AN 10.76: What do shame, remorse, and negligence refer to?

[perkele]

The Buddha never commends feeling remorseful, for remorse (kukkucca is a hindrance and always unskilful. The passage you allude to advises not remorse, but rather reflection on the nature of a mental action one has performed.

Was this an unskilled deed of mind, its yield anguish, its result anguish? If you, Rāhula, while reflecting thus, should find: ‘This deed that I did with the mind was a deed of my mind that conduced to the harm of self and to the harm of others and to the harm of both; this deed of mind was unskilled, its yield anguish, its result anguish’, such a deed of your mind, Rāhula, should be confessed, disclosed, declared to the Teacher or to intelligent Brahma-farers so that, confessed, disclosed and declared, it would induce restraint in the future.

https://suttacentral.net/en/mn61

Bhante, whose translation is this? [Edit: The translation is by I.B. Horner.] (Offtopic remark to the universe: I think this bad design on SuttaCentral, that the information about authorship for translations is so hidden that I don't even know where to look for it. [Edit: One can find it by clicking on the "hamburger menu" on the top left from the translation, and then on "Metadata" (which I still think is not easy to find)])

In all the other translations that I read there is this one notable difference in advice regarding mental unskillful deeds that deviates from the otherwise repititive enumeration pattern:

Was it an unskillful mental action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful mental action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should feel distressed, ashamed, & disgusted with it. Feeling distressed, ashamed, & disgusted with it, you should exercise restraint in the future.

When reflecting if you know, this mental action caused me, others, trouble. It is demerit and unpleasant. Then you should be disgusted and loathe such mental actions.

“If, Rāhula, when reflecting you realize; ‘Now this action that I have done by mind is conducive to my own harm, to the harm of others, and to that of both, hence unskilful is this mental action entailing suffering and productive of pain,’—such mental actions of yours, Rāhula, should be loathed, abhorred and despised. [13] Thus loathing, abhorring and despising, you should acquire restraint in the future.

Footnote
13. Being a mental offence, Rāhula is not exhorted (as in the case of bodily, and verbal, action) to confess it to anyone.

(Same with German translation by Kay Zumwinkel [Metthiko Bhikkhu] - which, I believe, is strongly oriented on Bhikkhu Bodhi's English translation.)

The noteworthy difference is, as remarked in the footnote to Ven. Nyanaponika's translation, that regarding unskillful mental actions (thought crimes), the Buddha does not recommend confession or disclosure, but instead to feel abhorred and disgusted (and ashamed?) by it.

I think the translation on SuttaCentral is wrong. Maybe the translator (Ven. Sujato, I guess [No, I.B. Horner]) simply continued the repetitive pattern from before according to the same formula as for bodily and verbal actions, without checking the Pali for possible differences after that. I will inform them about it.



I think this is a very thin line to tread, between feeling ashamed, abhorred and disgusted, and feeling remorseful. Feeling ashamed, abhorred and disgusted by an evil thought that one had seems almost like a description of feeling remorseful about it. What is the exact difference here between these two?

What else could it mean to feel ashamed, abhorred and disgusted by a deed (in body, speech or mind) that one committed, than to feel remorse?

I had some questions about this topic here before, some years ago. If I remember correctly, Ven. Dhammanando mentioned some abhidhammic stuff about remorse being an example of "an unwholesome citta that can give rise to wholesomeness" or something like that. In light of such possibilities, could it not make sense that the Buddha recommended feeling remorseful in response to certain situations (actions one performed, by body, speech or mind)? (I'll have to look for that older thread.)

[befriend]

i just looked at b Bodhi and Bhikkhu nanamoli's translation in the majjhima nikaya and it doesn't say one should feel remorse. But in the removal of distracting thoughts sutta a method for mental purification is to see ones unwholesome mental action as a carcass of a snake dog or human were hung around ones neck where one would be horrified, humiliated and disgusted. Humiliation in the context of evil mind states seems to suggest remorse? Food for thought.

[binocular]

I think this is a very thin line to tread, between feeling ashamed, abhorred and disgusted, and feeling remorseful. Feeling ashamed, abhorred and disgusted by an evil thought that one had seems almost like a description of feeling remorseful about it. What is the exact difference here between these two?

What else could it mean to feel ashamed, abhorred and disgusted by a deed (in body, speech or mind) that one committed, than to feel remorse?

A sociopath or a narcissist can probably feel ashamed, abhorred, and disgusted by a deed (in body, speech or mind) that they committed, but feel no remorse. Such a person's shame, horror, and disgust are probably motivated by and linked to other factors than in normal (" ") people.
Something similar could also be the case with people who frequently use intoxicants: they occasionally feel ashamed, abhorred, and disgusted by something they did, but feel no drive or have no moivation to change their ways, they feel no remorse.

[binocular]

In light of such possibilities, could it not make sense that the Buddha recommended feeling remorseful in response to certain situations (actions one performed, by body, speech or mind)? (I'll have to look for that older thread.)

Please do find that older thread; it sounds interesting!

[binocular]

Venerable, thank you for your reply.

Shame (hiri) is what restrains one from unwholesome acts by way of self-regard.

What do you mean "by way of self-regard"? A selfish regard for one's own wellbeing?

I'm asking because I'm coming from a culture where being moral not rarely corresponds with sacrificing one's own wellbeing (in fact, a frequent idea seems to be that if one doesn't sacrifice one's wellbeing, then one probably isn't being moral at all -- morality and happiness/wellbeing seem mutually exclusive for the most part).

[perkele]

Bhante, whose translation is this?

Ayya Vimala on the SuttaCentral forum clarified that the translation quoted earlier was by I.B. Horner.

[perkele]

In light of such possibilities, could it not make sense that the Buddha recommended feeling remorseful in response to certain situations (actions one performed, by body, speech or mind)? (I'll have to look for that older thread.)

Please do find that older thread; it sounds interesting!

I'm sorry to disappoint you. I think now that thread may only have existed in my own mind. I thought I had asked questions about it here myself, and discussed it to some extent. But maybe I was just reading the discussions of others and had my own thoughts and conclusions back and forth about it.

But at least here there are some confused thoughts from a confused time (and some clarification) about the topic. (That was the first time I noticed this difference and corrected the same mistaken repetition in translation of MN 61 in this essay by Ven. Johann [fka. Hanzze].) But that's probably not very enlightening. (I was remorseful at that time still about evil thoughts I had long time ago, which were, however, very powerful, and in their cumulative effect, have caused bad things, and was in the process of sorting myself out about this, and thus, obviously quite confused and somehow "mentally inhibited". I still think that remorse was helpful, although it was an oppressive, painful torturous burden for many years).

But the topic of remorse being an unwholesome state that can potentially prompt wholesome states was at least touched upon a couple of times by Ven. Dhammanando:

viewtopic.php?t=23759#p342343

Here on the topic of remorse and regret as fruits of kamma, maybe also vaguely related: (Bhante states that they are not fruits of kamma.)
viewtopic.php?t=30003
viewtopic.php?t=18955#p265557

While searching, I found something else maybe of interest regarding the topic of this thread, though:

"A disciple has faith in that teacher and reflects: 'The Blessed One in a variety of ways criticizes & censures the taking of life, and says, "Abstain from taking life." There are living beings that I have killed, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed of mine will not be undone.' So, reflecting thus, he abandons right then the taking of life, and in the future refrains from taking life. This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

"[He reflects:] 'The Blessed One in a variety of ways criticizes & censures stealing... indulging in illicit sex... the telling of lies, and says, "Abstain from the telling of lies." There are lies that I have told, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed of mine will not be undone.' So, reflecting thus, he abandons right then the telling of lies, and in the future refrains from telling lies. This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

[binocular]

I'm sorry to disappoint you.

Thank you for the links!

Reading your discussion about remorse, I was already earlier reminded of MN 131:

You shouldn't chase after the past
or place expectations on the future.
What is past
is left behind.
The future
is as yet unreached.
Whatever quality is present
you clearly see right there,
right there.
Not taken in,
unshaken,
that's how you develop the heart.
Ardently doing
what should be done today,
for — who knows? — tomorrow
death.
There is no bargaining
with Mortality & his mighty horde.

Whoever lives thus ardently,
relentlessly
both day & night,
has truly had an auspicious day:
so says the Peaceful Sage.

I find that this also covers issues of remorse, for remorse is a kind of chasing after the past and a kind of placing expectations on the future. When one feels remorse, one is mentally living in a parallel world, vicariously experiencing delight in that parallel past or future.

But the topic of remorse being an unwholesome state that can potentially prompt wholesome states was at least touched upon a couple of times by Ven. Dhammanando:
viewtopic.php?t=23759#p342343

As far as I can tell, remorse does have an element of considering that things could or should be otherwise, and such a consideration can be skillful.

For someone who doesn't have a systematic approach to morality, remorse is probably closest to a system of morality.

Here on the topic of remorse and regret as fruits of kamma, maybe also vaguely related: (Bhante states that they are not fruits of kamma.)
viewtopic.php?t=30003
viewtopic.php?t=18955#p265557

That's interesting! I haven't thought this way before.

While searching, I found something else maybe of interest regarding the topic of this thread, though:

"A disciple has faith in that teacher and reflects: 'The Blessed One in a variety of ways criticizes & censures the taking of life, and says, "Abstain from taking life." There are living beings that I have killed, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed of mine will not be undone.' So, reflecting thus, he abandons right then the taking of life, and in the future refrains from taking life. This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

"[He reflects:] 'The Blessed One in a variety of ways criticizes & censures stealing... indulging in illicit sex... the telling of lies, and says, "Abstain from the telling of lies." There are lies that I have told, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed of mine will not be undone.' So, reflecting thus, he abandons right then the telling of lies, and in the future refrains from telling lies. This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

In other words, this looks like Right Resolve, samma sankappo.

[binocular]

Right shame should not be indoctrinated but should occur naturally.

This sounds like an elitist and hopeless predicament!
Elitist in that you suggest that right shame is something one either has or doesn't have; and hopeless because one without it cannot attain it deliberately.

[Nicolas]

AN 10.76 lists triads of things which need to be dispelled in order to ultimately dispel birth, decay, and death. The basic triad seems to be lack of shame, lack of remorse, and negligence; and dispelling these three, one can then dispel other things, up to and including birth, decay, and death.

In this sutta, what do lack of shame, lack of remorse, and negligence refer to?
Is this meant in a general sense, as in whatever a person currently considers to be shame, remorse, and negligence; or is it meant in some specific sense?

I'm asking because shame, remorse, and negligence can be felt in various contexts, skillful and unskillful ones.
For example, one can be neglectful in how one sweeps the floor; but a drug dealer can also be neglectful in how he prepares the drugs meant for selling on the street.
One can feel remorse about harshly speaking to one's parents; but one can also feel remorse about not buying a lottery ticket.
One can feel shame when telling a deliberate lie; but one can also feel shame when one doesn't have the newest iPhone when one's friends have it.

Regarding shame [hiri] and remorse [ottappa]:

“And what is the treasure of a sense of shame [hiri]? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones feels shame at (the thought of engaging in) bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, mental misconduct. He feels shame at falling into evil, unskillful actions. This is called the treasure of a sense of shame.
“And what is the treasure of a sense of compunction [ottappa]? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones feels compunction at (the suffering that would result from) bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, mental misconduct. He feels compunction at falling into evil, unskillful actions. This is called the treasure of a sense of compunction.

[Dhammanando]

Bhante, whose translation is this? (Offtopic remark to the universe: I think this bad design on SuttaCentral, that the information about authorship for translations is so hidden that I don't even know where to look for it.)

The translation is I.B. Horner's.

On Sutta Central if someone posts a link to an English translation, like this:
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn61

you can find out who the translator is by removing the "en" from the url:

https://suttacentral.net/mn61

which will take you to a page where all the site's available translations of the sutta are listed and the translators identified.

[perkele]

The translation is I.B. Horner's.

Thanks Bhante. Ayya Vimala already clarified this for me on SuttaCentral. I had forgotten to edit my post.

On Sutta Central if someone posts a link to an English translation, like this:
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn61

you can find out who the translator is by removing the "en" from the url:

https://suttacentral.net/mn61

which will take you to a page where all the site's available translations of the sutta are listed and the translators identified.

It seems this is not correct (anymore?). There is no translator information to be found there. But one can find it from the translation by clicking on the "hamburger menu" icon in the top left and then on "Metadata", as Ayya Vimala also explained.

[mikenz66]

Hi perkele

If you hover over the link you'll see the translator's name.

Not sure how to get that info on a phone or tablet...


Mike

[Dhammanando]

What do you mean "by way of self-regard"? A selfish regard for one's own wellbeing?

1. If you're alone and holding your cat and it starts to urinate on you, then you'll probably put it down out of disgust at the prospect of having your clothes soaked in cat's piss.

2. If you're in company and a cat is urinating on you, then you'll probably put it down out of embarrassment at others seeing you being urinated on.

3. If you know that a cat has a habit of urinating on people, then you'll probably not want to pick it up because of the likely outcome of doing so.

Now if we replace cat's piss with misconduct, then #1 would be analogous to hiri, while #2 and #3 would be analogous to two different explanations that are given for ottappa.

From the Visuddhimagga:

This virtue (sīla) is manifested as the kinds of purity stated thus: “Bodily purity, verbal purity, mental purity” (A. i. 271); it is manifested, comes to be apprehended, as a pure state. But moral shame (hiri) and moral caution (ottappa are said by those who know to be its proximate cause; its near reason, is the meaning. For when moral shame and moral caution are in existence, virtue arises and persists; and when they are not, it neither arises nor persists.

[...]

When a bhikkhu is devoted to recollection of the Buddha, he is respectful and deferential towards the Master. He attains fullness of faith, mindfulness, understanding and merit. He has much happiness and gladness. He conquers fear and dread. He is able to endure pain. He comes to feel as if he were living in the Master’s presence. And his body, when the recollection of the Buddha’s special qualities dwells in it, becomes as worthy of veneration as a shrine room. His mind tends toward the plane of the Buddhas. When he encounters an opportunity for transgression, he has awareness of moral shame and caution as vividly as though he were face to face with the Master. And if he penetrates no higher, he is at least headed for a happy destiny.

(The last two sentences are repeated in the accounts of recollection of the Dhamma, the Saṅgha, and peace)

[...]

It is ashamed of (hiriyati) bodily misconduct, etc., thus it is called moral shame (hiri). This is a term for modesty. It is cautious/apprehensive (ottappati) of those same things, thus it is called moral caution (ottappa). This is a term for anxiety about evil. Herein, moral shame has the characteristic of disgust at evil, while moral caution has the characteristic of dread of it. Shame has the function of not doing evil and that in the mode of modesty, while caution has the function of not doing it and that in the mode of dread. They are manifested as shrinking from evil in the way already stated. Their proximate causes are self-respect and respect of others [respectively]. A man rejects evil through shame out of respect for himself, as the daughter of a good family does; he rejects evil through caution out of respect for another, as a courtesan does. And these two states should be regarded as the guardians of the world.

[binocular]

Thank you for your reply, Venerable.

What do you mean "by way of self-regard"? A selfish regard for one's own wellbeing?

1. If you're alone and holding your cat and it starts to urinate on you, then you'll probably put it down out of disgust at the prospect of having your clothes soaked in cat's piss.
2. If you're in company and a cat is urinating on you, then you'll probably put it down out of embarrassment at others seeing you being urinated on.
3. If you know that a cat has a habit of urinating on people, then you'll probably not want to pick it up because of the likely outcome of doing so.

Now if we replace cat's piss with misconduct, then #1 would be analogous to hiri, while #2 and #3 would be analogous to two different explanations that are given for ottappa.

I find this very difficult to understand.

Since we have cats, and some hygiene problems with them, I can relate to the above scenario, but not to the explanations for the motivations for those actions.
For example, to go into gross details, our cats sometimes have diarrhea. Then, esp. one long-hair gets dirty under his tail and on the back of his legs. Nevertheless, he still wants to be indoors and to cuddle. I can tell you exactly what I think and do in those situations. I put on my dirty work clothes and rubber gloves and wash the cat's behind and dry him. I think , "Poor cat, of course he isn't keen on cleaning himself, who would want to lick excrement!" My emotional capacities are focused on sympathizing with the cat and trying to calm him down as I wash him (cats generally hate to be washed, especially around their intimate parts).
Also, esp. when it rains a lot and in the winter, cats often have dirty, muddy feet, and I routinely wash their feet. For me, these are primarily technical/engineering problems, I think about how to clean clothes and floors, how to maintain proper hygiene in general, how to best wash out different types of filth out of cat fur, and such.
If a cat were to pee on me, I would probably be disgusted at first, but then I would try to figure out why it peed on me, what the medical or psychological cause for it could be and try to do something about it.
I can't imagine feeling embarrassed at others seeing me being urinated on.

I looked up further references to hiri and ottappa:

/.../ While moral shame and fear of wrongdoing are united in the common task of protecting the mind from moral defilement, they differ in their individual characteristics and modes of operation. Hiri, the sense of shame, has an internal reference; it is rooted in self-respect and induces us to shrink from wrongdoing out of a feeling of personal honor. Ottappa, fear of wrongdoing, has an external orientation. It is the voice of conscience that warns us of the dire consequences of moral transgression: blame and punishment by others, the painful kammic results of evil deeds, the impediment to our desire for liberation from suffering. /.../
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... ay_23.html

I clean cat poo on a daily basis. I have no personal honor. Seriously, I don't normally think like what the above passage says. When blame and punishment by others are a given in one's life, and one's main transgression is that one is alive at all, blame and punishment by others aren't motivating; and when one's life has been miserable for as long as one can remember, getting more painful kammic results isn't motivating either (if one has already been crushed by tons of rocks, adding a few more rocks or pebbles really doesn't make a difference).

When he encounters an opportunity for transgression, he has awareness of moral shame and caution as vividly as though he were face to face with the Master.
/.../
(The last two sentences are repeated in the accounts of recollection of the Dhamma, the Saṅgha, and peace)

What do I think the Buddha would think of me, if anything at all ... I think he'd be aloof.

It is ashamed of (hiriyati) bodily misconduct, etc., thus it is called moral shame (hiri). This is a term for modesty. It is cautious/apprehensive (ottappati) of those same things, thus it is called moral caution (ottappa). This is a term for anxiety about evil. Herein, moral shame has the characteristic of disgust at evil, while moral caution has the characteristic of dread of it. Shame has the function of not doing evil and that in the mode of modesty, while caution has the function of not doing it and that in the mode of dread. They are manifested as shrinking from evil in the way already stated. Their proximate causes are self-respect and respect of others [respectively]. A man rejects evil through shame out of respect for himself, as the daughter of a good family does; he rejects evil through caution out of respect for another, as a courtesan does. And these two states should be regarded as the guardians of the world.

I don't understand the references to the daughter of a good family and a courtesan (I looked up the passage you quoted in the Visuddhimagga, but couldn't find a clarification).