning of yathābhūta ñāṇadassana, or yoniso manasikāro, there would be no need to name the nexus of paticcasamuppada or the intrinsics of the mechanism of now, when consciousness is propped up by name and form. No need for sammādiṭṭhi and sampaññā and no need for entire Sutta collections like the book on the six sense spheres or the five groups of grasping.

But because these things  have to be seen, because they are the key for sati&samadhi to drill into, they make the cornerstone of Buddhist practice and obviously get mentioned more than anything else in the Tipitaka.

And because by looking at the 3D 6D movie of life in a way as to identify its individual frames and not fall for its story, it is paññā, the knowing, which is at the heart of vipassanā in form of developing ñāṇa (insight) and dassanā (seeing).

But it is not as mysterious as it sounds. Because indeed, if you go through the Cullaniddesa/SuttaNipata quote above you will see that what is understood as the practice of developing paññā or wisdom/insight in the early pali texts is ultimately linked to the practice of viriya, sati, samadhi as a manifestation of yoniso manasikara (attention which looks to the origin) or yathabhuta nyanadassana (the knowing and seeing of things as they present themselves, as they have come into existance).

An analogy. These three factors of the noble eightfold path which comprise “bhavanā” or “meditational development” are used as some sort of a laser. But any good laser is only as good as the work it is put to. It needs to be directed properly. This laser is not “Buddhist” by nature, but the direction it was pointed to, and the object it was applied and the person who understood why this would make a fundamental difference, indeed, was uniquely Buddhist. What is that direction? Obviously, the 4 noble truths, summarized in short as: the five groups of grasping, our obsession with them  and the true nature of their characteristics, which, if seen without making any exception, will lead to a transcendental (literally) experience.

The directing of this laser in the appropriate fashion is the wisdom part of the training. And the technique used – and here of course disagreement might abound – is some form of noting/labeling/naming/recognising/marking/calling out the characteristics of our experience, i.e. the five groups of grasping. But this is something which, if you get to this point in your own personal practice, you can of course find out easily – what method helps you best in not getting drawn into the ruminations of your 6 (!, again, including thinking!) senses, the tricky show they put up to pull us in – so far, personally, I haven’t seen anything working better than the noting technique esp. if used with a very limited set of labels (see this article, my favorite on the topic).

So, the bottom line is this, I guess: Sati supports Samadhi. Neither of them alone make the Christian mystic who experiences the Brahma Viharas in jhanic experiences an Arhant. Samadhi was practiced before and after the Buddha and observation, sati, if not sustained by concentration, is a weak laser, unreliable to uncover the fabric of existance not enough to support the generating of wisdom. The Buddha’s diamond to cut through delusion is wisdom, as in sila, samadhi, panna. And that paññā, while resting heavily on energy, mindfulness and concentration is knowing the nature of our experience as it presents itself to us. Again, not attending the s t o r y of our six senses but h o w they fabricate that story which keeps us trapped between longing and rejecting.

Lets close with some voices from the Commentaries…

Yaṃ viditvāti yaṃ dhammaṃ ‘‘sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā’’tiādinā nayena sammasanto viditvā.

“What one has experienced” – whatever object one has experienced, noting (lit. touching) it in this way “sabbe sankhara anicca” and so forth

Yaṃ viditvā sato caranti viditaṃ katvā tulayitvā tīrayitvā vibhāvayitvā vibhūtaṃ katvā, ‘‘sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā’’ti viditaṃ katvā tulayitvā tīrayitvā vibhāvayitvā vibhūtaṃ katvā, ‘‘sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti… ‘‘sabbe dhammā anattā’’ti…pe… ‘‘yaṃ kiñci samudayadhammaṃ sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhamma’’nti viditaṃ katvā tulayitvā tīrayitvā vibhāvayitvā vibhūtaṃ katvā.

“What one having experienced/learnt/got to know one proceeds mindfully” is having made the  experience, having weighed it, examined it, having developed it, having made it distinct; “all formations are impermanent” thus having made the experience, having weighed it, examined it, having developed it having made it distinct (vi-bhūta).

“all things are not-self”..etc..”whatever is subject to arising all that is also subject to cessation” thus having made the experience, having weighed it, examined it, having developed it having made it distinct.

…and the commentary on the Samyuttanikaya’s chapter on sense impressions contains a remarkable summary of vipassana instructions as they were known to Theravadin practice during the time of the commentaries (100 BC to approx. 300AD). This will be part of another separate post but here a straight forward translation as it adds some perspective to everything mentioned before:

So ‘‘vipassanaṃ paṭṭhapessāmī’’ti upādārūpakammaṭṭhānavasena cakkhupasādādayo pariggahetvā ‘‘ayaṃ rūpakkhandho’’ti vavatthapeti, manāyatanaṃ ‘‘arūpakkhandho’’ti. Iti sabbānipetāni nāmañceva rūpañcāti nāmarūpavasena vavatthapetvā, tesaṃ paccayaṃ pariyesitvā vipassanaṃ vaḍḍhetvā, saṅkhāresammasantoanupubbena arahatte patiṭṭhāti. Idaṃ ekassa bhikkhuno yāva arahattā kammaṭṭhānaṃ kathitaṃ hoti.

He thinks: “I will begin with the practice of vipassanā” and whatever form he has taken up by practising his meditation object having caught it from the eye, ear, etc. entrances he designates (points out, defines = vavatthapeti) it so: “This is the group of form” and if it is a mental entrance “This is a formless group”**.

Thus, having designated ALL of these so: “this is just name, just form” according to them being name-and-form, he develops (increases) his clear-sight (vipassana) having searched for their cause/origin/support, he attains the Arahantship by and by through seeing (sammasanto is lit. “touching”) the formations.

===

*Thus satipatthana could be understood as sati+patthana, the mindfulness and its objects. Sati directed towards the five groups of grasping is sati aiding in the development of wisdom (whereas sati applied on an object like “light” aids in the development of concentration on light, it is here that sati applied on the nature of the body, sensations etc. it aids in the concentration on the nature of reality, sparking insights into the mechanics of the five groups of grasping, developing detachment and finally release).

**This paragraph has a LOT to say about ancient vipassana practice and is very condensed in its description. A couple of notes: The meditator seems to make up his mind to start with vipassana (probably under the guidance of some meditation teaching preceptor) and then takes ANY of the six senses sense impressions as he “catches” (pariggaheti) them through one of the six sense organs (pasāda) and “designates, points out, determines” (see definition of vavatthapeti in the PED), i.e. he “labels” or “notes” them in this way: “This is a form” – if his awareness catches the object-aspect of the five groups of grasping and he labels “This is not a form” when he catches feelings, perceptions, intentions, conscious awareness of the object  (anything “subjective”) and notes that too.

This way he basically just experiences the five groups of grasping simply as what they are: namely “names” (or name evoking, see Nyananandas discussion on this in his first Nibbana sermons, anything “subjective”) and forms (the “objective” reality). By seeing them in this fashion he becomes aware of their foundation and relationship (paccaya) which is the interplay between name-form and consciousness. When he proceeds in this way, so the commentary, he eventually will realize arahantship (at the end of the path) by relentlessly “touching” or “observing” all formations in this manner.

Seeing the Seeing of the Disappearing disappear

One may wonder why and how the modern vipassana movement was revived a little bit more than a century ago in Burma.

When we look back at the history of Theravada countries in the 19th century, many of these countries actually went through a phase of pali revival. The printing presses and first Asian publishers, supported by a wake of national identity and longing for independance, started to pickup Buddhist texts and support Buddhist causes. Knowledge disseminated quicker, easier. Burma’s leadership in pali studies was definitely a role model for Thailand and Sri Lanka. Reading the commentaries of course helped scholastically inclined personalities to further their knowledge, but eventually practically inclined monks soon focused their attention on the Visuddhimagga.

Some old temples in Sri Lanka give a prime example of this. If you go through their libraries you will be astonished to see how many printed editions of pali texts can be found which all originated around the same time as the vipassana system was revived in Burma. When this first Buddhist reformation was slowly underway (partially as a response to the relentless efforts of Christian missionaries) the Visuddhimagga with its chapters on samatha and vipassana meditation became a center point of interest.*

Not only does the Visuddhimagga (“Path to Purity”) explain concentration meditation in a very detailed fashion – at least giving you some bright ideas where to start – the same is true for insight meditation and references on its characteristics as explained in the later chapters of the Visuddhimagga.

Still, reading the Visuddhimagga (or in any translations) is a daunting adventure. Scholastic platitudes abound.

However, there is one reason why reading the Visuddhimagga especially in pali can be of added value: Many of the associations which are implicit can only be detected with some prior knowledge of the suttas and their terminology. These references are difficult to uncover when studying a translation (which had to deal with dry scholasticism and commentarial grammar) although Ven. Ñāṇamolis footnotes do a great job in this regard.

This is why recently I was struck when reading  the chapter on Bhanganupassana in the Visuddhimagga in pali. My first thought was: Is this a different book?!

This is where the journey starts:

738. Puna udayabbayañāṇe yogo kimatthiyoti ce? Lakkhaṇasallakkhaṇattho. Udayabbayañāṇaṃ hi heṭṭhā dasahi upakkilesehi upakkiliṭṭhaṃ hutvā yāthāvasarasato tilakkhaṇaṃ sallakkhetuṃ nāsakkhi. Upakkilesavimuttaṃ pana sakkoti. Tasmā lakkhaṇasallakkhaṇatthamettha puna yogo karaṇīyo.

Again yoking to the insight of rising and falling has which purpose? The purpose of noting/labelling/marking the characteristics [lit. 'Noting the Notables'].

Because before the insight of rising and falling was besmeared with the ten defilements one was unable to note/label/mark the three characteristics as they really are (as they appear)**.

The next paragraph is not that important for our discussion, but I added it anyway, this time in Bhikkhu Ñāṇamolis translation, just so you get the context…

739. Lakkhaṇāni pana kissa amanasikārā kena paṭicchannattā na upaṭṭhahanti? Aniccalakkhaṇaṃ tāva udayabbayānaṃ amanasikārā santatiyā paṭicchannattā na upaṭṭhāti. Dukkhalakkhaṇaṃ abhiṇhasampaṭipīḷanassa amanasikārā iriyāpathehi paṭicchannattā na upaṭṭhāti. Anattalakkhaṇaṃnānādhātuvinibbhogassa amanasikārā ghanena paṭicchannattā na upaṭṭhāti. Udayabbayampana pariggahetvā santatiyā vikopitāya aniccalakkhaṇaṃ yāthāvasarasato upaṭṭhāti. Abhiṇhasampaṭipīḷanaṃ manasikatvā iriyāpathe ugghāṭite dukkhalakkhaṇaṃ yāthāvasarasato upaṭṭhāti. Nānādhātuyo vinibbhujitvā ghanavinibbhoge kate anattalakkhaṇaṃ yāthāvasarasato upaṭṭhāti.

Now the characteristics fail to become apparent when something is not given attention and so something conceals them. What is that? Firstly, the characteristic of impermanence does not become apparent because, when rise and fall are not given attention, it is concealed by continuity. The characteristic of pain does not become apparent because, when continuous oppression is not given attention, it is concealed by the postures. The characteristic of not self does not become apparent because, when resolution into the various elements is not given attention, it is concealed by compactness.

However, when continuity is disrupted by discerning rise and fall, the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent in its true nature. [See our discussion on this in a prior posting]. When the postures are exposed by attention to continous oppression, the characteristic of pain becomes apparent in its true nature. When the resolution of the compact is effected by resolution into elements, the characteristic of not-self becomes apparent in its true nature.***

740. Ettha ca aniccaṃ, aniccalakkhaṇaṃ, dukkhaṃ, dukkhalakkhaṇaṃ, anattā, anattalakkhaṇanti ayaṃ vibhāgo veditabbo. Tattha aniccanti khandhapañcakaṃ. Kasmā? Uppādavayaññathattabhāvā , hutvā abhāvato vā…

And here the following differences should be understood: the impermanent, and the characteristic of impermanence; the painful, and the characteristic of pain; the not-self, and the characteristic of not-self. Herein, the five aggregates are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall and change, or because of their non-existence after having been.

‘‘Yadaniccaṃ taṃ dukkha’’nti (saṃ. ni. 3.15) vacanato pana tadeva khandhapañcakaṃ dukkhaṃ. Kasmā? Abhiṇhapaṭipīḷanā…

Those same five aggregates are painful because of the words: “What is impermanent is painful”. Why? Because of continuous oppression.

‘‘Yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadanattā’’ti (saṃ. ni. 3.15) pana vacanato tadeva khandhapañcakaṃ anattā. Kasmā? Avasavattanato, avasavattanākāroanattalakkhaṇaṃ.

Those same five aggregates are not self because of the words “What is painful is not self”. Why? Because there is not exercising of power over them.

So far so good. Now comes another important paragraph:

Tayidaṃ sabbampi ayaṃ yogāvacaro upakkilesavimuttena vīthipaṭipannavipassanāsaṅkhātena udayabbayānupassanāñāṇena yāthāvasarasato sallakkheti.

The diligent practicioner (yogāvacaro)  notes (sallakkheti) all of this (tay’idam sabbampi) as it presents itself (yāthavasara-sato) ** with a knowing and observation of the rising and falling, that is free from defilements (upakkilesa) and that is an insight which follows the path.

From a vipassana meditation standpoint the translation of this last paragraph makes sense. We continue noting (labelling/marking – sallakkheti) as “impermanent” etc. whatever our mind goes to (experiences) or whatever enters our mind.

The continuity of doing so has become possible because we overcame certain mental defilements which blotted our ability to continuously observe. Furthermore our knowing is observing the arising and disappearing and the clear sight (vipassana) is following with the practice.

It is interesting to see how the Visuddhimagga in this last little paragraph draws a similar bridge between the sutta’s description of the insight process and a noting process which Mahasi later re-energizes.

But this connection becomes even more obvious when you turn the page:

Bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇakathā

741. Tassevaṃ sallakkhetvā punappunaṃ ‘‘aniccaṃ dukkhamanattā’’ti rūpārūpadhamme tulayato tīrayato taṃ ñāṇaṃ tikkhaṃ hutvā vahati, saṅkhārā lahuṃ upaṭṭhahanti, ñāṇe tikkhe vahante saṅkhāresu lahuṃ upaṭṭhahantesu uppādaṃ vā ṭhitiṃ vā pavattaṃ vā nimittaṃ vā na sampāpuṇāti. Khayavayabhedanirodheyeva sati santiṭṭhati. Tassa ‘‘evaṃ uppajjitvā evaṃ nāma saṅkhāragataṃ nirujjhatī’’ti passato etasmiṃ ṭhāne bhaṅgānupassanaṃ nāma vipassanāñāṇaṃ uppajjati.

Now, this is a pretty powerful paragraph. It starts out like this:

Having thus noted/marked, again and again weighing and examining form- (object) and non-form- (subject) related things thus: “impermanent, painful, not self”, he proceeds, his knowing having become really swift, and the formations establish (themselves) lightly/easily; and, while his knowledge is fast and the formations appear easily he does not obtain the rising, staying, persisting nor object. Quite contrary his sati establishes itself firmly in the destruction, cessation, breaking up and cessation.

For him who sees thus: “So having come into being so namely these formations cease” in this state the vipassana insight called ‘Observation of Breaking up’ arises.

{Here, for comparison purposes, Ñāṇamolis translation. It is really an excellent translation, but does not attach any importance to the way the punappunaṃ ‘‘aniccaṃ dukkhamanattā’’ti is being used.}

>>When he repeatedly observes in this way, and examines and investigates material and immaterial states, [to see] that they are impermanent, painful, and not self, then if his knowledge works keenly, formations quickly become apparent.<<

{whereas slightly more literal it would read: again and again weighing … thus: “impermanent, painful, not self”.}

So, one paragraph before Buddhaghosa tells us that a diligent practicioner (yogāvacaro)  notes/labels/observes/marks (sallakkheti) all of this (tay’idam sabbampi) as it presents itself (yāthavasara-sato)**. He was referring to the suttas ‘‘Yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadanattā’’ti formula of explaining the observation of the three characteristics but in this powerful passage he ties those two ideas closer together and says that

Tassevaṃ sallakkhetvā, punappunaṃ ‘‘aniccaṃ dukkhamanattā’’ti tīrayato

For him who thus noted, again and again observing so: “imperment, dukkha, non-self”.

…eventually the insight knowledge of bhanga or dissolution arises….(which, BTW quite a few among readers of this blog have probably experienced in their own vipassana meditation. Here a short “contemporary” word on this insight experience by Mahasi Sayadaw:

At such a stage, the arising of formations, that is, the first phase of the process, is not apparent (as it is in the case of knowledge of arising and passing away), but there is apparent only the dissolution, that is, the final phase, having the nature of vanishing. Therefore the meditator’s mind does not take delight in it at first, but he may be sure that soon, after becoming familiar (with that stage of the practice), his mind will delight in the cessation (of the phenomena) too, which is called their dissolution. With this assurance he should again turn to the practice of continuous noticing. [Mahasi Sayadaw, Progress of Insight, Chapter 6]

So our current meditative experience using a noting system as an approach to establish our attention/witnessing (sati) of the five groups of grasping seems quite in line with the Visuddhimaggas explanation at this point.

And the Visuddhimagga draws a direct connection between this insight activity and the “seeing and knowing of the rising and falling” as mentioned in the suttas, where it is said that this type of insight into impermanence serves as a  trigger to the process of enlightenment. If this is the case, than the idea of a meditation as expressed in such lines as

‘‘Sukhaṃ vā yadi vā dukkhaṃ, adukkhamasukhaṃ saha;
Ajjhattañca bahiddhā ca, yaṃ kiñci atthi veditaṃ.
‘‘Etaṃ dukkhan” ti ñatvāna, mosadhammaṃ palokinaṃ;
Phussa phussa vayaṃ passaṃ, evaṃ tattha virajjatī’’ti.

Whatever there is that can be felt/experienced, inside or outside,
Pleasure or pain, or neither pleasure nor pain;
Having known it so: “This is painful” of deceptive nature, disolving
In every moment of contact (“phussa, phussa” – lit. “touched, touched”)
Seeing its passing away, thus he there becomes disenchanted.

[Sutta Nipāta, Dvayatānupassana Sutta, v. 743, en]

..is exactly as what the Visuddhimagga sees here too: a description of meditation, rather than just a philosophical statement. A sujet for and application of meditation rather than a religious dogma or purely philosophical statement.

While we happen to be at this point: The Visuddhimagga then goes on to quote the Patisambhidamagga and makes a profound remark:

‘‘Kathaṃ ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā bhaṅgānupassane paññā vipassane ñāṇaṃ? Rūpārammaṇatā cittaṃ uppajjitvā bhijjati, taṃ ārammaṇaṃ paṭisaṅkhā tassa cittassa bhaṅgaṃ anupassati.

How is the observation of the breaking up of objects a knowledge with regard to insight?

The mind too, which has the form as its object, arises and breaks up. He watches the breaking up of that mind which (just) observed the breaking up of a form object.

This is really quite an amazing thing to watch/experience in vipassana. As these old texts (the Patisambhidamagga  was probably canonized around 150-200 years after the Buddha) highlight it is quite a show and a sign of an advanced state of mindfulness and skill in observation to be so un-fooled by the mind that one is even able to see the impermanence of the “watcher”. The Visuddhimagga adds:

Tassa cittassa bhaṅgaṃ anupassatīti yena cittena taṃ rūpārammaṇaṃ khayato vayato diṭṭhaṃ, tassa cittassa aparena cittena bhaṅgaṃ anupassatīti attho. Tenāhu porāṇā ‘‘ñātañca ñāṇañca ubhopi vipassatī’’ti.

“He watches the breaking up of that mind” – having seen the cessation and dissappearing of the form object with his mind, he watches in the next moment (aparena, later) that particular mind’s breaking up. Therefore the ancient meditation masters (porāṇā) have said: “He sees clearly both: the known and the knowing”

So cool It sounds like a ZEN koan:

ñātañca ñāṇañca ubhopi vipassatī

The known and the knowing – both of which he sees clearly.

Something you can imagine an old hermit monk to have said to his disciples,  which was later recorded in the Patisambhidhamagga and is now referenced by Buddhaghosa. Which is true for many other hints these late canonical and early none canonical texts give us with regards to early Buddhist meditation practice.

======Notes=====

*so much so, that you can find old Sinhalese editions of the Visuddhimagga with interlinear translations. Sometimes one sentence in Sinhala, one in Pali. Or sometimes the left column on each page in Sinhala and the opposite in pali.

**yāthāvasarasato – a very interesting term.

However, the fascinating rendering of yāthāvasarasato as yatha-avasara-sato needs some backing. The PED simply translates it as “to see things as they really are” interpreting it as “yathava-sarasato”. Ñāṇatiloka and Ñāṇamoli translate it in this way too.

This might remind you of the discussion on this blog on a very similar term, used by the Buddha, “yathabhuta” were I was arguing that while “as it really is” is not completely wrong, there could also be something more meditation-relevant be implied. Every time you perceive an object in your vipassana meditation it is only after the fact (when it has already become “bhuta”, i.e. “when it appeared”, “has come into existance”) that you note it. But this is the point were you have to note it immediately – stopping the mind from falling into papañcā…its creative tendency to place subject and object apart and spin a story around them.

Let’s check some other places where this term appears:

399. Sammappaññāya sudiṭṭhanti hetunā kāraṇena vipassanāpaññāya yāthāvasarasato diṭṭhaṃ.

which the sub-commentary explains as “Yāthāvasarasato diṭṭhanti yathābhūtasabhāvato paccakkhaṃ viya.”

So it is really being perceived as a synonym for yathābhūta and depending on how you interpret that word it might just simply mean “as it really is” or, focusing more on the subjective side of things, “as it found entrance”/”came into” (your mind), i.e. “appears to you”, “manifested itself to you”.

***[Ñānamoli's footnote on this runs as follows]Commenting on this Vis. paragraph, Pm. [Visuddhimagga Commentary] says:’ “When continuity is disrupted” means when continuity is exposed by observing the perpetual otherness of states as they go on ocurring in succession. For it is not through the connectedness of states that the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent to one who rightly observes rise and fall, but rather the characteristic becomes more thoroughly evident through their disconnectedness, as if they were iron dart. [Again, another discussion on this blog as to why the interruption plays such an important role and the role of mindfulness in this]. “When the postures are exposed”  means when the concealment of the pain that is actually inherent in the postures is exposed. For when pain arises in a posture, the next posture adopted removes the pain, as it were, concealing it. But once it is correctly known how the pain in any posture is shifted by substituting another posture for that on, then the concalment of the pain that is in them is exposed because it has become evident that formations are being incessantly overwhelmed by pain. “Resolution of the compact” is effected by resovling [what appears compact] in this way “The earth element is one, the wate element is another” [ah...a form of noting?! ], etc., distinguishing each one; in this way “Contact is one, feeling is another”, etc. distinguishing each one. “When the resolution of the compact is effected” means that what is compact as a mass and what is compact as a function or object has been analysed. For when …states have arisen… then, owing to misinterpreting that as a unity, compactness of mass is assumed through failure to subject formations to pressure….But when they are seen after resolving themby means of knowledge into these elements, they disintegrate like froth subjected to compression by the hand. They are mere objects (dhammas) occuring due to conditions and void.

No opinion

The Pali language has a very interesting verb called “maññati”. Or rather the way the Buddha uses this verb is very intriguing.

It is related to our English “to mean” or German “meinen”. It can be translated in a variety of ways such as “to think, believe, suppose, superimpose, to imagine, to dream, to mean, to measure, to appear, to be of the opinion of“…

This little verb is sometimes used by the Buddha to express a certain attitude which we should not entertain when facing the world in our insight meditation.

In the jhanas though, quite the opposite is true: up to the point of upekkha we do put ourselves into a relationship with the world. With a very narrow and focused one but with full intention. The grasping and holding of one {usually mental} object versus other sense impressions requires a great deal of identification. Eventually, however, when our meditation enters the realm of clear-sight (vipassana) it gets transformed into a pure vision.

Having said that, what does it really mean to “mean” something?…………………

Doesn’t “meaning” always imply an opinion? A certain attitude, thought, perception, relationship, mental concept or opinion  about/towards a thing?

Therefore, in a passage like this:

90. ‘‘Ejā, bhikkhave, rogo, ejā gaṇḍo, ejā sallaṃ. Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, tathāgato anejo viharati vītasallo. Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu cepi ākaṅkheyya ‘anejo vihareyyaṃ vītasallo’ti, cakkhuṃ na maññeyya, cakkhusmiṃ na maññeyya, cakkhuto na maññeyya, cakkhu meti na maññeyya; rūpe na maññeyya, rūpesu na maññeyya, rūpato na maññeyya, rūpā meti na maññeyya; cakkhuviññāṇaṃ na maññeyya, cakkhuviññāṇasmiṃ na maññeyya, cakkhuviññāṇato na maññeyya, cakkhuviññāṇaṃ meti na maññeyya; cakkhusamphassaṃ na maññeyya, cakkhusamphassasmiṃ na maññeyya, cakkhusamphassato na maññeyya, cakkhusamphasso meti na maññeyya. Yampidaṃ cakkhusamphassapaccayā uppajjati vedayitaṃ sukhaṃ vā dukkhaṃ vā adukkhamasukhaṃ vā tampi na maññeyya, tasmimpi na maññeyya, tatopi na maññeyya, taṃ meti na maññeyya.

…

‘‘So evaṃ amaññamāno na kiñcipi loke upādiyati. Anupādiyaṃ na paritassati. Aparitassaṃ paccattaññeva parinibbāyati. [Samyutta Nikaya, Salayatana]

…we can see that the Buddha asks us  not to entertain any “opinion” about sights nor the way we perceive sights, sounds…thoughts. Clearly, it left Dandapani puzzled, when the Buddha mentioned that his teaching is the teaching of no-view, of less concepts – even with regard to his own teaching. His teaching is the no-conceptualization-conceptualization , or what we call “a raft”.

Therefore in our vipassana sessions (based on proper instruction and technique) our practice should reflect the above quoted passage of the Buddha and follow along these lines:

1. do not form an opinion about the seeing, hearing…thinking
2. do not form an opinion or believe to be in the seeing,hearing…thinking
3. do not form an opinion that you are apart of the seeing,hearing…thinking
4. do not form an opinion that “seeing is mine”
5. do not form an opinion or believe to be sights, sounds…thoughts
6. do not form an opinion to be among them
7. nor entertain an opinion that you are apart from them
8. do not think, believe, opinionate that “these sights are mine“.
9. do not form an opinion about the knowing of the seeing, hearing….thinking
10. do not think that you are in the knowing of the seeing
11. nor do believe or think that you are apart from the knowing of seeing
12. nor do think that any “knowing of seeing is mine”
13. do not form an opinion towards the contact, the moment of experience of seeing, hearing…thinking
14. do not form an opinion to be in the experience of seeing
15. nor do think or believe that you are apart from that experience of seeing
16. or that the “experience of seeing is mine“
17. and even when it comes to any feeling, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral which arises based on that experience of seeing
18. do not form an opinion about it
19. do not form an opinion to be in (part of it)
20. do not form an opinion to be apart from it (outside)
21. do not form an opinion “this feeling is mine”

Hope you read carefully through that list. No redundancy but guided meditation. In fact we can see a very thorough  application of the famous formula “in the seen, just the seen” in each present moment. A clear instruction of how to face ‘it’ (i.e. what has ‘become’, aka yathābhūta, each moment).

But thats not the entire message. We can also take this as a gauge (!) when we think about our own particular vipassana technique we apply. Check for yourself, does your vipassana technique move your attention in such a direction as noted above or do you still attach to certain objects forming an opinion about them?

A proper vipassana method should therefore help us to establish a vision of insight without any opinion, any predisposition, any fabricated perception. Just letting the bare experience experience itself. Over and over and over again. This has to include the method itself…it just becomes another object of vipassana. How could such a technique look like? Venerable Nyanananda gives us a hint in the following remarkable essay:

What prevents this insight is that grasping or `upàdàna‘. Generally in the world, very few are keen on emptying the well. The majority simply draw water to make use of it. But there is no end to this making use of the water. Only when one decides upon emptying the well, will one be drawing water just to throw it away without grasping. This is the position of those who are keen on seeing the emptiness if the world, and it is they that are fully appeased in the world. The word `parinibbutà‘ in this context does not mean that the arahants have passed away. They live in the world fully appeased, having extinguished the fires of lust, hate and delusion. [One of the most excellent articles by Ven. Nyanananda summarizing their (Nyanarama and his) understanding of insight meditation after studying vipassana approaches for over half a century. In theory AND practice.]

With regard to the above quoted passage from the Samyutta Nikaya, could it be true that we find our entire Buddhist meditation explicitely explained in such redundant sutta passages? I’d say yes

The following text passage might serve as another example. (That is if you grant our little “iti – sallakkheti” theory, as entertained in this blog, some validity). So the question could be: do some of the most boring repetitions in the suttas in fact breath the air of pure pragmatism, if looked at from the pragmatic angle of a vipassanā meditator who needs to note anything in the same neutral way in order to make progress? Funny that such a question needs to be raised in the first place if you think about the life and teaching of the Buddha and his utter pragmatism, his focus on the three characteristics and his explanation on what will get you to the same vision and knowledge as is his…

‘‘Taṃ kiṃ maññatha, bhikkhave, rūpaṃ niccaṃ vā aniccaṃ vā’’ti?

What do you think/believe/what is your opinion, o monks, is form permanent or impermanent (does it stay or does it go?)

‘‘Aniccaṃ, bhante’’.

It is impermanent, Sir.

‘‘Yaṃ panāniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā’’ti?

But what is impermanent, is that satisfying or unsatisfactory?

‘‘Dukkhaṃ, bhante’’.

It is unsatisfactory, Sir.

‘‘Yaṃ panāniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāmadhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ – ‘etaṃ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’’’ti?

But what is impermanent, unsatisfactory, ruled by constant change, is it smart to observe it [sam-anu-passati: together-follow-looking] thus [iti - do not skip the word!!!]

“This is mine. This I am, this is my self”?

‘‘No hetaṃ, bhante’’.

No, really not, Sir.

…{same goes for the other 5 groups/or senses}

‘‘Tasmātiha, bhikkhave,

Therefore, o monks,

yaṃ kiñci rūpaṃ

w h a t e v e r   form

atītānāgatapaccuppannaṃ ajjhattaṃ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṃ vā sukhumaṃ vā hīnaṃ vā paṇītaṃ vā yaṃ dūre santike vā

be it past, future, present, inside, outside, coarse, subtle, low or refined, close to you or far away [i t  d o e s      n o t     m a t t e r - this is probably the part a vipassana teachers repeats MOST often in his instructions]

sabbaṃ rūpaṃ

all form

– ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ.

have to be seen, together with full knowing, as they have become (or ‘as they are’) thus: “This is NOT mine, This I am NOT, This is NOT my self”.

Yā kāci vedanā… yā kāci saññā… ye keci saṅkhārā… yaṃ kiñci viññāṇaṃ

Again, the same goes for all other groups, i.e. characteristics of experience of a single moment in time. The experience of an object (a form), a feeling, a perception of it, an intention related to it, a knowing/bein conscious of it. No matter what they are, how they are, where they are, they all need to be treated in the same non-opinionated fashion.

Evaṃ passaṃ, bhikkhave,

Seeing thus o monks (not “meditating” or “doing jhana” etc. etc. but “seeing” pres. part. of passati, to see.) the stress lies on the way this particular seeing/vision as it was just described

sutavā ariyasāvako rūpasmimpi nibbindati, vedanāyapi nibbindati, saññāyapi nibbindati, saṅkhāresupi nibbindati, viññāṇasmimpi nibbindati;

the hearer [the one who actually listened, learned and does practice accordingly ], the noble follower, gets weary off (nibbindati… lit. to “not find anything in something any more” … means getting weary of a thing, to have enough of, be satiated, turn away from, to be disgusted with, loosing interest in it)

gets weary of forms, feelings….consciousness

nibbindaṃ virajjati,

getting weary his (passion) fades away (vi-rajjati, lit. de-coloring, fading away)

virāgā vimuccati.

from the fading away he is detached (released).

Vimuttasmiṃ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṃ hoti.

When released (loc abs…in the moment/right after his realization) he has this (experiental) knowledge/insight thus “liberated/freed”

‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṃ brahmacariyaṃ, kataṃ karaṇīyaṃ, nāparaṃ itthattāyā’ti pajānātī’’ti.

and he knows thus: “extinct is birth, lived is the holy life, done is what had to be done, there is no more of this state of being’.”

It might be partially a philosophical statement but more than that, I honestly do believe this was intended to be a meditation instruction. If you look at how the Buddha addresses the monks…it gets pretty powerful. And he also uses the gerundium daṭṭhabbaṃ “has to be seen as”. If you take it as an instruction for meditation and go through the pali there is no reason why you could not start meditating on this (even while you would hear the Buddha say it). Those of you out there, who have done some vipassana retreats before probably can relate to this idea better than others, I guess.

But again, I tried to be extremely literal, showing several alternative semantics….you might not see any meditation related context…its just that when I try to put myself into the shoes of people who sat across the Buddha…what would be the most important thing on their minds?? Honestly, what would be your thoughts? Would not you think: Please tell me more about how samsara works and how to attain that Nibbana you are talking about…well, especially when faced with samsara :

This was said by the Lord…

“Bhikkhus, the skeletons of a single person, running on and wandering in samsara for an aeon, would make a heap of bones, a quantity of bones as large as this Mount Vepulla, if there were someone to collect them and if the collection were not destroyed.”

The bones of a single person
Accumulated in a single aeon
Would make a heap like a mountain —
So said the Great Sage.
He declared it to be
As great as Mount Vepulla
To the north of Vulture’s Peak
In the hill-fort of Magadha.
But when one sees with perfect wisdom
The four noble truths as they are —
Suffering, the origin of suffering,
The overcoming of suffering,
And the noble eightfold path
Leading to relief from suffering —
Having merely run on Seven times at the most,
By destroying all fetters
One makes an end of suffering.

[Itivuttaka, I. 24]

=============

Recommended reading: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html

In search of the (original?) Oxen!

…sounds like Zen, might be Zen, but is no Zen?

Hidden within in the scholastic bodies of ancient Theravadin commentarial literature dwell gems of wisdom taught by ancient Masters of Buddhist meditation. One such beautiful little gem, an allegory, really needs some more attention.

Everyone knows about the 10 pictures in the ZEN tradition of “Taming the Wild Ox” but only a few know that a similar story of a farmer who is out looking for his oxen can already be found in the Visuddhimagga, a commentary on Theravada Buddhism compiled about 500 AD. The Visuddhimagga, the crown jewel of commentarial literature is far more than a dry scholastic theoretical treatise. Based on the suttas, commentaries and Buddhist practice of the 1-3rd century the famous commentator Buddhaghosa put together many pragmatic meditation instructions both of concentration and insight meditation.

This particular story, the potential boilerplate version for the now famous ZEN story, appears in the Wisdom section of the Visuddhimagga, chapter XXI, and describes and compares the insight process of a meditator to a farmer’s different stages of search and discovery of his lost ox.

While in ZEN this story became quite mystical and, well, Zen-like it is pretty down to earth and sounds Theravadin clear cut (bordering to boring) in pali. Have a look at the following few lines with an attempt in translation further below:

793. Goti ekassa kira kassakassa rattibhāge niddaṃ okkantassa vajaṃ bhinditvā goṇā palātā, so paccūsasamaye tattha gantvā olokento tesaṃ palātabhāvaṃ ñatvā anupadaṃ gantvā rañño goṇe addasa. Te ‘‘mayhaṃ goṇā’’ti sallakkhetvā āharanto pabhātakāle ‘‘na ime mayhaṃ goṇā, rañño goṇā’’ti sañjānitvā ‘‘yāva maṃ ‘coro aya’nti gahetvā rājapurisā na anayabyasanaṃ pāpenti, tāvadeva palāyissāmī’’ti bhīto goṇe pahāya vegena palāyitvā nibbhayaṭṭhāne aṭṭhāsi. Tattha ‘‘mayhaṃ goṇā’’ti rājagoṇānaṃ gahaṇaṃ viya bālaputhujjanassa ‘‘ahaṃ mamā’’ti khandhānaṃ gahaṇaṃ, pabhāte ‘‘rājagoṇā’’ti sañjānanaṃ viya yogino tilakkhaṇavasena khandhānaṃ ‘‘aniccā dukkhā anattā’’ti sañjānanaṃ, bhītakālo viya bhayatupaṭṭhānañāṇaṃ, vissajjitvā gantukāmatā viya muñcitukamyatā, vissajjanaṃ viya gotrabhu, palāyanaṃ viya maggo, palāyitvā abhayadese ṭhānaṃ viya phalaṃ.

The “ox”. Once there was a farmer, as they say, who in the night became overwhelmed by sleep and his oxen broke through the fence running away.

When we woke up in the early morning and went to where he kept his oxen he realized that they had run away ["palātabhāvaṃ ñatvā" - having known their running-away-nature]. Then he followed their tracks and saw the king’s oxen. He labelled [sallakkheti]  them “These are mine” (mistakenly) and took them with him. Later, when the sun had come out, he realized (sañjānitvā) ”Not are these my oxen, they belong to the king”. When they will catch me thus “He is a thief” the king’s men will make me come into distress and misfortune. I will therefore quickly send them away. Full of fear he quickly ran away and later, free of fear found a place to rest.

In this story grasping the king’s oxen thus “my oxen” is the same as the foolish worldling’s grasping of the groups (khandhas) thus “I, mine”. The realization in the morning (when the sun came out) with “These are the king’s oxen” is similar to the Yogis realization of the groups thus “impermanent, suffering, non-self” with the help of the three characteristics. The time he is afraid resembles the arising of the insight knowledge of fear and the wish to expel them is similar to the insight knowledge of desire for freedom. The actual dismissing them is the gotrabhu-insight knowledge. Their running off is similar to the attainment of Nibbana (magga) and when he ran away, that place free from any fear is a synonym for the fruit of Nibbana (phala, the meditative state).

This was a pretty self explaining metaphor. A nice analogy which was intended to help understanding exactly what and how we react when vipassana meditation starts to uncover the true characteristics of life. From the insight into seeing and falling, over a period of fear and disorientation to the desire to let go and the eventual freedom ensuing with the peace of Nibbana. For further information read on “the insight knowledges“

If this is really the same “Meme” then it is interesting to see how 300-500 years later this story surfaces in ZEN writings in Japan. Here is a short quote on the ZEN history and Chinese whispers [ , the story really went through China as the Visuddhimagga or more likely the Vimuttimagga where translated in China in the 6th century and found their way into the Chinese Chan culture. Especially the pragmatic aspect of the Vimuttimagga/Visuddhimagga must have had a strong influence on Chinese Chan masters].

Among the various formulations of the levels of realization in Zen, none is more widely known than the Oxherding Pictures, a sequence of ten illustrations annotated with comments in prose and verse. It is probably because of the sacred nature of the ox in ancient India that this animal came to be used to symbolize man’s primal nature or Buddha-mind. The original drawings and the commentary that accompanies them are both attributed to Kakuan Shien (Kuo-an Shih-yuan), a Chinese Zen master of the twelfth century, but he was not the first to illustrate the developing stages of Zen realization through pictures. Earlier versions of five and eight pictures exist in which the ox becomes progressively whiter, the last painting being a circle. [Hm, should we think Nibbana?! Like in our Visuddhimagga story...]

This implied,that the realization of Oneness (i.e., the effacement of every conception of self and other) was the ultimate goal of Zen. But Kakuan, feeling this to be incomplete, added two more pictures beyond the circle to make it clear that the Zen man of the highest spiritual development lives in the mundane world of form and diversity and mingles with the utmost freedom among ordinary men, whom he inspires with his compassion and radiance to walk in the Way of the Buddha. [Sources: Here]

…

“Since the ninth century, students of Zen Buddhism have drawn a parallel between the individual
path to enlightenment and the story of the herder and his missing ox. There are 10 stages in the
parable, beginning with the search for the ox, in which a boy is racked with doubt because “Nothing
has been lost in the first place,/ So what is the use of searching?” In the final stage, the boy
reappears as the Buddha of the Future, enlightened. The scroll reprinted here is the oldest
known version of the Japanese Ten Oxherding Songs, dating to 1278, and the only known
example with illustrations in color along with the calligraphy. [Source: Here]

This is a beautiful clear example for the differences but also joint history of Zen-Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhist practice. But of course, not necessarily do we have a connection here. The idea of using an oxen to display levels of progress suggests it, but oxen are all over the place and taming them could have been used regardless of any older tradition.

It is funny though, that our Visuddhimagga text starts to get interesting where the Zen pictures stop. When the farmer realizes his deadly mistake, he quickly lets go of the oxen. Our Zen farmer, after bringing the oxen home, seems content. Maybe its his oxen after all

OR, if you look at some of the ZEN interpretations there are actually some which could be better understood if someone would take this Visuddhimagga text and check the pictures again…If  you follow this link you can see how the farmer now roams about, in a secure place and the oxen is gone…maybe he let it go,  like the Visuddhimagga suggests would be prudent ! Just have a look at some of the descriptions of step 7 and 8 in the story of the oxen with the pali text.

Ox lost, man remaining

As an expression of the Theravada spirit of this Blog, however, we let our search for the oxen end in the beautiful empty circle, a synonym for Nibbana:

==================

(1)If you were to just follow the “idea” of taming a bull and look for references in the suttas, you might come up with an article like this by Ven. Walpola Rahula. My guess is he was not aware of this particular similie in the Visuddhimagga which fits the story of the bull much better than other references to the general theme of “taming” the mind like an unruly animal. The Zen story revolves around stages of development – exactly the same ideas as in the analogy given in the Visuddhimagga – a picturesque walk through a ZEN’s version of the insight knowledge…

(2) Other references: Herding the Ox

(3) Visuddhimagga/Vimuttimagga in Chinese Tripitaka: “Samghapala (459-524 C.E.), the translator of the Chinese ver sion of the A-yu-wang jing, was a monk from the kingdom of Funan (in the eastern part of present-day Thailand), who came to China during the Qi dynasty (479-501 C.E.) and stayed at Zheng guan Monastery in the capital, where he studied Mahayana texts under the Indian monk Gunabhadra and “mastered the languages of several countries”. When Emperor Wu of the Liang dynasty came to power, he invited Samghapala in the fifth year of Tian jinn (506 C.E.) to translate Buddhist texts into Chinese. In the course of the subsequent seventeen years, he translated eleven Buddhist texts into Chinese, making a total of forty-eight fascicles, including the A yu-wang jing and the Vimuktimarga, with the assistance of Chinese Buddhist monks and lay scholars under imperial patronage. In the fifth year of Pu-tong (524 C.E.), he died of illness at the age of sixty-five at Zheng-guan Monastery.”

Advantages of a systematic approach

Surely, most of you had had experience with the following most common approaches towards establishing a Buddhist practice:

• Scanning through bits and pieces of Buddhist literature and patching them together into your own personal regiment.
• Following the (ad-hoc) instructions of a specific (charismatic) teacher who explains in his own terminology or particular tradition
• A training according to a (streamlined) meditation system.

Some might finally end up at option number three and yes, one could argue that even the noble eightfold path is a systematic approach in practicing the Dhamma – though open to lots of interpretations.

Here is a short list of why meditation systems seem to have such a benefit over other less organized approaches:

A meditation (development) system is….

1. Repeatable
2. Clearly defined / structured
3. Student and teacher can compare progress and results (!!!)
4. The same terminology and concepts are used. This too helps explaining, understanding and comparing progress / results
5. It is independent of a teacher or guru. Even after the death of a charismatic master the system can be applied. It relies less on “people” but rather on application of the system.
6. The system itself can be considered the teacher (like the Buddha venerated the Dhamma as his teacher)
7. A system can easily be taught and distributed. Well, at least easier than the specific heritage of a teacher personality.
8. A system has a scientific element: Like an experiment that someone tries to replicate successfully.
9. A system motivates students: The path is clearly structured, many other former students can help and define the path. Progress is made step by step and can be compared with others.
10. Teachers of such a system are able to better judge the progress of individual students based on their prior experience with the same set of instructions on former students…. This will lead to better teachers and an ever refined system.
11. It is better, the more detailed it is and/or the better teachers can anticipate and judge another person’s progress

etc.

BTW, this is not about advocating any particular Buddhist meditation system. Looking at the Suttas we can see how system(s) were in place already during the time of the Buddha. And even a certain methodology needs to allow for variations based on the character of the meditator – but this too, could be approached in a ’systematic’ fashion.

Of course, once such a system becomes merely recorded on paper and dies out (no person-to-person transmission left) it is kind of hard to re-surrect it properly just from the “words” used for recording it.

One more reason to be thankful that recent decades have seen many authentic varients of meditation systems (Mahasi, Goenka, Nyanarama etc.) even though they cannot always be matched literally and perfectly to the ancient days some of the posts on this blog might highlight what seems to me at least a closeness in spirit

So while personally looking back into the texts for verfication and inspiration (for instance on this blog) there is nothing I would trade a proper step by step “living” meditation system in for.

Possible improvements of these meditation systems would be to further refine their instructions (after mastering them) and by updating them based on experience of students of those systems and their relationship to the clear instructions left by the Buddha which – obviously – make more and more sense to those who actually walk along their lines. This would benefit teacher and student alike who can take a look at the textual “evidence” left by the Buddha and compare it 1:1 to their own experiences.

That the Buddha’s teaching was intended as a systematic approach (or containing systematic approaches) can also be drawn from this famous remark:

“Sariputta, Buddha Vipassi’s, Buddha Sikhi’s Buddha Vessabhu’s teaching did not last long. Sariputta, Buddha Kakusandha’s, Buddha Konagamana’s and Buddha Kassapa’s(*) teaching lasted long.”

“And what, Lord, is the cause, what the reason why when Vipassin was Buddha and when Sikhin was Buddha and when Vessabhu was Buddha the teaching did not last long ?”

“Sariputta, the Buddha Vipassin and the Buddha Sikhin and the Buddha Vessabhu were weary of [lit. 'exhausted' from kilāsu] preaching dhamma in detail to the disciples; and these had little of the  Suttas in prose or in prose and verse, the Expositions, the Songs, the Verses of Uplift, the Quotations, the Jatakas, the Miracles, the Miscellanies; the course of training for the disciples was not made known, the Patimokkha was not appointed.

After the disappearance of these enlightened ones, these Buddhas, after the disappearance of the disciples enlightened under these enlightened ones,’ those last disciples of various names, of various clans of various strata, who had gone forth from various families, caused this teaching&practice rapidly to disappear.

It is as if, Sariputta, various flowers, loose on a flat piece of wood, not tied together by a thread, are scattered about, whirled about and destroyed by the wind. What is the cause ? Inasmuch as they are not held together by a thread, even so, Sariputta, at the disappearance of these enlightened ones, these Buddhas, at the disappearance of the disciptes enlightened under these enlightened ones, those last disciples of various names, of various clans, of various social strata, who had gone forth from various families, caused this Brahma-life rapidly to disappear. Andthese Buddhas were untiring in exhorting the disciples, for they read their minds with their own:

Formerly, Sariputta, the Buddha Vessabhu, perfected, all enlightened one, in a certain awe-inspiring jungle-thicket exhorted and admonished a congregation of a thousand monks, reading their minds with his own, and saying: Apply the mind thus, you should not apply the mind thus ; pay attention thus,’ you should not pay attention thus; forsake this; having attained this, abide in it.

Then Sariputta, when these thousand monks had been exhorted and admonished by Vessabhu, the Buddha, perfected, all enlightened one, their minds were freed from the cankers without grasping. Moreover, Sariputta, whoever not devoid of passion, is in a terror of the awe-inspiring jungle-thicket, and enters the jungle thicket, as a rule his hair stands on end. This, Sariputta, is the cause, this is the reason why, when Vipassin was Buddha and when Sikhin was Buddha and when Vessabhu was Buddha, the Brahma-life did not last long.”

” But what, Buddha, is the cause, what the reason why when Kakusandha was Buddha, and when Konagamana was Buddha and when Kassapa was Buddha the Brahma-life lasted long?” [8]

” Sariputta, the Buddha Kakusandha and the Buddha Konagamana and the Buddha Kassapa were diligent in giving dhamma in detail to the disciples, and these had much of the Suttas in prose or in prose and in verse, the Expositions, the Songs, the Verses of Uplift, the Quotations, the Jatakas, the Miracles, the Miscellanies….

The course of training for disciples was made known, the Patimokkha was appointed. At the disappearance of these enlightened ones, these Buddhas, at the disappearance of the disciples who were enlightened under these enlightened ones, those last disciples of various names, of various clans, of various social strata, who had gone forth from various families, established the teaching and practice for a very long time.

It is as if, Sariputta, various flowers, loose on a piece of wood, well tied together by a thread [lit. 'sutta' - the thread], are not scattered about or whirled about or destroyed by the wind. What is the reason for this ? They are well tied together by the thread.

Even so, Sariputta, at the disappearance of these enlightened ones, these Buddhas, at the disappearance of the disciples who were enlightened under these enlightened ones, those last disciples of various names, of various clans, of various strata, who had gone forth from various families, established the teaching&practice for a very long time.

This, Sariputta, is the cause, this  the reason why when Kakusandha was the Buddha, and when Konagamana was the Buddha and when Kassapa was the Buddha, the teaching and practice lasted long.”

[Slightly adjusted but based on I.B. Horners translation of the Vinaya text. Here.]

‘bhagavato ca, sāriputta, vipassissa bhagavato ca sikhissa bhagavato ca vessabhussa brahmacariyaṃ na ciraṭṭhitikaṃ ahosi. bhagavato ca, sāriputta, kakusandhassa bhagavato ca koṇāgamanassa bhagavato ca kassapassa brahmacariyaṃ ciraṭṭhitikaṃ ahosī’’ti.

1.) Wiederholbar

2.) Klar abgesteckt

3.) Schuler und Lehrer koennen Fortschritt mit anderen vergleichen (!!!! so wichtig)

4.) Es werden die selben sprachlichen Konzepte benutzt um den Fortschritt vergleichbar zu machen

5.) Das System kann unabhaenging von einem “Guru” oder “Meister” gelehrt werden.

6.) Das System IST der Meister (Buddha verehrte den Dhamma als seinen Lehrer)

7.) Das System kann weitergegeben werden. Ein “Guru” stirbt irgendwann

8.) Ein System baut auf einer nahezu wissenschaftlichen Vorgehen auf…Wie ein Experiment, dass man versucht erfolgreich zu wiederholen

9.) Ein System motiviert Schuler: Der Weg ist klar strukturiert. Schritt fuer Schritt Fortschritte.

10.) Lehrer eines solchen Systems koennen aufgrund gleicher/aehnlicher Anweisungen bei vielen Teilnehmern besser lernen wie sich der Fortschritt gestaltet….das wird sie zu b e s s e r e n Lehrern machen, je oefter sie das System lehren……..

19. ‘‘ko nu kho , bhante, hetu ko paccayo, yena bhagavato ca vipassissa bhagavato ca sikhissa bhagavato ca vessabhussa brahmacariyaṃ na ciraṭṭhitikaṃ ahosī’’ti? ‘‘bhagavā ca, sāriputta, vipassī bhagavā ca sikhī bhagavā ca vessabhū kilāsuno ahesuṃ sāvakānaṃ vitthārena dhammaṃ desetuṃ. appakañca nesaṃ ahosi suttaṃ geyyaṃ veyyākaraṇaṃ gāthā udānaṃ itivuttakaṃ jātakaṃ abbhutadhammaṃ vedallaṃ. apaññattaṃ sāvakānaṃ sikkhāpadaṃ. anuddiṭṭhaṃ pātimokkhaṃ. tesaṃ buddhānaṃ bhagavantānaṃ antaradhānena buddhānubuddhānaṃ sāvakānaṃ antaradhānena ye te pacchimā sāvakā nānānāmā nānāgottā nānājaccā nānākulā pabbajitā te taṃ brahmacariyaṃ khippaññeva antaradhāpesuṃ. seyyathāpi, sāriputta, nānāpupphāni phalake nikkhittāni suttena asaṅgahitāni tāni vāto vikirati vidhamati viddhaṃseti. taṃ kissa hetu? yathā taṃ suttena asaṅgahitattā. evameva kho, sāriputta, tesaṃ buddhānaṃ bhagavantānaṃ antaradhānena buddhānubuddhānaṃ sāvakānaṃ antaradhānena ye te pacchimā sāvakā nānānāmā nānāgottā nānājaccā nānākulā pabbajitā te taṃ brahmacariyaṃ khippaññeva antaradhāpesuṃ. (etc) found in [Vinaya, I, Veranjakanda]

(*) Note: Seems like the Buddhas changed their strategy in teaching the Dhamma. The last four Buddhas established and left a systematic organization of their teachings.

500 years after Schopenhauer

In one of his prefaces to the translation of the Majjhima Nikaya, Karl Eugen Neumann (who lived many years before the relativity theory was conceived, let alone quantum physics) once made the following observation:

These discourses originated in the 6th century before Christ: but sometimes they leave the impression that they belong to the 6th century after Schopenhauer.

Schopenhauer based on Kant and others of course had lead philosophy towards a much subtler understanding of the interplay between physical world and consciousness in which the physical world (the “object”) derives its quality of “being”. Whenever we speak of something “to be” or “to exist” we indirectly imply a consciousness or observation of that object. But Schopenhauer (and in fact the Buddha) did a greater job explaning this than I do

It seemed for some time now that material-istic (aka physical) science was catching up as well… And though there have been all kinds of new-agy metaphysicists jumping on this band-wagon, – still there are honorable researchers who try to console the philosophical angle with the physical evidence.

In a discussion on the book “Quantum Enigma” (on the role of consciousness in quantum physics) I found this rather nice summary by Prof. David Mermin:

Does quantum mechanics give consciousness a special role to play in our description of the physical world? Opinions range all over the map. I myself would say yes, but in a rather limited sense: the laws of physics are conceptual tools we have discovered in our collective efforts to impose coherence on how the world impinges on us, and ultimately the world gets through to each of us only through our conscious perceptions. This, of course, is as true of classical physics as it is of quantum physics. What makes quantum physics special is that it forces us (or ought to force us) to acknowledge this to be the character of physical law, while in classical physics we could (and did) fool ourselves into thinking that the abstractions we created to help us organize our perceptions had an independent existence of their own.

Take space-time, for example. We organize our perceptions into events, and for many purposes it is illuminating to represent those events as points in an abstract four-dimensional continuum. This is so useful that most of us reify this abstract scheme, believing that we inhabit a world that is such a four- (or, for a few of us, ten-) dimensional continuum. The reification of abstract time and space goes so far back in human history that it’s easy to miss the intellectual sleight of hand. The reification of electric and magnetic fields is more recent but also came to be taken for granted, until it started to unravel (for some of us) with the arrival of quantum electrodynamics. The strongest hints of how we have been fooling ourselves emerge when we try to reify quantum states, and thereby run into “the measurement problem” and “quantum nonlocality.”

Quantum phenomena have finally brought home (or should have brought home) to us that the purpose of physical law is, as Niels Bohr so succinctly put it, “only to track down, so far as it is possible, relations between the manifold aspects of our experience.” That experience is, by its very nature, conscious experience. It is only in this profoundly philosophical sense that quantum mechanics has led physics to an encounter with consciousness.

[Review of Quantum Enigma]

 

A reason why it sometimes seems that the further we scientifically progress the closer we go back in time to the explanations of the ‘Awakened One’.

Luckily, in order to study the mind we do not need expensive (material) equipment like this…one simple reason the Buddha gave us is that in the case of “consciousness” experimental replication is all about e x p e r i e n t i a l replication. Obviously and so it says that one quality of the teaching of the Buddha is: 

paccattam veditabbo vinnuhi

(it) has to be realize personally each by himself/herself alone

Still, its interesting to see the timelessness of the Dhamma and exciting to watch the physical implications of all this. Here are some other links to a Buddhist understanding of “the world”.

Let’s talk about the world

The world II – concept and reality

 

=======================

One of the best descriptions of Schopenhauer’s philosophy I have seen can be found here if you do not intend to read his famous WWR.

Yoke of Oxen

Recently I was asked whether jhana and vipassana meditation ultimately lead to the same results.*

My answer was, that I would rather rephrase that question:

“How are jhana and vipassana faculties tied together on the path to Nibbana?”

 

A pure jhana practicioner (like your typical yogi in the Himalaya) who is hooked on a nimitta is not likely to “move” towards Nibbana.

A pure vipassana practicioner (dry vipassana) who discursively buries himself  in lists of abhidharmic concepts is not likely to move towards Nibbana either.

However

A jhana trained person observing with direct vision the rising and falling of the 5 groups of grasping AND a concentrated vipassana meditator experiencing jhanic states during stretches of intensive vipassana both will meet at a stage in their battle where their position is indistinguishable from each other.

 

What we do see, when studying the Tipitaka and early post-canonical Buddhist texts on meditation as well as early Buddhist history is this:

In the beginning the distinction between concentration and the specific “insight” part was almost indistinguishable. Not because they are the same but because the method of samadhi was a give for everyone and many cases even before meeting the Buddha and the special attention was on understanding craving, thirst with regard to the interplay of senses and moments of experience. The teaching of dependent origination was the key to freedom. Something which came as a revelation to even the most gifted concentration meditators among the students of the Buddha (think of Anuraddha’s story meeting Sariputta). But at the early days of the Dhamma sati and samadhi were joined forces to attain panya. The distinction was just mentioned after the enlightenment of the Buddha not completely detailed to the last inch.

Now, over time  however- and this already started to happen during the lifetime of the Buddha – we see that with more people, more explanations, more refinement of instructions the noble eightfold path and its areas of expertise and training got more and more refined and elaborated on.

No exception for the concentration (jhanic) and insight (sati toward panya) parts of meditation.

This is how the terms samatha vipassana are finally born which from then on would be used to describe two qualities necessary on the path.

Coming back to the question I was asked:

To me (and this is my little 2 cents on it) these two “forces” are part of the noble eightfold path. They can be trained separately but in order to attain Nibbana they will automatically “connect” and support each other.

If you ask vipassana meditators, the further they go, the more and more jhanic experiences they get. They might lack training identifying and harnessing them. They are simply induced by the extreme amount of concentration which correct vipassana produces.

Same is true for samatha. Moving from the Jhanas using some form of noting and letting go of experience (on a fundamental level) the rising and falling is noticed stronger and stronger.

Both oxen are yoked and will culminate in the moment we step through the door to freedom (vimutti). So even if you let one run first for a while, the other one will never be far behind and eventually catch up – due to the yoke…

That however is only true if

a.) you have two bulls, not just one

b.) they run in the right direction

 

=========

* For other posts on this topic see here. It is just a very popular question