[sybe07]

I sense that doing automatically good, on auto-pilot, driven by a habitual force, like automatically taking care of somebody, is not really doing good. I tend to see it this way that all this habitual driven behaviour is in the end not really good. It is not really authentic. It is mind in a re-active mode. Also results, i find, are doubtful at least.

I understand that ‘automatically taking care of somebody’, is not bad or immorel. In a mundane sense it is moral to take care of people or animals etc. In that sense it is good and appreciated. But i can also sense it is not really good, it is not really nobel, it is also often not really wise and intelligent. I belief, re-activity isn’t. There is something to re-activity which is not oke.

Isn’t all re-active behaviour a kind of delusion? A kind of being overwhelmed, being fettered, being attached to habitual forces? Can it ever be really called wise in the sense the Buddha meant?

I understand an arahant or Buddha does not automatically, from habitual forces, do good. I belief this is really “doing good” in the most wise and sensible sense.

In a certain way buddha-dhamma is about abandoning immoral thoughts and habits en developing moral thought and habits. That part is a main theme in the sutta’s and also in Lal’s posts. It is meritorious. Sutta’s illustrate that the Buddha was very active in this kind of practise. It is, as it were, a way to close the gates to the lower worlds and to open the gates to heaven. At least, making the changes bigger. It fuels the path to Nibbana too. Ignoring this kind of work is the path of Mara.

But, at least for me, buddha-dhamma is also about becoming really authentic, in the sense that one enters more and more the unconditioned and cuts through the forces of habits. Habitual forces are not who i am, not mine, not myself, but just habitual forces arising. This is also true for moral habitual forces. The ultimate goal, at least that’s how i understand this, is not to do automatically good by force of habit, but to end such force-ful behaviour.

kind regards, Siebe

[sybe07]

i struggled with this theme a lot,

but i have come to see it this way that “doing right” is the best guaranteed when in certain situation i am not overwhelmed by any habitual force.

i have come to see that to do really right, i have to be beyond the force of all habits, unconditioned, authentic, not in a re-active mode.

I have come to see that to do really right, i must be authentic. If i am a slave of a habit, also a good one, i have seen this is not really doing right.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Can we say that due to sankhara we operate in a re-active way? In a certain sense we are at that time not really ourselves. Our behaviour is just habitual, conditioned, like an animal or machine.

In a re-active mode of behaviour, even when this can be called morally good, we still are alienated from ourselves. At least, this is how i can experience this.

This reactive mode, even when the result is morally good, such as the habit to take care of somebody, the habit to help somebody, it still is a kind of alienated or corrupt behaviour. It is not really truthfull or right. Maybe in an mundane sense it is right, but i think it can also be sensed as not really authentic behaviour. In a sense all habitual behaviour is a kind of imprisonment, fettered, not free.

Can we say that this conditioned behaviour, this reactive modus operandes is in the end due to avijja? So avijja is a kind of fuel for the habitual mind and our not really authentic habitual behaviour?

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

“We need to see how our conscious thoughts (vaci sankhara and kaya sankhara) lead to births in various realms, and first suppress/remove those sankhara that lead to births in the apayas”.(Lal)

sutta references for the relation between our kind of mental, verbal and phyiscal actions and their results are:

From Anguttara Nikāya:
-AN3.111, AN4.233, AN6.39, AN10.216

From Majjhima Nikāya:
-MN45, MN46, MN129,
also ofcourse the sutta on kamma MN135 and MN136

AN10.47 is also interesting. It lists greed, hate and delusion as causes and conditions for the doing of bad kamma, like usual in the sutta Piṭaka but lists also careless attention and wrongly directed mind as causes and conditions
It lists also non-greed, non hatred, non delusion and carefull attention and a rightly directed mind as causes and conditions for doing of good kamma, for the occurance of good kamma.

This list of sutta’s is not complete.

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

“When such thoughts creep into the mind, one should immediately get rid of them. That is the basis of Anapana and Satipatthana”. (Lal)

I know there are schools, like dzogchen, who teach we do not have to change anything which arises in the mind. The idea is: If we understand that thoughts are mere thoughts, they come and go, we do not have to dispel them. They liberate themselves, they go without a trace.

I have seen the Pali sutta’s deal with this differently. Thoughts are seen as motivations, such as sensual thoughts, ill will thoughts and thoughts of harming. Those thoughts prepare mind to speak and acts in a immoral way.

When such unwholesome thoughts are mentioned in the sutta’s, the sutta’s are very consistent in how to deal with them. They must be abandoned, dispelled, not tolerated, annihilated. Tolerating such unwholesome thoughts/motivation is seen as a lack of right energy, right diligence, as laziness.

I came upon a sutta in which this is nicely illustrated with two metapors, SN14.12

This sutta’s also treats the source of wholesome and unwholesome thoughts.
I will only mention the two metaphors:

“Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would drop a blazing grass torch into a thicket of dry grass. If he does not quickly extinguish it with his hands and feet, the creatures living in the grass and wood will meet with calamity and disaster. So too, if any ascetic or brahmin does not quickly abandon, dispel, obliterate, and annihilate the unrighteous perceptions (regarding sensuality, ill will and harming, Siebe) that have arisen in him, he dwells in suffering in this very life, with vexation, despair, and fever; and with the breakup of the body, after death, a bad destination may be expected for him. “Bhikkhus, thought of renunciation arises”

And

“Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would drop a blazing grass torck into a thicket of dry grass. If he quickly extinguishes it with his hands and feet, the creatures living in the grass and wood will not meet with calamity and disaster. So too, if any ascetic brahmin quickly abandons, dispels, obliterates, and annihilates the unrighteous perceptions that have arisen in him, he dwells happily in this very life, without vexation, despair, and fever; and with the breakup of the body, after death, a good destination may be expected for him.”

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

Overcoming fear

-1. Due to mindfulness of the body.

This is said in MN119. In this sutta mindfulness of the body is explained. It consists of (in short): 1. Breath-meditation; 2. awareness of the four postures (awareness of walking, standing, sitting, lying down); 3; doing everything with full awareness, such as eating with attention, urinating, extending limbs, all kind of acts; 4. Reviewing the body parts and there foulness; 5. Contemplating the elements of the body; 6. Contemplating the decay of the body in nine phases of decomposition, realising our own body is of the same nature.. 7. Abiding in the four jhana’s.

When this mindfulness of the body has been repeatedly practised, developed, cultivated, used as a vehicle, used as a basis, established, consolidated, and well undertaken, these ten benefits may be expected. What ten? These are listed in the sutta. One of them (ii) is:
– “One becomes a conqueror of fear and dread, and fear and dread do not conquer oneself; one abides overcoming fear and dread whenever they arise. (MN119)

-2. Ending sakkaya ditthi.

I personally think this is the key.

This is treated in SN22.7. The mechanism, in my own words ofcourse, is that due to sakkaya ditthi we are in a negative way obsessed with changes in what we feel, perceive, experience. We are afraid of changes. Changes are normal, a fact of life, but in a psychological sense it is very hard to endure, i find.

For example, the body changes, from relative young to old, from strong to weak, from healthy to sick. And all this change comes with much worry, much fear, feelings of unsafety, anxiety.

I think the main cause is sakkaya ditthi. We are identified with this body. This is one kind of sakkaya ditthi (i am this body). So when the body changes and it becomes old and sick this becomes something very personal and dramatic. This dramatising effect is, i belief, due to sakkaya ditthi. Sakkaya ditthi makes everything so personal.
Change becomes a drama while change is just a fact of life. When sakkaya ditthi ends all those changes in what we feel, experience, perceive do not make us worry anymore.

-3. contemplating the qualities of the three gems, the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. (SN11.3)

Siebe

[sybe07]

Hi ynot, references are:

-‘What are the four causes of evil from which he refrains?
Evil action springs from attachment, it springs from ill-will, it
springs from folly, it springs from fear. If the Ariyan disciple
does not act out of attachment, ill-will, folly or fear, he will not
do evil from any one of the four causes.’ DN31§5, translation Walshe

-“Bhikkhus, there are these two kinds of assemblies. What two?
The dregs of an assembly and the cream of an assembly. And what is the dregs of an assembly? The assembly in which the bhikkhus enter upon a wrong course on account of desire, hatred, delusion, or fear is called the dregs of ann assembly. “And what is the cream of an assembly? The assembly in which the bhikkhus do not enter upon a wrong course on account of desire, hatred, delusion, or fear is called the cream of an assembly. “These, bhikkhus,are the two kinds of assemblies. Of these two kinds of assemblies, the cream of an assembly is foremost” AN2.46, translation Bodhi

-“Bhikkhus, there are these four ways of taking a wrong course. What four? One takes a wrong course because of desire, because of hatred, because of delusion, or because of fear. These are the four ways of taking a wrong course.” If through desire, hate, fear, or delusion one transgresses against the Dhamma, one’s fame diminishes like the moon in the dark fortnight.
AN4.17, translation Bodhi

-See also AN4.19 + 4.20

-“Bhikkhus, one possessing five qualities should not be appointed an assigner of meals.What five? He enters upon a wrong course because of desire; he enters upon a wrong course because of hatred; he enters upon a wrong course because of delusion; he enters upon a wrong course because of fear; he
does not knoW which [meal] has been assigned and which has not been assigned. One possessing these five qualities should not be appointed an assigner of meals. a fragment of AN5.272, translation Bodhi.

I personally feel fear is not getting very much attention but plays a key role in my life. Some say fear is an aspect of dosa. But i have not found sutta references for this yet. Fear is mentioned apart from dosa.

I think fear is often a motive of not doing the right thing. Not telling something which needs to be told. Not making contact with somebody while that would be appropriate. Not making that important step while you feel inside one needs to make that step. That kind of things.

I will post a seperate post on removing fear from sutta perspective. Otherwise this is becoming to long.

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

Fear plays an important role in my life. I have very much trouble to trust. Trust computers, cars, trust people, trust my own mind, trust the body, trust the world, trust life. I live most of the time with the perception of teror, that everything goes wrong. Up till now i am not able to let go. But i just keep on practising.

I have examined this theme of fear in the Sutta-pitaka. Now i have been given the oppertunity to share some information:

fear which is conducive to the goal of Nibbana

there is a kind of fear which is good, this is the fear of wrong doing, otappa. In the texts it is often mentioned together with moral shame, hiri.
They are seen as protectors. They protect from going immoral ways. They protect from downfall.
Hiri is seen a manifestation of self-respect. Respecting oneself one stays away from immoral unworthy deeds.
Otappa is seen as a manifestation of respecting others, wanting to do no harm to them, because there is respect for others welbeing.

Seeing fear in the slightest moral faults is a quality which is often mentioned in the sutta’s.

Fear as something positive is also mentioned in MN49. Here it is said the Buddha saw fear in any form of existence. This is seen as conducive to the goal of Nibbana.

fear which is not conducive to the goal of Nibbana

there are mentioned four ways of going wrong; chandagati, dosagati, mohagati and bhayagati. It are ways to express how we, or mind, takes a wrong way/route under the influence of greed, hate, delusion and fear.

Bhayagati is going wrong due to fear, due to shiness, due to lack of selfconfidence, due to nerves, being timid etc. What needs to be done in a certain situation is not done because of that bhayagati, the influence of fear on the mind and behaviour. I feel this is happening a lot.

The causes for fear are treated differently but in fact it all comes down to attachment. How can there be fear without attachment?

a cause for fear is:

-immoral behaviour/the fool (MN115)
– sakkaya ditthi (SN22.7). Identified with the the khandha’s, one fears change. If one thinks thoughts like “this youthful body that is me”, or” this health and strenght is me” then one will ofcourse fear the changes which will certainly occur. This kind of fear i have, with regard to external and internal matters. I did no used to have this so extreme but this has devoloped during time.
-Dhammapada 212-216 mentions loved ones, affection, attachment, craving, sensual desire as causes for fear. Ofcourse one will fear change or disappearance of what one loves and feels affection for.
-SN2.17 makes clear that without letting go of everything there will Always be some fear of loosing something. How accurate, right?
-Udana 3.10 mentions Delight as cause. I think because one fears the end of what one takes delights in.
-fear of death is treated in AN.4.116 and AN4.184 there is no fear of death when immorality is abandoned and morality is developed

This is a short summery of what i once examined.

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

Replying y not:

1. The idea that an arahant or tathagata exist after death (parinibbana) is, as far as i know, not answered with a “Yes” or “No” but put aside. I also do not know any sutta’s which makes clear what happens after death with an arahant or with the pure mind. Maybe someone can give some references?
I have not read that parinibbana means, for example, that mind becomes totally free of any body and is, for ever and Always, happy and beyond samsara in some kind of realm with individuals which all attained Nibbana.
Where can this be found?

2. If there is no unchanging entity, how can the one who suffered in so many lives be the same as the one who will reach Nibbana one day, like y-not says?

Siebe

[sybe07]

Hello Akvan,

I have learned anatta nupassana the way U Pandita teaches this in his book “in this very live, the liberations teachings of the Buddha”, Sayadaw. See pages 293-295. But i did not learn this from him. I also belief, am quit sure, it is Tipitaka proof.

He emphasizes certain things which make much sense to me:

“aniccānupassana-ñāṇa only can occur in the precise moment when one sees the passing away of a phenomenon. In the absence of such immediate seeing, then, it is impossible to understand impermanence”.

In the some way he refers to the other nupassana’s, dukkha and anatta.

Maybe you do not agree with the translation ‘impermanence’ but, i feel, it is very important to understand that …“True insight only occurs in the presence of a nonthinking, bare awareness of the passing away of phenomena in the present moment”.

So insight is not some kind of reasonable conclusion or gut-feeling or sense of understanding that arises after some time thinking or pondering about these concepts anicca, dukkha and anatta. It is an kind of seeing, wisdom or understanding that penetrates in this very moment the nature of phenomena. I think this is very important.

For example, (he explains) when contemplating dukkha one sees the arising and passing away of phenomena and “you will realize that nothing is dependable and there is nothing fixed to cling to. Everything is in flux, and this is unsatisfactory. Phenomena provide no refuge” (U. Pandita)

The fact that “no-refuge” is understood in relation with dukkha-nupassana and not anatta nupassana agrees with Patisambhidamagga.

One can ask oneself…when one sees there is no refuge in samsara, is that a kind nupassana-nana? Is that understanding tilakkhana? I have the impression this is not real insight meditation, but it is a kind of intellectual understanding.

I feel anatta has, like the other concepts of anicca and dhukka different meanings, or levels of understanding. I will give some in the below.

Applying anatta-nupassana on all that arises in the moment in the mind, one sees that there is no self governing these formations. It is a selfless proces. When one continues this practise one can get to see that it is also not a self (I am) who sees, hears, etc.

One can also see anatta nature in material phenomena. For example a rainbow. It just arises because of causes and conditions and it is no entity which came from anywhere when is arose and does not go anywhere when it vanishes. It has no self-nature, it is no entity with wishes.

A book is just a collection of pages which are in turn a collection of molecules which are in turn a collection of atoms, which are in turn etc. Independend of pages there is no book. Independend of molecules no pages etc. So, nothing exist on it’s own accord or has any self-nature, anatta, the absence of an abiding self.

These are also meanings of anatta.

I think it is important that insight-meditation is not the same as pondering, or reasoning or thinking about the meaning of tilakkhana and nana is not the understand which arises based on that thinking etc. but it is the activity which sees the mental and phyiscal formations arise and cease in the moment and at that moment sees the anicca, dukkha and anatta nature.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Akvan has listed above possible reasons why one may not attain magga phala even when listening to the true dhamma, refering to the sutta’s.

I wanted to reaction on: “However this underlying perception of “I” or “me” i.e., “asmi mana” is removed only at the Arahant stage”. (Saket)

Yes, i have understood this too. At the same time, correct me if i am wrong, this does not mean that even for a normal person, not a sotapanna yet, that this conceit “I am” or “me” is Always present in the mind. Like anything (except Nibbana) it arises and ceases momentarily. I belief a sotapanna knows this.

This “I am” conceit seems to have different strenghts too. For example, imagine you are falsely accused of something. Well, probably at such moments there is a very strong sense of “me”. Maybe while your taking a walk in the Woods this becomes less strong.

I also think it might be somewhat obscure what this conceit “I am” refers too. I think we call this self-awareness or awareness of a self. I have seen this also explained as ego-conceit. I have the impression this is right.
Do you agree?

Siebe

[sybe07]

I think the answer is no real yes or no.

The sutta’s talk, for example, about things which are difficult to correct. One of those things, and i find this very recognisable, is mental distraction. Mindfulness of breathing is to be developed for abandoning mental distraction.
(AN6.115)

Mental distraction, i belief, comes with delusion. We become so easy involved in all these arising mental formations, like thoughts, plans, intentions, views. That proces of getting involved in those arising mental phenomena does something with mind. It is not easy to see this khandha with wisdom, ‘this i am not, this is not mine, not myself’. Most of the time, while these formations arise, there is an immediately grasping at those formations as ‘mine’. This is also called monkey mind. A monkey grasps a branch and then another. Mind does that too. There is constantly a grasping of this or that. We do not do this. It is a self-less proces. There is no self or I behind it.

Another sutta says one should develop mindfulness of breathing to cut of thoughts (AN9.1)

siebe

[sybe07]

This material is meant as research and discussion material. I do not want to cause conlficts but i want to investigate what is meant by anicca, dhukka and anatta nupassana.

I have collected some fragments from the book; ” In this very life, the liberation teachings of the Buddha, Sayadaw U Pandita

Dhukka nupassana (p.293)

“Dukkhānupassanā-ñāṇa, the insight that comprehends suffering, also occurs at the moment when one is contemplating the passing away of phenomena, but it has a different flavor from aniccānupassanā-ñāṇa. One is suddenly seized by a great realization that none of these objects is dependable. There is no refuge in them; they are fearsome things”.

I can see this insight that there is no refuge in conditioned phenomena is also in Patisambhidamagga (Treatise on Insight §9) related to dhukka-nupassana. It is not related specifically to anatta nupassana.

Anatta nupassana (p.294)

“Automatically now, one appreciates anatta, that no one is behind these processes. Moment to moment, phenomena occur; this is a natural process with which one is not identified (this i am not, not mine, not myself, Siebe). This wisdom relating to the absence of self in things, anattānupassanā-ñāṇa, also is based on two preceding aspects, anatta itself and anatta lakkhaṇa. Anatta refers to all impermanent phenomena which possess no self-essence — in other words, every single element of mind and matter. The only difference from anicca and dukkha is that a different aspect is being highlighted. The characteristic of anatta, anatta lakkhaṇa, is seeing that an object does not arise or pass away according to one’s wishes.
All the mental and physical phenomena that occur in us come and go of their own accord, responding to their own natural laws. Their occurrence is beyond our control. We can see this in a general way by observing the weather. At times it is extremely hot, at other time freezing cold. At times it is wet, at other times dry. Some climates are fickle, such that one does not know what will happen next. In no climate can one adjust the temperature to suit one’s comfort. Weather is subject to its own natural laws, just like the elements that constitute our minds and bodies. When we fall ill, suffer, and eventually die, are these processes not contrary to our wishes? While conscientiously watching all the mental and physical phenomena arising and passing away within, one may be struck by the fact that no one is in control of the process. Such an insight comes quite naturally. It is not affected or manipulated in any way. Nor does it come from reflection. It simply occurs when one is present, observing the passing away of phenomena. This is called anattānupassanā-ñāṇa. When one is unable to see the momentary arising and passing away of phenomena, one is easily misled to think that there is a self, an individual unchanging entity behind the process of body and mind. With clear awareness, this false view is momentarily eliminated”

at this moment i, indeed, belief this corresponds to the sutta’s and commentaries like Patisambhidamagga. Atta is the idea of an unchanging governing self (see anattalakkhana suta. A self who governs all these mental, verbal, and physical formations. Anatta nupassana sees, momentarily, so not philosphically, that this is not true. Also the notion I am arises and ceases out of control. There arises no entity but the notion “I am” is itself a formations caused by (longstanding) craving. The notion “I am” can, i belief, the best be understood as the notion of an existing ego.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Maybe these above fragments need to be translated by someone else than Nanamoli? But maybe you are all overworked. I hope not.

I am especially interested in the right meaning and application of anatta nupassana.

i think it is correct that the idea of “atta” refers to a self-who-is-in-control, an autonomous agent.

For example: “Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.’ And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.’ (SN22.59)

so the idea of a self refers to a kind of autonomous agent or entity which is in control.

I compare this with a tree. The tree is no entity or autonomous agent which decides to loose her leaves or to suck water or to grow. This happens due to causes and conditions and is not governed by some inner or outer tree-self or tree-soul or tree entity. The point of anatta is, i belief, all happens due to causes and conditions without there is some agency or self or soul or entity responsible for all this to happen.

In the old days they postulated endless such entities, such as all kind of Gods who ruled over lightening, the oceans, etc. Science has another approach and has made this entities needless. Causes and conditions are determining what happens.

The concept of anatta does not denie the (conventional) existence of ‘a person’ or ‘a being’, just like it does not denie the existence of a tree. And just like there is no tree-entity who decides to let the leaves fall, there is also no entity inside us who governs all those formations as breathing, verbal formations, mental formations, phyiscal formations. Those formations are not governed by a self, some psychological entity who rules, they arise due to causes and conditions.

I keep on investigating the right meaning and application of anatta nupassana and look forward to your answers and comment.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Thanks Lal.

The unconditioned element is in sutta’s (SN43.14-43, translation Bodhi) also called: the far shore…the subtle…the very difficult to see…the unaging…the stable…the undisintegrating…the unnanifesting…the unproliferated…the peaceful…the deathless…the sublime…the auspicious…the secure…the destruction of craving…the wonderful… the amazing…the unailing…the unailing state… Nibbana…the unafflicted…dispassion…purity…freedom…
the unadhesive…the island… the shelter… the asylum … the refuge”

And in SN43.13 it is called the uninclined.

If one sees the deathless, Nibbana, the refuge, does one than at the same time see this is in fact the true identity of us, or, in other words, the nature of mind?

I ask this, because how can the unailing state, the deathless, the unconditioned etc. be a refuge when this is only an object of a magga citta?

How can any (sense) object of a citta ever function as a refuge? How can Nibbana be a object of a citta and be a refuge?

Siebe

. How do you understand this?

[Author]

Posts