Mindfulness Flow(Fluidity) & Indrya Bhavana

  • This topic has 8 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by Lal.
Viewing 7 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #15139
      Embodied
      Spectator

      Hello all.

      Mindfulness Flow(Fluidity), Indrya Bhavana & Satipattana

      From PureDhamma pdf page 189:
      – “Thus “indriya bhāvanā” is nothing but special application of the Satipaṭṭhāna bhāvanā. In fact,“indriya bhāvanā” is to be practiced not in a “sitting down” meditation session, but while one is doing normal day-to-day activities.”
      – “12.Thus only Arahants use their sense faculties as indriya ALL THE TIME. They do not form attachments to body touches, tastes, odors, sounds (music), pictures, or any type of concepts (thoughts).”

      The above brought to my mind the following:

      • I feel (vedana touch) the ground under my soles (touch) but only for a short time, not more than 3/5 secs thus preventing the formation of ayatana.
      • I see a “beautiful” building but only for a short time, not more than 3/5 secs, thus preventing the formation of ayatana.

      And so on : the same can be practiced with any of the 6 senses during everyday life, mindstream/thoughts included thus, but in this case for each arising bad thought one should immediatly replace it by a thought-intention that will neutralise the negativity of the bad thought.

      Any kind of comment welcome.

      Metta

    • #15141
      Lal
      Keymaster

      “I feel (vedana touch) the ground under my soles (touch) but only for a short time, not more than 3/5 secs thus preventing the formation of ayatana.

      I see a “beautiful” building but only for a short time, not more than 3/5 secs, thus preventing the formation of ayatana.”

      I am not sure what you mean by above. Are you trying to suppress all sensations?

      We should not make things hard. All one needs to do is to be aware of whether greed or hate arise in one’s mind, and to suppress those. It is very simple. The hard thing is to catch it quickly. But with practice, it becomes easier.

      An indriya becomes an ayatana only when the sense experience taken in by the indriya (say eyes), make one’s mind form greedy or hateful thoughts. If what is seen makes one greedy or hateful, stop looking at it, and focus attention on something different.

      On the other hand, if it makes one’s mind calmer by keeping a Buddha statue in the meditation room, that helps train the mind to use that image as one to focus on. Then, if even one does not have the Buddha Statue when one sees a tempting figure, one can bring the image of the Buddha statue the mind and thus help take the mind away from that tempting figure. That is just an example. Each person need to come up with ways on how to take one’s mind away from greedy or hateful thoughts when they arise.
      – Another way is to think about the harmful consequences of focusing on that tempting (or hateful) visual. This is what the Buddha recommended as a general solution.

      • #15145
        Embodied
        Spectator

        “I am not sure what you mean by above. Are you trying to suppress all sensations?” :
        – Not at all. It’s a tool to dissolve any eventual mental fermentation related to any sensing and to intensify here-and-now-awareness.
        One more example: supposing that i’m eating something usually considered tasty, to prevent me from being overflowed by defilement related to such sensing i move my attention to another sensing…and so on.
        Or as you very well put : “An indriya becomes an ayatana only when the sense experience taken in by the indriya (say eyes), make one’s mind form greedy or hateful thoughts. If what is seen makes one greedy or hateful, stop looking at it, and focus attention on something different.

        Thanks for the concise counselling, Lal.

    • #39972
      LayDhammaFollower
      Participant

      Lal, I am quoting this from MN152: Indriya Bhāvanā sutta,

      In that buddha says,

      “uppannaṁ kho me idaṁ manāpaṁ, uppannaṁ amanāpaṁ, uppannaṁ manāpāmanāpaṁ.”

      Can you explain the meaning of this verse?

      Link to referenced sutta:MN152

    • #39976
      Lal
      Keymaster

      Sutta Central translation there is:
      “Liking, disliking, and both liking and disliking have come up in me.”

      That is good. I may state it as:
      “Liking, disliking, and both liking and disliking may arise in me.”

      That happens when an arammana comes in through one of the six sensory inputs.
      – “both liking and disliking may arise in me” seems a bit confusing.
      – That is possibly the case when one is uncertain whether that arammana is good or bad.

      All three possibilities arise when one is “unaware of the real nature” (na pajānāti) of such arammana.

      A Noble person would know with wisdom (pajānāti) how such arammana arise via Paticca Samuppada and thus, would not be swayed by them.

    • #39982
      LayDhammaFollower
      Participant

      Lal, Another similar question,

      When We say something is pleasurable, delightful, good, beautiful etc, those are due to sukha vēdanā,
      Opposite conclusions are derived based on dukha vēdanā.

      However, Recently during contemplate it occured to me, that kama guna, vipakā vēdanā and samphassa-jā-vēdanā all three are PURELY SUBJECTIVE AND CONDITIONAL right?

      There is no object for which all beings have niccā saññā. (So, there is no universal kama guna in any objects.) For example, devata might be disgusted with body (that might be appealing to lot of humans.)

      There is no object similarly for which all beings have sukha vipaka vedana upon phassa.
      (For example, same pizza might seem tasty to young person, but, might not appeal to old person with declined taste faculty.)

      Samphassa-jā-vēdanā is obviously again both subjective (due to gathi of that being) and conditional (Paṭicca Samuppāda).

      So, in summary everything experienced is subjective and conditional and unique to that lifestream.

      Which you have said in some post, that pañcakKhanda and PañcaUpādānaKhandha both are unique to that lifestream.)

      ——–

      Question about which I am confused is that,
      You said somewhere that even Arhant might “recognise” beautiful women as beautiful women.

      I don’t understand this.

      Because, not all objects are pleasent to everyone, if particular object seem pleasent that is because of GATHI in addition to conditions between external and internal Rūpa.

      However, Arhant has no gathi,
      In addition he has complete Aniccā saññā,

      How can he come to such conclusion based on contact with such rupa through eyes, if he has no gathi?

    • #39983
      Lal
      Keymaster

      “However, Recently during contemplate it occured to me, that kama guna, vipakā vēdanā and samphassa-jā-vēdanā all three are PURELY SUBJECTIVE AND CONDITIONAL right?”

      No. That is not right.
      – “Kama guna” go with each bhava. Something that may appear enticing to a dog could be disgusting to us (e.g., feces).
      – “Vipaka vedana” may APPEAR as good (attractive) or bad (repulsive) depending on the kama guna. For example, the grass is appealing to cows, but not to us.
      – samphassa-jā-vēdanā is PURELY SUBJECTIVE AND CONDITIONAL.

      You wrote: “You said somewhere that even Arhant might “recognise” beautiful women as beautiful women.”

      “Kama guna” and “attaching to kama guna” are two different things.
      – An Arahant would see a beautiful woman as a beautiful woman just as they would taste sugar to be sweet or feces to be stinky. But they would not be attracted to that woman or sugar or repulsed by feces.

      You may want to read some of the following posts:
      Search Results for: kama guna

    • #39984
      LayDhammaFollower
      Participant

      Lal, I think you haven’t considered the examples I cited in last post.

      By, Subjective I meant, based on gathi/anusuya.

      By, conditional I meant, based on states of internal, external Rūpa and external environment AND BHAVĀ.

      Even among single Bhavā, there is no object which is universally appealing to everyone.

      Even if somehow a universally appealing sense object existed, it still would not be appealing to everyone in THAT bhava, because, difference in their sense faculties.

      I said Kama guna is subjective to the particular lifestream. No object has kama guna that is universally appealing or disgusting to everyone, hence, how can It be objective? So, that is what I meant.

      Kama guna is conditional because, Even if something is appealing to majority of lifestream in particular bhava, it can not give same vipakā vēdanā to all.

      For example, Aged human vs young human have different state of sense, hence, difference in vipakā vēdanā isn’t it?

      Beauty is subjective, do you agree or not?

      Now, if beauty is subjective (based on gathi) and Arhant has removed the gathi, IN ADDITION he has complete Aniccā saññā AND It is saññā that recognises objects,
      How can Arhant recognise it as beautiful?

      I am not talking about attachment either, lal.

    • #39990
      Lal
      Keymaster

      OK. As long as you understand that kama guna and attachments are two different things.

      As I said, an Arahant does not lose the “sweetness of sugar” upon attaining Arahanthood.
      – But, he does lose any attachment to the taste of sugar.

      This issue could be a problem with exchanging ideas with words.

      For example, you asked: “How can Arhant recognise it as beautiful?”
      – You may be implying that the Arahant would not be attracted to a beautiful woman. If so, that is right.
      – But just like the issue of sugar, Arahant would see the difference between a “beautiful woman” and a “not so beautiful woman” per kama guna.
      – Attachment is different from “natural perception” due to kama guna.

Viewing 7 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.