Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Alex123 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:16 pm

daverupa wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Dan74 wrote:My intention was not to marginalise study at all, but to inquire whether insight can happen without closely attending to the present moment (among other things).


And every conscious moment we are aware of the only moment there is, the present moment. Awareness of the present moment is the only awareness that can be, and it is present in all states of consciousness. Even in animals. So something more is required than what we all have anyways.


Well, that'll be where having sampajana as part of sati is important, yes?



Yes. One needs to have sammā rather than micchā sati.

Because sati can be right or wrong, it means that it isn't mere "bare awareness". When one remembers Dhamma, then it is sammāsati. When one forgets it, and/or remember worldly things, then it is micchāsati.

Bare awareness is present with every conscious (viññāṇa, mano, citta) moment. To try to have bare awareness is like trying to make water wet.

We need to remember to follow the Dhamma.
Last edited by Alex123 on Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:17 pm

Greetings Dan,

Dan74 wrote:My intention was not to marginalise study at all, but to inquire whether insight can happen without closely attending to the present moment (among other things).

The Buddha advises to closely attend to a good many things, but finding somewhere that he actually talks about attending to "the present moment" is a bit more problematic, and perhaps that paucity is not accidental.

Dan74 wrote:I did say "the map is important and following it correctly is important..." Doesn't sound like marginalising to me.

I didn't say you were, and sorry if it seemed implied - I was speaking generally. As you say, having a map and looking around, is the way to get where you're going. Get thy bearings.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Dan74 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:43 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Dan,

Dan74 wrote:My intention was not to marginalise study at all, but to inquire whether insight can happen without closely attending to the present moment (among other things).

The Buddha advises to closely attend to a good many things, but finding somewhere that he actually talks about attending to "the present moment" is a bit more problematic, and perhaps that paucity is not accidental.

Metta,
Retro. :)


Yes, developing factors leading to enlightenment (and before that to sama sati) is important.

When mindfulness is purified, one comes to see mind-objects clearly. This is investigating mind-objects - seing as they are at least to a certain extent. This is the clear seeing/ bare awareness/ sama sati that is being talked about.

Dmytro seems to leave no room for it at all and I am wondering how insight is meant to take place without it.
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Ben » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:05 am

Hi all

I am wondering whether the issue is one as simple as language?

Perhaps substituting "attending to the present moment" with "attending to [the object] within the present moment"?
kind regards,

Ben
"One cannot step twice into the same river, nor can one grasp any mortal substance in a stable condition, but it scatters and again gathers; it forms and dissolves, and approaches and departs."

- Hereclitus


Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR
Buddhist Life Stories of Australia

e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com
User avatar
Ben
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15969
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Land of the sleeping gods

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby bodom » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:10 am

retrofuturist wrote:The Buddha advises to closely attend to a good many things, but finding somewhere that he actually talks about attending to "the present moment" is a bit more problematic, and perhaps that paucity is not accidental.


Off hand just two examples I can think of:

[Devata:]
Those who abide in the forest, Peaceful, living the holy life; Those who eat but a single meal; — why is it their face is so calm?

[The Buddha:]
They do not grieve over the past, Nor do they yearn for the future; They live only in the present — That is why their face is so calm. It's from yearning for the future, And from grieving over the past; This is how fools become withered — Like a fresh reed that's been hacked down.


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .olen.html

Let one not trace back the past Or yearn for the future-yet-to-come. That which is past is left behind Unattained is the "yet-to-come." But that which is present he discerns —


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nana.html

I have no interest in debating over sati so take these suttas for what there worth.

:anjali:
The heart of the path is SO simple. No need for long explanations. Give up clinging to love and hate, just rest with things as they are. That is all I do in my own practice. Do not try to become anything. Do not make yourself into anything. Do not be a meditator. Do not become enlightened. When you sit, let it be. When you walk, let it be. Grasp at nothing. Resist nothing. Of course, there are dozens of meditation techniques to develop samadhi and many kinds of vipassana. But it all comes back to this - just let it all be. Step over here where it is cool, out of the battle. - Ajahn Chah
User avatar
bodom
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Greetings Bodom,

Thanks for sharing the links.

Indeed there are such references, hence why I said paucity as opposed to absence... though in their context they seem to say little more than don't yearn/grieve for the past/future.

In the context of 'sati' as rememberance, it is interesting to consider the way in which there might be yoniso manasikara with respect to the past.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby dhamma follower » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:25 am

Ñāṇa wrote:
dhamma follower wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:Sati functions to direct awareness away from the five strands of sensual pleasure and place.

The above seems to conflict with what we read here:

Bhikkhus, the bhikkhu following my Teaching knows the mind accompanied by passion, as 'Mind with passion'....

Are you suggesting that this is an injunction to simply sit wallowing in passion and other defilements? I don't think it is. SN 47.6 Sakuṇagghi Sutta:


Isn't it rather right effort that is doing this job?

As I've already mentioned to Dukkhanirodha, "present moment awareness" is viññāṇa. Specifically, the five sensory consciousnesses


Vinnana arises with all objects, but it seems there are moments we don't have "presence of mind", we don't remember. So I don't think vinnana alone fulfills what we know by common sense as presence of mind.

I suggest that the remembering feature of sati should be applied to the present moment to, that is to remember the dhammas that are arising.

dhamma follower wrote:By Inferential, do you mean through a kind of mental process, no direct understanding?

Saññā is a mental process. As is ñāṇa and all other mental phenomena. And as Sn 4.13 tells us, an arahant doesn't follow views (na diṭṭhisāri) and isn't tied even to gnosis (napi ñāṇabandhu). Also, AN 4.24 Kāḷakārāma Sutta:


Then, panna doesn't have any place at all? are you saying that in the end, panna is the same than sanna?

If sanna suffices to understand the nature of reality, much more of us have already become enlightenned.

Regards,
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Alex123 » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:30 am

bodom wrote:
Let one not trace back the past Or yearn for the future-yet-to-come. That which is past is left behind Unattained is the "yet-to-come." But that which is present he discerns —

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nana.html
I have no interest in debating over sati so take these suttas for what there worth.
:anjali:


If we read what MN131 means, it is not bare awareness. One should remember that five aggregates are anatta.

And how is one drawn into present things? Herein, monks, an uninstructed ordinary man who takes no account of the Noble Ones, is unskilled in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, untrained in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, taking no account of the good men, unskilled in the Dhamma of the good men, untrained in the Dhamma of the good men, looks upon form as self, or self as possessed of form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He looks upon feeling as self, or self as possessed of feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling. He looks upon perception as self, or self as possessed of perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception. He looks upon formations as self, or self as possessed of formations, or formations as in self, or self as in formations. He looks upon consciousness as self, or self as possessed of consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. That is how, monks, one is drawn into present things.

"And how, monks, is one not drawn into present things? Herein, monks, an instructed Noble disciple who takes into account the Noble Ones, skilled in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, trained in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, taking into account the good men, skilled in the Dhamma of the good men, trained in the Dhamma of the good men, does not look upon form as self, or self as possessed of form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He does not look upon feeling as self... He does not look upon perception as self... He does not look upon formations as self... He does not look upon consciousness as self, or self as possessed of consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. That is how, monks, one is not drawn into present things. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nana.html


This awareness includes knowledge. It is not bare awareness that even worms have. Every conscious moment there is bare awareness. To train it is like to try making water become wet.
Last edited by Alex123 on Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:35 am

Image
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Dan74 » Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:02 am

Perhaps this is relevant to our discussion here:

http://nibbanam.com/?p=49
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:12 am

Greetings Dan,

Nice find.

Nanananda wrote:That is to say, at the very start, one finds it difficult to develop these Factors of Enlightenment as in the case of the five faculties, namely, `saddhà’, `viriya’, `sati’, `samàdhi’ and `pañña’ – faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. When analyzing these five faculties also, one sees a certain order. There is a certain balancing necessary in their development. One has to balance faith with wisdom and energy with concentration. In that context, mindfulness stands in the middle and fulfills the purpose. Its function is to balance the two sets – faith and wisdom, energy and concentration. Now in this context, mindfulness comes to the forefront. It is the leader. Even as the leader, mindfulness fulfills a very important function. That, again, is the question of balancing. It marshals the other factors into a perfect line-up. Just as in the case of the faculties mindfulness stands in the middle and orders the other faculties, here too it comes to the forefront and marshals those factors that are behind it. The three factors, dhammavicaya, viriya and piti have a tendency to lean towards restlessness. They are on the side of restlessness. When they happen to lean too much to that side, mindfulness orders them to straighten up. Then there are three others which have a tendency to lean towards laziness, inertia or inactivity. Those three factors are passaddhi, samàdhi, upekkhà – tranquility, concentration and equanimity. When they are leaning too much to that side, then also mindfulness orders them to straighten up.

Thus among the Factors of Enlightenment also, mindfulness fulfills the function proper to it. It is when all these are fully lined-up with this type of training, that one can say one’s mind has attained a developed stage in the Enlightenment Factors.

It also contains this, which makes a probably more eloquent point than I was able to make earlier regarding the proposition that all phenomena are fashioned by nama-rupa (name-and-form / naming forms), and should not therefore be regarded as objective sense stimuli, independent of that layer of perception...

Nanananda wrote:One becomes aware that in this type of mental-noting as `form’, `form’ or `sound’, `sound’, one presupposes an object. That is to say, these things get object-status by the very fact of mental-attention. Of course, in order to attend, there has to be an object. But as one goes deeper in insight meditation, one realizes that an object by definition is what one grasps (àrammana) – what one hangs on to (àlambana).

Whenever there is grasping, there is ignorance present. Grasping is something that leads to the perpetuation of ignorance.

...

However as one proceeds in Insight Meditation, one comes to reflect that in this mode of attention, there is present a certain illusion – a wrong notion one has been cherishing throughout `samsàra’. That is, the concept of two ends and a middle. When one notes a visual object as `a form’ and an auditory object as `a sound’, there is a kind of bifurcation between the eye and form, the ear and the sound. So thereby one is perpetuating the illusion, the wrong notion, of two ends. Whenever there are the two ends, there is also the middle. In short, this way of mental noting leaves room for a subject-object relationship. There is the meditator on one side, whoever it may be, and there is the object that comes to his mind; and he attends to it as an object, even though he may not go into its details. Now the meditator has to break through this barrier as well. He has to break this bondage.

Nanananda Bhikkhu is cool. 8-)

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:29 am

Greetings,

Again from Nanananda, courtesy of Dan's link, here is a profitable way in which to regard "bare attention" other than that of the "bare attention" of a snail, goldfish or worm...

Nanananda wrote:In short, the attempt here, is to escape the net of `saññà’ or perception and to limit oneself to the bare awareness. To stop short just at the bare awareness. This is an attempt to escape the net of language, the net of logic and also to be free from the duality of two ends which involves a middle. Everywhere one is confronted with a subject-object relationship. There is one who grasps and something to be grasped. There is a seer and an object seen. But this way of attending leaves room for delusion.

Now, if perception is a mirage, in order to get at this mirage nature, one has to be content with attending simply as `seeing, seeing’. One way or the other it is just a seeing or just a hearing. Thereby he stops short at the bare awareness. He stops short at the bare seeing, bare hearing, bare feeling and bare thinking. He does not grant it an object status. He does not cognize it as an object existing in the world. He does not give it a name. The purpose of this method of mental noting or attending, is the eradication of the conceit `AM’, which the meditator has to accomplish so a to attain release. The conceit `AM’ is `asmi-màna’.

This existence or `bhava’ is actually a way of measuring. Existence involves measuring. In order to measure, one has to have two pegs and this subject-object relationship fulfills this requirement. There is one who grasps and an object grasped. It is after driving these two pegs `down-to-earth’, so to say, that one starts measuring that what is called `existence’ or `bhava’. So it is between these two pegs that `existence’ exists.

In order to eradicate or uproot these pegs, one has to do away with this duality or the dichotomy as well as the middle. As already mentioned, wherever there are two ends, there is a middle. The attempt now is to eliminate all these.

Note: Attention is not given to the signs/features here, merely the perception of the experience of an active sense-channel is cultivated. That's quite precise.

Ben wrote:Perhaps substituting "attending to the present moment" with "attending to [the object] within the present moment"?

In line with Nanananda's words above, for me, such a replacement of terminology is an improvement of sorts as it removes some degree of ambiguity, but doesn't go far enough, as it still involves the establishment/perception/acknowledgement of an object. Maya is deep set, and the implicit acceptance of any illusion as real, is an obstacle on the path. "Objects" need to be questioned too - not taken as real, existing, given or in any way fundamental.

This is not something I see regularly discussed in contemporary discourse on satipatthana/vipassana.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ground » Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:04 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

Again from Nanananda, courtesy of Dan's link, here is a profitable way in which to regard "bare attention" other than that of the "bare attention" of a snail, goldfish or worm...


As I see it this is quite in line with the instruction given to Bahiya.

However in Satipatthana there is still another aspect involved which is the context of mindfulness suggested. So the "bare attention" of the Bahiya/Nanananda mode is not what is suggested by Satipatthana.


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ground » Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:22 am

I think one has to be careful to not fabricate another pair of dichotomies/extremes which is equating "discerning" with "ignorant objectivying" on the one hand and equating "non-discerning" with "knowing" or "wisdom" on the other hand.
The Satipatthana instructions clearly indicate that discerning in a remembered frame of reference leads to insight. Now if this would only be possible in an ignorant objectivying mode then the Satipatthana sutta would be flawed.
So there has to be a modus operandi which "discerns" a dhamma ("object"?) in a "given" (i.e. remembered) frame of reference without being caught up in ignorant subject/object dichotomy.


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Ben » Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:02 am

TMingyur wrote:The Satipatthana instructions clearly indicate that discerning in a remembered frame of reference leads to insight.

I disagree with you there, Ol' Ming.
"One cannot step twice into the same river, nor can one grasp any mortal substance in a stable condition, but it scatters and again gathers; it forms and dissolves, and approaches and departs."

- Hereclitus


Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR
Buddhist Life Stories of Australia

e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com
User avatar
Ben
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15969
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Land of the sleeping gods

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:28 am

Greetings Ben,

Do you care to elaborate a little further (time pending)?

To re-word what he wrote... you learn the frame of reference, and then you discern objects via the application of that frame of reference. For example, one learns the frame for vedananupassana, and then applies that learned/remembered frame.

On face value, that doesn't seem particularly controversial to me.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:31 am

Ben wrote:I am wondering whether the issue is one as simple as language?

Perhaps substituting "attending to the present moment" with "attending to [the object] within the present moment"?

Sati is even more fundamental than this. In terms of sati as memory, it's what allows for context and the continuity of experience. In terms of practice it is both calling to mind (apilāpana) as well as keeping in mind (upaggaṇhana). Cf. Milindapañha.

In commentarial terms, regarding sati's characteristic (lakkhaṇa), property (rasa), manifestation (paccupaṭṭāna), and basis (padaṭṭāna), the Vism. adds the following (Ch. 14.141):

    By means of it they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just mere remembering (saraṇamatta), thus it is sati. Its characteristic is not floating [away from the object]; its property is not losing [the object]; its manifestation is guarding the state of being face to face with an object; its basis is strong noting or the satipaṭṭhānas of the body and so on. It should be seen as like a post due to its state of being firmly set in the object, and as like a gatekeeper because it guards the gate of the eye and so on.

(In the Vism. apilāpana is interpreted differently than in the older Milindapañha, but that isn't germane to this discussion.)
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:01 am

dhamma follower wrote:
Are you suggesting that this is an injunction to simply sit wallowing in passion and other defilements? I don't think it is. SN 47.6 Sakuṇagghi Sutta:

Isn't it rather right effort that is doing this job?

In concert with sati. According to the Dhammasaṅgaṇī sati occurs with every skillful state of mind.

dhamma follower wrote:Vinnana arises with all objects, but it seems there are moments we don't have "presence of mind", we don't remember. So I don't think vinnana alone fulfills what we know by common sense as presence of mind.

My point was that right sati only arises with skillful types of consciousness. "Presence of mind" is an insufficient definition.

dhamma follower wrote:I suggest that the remembering feature of sati should be applied to the present moment to, that is to remember the dhammas that are arising.

Yes.

dhamma follower wrote:
dhamma follower wrote:By Inferential, do you mean through a kind of mental process, no direct understanding?

Saññā is a mental process. As is ñāṇa and all other mental phenomena. And as Sn 4.13 tells us, an arahant doesn't follow views (na diṭṭhisāri) and isn't tied even to gnosis (napi ñāṇabandhu). Also, AN 4.24 Kāḷakārāma Sutta:


Then, panna doesn't have any place at all? are you saying that in the end, panna is the same than sanna?

No, I'm not saying that. Saññā is not the same as paññā. But there can be no paññā without saññā. BTW, the followers of Buddhaghosa's system also accept that the three characteristics are known by inferential cognition (anumānañāṇa) Why? Because the three characteristics are universals (i.e. sāmaññalakkhaṇa) and not unique particulars (i.e. salakkhaṇa). The latter are cognized by direct perception, the former are not.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ground » Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:06 am

Ben wrote:
TMingyur wrote:The Satipatthana instructions clearly indicate that discerning in a remembered frame of reference leads to insight.

I disagree with you there, Ol' Ming.


No insight?
No discerning?
No remembering?
No frame of reference?

You prefer some of these negations or all of these?

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Ben » Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:01 am

Hi Geoff,

Ñāṇa wrote:
Ben wrote:I am wondering whether the issue is one as simple as language?

Perhaps substituting "attending to the present moment" with "attending to [the object] within the present moment"?

Sati is even more fundamental than this. In terms of sati as memory, it's what allows for context and the continuity of experience. In terms of practice it is both calling to mind (apilāpana) as well as keeping in mind (upaggaṇhana). Cf. Milindapañha.

In commentarial terms, regarding sati's characteristic (lakkhaṇa), property (rasa), manifestation (paccupaṭṭāna), and basis (padaṭṭāna), the Vism. adds the following (Ch. 14.141):

    By means of it they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just mere remembering (saraṇamatta), thus it is sati. Its characteristic is not floating [away from the object]; its property is not losing [the object]; its manifestation is guarding the state of being face to face with an object; its basis is strong noting or the satipaṭṭhānas of the body and so on. It should be seen as like a post due to its state of being firmly set in the object, and as like a gatekeeper because it guards the gate of the eye and so on.

(In the Vism. apilāpana is interpreted differently than in the older Milindapañha, but that isn't germane to this discussion.)


You are reminding me of our recent discussions regarding Vitakka and Vicara!

In terms of sati as memory, it's what allows for context and the continuity of experience. In terms of practice it is both calling to mind (apilāpana) as well as keeping in mind (upaggaṇhana). Cf. Milindapañha.


This, to me, is reminiscent of the repeated formula: atapi sampajjano satima.
Perhaps I'm not getting the 'memory' aspect of sati. To me, memory seems to be more a function of sanna (apperception).
kind regards,

Ben
"One cannot step twice into the same river, nor can one grasp any mortal substance in a stable condition, but it scatters and again gathers; it forms and dissolves, and approaches and departs."

- Hereclitus


Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR
Buddhist Life Stories of Australia

e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com
User avatar
Ben
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15969
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Land of the sleeping gods

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mikenz66, nalnit and 22 guests