Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

murphythecat8 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness.
Paying attention with a concentrated, mindful mind to an unwholesome thought that has arisen is not "pursuing with his thinking & pondering."


if we are really mindful, the negative thoughts subside automatically.. no?
Subsides, which is to say that they arise, have a duration and subside, all of which can be clearly tended to with a concentrated, mindful mind, without discursively thinking about it, but by paying attention. It does, however, take practice, just as it takes practice to to be mindful of bodily sensation or wholesome thoughts.

Here is a thread for your consideration: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 7&p=331092

[minor edits for formatting and omitted word]
Last edited by tiltbillings on Wed Sep 28, 2016 5:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

murphythecat8 wrote: isnt guarding the sense doors, if a unwholesome thoughts steer us, cultivate mindfulness of thoughts then go back to the body, the method to deal with lust?
One can do that; however, one can also, if one has the experience, pay attention to whatever it is that arises.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
murphythecat8
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:07 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by murphythecat8 »

tiltbillings wrote:
murphythecat8 wrote: isnt guarding the sense doors, if a unwholesome thoughts steer us, cultivate mindfulness of thoughts then go back to the body, the method to deal with lust?
One can do that; however, one can also, if one has the experience, pay attention to whatever it is that arises.
I dont see where in the scripture its mention to let a unwholesome thoughts in the mind. a wholesome thoughts take birth in wrong view. letting a wrong view that had pervaded the mind is beneficial?
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by mikenz66 »

Here, a monastic who has sensual desire clearly knows ‘I have sensual desire’; when they don’t have sensual desire they clearly know ‘I don’t have sensual desire’; and they clearly know how sensual desire that has not arisen comes to arise; how sensual desire that has arisen comes to be abandoned; and how the abandoned sensual desire comes to not rise again in the future. (1)
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn10/98
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

murphythecat8 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
murphythecat8 wrote: isnt guarding the sense doors, if a unwholesome thoughts steer us, cultivate mindfulness of thoughts then go back to the body, the method to deal with lust?
One can do that; however, one can also, if one has the experience, pay attention to whatever it is that arises.
I dont see where in the scripture its mention to let a unwholesome thoughts in the mind. a wholesome thoughts take birth in wrong view. letting a wrong view that had pervaded the mind is beneficial?
"let a unwholesome thoughts in the mind" Do you have a choice? An unwholesome thought arises dependent upon conditions. The is, then what do you do with it? I take the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta seriously:
    • Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be.
The only way one is going to do what the sutta says is by paying attention with a concentrated mindful mind. This not a matter of driving the sense-desire out; rather, it is a matter of paying attention in a way that allows one to how see how the sense-desire comes to be, to see sense-desire as it is, and to see how it to ceases, which, with repeated experiences of this allows one to far easier to let it go when it arises.

Also, keep in mind that sense-desire is anicca, dukkha, and anatta (impermanent, unsatisfactory to hold into, and empty of any self, in other words dependently arisen). With paying attention with a concentrated mindful mind sense-desire is no less a basis for insight than any other experience that may arise, and such insight allows one to let go of sense-desire from a place wisdom.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

Well, murphythecat8, we have gone around on this business before in this thread. Earlier in this thread you, murphythecat8, stated:
murphythecat8 wrote: with my practice, I have seen that unwholesome thoughts doesnt bring any purification, quite the contrary.
And I responded:
    • So according to you, murphythecat8,

      - seeing the conditioned/conditioning nature of the dangerous mind states does not bring any purification or insight,

      - seeing the impermanent nature of the dangerous mind states does not bring any purification or insight,

      - seeing the unsatisfactory nature of the dangerous mind states does bring any purification or insight,

      - seeing that the dangerous mind states are empty of any reality to hold onto does not bring any purification or insight,

      - seeing the conditioned antecedents that gives rise to the dangerous mind states does not bring any purification or insight,

      - seeing the conditioned/conditioning sense of self in relationship to the dangerous mind states does not bring any purification or insight,

      - seeing the cessation of the dangerous mind states as the supporting conditions (the fuel) are expended does not bring any purification or insight,

      - experiencing the ease with the cessation of the dangerous mind states does not bring any purification or insight,

      - the repeated experiencing of this process of insight that weakens the hold, dulls the hooks, frees one of the enchantment of the dangerous mind states does not bring any purification or insight,

      which seems to be what you are suggesting, but my practice tells me otherwise.
Now, murphythecat8, you did not respond to the above, even though I posted it twice before in this thread. You, murphythecat8, do not need to agree with me, but you cannot tell me that I am wrong in terms of my practice, given that it what I am doing is well grounded in the suttas, taught by respected, experienced teachers and is confirmed by my own experience.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
ToVincent
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent »

People have a their own reading of the suttas.
So they have their own practice.
Then the result shows in their attitude.
And that attitude is the reflection of their reading of the suttas.
In this world, there are many people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; and very few for the Unborn.
ToVincent
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent »

jackson wrote: Hi everyone,
I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts on thought substitution vs. simply observing feeling in the body. I've practiced substitution for a while, but recently read Ajahn Munindo's excellent book "Unexpected Freedom", where the recurring theme seemed to be just letting emotions be as they are and dwelling in the feeling in the body.
I think Ajahn Munindo, might have wrongly interpreted a major sutta, a very important sutta, an absolutely crucial sutta, a major sutta; whose number I have not in mind right now, but whose gist is the following:
Apart from the fact that the SA version deals with enjoying sensual pleasure for pleasant feeling, instead of the SN version where the bikkhu is repulsed by unpleasant feeling; they are about the same.
To prevent that the repulsion obsesses (anuseti) him, and that he be bound (saññuta) by repulsion, (or desire, or ignorance), the monk should feel bodily and not bodily and mentally.
But bodily doesn't mean with sensuality, because both SN and SA equate desire, repulsion and ignorance with the mental part.
Those who, by now, have understood through their (maybe wrong) practice what body means, will enjoy plainly this sutta.
What is mentally felt is lust and grief and ignorance; not what is bodily felt.
In this world, there are many people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; and very few for the Unborn.
murphythecat8
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:07 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by murphythecat8 »

hi Tilt, im not sure I disagree with you, I asked you how to practice in the way you mention as this seem to be vague in terms of practice.

""let a unwholesome thoughts in the mind" Do you have a choice? An unwholesome thought arises dependent upon conditions. The is, then what do you do with it? I take the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta seriously:"
once a unwholesome thoughts have arisen, you have to go back to mindfulness of thoughts, one of the four foundations of mindfulness.

Here are Ayya Khema words about how to deal with unwholesome thoughts:

"Then we can become aware of the content of our thoughts, which means knowing whether it is wholesome or not. We can learn to drop any negative thinking and replace it. This is where our meditation training comes in, which is not divorced from outer activities. When we pay attention to the breath in meditation and a thought intervenes, we learn to let go of the thought and come back to the breath. The same procedure is used in daily life to let go of unwholesome thoughts. We substitute at that time with a wholesome thought, just as we substitute with the breath in meditation.
Mindfulness of the thinking process is what the Buddha Named the "four supreme efforts."[1] They constitute the heart of the purification process. The spiritual path is the path of purification and hinges on mindfulness. "There's only one way for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of dukkha, for the final elimination of pain, grief and lamentation, for entering the noble path, for realizing Nibbana, that's mindfulness." (Words of the Buddha). To practice the purification process is necessary not only for one's own peace of mind, for adding to the peace in the world, but also in order to be able to meditate.

The hope that one might sit down on a pillow, watch the breath and become concentrated, is a myth. One has to have the mind in proper shape for it. Therefore, we must practice these four supreme efforts not only while we are meditating, but in every-day life. We will gain inner peace which everybody is looking for and very few people ever find.

The first effort is not to let an unwholesome thought arise which has not yet arisen. The requires sharp mindfulness. A thought which has not yet arisen creates waves ahead of it. To realize that these waves are boding no good, needs much attention and practice. The second effort, not to continue an unwholesome thought which has already arisen, can be done by anyone of good will, if it is understood that there is nobody else to blame. Unwholesome thinking is not due to outer triggers, but results strictly from our own defilements.

The third step is to make a wholesome thought arise which has not yet arisen. This means that we continually watch over our mind and encourage positive, wholesome thoughts where none are present even under the most trying circumstances.

Finally, to make a wholesome thought, which has already arisen, continue. In the meditation practice, this concerns our meditation subject. But in daily life it means our mind's reaction. If we have some sensitivity towards ourselves, we can feel that there is a disturbance within when unwholesome thinking arises, a feeling of resistance. Unwholesome thoughts have been thought of so often for so many years, that they have become part and parcel of our thinking process. It takes mindfulness and determination to let go."
http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/khe ... _aware.php

This is how one must deal with unwholesome thoughts.






I feel Paul davy already covered and answered very well in this thread.
Paul Davy wrote:Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:How is it reconciled in the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta?
As explained previously... by putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

But lest that be accused of being a glib response, I'll put it another way. I will endeavour here to highlight how it experientially occurs by way of my understanding, since there seems to be some uncertainty expressed as to how "putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world" could be enacted outside the extreme responses of [passive] "observation" and [active] "destruction"...

When sense-desire arises, it arises due to Wrong View.

If one were viewing with Right View at the time, sense-desire would not arise - there would be no basis for its arising.
MN 105 wrote:"In the same way, there's the possible case where a certain monk thinks, 'Craving is said by the Contemplative to be an arrow. The poison of ignorance spreads its toxin through desire, passion, & ill will. I have abandoned the arrow. I have expelled the poison of ignorance. I am rightly intent on Unbinding.' Because he is rightly intent on Unbinding, he wouldn't pursue those things that are unsuitable for a person rightly intent on Unbinding. He wouldn't pursue unsuitable forms & sights with the eye. He wouldn't pursue unsuitable sounds with the ear... unsuitable aromas with the nose... unsuitable flavors with the tongue... unsuitable tactile sensations with the body. He wouldn't pursue unsuitable ideas with the intellect. When he doesn't pursue unsuitable forms & sights with the eye... doesn't pursue unsuitable ideas with the intellect, lust doesn't invade the mind. With his mind not invaded by lust, he doesn't incur death or death-like suffering.

...

"Now, when a monk — maintaining restraint over the six spheres of contact, knowing that 'Acquisition is the root of stress' — is free from acquisition, released in the total ending of acquisition, it's not possible that, with regard to acquisition, he would stir his body or arouse his mind.

"Suppose there were a beverage in a bronze cup — consummate in its color, smell, & flavor — but mixed with poison. And suppose a man were to come along, wanting to live, not wanting to die, desiring pleasure, & abhorring pain. What do you think, Sunakkhatta — would he drink the beverage in the bronze cup knowing that 'Having drunk this, I will incur death or death-like suffering'?"

"No, lord."

"In the same way, when a monk — maintaining restraint over the six spheres of contact, knowing that 'Acquisition is the root of stress' — is free from acquisition, released in the total ending of acquisition, it's not possible that, with regard to acquisition, he would stir his body or arouse his mind.

"Suppose there were a deadly poisonous viper, and a man were to come along, wanting to live, not wanting to die, desiring pleasure, & abhorring pain. What do you think, Sunakkhatta — would he give his hand or finger to the snake knowing that 'Having been bitten by this, I will incur death or death-like suffering'?"

"No, lord."

"In the same way, when a monk — maintaining restraint over the six spheres of contact, knowing that 'Acquisition is the root of stress' — is free from acquisition, released in the total ending of acquisition, it's not possible that, with regard to acquisition, he would stir his body or arouse his mind."
So when sense-desire arises, we can know it has arisen due to the presence of Wrong View and we can then apply Right Effort to re-establish ourselves in Right View. The dynamic is explained here...
MN 19 wrote:"And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with sensuality arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with sensuality has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding.'

"As I noticed that it leads to my own affliction, it subsided. As I noticed that it leads to the affliction of others... to the affliction of both... it obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding, it subsided. Whenever thinking imbued with sensuality had arisen, I simply abandoned it, dispelled it, wiped it out of existence.
Seeing the power of Right View...
MN 117 wrote:"One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong view & for entering into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view.
Once Right View is restored, sense-desire is absent.

It is through that process that...
MN 10 wrote:Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be.
It is my perspective, which you're welcome to share or reject as you see fit, that the re-establishment of Right View is the most natural, effective and regularly promoted process through which the abandoning of unwholesome states can be made to occur. If the unwholesome state prevails, it is not a particularly valuable, useful or insightful experience, but a failure in re-establishing Right View in a timely manner. The consequences of this failure are as follows...
MN 19 wrote:"Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with sensuality, abandoning thinking imbued with renunciation, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with sensuality. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with ill will, abandoning thinking imbued with non-ill will, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with ill will. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with harmfulness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmlessness, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with harmfulness.
You often ask how much Right View is really needed in order to practice. By the approach reckoned above, the extent to which there is Right View is the extent to which dukkha is transcended.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Last edited by murphythecat8 on Wed Sep 28, 2016 1:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

ToVincent wrote:
jackson wrote: Hi everyone,
I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts on thought substitution vs. simply observing feeling in the body. I've practiced substitution for a while, but recently read Ajahn Munindo's excellent book "Unexpected Freedom", where the recurring theme seemed to be just letting emotions be as they are and dwelling in the feeling in the body.
I think Ajahn Munindo, might have wrongly interpreted a major sutta, a very important sutta, an absolutely crucial sutta, a major sutta; whose number I have not in mind right now, but whose gist is the following:
Apart from the fact that the SA version deals with enjoying sensual pleasure for pleasant feeling, instead of the SN version where the bikkhu is repulsed by unpleasant feeling; they are about the same.
To prevent that the repulsion obsesses (anuseti) him, and that he be bound (saññuta) by repulsion, (or desire, or ignorance), the monk should feel bodily and not bodily and mentally.
But bodily doesn't mean with sensuality, because both SN and SA equate desire, repulsion and ignorance with the mental part.
Those who, by now, have understood through their (maybe wrong) practice what body means, will enjoy plainly this sutta.
What is mentally felt is lust and grief and ignorance; not what is bodily felt.
It would be helpful if you carefully identified the sutta in question.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

murphythecat8 wrote:hi Tilt, im not sure I disagree with you, I asked you how to practice in the way you mention as this seem to be vague in terms of practice.
Would you be kind enough to link to the msg, since I obviously missed it, but I have also given you a link to a msg where I give an actual example of the practice I am talking about: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 92#p331092
murph wrote:
tilt quoting murph wrote: '"let a unwholesome thoughts in the mind" Do you have a choice? An unwholesome thought arises dependent upon conditions. The is, then what do you do with it? I take the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta seriously:'
once a unwholesome thoughts have arisen, you have to go back to mindfulness of thoughts, one of the four foundations of mindfulness.
What is interesting here is that immediately after I made the above statement, I quoted from the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta, which I shall quote again:
    • Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be.
And you really did not respond to this.
Here are Ayya Khema words about how to deal with unwholesome thoughts: . . .This is how one must deal with unwholesome thoughts.
Must? This is absolutely the only way to practice the Dhamma taught by the Buddha?

Well, maybe according to the late Ven Khema, but other respected and experienced monastics, and other respected and experienced lay teachers see it a bit differently, as has been point out to you in detail.
I feel Paul davy already covered and answered very well in this thread.
Paul Davy wrote:Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:How is it reconciled in the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta?
As explained previously... by putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

But lest that be accused of being a glib response, I'll put it another way. I will endeavour here to highlight how it experientially occurs by way of my understanding, since there seems to be some uncertainty expressed as to how "putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world" could be enacted outside the extreme responses of [passive] "observation" and [active] "destruction"...

When sense-desire arises, it arises due to Wrong View.

If one were viewing with Right View at the time, sense-desire would not arise - there would be no basis for its arising.
MN 105 wrote: . .
So when sense-desire arises, we can know it has arisen due to the presence of Wrong View and we can then apply Right Effort to re-establish ourselves in Right View. The dynamic is explained here...
That is naught more than a variation of trying to replace the unwholesome with the wholesome.
Not terribly illuminating.

Davy wrote:Seeing the power of Right View...
MN 117 wrote:"One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong view & for entering into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view.
Once Right View is restored, sense-desire is absent.

It is through that process that...
MN 10 wrote:Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be.
It is my perspective, which you're welcome to share or reject as you see fit, that the re-establishment of Right View is the most natural, effective and regularly promoted process through which the abandoning of unwholesome states can be made to occur. If the unwholesome state prevails, it is not a particularly valuable, useful or insightful experience, but a failure in re-establishing Right View in a timely manner. The consequences of this failure are as follows...
The problem with what is stated here is that the MN10 section quoted simply could not happen if Davy's "Right View" theory was correct. Basically, Davy's theory sounds like using conceptual structures to try to "abandon unwholesome states." The Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta suggest something very different, which is amplified in the Bahiya Sutta and related suttas:
    • "Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' -- Ud 10
    • Not impassioned with forms
      — seeing a form with mindfulness firm —
      dispassioned in mind,
      one knows
      and doesn't remain fastened there.
      While one is seeing a form
      — and even experiencing feeling —
      it falls away and doesn't accumulate.
      Thus one fares mindfully.
      Thus not amassing stress,
      one is said to be
      in the presence of Unbinding.

      Not impassioned with sounds...
      Not impassioned with aromas...
      Not impassioned with flavors...
      Not impassioned with tactile sensations...

      Not impassioned with ideas
      — knowing an idea with mindfulness firm —
      dispassioned in mind,
      one knows
      and doesn't remain fastened there.
      While one is knowing an idea
      — and even experiencing feeling —
      it falls away and doesn't accumulate.
      Thus one fares mindfully.
      Thus not amassing stress,
      one is said to be
      in the presence of Unbinding.
      -- SN 35.95
    • And how is a monk 'alert' (sanmpajanna) ? There is the case where feelings are known
      to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, known as they
      subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they
      persist, known as they subside. Discernment is known
      to him as it arises, known as it persists, known as it subsides. This
      is how a monk is alert. So stay mindful, monks, and alert. This is
      our instruction to you all.

      — SN 47.35
    • “For a person whose mind is concentrated, there is no need for an act of will, ‘May I know & see things as they actually are.’ It is in the nature of things that a person whose mind is concentrated knows & sees things as they actually are.
      “For a person who knows & sees things as they actually are, there is no need for an act of will, ‘May I feel disenchantment.’ It is in the nature of things that a person who knows & sees things as they actually are feels disenchantment.
      “For a person who feels disenchantment, there is no need for an act of will, ‘May I grow dispassionate.’ It is in the nature of things that a person who feels disenchantment grows dispassionate.
      “For a dispassionate person, there is no need for an act of will, ‘May I realize the knowledge & vision of release.’ It is in the nature of things that a dispassionate person realizes the knowledge & vision of release.
      AN V 312
The point is here that the practice of attending to the "dangerous mind states" with a concentrated, mindful mind is not out line with what the Buddha taught.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by mikenz66 »

tiltbillings wrote:
murphythecat8 wrote: ....
I feel like this is not enough understood. this is exactly the practice. not observing unwholesome thoughts unfolding, but rather go back to mindfulness of thoughts which replacing unwholesome thoughts with wholesome thoughts then go back to mindfulness of the body.
That may be one way of doing the practice, but the suttas, such as the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta, certainly support paying attention to the unwholesome minds states. I suggest you go back to this msg and read the replies that follow.
Something possibly worth clarifying. This dismissing of distractions and returning to the main meditation object as soon as possible is, of course, an effective way of promoting tranquility (samatha), which seems to be what is being referred to in MN20:
“Here, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu is giving attention to some sign (nimitta)...
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn20/3-3.718
This is a different practice from what is being described in the sattipattana sutta passages discussed above, which is promoting insight into the hindrances, etc.:
Here, a monastic who has sensual desire clearly knows ‘I have sensual desire’; when they don’t have sensual desire they clearly know ‘I don’t have sensual desire’; and they clearly know how sensual desire that has not arisen comes to arise; how sensual desire that has arisen comes to be abandoned; and how the abandoned sensual desire comes to not rise again in the future. (1)
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn10/98
The Buddha taught a variety of approaches, all useful.

:anjali:
Mike
ToVincent
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent »

tiltbilling wrote: That may be one way of doing the practice, but the suttas, such as the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta, certainly support paying attention to the unwholesome minds states. I suggest you go back to this msg and read the replies that follow.
Again, that is the way you read it.

I see nowhere in MN 10 an instruction to **pay attention** to **unwholesome minds states**.
Manasikara applies only to the perception of foulness-parts of the body, and the analysis of the 4 elements (dhātu). And that is in the title of those dwelling only (like in Kāyānupassanādhātumanasikārapabba = The analysis of the 4 elements - the title of the paragraph on the 4 elements, for instance).

The general idea in MN 10 is to "discern", to "distinguish" (pajānāti) from different inputs; once in a dwelling (vihāra) [body, feeling, mind or dhamma]. Like: "is this a pleasant, or is this an unpleasant feeling," for instance?

Then comes the refrain where the meditator dwells observing states (dhamma) that arise, or that pass away, or that arise and pass away.
Or else, he maintains the mindfulness that "there is (this particular dwelling), merely for knowing and awareness". Dwelling independent, not clinging to anything in this world.

The ekottarika-agama (https://suttacentral.net/en/ea12.1) states for instance:
As feelings arise, the practitioner recognizes and is aware of them and their roots, and he is not dependent on them and does not give rise to feelings of attachment to the world.
Here the "having removed covetousness and displeasure" at the begining of the MN 10 sutta - and the "dwelling independent, not clinging to anything in this world," in the refrain, takes all their meaning.

So, is it because the meditator sees the all process of arising and passing away, that you imply that the process should be encompassing a thorough mental and body course of action ?

Then again, where do you see "unwholesome mind states" (akusalehi dhammehi,) in that MN 10 sutta? - In the Four Noble Truths part?
The mindfulness over the Four Noble Truths does not even appear in the Ekottarika-agama or the Madhyama-agama parallels.

I am not here to argue. These are just facts.
In this world, there are many people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; and very few for the Unborn.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

ToVincent wrote: . . .

I am not here to argue. These are just facts.
Again, that is the way you read it.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings »

mikenz66 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
murphythecat8 wrote: ....
I feel like this is not enough understood. this is exactly the practice. not observing unwholesome thoughts unfolding, but rather go back to mindfulness of thoughts which replacing unwholesome thoughts with wholesome thoughts then go back to mindfulness of the body.
That may be one way of doing the practice, but the suttas, such as the Satipaṭṭhānā Sutta, certainly support paying attention to the unwholesome minds states. I suggest you go back to this msg and read the replies that follow.
Something possibly worth clarifying. . . .
Thanks.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply