anatta and cetana and conditions for right view

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Dear Robert,
robertk wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:Hi Robert,

I don't mean that one can achieve sati at all times, if at all. I probably should not use "mindfulness" but some more generic term like "pay attention".

Mike
Dear Mike
the thing is, is that this idea that paying attention leads somehow to mindfulness needs to be examined. Attention arises with kusala and akusala and if we agree that akusala is more likley to arise (which it is) then all someone is doing by having more attention is increasing some special type of akusala or even magnifying the idea of a self who can control awareness to go here, arise there..
Of course. This is an important issue, and it's clear that such wrong view can be a serious problem. However, it is something that most teachers certainly do address (putting aside whether they get it exactly right...). No-one reputable that I'm aware of teaches "control of aggregates (or cittas)". All talk about causes an conditions for the arising of sati/samadhi/panna/etc.

Perhaps you could provide a clear canonical (or commentarial) reference for your assertion that:
akusala is more likley to arise (which it is)
and we could discuss how that might apply.



:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Greeting Alex,
And why isn't proper practice with right view are the conditions for more of it. Do you expect person who never meditates to have the same sati as someone who was, lets say, a meditating bhikkhu for 20 years?
The question is: what is proper practice in term of paramatha dhamma?

Is staying in a kuti or a meditation hall, trying to focus on something, or having the idea that "I can direct sati while walking, sitting" what you call proper practice? All these things, when done with the idea that sati can arise at will, are more likely to be akusala moments rooted in wrong view. Is akusala the practice?

Also, your comment above implies that as long as we decide to have some activities called meditation, sati will be there. Is it so, or sati arises by its own conditions? What is the characteristics of sati, precisely? Here is the description on sati in the Atthasalini:
The Atthasalini then gives another definition of mindfulness:
... Mindfulness has "not floating away" as its characteristic, unforgetfulness as its function, guarding, or the state of facing the object, as its manifestation, firm remembrance (sanna) or application in mindfulness as regards the body, etc., as proximate cause. It should be regarded as a door-past from being firmly established in the object, and as a door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses.
Nina commented:
As we have seen, the Atthasalini states that the proximate cause of mindfulness is ill remembrance (sanna) or the four applications of mindfulness (satipatthana). There can be mindfulness of the nama or rupa which appears because of firm remembrance of all we learnt from the teachings about nama and rupa. Listening is mentioned in the scriptures as a most important condition for the attainment of enlightenment, because when we listen time and again, there can be firm remenbrance of the Dhamma. Mindfulness is different from remembrance, sanna. Sanna accompanies every citta; it recognizes the object and "marks" it, so that it can be recognized again. Mindfulness, sati, is not forgethe of what is wholesome. It arises with sobhana cittas. But when there is sati which is non-forgetfuI of dana, sila, of the object of calm or, in the case of vipassana, of the nama and rupa appearing at the present moment, there is also kusala sanna which remembers the object in the fight way, in the wholesome way.
http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas28.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Brgrds,
D.F
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Alex123 wrote:Hello Dhamma follower,
dhamma follower wrote:- why sitting on a cushion should be chosen as opposed to going to the market after listening to the right Dhamma?
Less external stimulation that can provoke defilements. Even when it comes to considering the Dhamma, it is easier to do it in a quite rather than loud and chaotic environment.
Defilement is also object of satipatthana:
"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

"When the mind is constricted, he discerns that the mind is constricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by Alex123 »

Hello Dhamma Follower,
dhamma follower wrote:Defilement is also object of satipatthana
Right, but at what stage? Beginner can simply get swept away by tide of defilements. It requires a very wise person to be able to observe them.

Just like a person who just joined a gym shouldn't attempt to lift too much, same is here.
dhamma follower wrote:The question is: what is proper practice in term of paramatha dhamma?
To observe things as they occur with wisdom.
dhamma follower wrote:Is staying in a kuti or a meditation hall, trying to focus on something,
Not everyone teaches that one should focus on something. Rather, be mindful of what is present to awareness right now.

dhamma follower wrote: or having the idea that "I can direct sati while walking, sitting" what you call proper practice?
How about doing this without delusive idea of "I am doing this".

dhamma follower wrote: Also, your comment above implies that as long as we decide to have some activities called meditation, sati will be there. Is it so, or sati arises by its own conditions?
Like weight training for more strength, conditions can be set for more sati.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote:
And why isn't proper practice with right view are the conditions for more of it. Do you expect person who never meditates to have the same sati as someone who was, lets say, a meditating bhikkhu for 20 years?
The question is: what is proper practice in term of paramatha dhamma?

Is staying in a kuti or a meditation hall, trying to focus on something, or having the idea that "I can direct sati while walking, sitting" what you call proper practice? All these things, when done with the idea that sati can arise at will, are more likely to be akusala moments rooted in wrong view. Is akusala the practice?
I thought we had got past this idea that anyone is claiming that they can "direct" sati. Things happen due to causes and conditions.

:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote:
And why isn't proper practice with right view are the conditions for more of it. Do you expect person who never meditates to have the same sati as someone who was, lets say, a meditating bhikkhu for 20 years?
The question is: what is proper practice in term of paramatha dhamma?

Is staying in a kuti or a meditation hall, trying to focus on something, or having the idea that "I can direct sati while walking, sitting" what you call proper practice? All these things, when done with the idea that sati can arise at will, are more likely to be akusala moments rooted in wrong view. Is akusala the practice?
I thought we had got past this idea that anyone is claiming that they can "direct" sati. Things happen due to causes and conditions.

:anjali:
Mike
Indeed, Mike. I think it would be helpful that any newcomer reads carefully what has been discussed before, to avoid repeating the same arguments again and again.
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Alex,

First of all, please read my answer to Mike's comment above.
dhamma follower wrote:Defilement is also object of satipatthana
Right, but at what stage
At the stage where sati which is directly aware of reality arises, by conditions. Concerning the conditions for sati accompanied by panna to arise, please refer to what has been discussed before.
The question is: what is proper practice in term of paramatha dhamma?

To observe things as they occur with wisdom.


Can someone decide: I shall obverse things as they occur with wisdom? Or it is sati-panna itself which arise and understand the reality as it is when the conditions for it are sufficient?

Back to the conditions for sati and panna.

Brgrds,
DF
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote: Indeed, Mike. I think it would be helpful that any newcomer reads carefully what has been discussed before, to avoid repeating the same arguments again and again.
Now I'm confused. Since I've not come across anyone (sensible) teaching that "sati can arise at will" I don't see the relevance of the comment.

If there is a problem with the view of other teachers and practitioners, it must therefore be much more subtle than that.

:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote: Indeed, Mike. I think it would be helpful that any newcomer reads carefully what has been discussed before, to avoid repeating the same arguments again and again.
Now I'm confused. Since I've not come across anyone (sensible) teaching that "sati can arise at will" I don't see the relevance of the comment.

If there is a problem with the view of other teachers and practitioners, it must therefore be much more subtle than that.

:anjali:
Mike
This is precisely the core of the arguments so far. The teachers/students may not say: “we can make sati to arise at will”, but the very idea that one has to select some activities (like meditation) to develop sati implies that one thinks that sati will arise more often because one intends to be aware. When Alex said:
And why isn't proper practice with right view are the conditions for more of it. Do you expect person who never meditates to have the same sati as someone who was, lets say, a meditating bhikkhu for 20 years?
It is clear that he meant conventional meditation brought about sati.

Other than listening to the right Dhamma from wise friend, and wise consideration, which are also conditioned and have nothing to do with intention, no specific activity is mentioned as the condition for the arising of sati-panna in vipassana bhavana.

And when someone think that proper practice is involved with specific activities, instead of practice being only moments of right understanding which can happen independently of places/activities, the wrong understanding is already there, so speaking about “proper practice with right view” doesn’t make sense at all.

It is what AS said of understanding having to be very precise, not just words.

Actually, when I first listened to her, the subtlety of this point didn't click yet. I also thought that she was teaching about anatta like other teachers, only more radically. Yet, it turned out my understanding was not right, just of the words....

Brgrds,
DF
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by Alex123 »

Hello DF,
dhamma follower wrote: This is precisely the core of the arguments so far. The teachers/students may not say: “we can make sati to arise at will”, but the very idea that one has to select some activities (like meditation) to develop sati implies that one thinks that sati will arise more often because one intends to be aware. When Alex said:
Alex wrote:And why isn't proper practice with right view are the conditions for more of it. Do you expect person who never meditates to have the same sati as someone who was, lets say, a meditating bhikkhu for 20 years?
If it is cold, one can put more cloth on and feel warmer. If it is hot, one dresses in lighter close. If one is thirsty, one quenches thirst by drinking.
If one is hungry one quenches hunger by eating.
dhamma follower wrote: Other than listening to the right Dhamma from wise friend, and wise consideration, which are also conditioned and have nothing to do with intention, no specific activity is mentioned as the condition for the arising of sati-panna in vipassana bhavana.
It does involve intention to open the book, and keep reading it. Or it involves even more intentional activity such as booking a plane ticket to Bangkok and traveling there.
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by beeblebrox »

There are quite a few references to the sitting in suttas. It's one of the possible parts for a practice. If a person reads about it, and then goes on to try it... then that is one of the conditions taking root. If the person is resistant about it, then that means it's not one of the proper conditions. It's that simple.

There's no need to argue about it, or to debate about which is better than what. I think that one of the signs of a good practice (or a good listening) is when there is less struggle against others, i.e., less dukkha due to clinging. That is the main point of the four noble truths... I think it should be obvious.

:anjali:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote: Indeed, Mike. I think it would be helpful that any newcomer reads carefully what has been discussed before, to avoid repeating the same arguments again and again.
Now I'm confused. Since I've not come across anyone (sensible) teaching that "sati can arise at will" I don't see the relevance of the comment.

If there is a problem with the view of other teachers and practitioners, it must therefore be much more subtle than that.

:anjali:
Mike
This is precisely the core of the arguments so far. The teachers/students may not say: “we can make sati to arise at will”, but the very idea that one has to select some activities (like meditation) to develop sati implies that one thinks that sati will arise more often because one intends to be aware. When Alex said:
I have no idea why you equate setting up causes and conditions with "control". And, as I've said, exactly the same objection (making choices with the idea that they will lead to better understanding) applies to your approach.
dhamma follower wrote: Other than listening to the right Dhamma from wise friend, and wise consideration, which are also conditioned and have nothing to do with intention, no specific activity is mentioned as the condition for the arising of sati-panna in vipassana bhavana.
I understood that the conditions for sati were (CMA II, 5, Bhikkhu Bodhi commentary, Page 86):
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote:It's proximate cause is strong perception (thirasanna) or the four foundations of mindfulness.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=hxo ... 86&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dhamma follower wrote: And when someone think that proper practice is involved with specific activities, instead of practice being only moments of right understanding which can happen independently of places/activities, the wrong understanding is already there, so speaking about “proper practice with right view” doesn’t make sense at all.

It is what AS said of understanding having to be very precise, not just words.

Actually, when I first listened to her, the subtlety of this point didn't click yet. I also thought that she was teaching about anatta like other teachers, only more radically. Yet, it turned out my understanding was not right, just of the words....
Clearly there are a lot of steps in the argument (from the suttas/abhidhamma, to the late commentary interpretation of the abhidhamma, to the interpretation of Khun Sujin) that others are practising the wrong way. So it's far from clear to the rest of us how to judge the accuracy of these arguments.

If you could point to a sutta/abhidhamma/commentary passage that spells out this problem, that would be very helpful.

:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Mike,
I have no idea why you equate setting up causes and conditions with "control"
I don’t. No control whatsoever, even this “setting up causes and conditions” is conditioned. The thing is: it is conditioned by right understanding or wrong understanding?
Why one selects “doing meditation” ? What are the conditions for sati in that process?

Let’s see what the Buddha says:
(7) And what is the food for mindfulness and full awareness?
Wise attention (yoniso manasikāra),84 should be the answer.
Wise attention, too, bhikshus, is with food, I say, not without food.
(8) And what is the food for wise attention?
Faith (saddhā)85 should be the answer.
Faith, too, bhikshus, is with food, I say, not without food.
(9) And what is the food for faith?
Listening to the true Dharma (saddhamma-s,savana)86 should be the answer.
Listening to the true Dharma, too, bhikshus, is with food, I say, not without food.
(10) And what is the food for listening to the true Dharma?
Associating with true individuals (sappurisa,saṁseva)87 should be the answer
Avija sutta 10.61

If one is clear that intention is not and doesn’t bring about sati, why select meditation as an activity? What's in there?
Clearly there are a lot of steps in the argument (from the suttas/abhidhamma, to the late commentary interpretation of the abhidhamma, to the interpretation of Khun Sujin) that others are practising the wrong way. So it's far from clear to the rest of us how to judge the accuracy of these arguments.

If you could point to a sutta/abhidhamma/commentary passage that spells out this problem, that would be very helpful.
It would need too many quotes and citations. Let’s see if we can get there using basic, fully recognized concepts:
- There’s no person, only rupa, citta and cetasikas. Agree?
- So when we talk about practice (or anything), actually we are talking about the working of rupa, citta and cetasikas. Agree?
- Rupa can not practice, it doesn’t know anything, it is incapable of panna. Agree?
- Only citta and cetasikas can be actually said to be the “practice” then. Agree?
- Can the citta which is seeing, hearing, smelling... is said to be the practice? Clearly, no, they can only does their respective function of seeing, hearing....
- There are many kinds of citta: akusala cittas, kusala cittas unaccompanied by panna, kusala cittas accompanied by panna. Agree?
- There’s only one citta arising at one moment with its object. Agree?
- At moments of akusala cittas, or kusala cittas unaccompanied by panna. Can it said to be the moment of practice? Clearly the answer is no. Agree.
- So what do we get here: Only moments of kusala cittas accompanied by panna can be said to be the practice, and more precisely, only sati-panna cetasikas them-selves constitute the practice, together with other path factors. And here, we should come back to the question: what are the conditions for them to arise?

I don’t see any of the above steps out of the content of the Sutta-Abhidhamma. If you don’t agree with any of the points above, please let me know.

There is, of course, samatha bhavana, which has its own conditions too. But we can spare that for now, unless you want to open a new thread for it.

Brgrds,
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear BBB,
beeblebrox wrote:There are quite a few references to the sitting in suttas. It's one of the possible parts for a practice. If a person reads about it, and then goes on to try it... then that is one of the conditions taking root. If the person is resistant about it, then that means it's not one of the proper conditions. It's that simple.

There's no need to argue about it, or to debate about which is better than what. I think that one of the signs of a good practice (or a good listening) is when there is less struggle against others, i.e., less dukkha due to clinging. That is the main point of the four noble truths... I think it should be obvious.

:anjali:
I have addressed this before:
It would be a proper question to ask: what conventional meditation exactly means? Actually, AS doesn't reject any particular activity. She just asks why? It is clear that people in the suttas were sitting in jhanna. But do we have the same accumulations than the Boddha and his disciples at that time? What did the Buddha teach to his lay, house-holders followers, and what did he teach to the bikkhus who were already in the forest and who had the accumulations to be so? The word "samatha" also has different meanings. A reading into the suttas will be very different if the understanding of realities is thorough like AS's
We are talking about vipassana bhavana here.

Brgrds,
DF
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

dhamma follower wrote:Dear Mike,
I have no idea why you equate setting up causes and conditions with "control"
I don’t. No control whatsoever, even this “setting up causes and conditions” is conditioned. The thing is: it is conditioned by right understanding or wrong understanding?
Why one selects “doing meditation” ? What are the conditions for sati in that process?


Let’s see what the Buddha says:
(7) And what is the food for mindfulness and full awareness?
Wise attention (yoniso manasikāra),84 should be the answer.
Wise attention, too, bhikshus, is with food, I say, not without food.
(8) And what is the food for wise attention?
Faith (saddhā)85 should be the answer.
Faith, too, bhikshus, is with food, I say, not without food.
(9) And what is the food for faith?
Listening to the true Dharma (saddhamma-s,savana)86 should be the answer.
Listening to the true Dharma, too, bhikshus, is with food, I say, not without food.
(10) And what is the food for listening to the true Dharma?
Associating with true individuals (sappurisa,saṁseva)87 should be the answer
Avija sutta 10.61

If one is clear that intention is not and doesn’t bring about sati, why select meditation as an activity? What's in there?
There is, of course, the Satipatthana sutta, and the Satipatthana Samyutta...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .soma.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him.
"And further, O bhikkhus, when he is going, a bhikkhu understands: 'I am going'; when he is standing, he understands: 'I am standing'; when he is sitting, he understands: 'I am sitting'; when he is lying down, he understands: 'I am lying down'; or just as his body is disposed so he understands it.
dhamma follower wrote:
Clearly there are a lot of steps in the argument (from the suttas/abhidhamma, to the late commentary interpretation of the abhidhamma, to the interpretation of Khun Sujin) that others are practising the wrong way. So it's far from clear to the rest of us how to judge the accuracy of these arguments.

If you could point to a sutta/abhidhamma/commentary passage that spells out this problem, that would be very helpful.
It would need too many quotes and citations. Let’s see if we can get there using basic, fully recognized concepts:
- There’s no person, only rupa, citta and cetasikas. Agree?
- So when we talk about practice (or anything), actually we are talking about the working of rupa, citta and cetasikas. Agree?
- Rupa can not practice, it doesn’t know anything, it is incapable of panna. Agree?
- Only citta and cetasikas can be actually said to be the “practice” then. Agree?
- Can the citta which is seeing, hearing, smelling... is said to be the practice? Clearly, no, they can only does their respective function of seeing, hearing....
- There are many kinds of citta: akusala cittas, kusala cittas unaccompanied by panna, kusala cittas accompanied by panna. Agree?
- There’s only one citta arising at one moment with its object. Agree?
- At moments of akusala cittas, or kusala cittas unaccompanied by panna. Can it said to be the moment of practice? Clearly the answer is no. Agree.
- So what do we get here: Only moments of kusala cittas accompanied by panna can be said to be the practice, and more precisely, only sati-panna cetasikas them-selves constitute the practice, together with other path factors. And here, we should come back to the question: what are the conditions for them to arise?

I don’t see any of the above steps out of the content of the Sutta-Abhidhamma. If you don’t agree with any of the points above, please let me know.
There is nothing to disagree with in the above. We all agree that individual citta are not controllable. The disagreement seems to be to do with the conditions for the arising of kusala cittas. Obviously you agree that the conditions for their arising can be influenced, otherwise you wouldn't bother doing anything. We agree that sila and listening to the Dhamma is a good thing to do, right?

Where is the argument, then, that doing the things described in the Satipatthana sutta and various other suttas, commentaries, and so on are a wrong interpretation of the training? (Of course, I'm not disagreeing that any of these things could be done wrongly.) Where is this clearly explained in the Canon or Commentary?
dhamma follower wrote: There is, of course, samatha bhavana, which has its own conditions too. But we can spare that for now, unless you want to open a new thread for it.
The same arguments apply. No teacher I know of teaches that one can will oneself into jhana...

:anjali:
Mike
Post Reply