Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
santa100
Posts: 6799
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by santa100 »

SarathW wrote:What is the meaning of above?
I can't agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi's explanation.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Actually your cited link to Ven. Thanissaro's translation already answered your question. Notice Ven. T's footnote #2. on "body" versus "bodily fabrication" (or bodily formation from Ven. Bodhi's version). Also notice the point of disagreement was not on the 4th step of the 1st tetrad. Both Bodhi, Thanissaro, and most other teachers agree with the interpretation of "bodily formation/KayaSankhara" as the in-and-out breathing. The point of disagreement was actually at the 3rd step of the 1st tetrad, where the Comy. interpreted "whole body/SabbaKaya" as the breath, while some teachers (including both Bodhi and Thanissaro) interpret it as the whole physical body. So for that, I guess one would have to try it out and experiment for himself to see which interpretation works for him.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

santa100 wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:51 am
SarathW wrote:What is the meaning of above?
I can't agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi's explanation.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Actually your cited link to Ven. Thanissaro's translation already answered your question. Notice Ven. T's footnote #2. on "body" versus "bodily fabrication" (or bodily formation from Ven. Bodhi's version). Also notice the point of disagreement was not on the 4th step of the 1st tetrad. Both Bodhi, Thanissaro, and most other teachers agree with the interpretation of "bodily formation/KayaSankhara" as the in-and-out breathing. The point of disagreement was actually at the 3rd step of the 1st tetrad, where the Comy. interpreted "whole body/SabbaKaya" as the breath, while some teachers (including both Bodhi and Thanissaro) interpret it as the whole physical body. So for that, I guess one would have to try it out and experiment for himself to see which interpretation works for him.
I am not concern at 3rd step on the 1st tetrad, unless there is a connection between the third and the fourth.
Last edited by SarathW on Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Volo
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by Volo »

SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:18 am Say for instance if we teach Anapanasti to a murderer in the prison.
In which point he contemplate on his previous bodily action?
It is not said "contemplate bodily formations", but "calming bodily formations". Not violating 5 precepts would come under sila, i.e. before meditation, which is ānāpānasati.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

Volovsky wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:31 am
SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:18 am Say for instance if we teach Anapanasti to a murderer in the prison.
In which point he contemplate on his previous bodily action?
It is not said "contemplate bodily formations", but "calming bodily formations". Not violating 5 precepts would come under sila, i.e. before meditation, which is ānāpānasati.
Does this mean we can't teach Anapanasati to a person who does not have Sila?
When you contemplate bodily formations you calm the bodily formations.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
santa100
Posts: 6799
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by santa100 »

SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:26 am I am not interested at 3rd step on the 1st tetrad, unless there is a connection between the third and the fourth.
You should, because it holds the key to remove your confusion in the OP. There's a difference between SabbaKaya (3rd step) versus (KayaSankhara) (4th step). You will not understand step 4 unless you try to understand step 3 first. And as already mentioned, most teachers are already in agreement with the 4th step per supporting suttas in some previous posts. It's the 3rd step that has different interpretations, not the 4th.
Last edited by santa100 on Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Volo
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by Volo »

SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:40 am Does this mean we can't teach Anapanasati to a person who does not have Sila?
Even if he had killed before, but now gave it up, saw his previous wrong actions as wrong, then his sila is pure (see Ven. Angulimala), unless such a person had killed his mother, farther, etc. But even if he still is involved in killing, we can explain ānāpānasati, of course, but most probably he won't be successful in it.
When you contemplate bodily formations you calm the bodily formations.
I don't think, ānāpānasati sutta supports this.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

santa100 wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:06 am
SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:26 am I am not interested at 3rd step on the 1st tetrad, unless there is a connection between the third and the fourth.
You should, because it holds the key to remove your confusion in the OP. There's a difference between SabbaKaya (3rd step) versus (KayaSankhara) (4th step). You will not understand step 4 unless you try to understand step 3 first. And as already mentioned, most teachers are already in agreement with the 4th step per supporting suttas in some previous posts. It's the 3rd step that has different interpretations, not the 4th.
That means fourth should have different interpretations as well as they both have a relationship.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
pegembara
Posts: 3454
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Question 1 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by pegembara »

SarathW wrote: Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:00 am
pegembara wrote: Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:01 am
"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

"But why are in-&-out breaths bodily fabrications? Why are directed thought & evaluation verbal fabrications? Why are perceptions & feelings mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Things tied to the body - breathing/heartbeat/tremors/sympathetic-adrenergic systems.
Agree.
My question is why it does not include other bodily fabrications.
Does it not?

I know of a meditator who had difficulties doing anapanasati but the moment she used the sensation of pressure on sitting became instantly grounded. This never happened with breath as meditation object. Body sweeping too seems the same to me.

https://aboutmeditation.com/how-to-prep ... editation/
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
santa100
Posts: 6799
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by santa100 »

SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:28 am That means fourth should have different interpretations as well as they both have a relationship.
I don't follow your logic at all. Why do you keep raising question about the 4th step while Bodhi, Thanissaro, and almost all others already share the same interpretation that have solid backup from MN 44? If the Buddha intended it as "whole physical body" as what you wanted to believe, He'd just use SabbaKaya just like in the 3rd step, not KayaSankhara.
Last edited by santa100 on Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

I know of a meditator who had difficulties doing anapanasati but the moment she used the sensation of pressure on sitting became instantly grounded. This never happened with breath as meditation object. Body sweeping too seems the same to me.
I agree with you, but you may face lot of disagreement from some.
In and out breathing is bodily fabrication does not mean it exclude other bodily fabrications.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
paul
Posts: 1512
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:27 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by paul »

In my opinion the 3rd 4th steps of the 1st tetrad refer to noticing the sensations in the body with the breath as secondary :

“Here, the parallel versions in the three Vinayas provide a helpful indication, as they formulate the third step in terms of “pervading the body.” Such pervading would indeed present a distinctly new element for the progression of practice, in that from having become aware of the breath in its entire length, the meditator now moves on to becoming aware of the whole body in the sitting posture. This would be a natural progression when turning attention inward, where the breath as an easily noticeable bodily process would then lead on to noticing other and more subtle bodily sensations occurring elsewhere in the body. On this understanding, the third step in the progression would involve a conscious broadening of the field of awareness from the breath alone to the breath experienced within an awareness of the whole body.

The final step in the first tetrad then requires a calming of the bodily formation. Here, the term formation, saṅkhāra, can be understood to mean in particular the breath itself. In addition, the same term could also be taken to stand for any other bodily activity. On this understanding, the instruction would then entail a relaxing of the body in the sitting posture until it becomes naturally still and stable, as well as a calming of whatever other bodily activity may be going on within the body, to the extent that one is able to calm these down. These two interpretations are mutually supportive insofar as a calming of the breath will naturally lead to an increased general tranquility of the body, and tranquility of the body in turn will enhance the calmness of the breathing process. So it seems safe to conclude that step (4) requires calming the breath and the body.”—-“Understanding and Practicing the Anapanasati-sutta’, Analayo
Last edited by paul on Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

When there are such body fabrications whereby there is bending backwards,
sideways, in all directions, and forwards, and perturbation, excitement,
moving, and shaking, of the body, he trains thus 'I shall breathe in calming the
body fabrication;' he trains thus' I shall breathe out calming the body
fabrication.' When there are such body fabrications whereby there is no
bending backwards, sideways, in all directions, and forwards, and no
perturbation, excitement, moving, and shaking, of the body, quiet and subtle,
he trains thus 'I shall breathe in calming the body fabrication;' he trains thus 'I
shall breathe out calming the body fabrication.'

https://archive.org/details/Patisambhid ... rimination

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=16918&p=241506&hilit=
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Volo
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by Volo »

SarathW wrote: Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:20 am When there are such body fabrications whereby there is bending backwards,
It seem Patisambhida also considers breath as bodily formations.
“Bodily-formation”: long in-breaths, long out-
breaths, short in-breaths, short out-breaths,
breathing in experiencing the whole body,
breathing out experiencing the whole body—
these things are bodily properties; being bound
up with the body they are bodily formations. He
trains himself by calming, causing to cease
[and] pacifying, those bodily formations.
Then is what you quoted, then it goes further (the text in brackets is added by Ñanamoli and is not in the original):
60. (If) it is thus, (it is objected): “`Calming the
bodily formation, I shall breathe in,’ thus he
trains himself; ‘calming the bodily formation, I
shall breathe out,’ thus he trains himself’—this
being so, there is no production of awareness of
wind, and there is no production of the in-and-
out breathing, and there is no production of
respiration-mindfulness, and there is no
production of respiration mindfulness
concentration, and accordingly the wise neither
enter into, nor emerge from, that attainment.”
(Yet since) it is thus, (it is replied): “`Calming
the bodily formation, I shall breathe in,’ thus he
trains himself; ‘calming the bodily formation, I
shall breathe out,’ thus he trains himself’—this
being so, there is production of awareness of
wind, and there is production of the in-and-out
breathing, and there is production of respiration-respiration mindfulness concentration, and
accordingly the wise do enter into, and emerge
from, that attainment.”
Like what? Just as when a metal gong is struck;
at first gross sounds occur, and (consciousness
proceeds) because the sign of the gross sounds
is well grasped, well brought to mind, well
considered; and when the gross sounds have
ceased, then afterwards faint sounds occur, and
(consciousness proceeds) because the sign of the
faint sounds is well grasped, well brought to
mind, well considered; and when the faint
sounds have ceased, ─ then afterwards
consciousness proceeds because of having the
sign of the faint sounds as object: so indeed, at
first gross in-breaths and out-breaths occur and
(consciousness does not become distracted)
because the sign of the gross in-breaths and out-
breaths is well grasped, well brought to mind,
well considered; and when the gross in-breaths
and out-breaths have ceased, then afterwards (consciousness does not become distracted)
because the sign of the faint in-breaths and out-
breaths is well grasped, well brought to mind,
well considered; and when the faint in- and out-
breaths have ceased, then, afterwards
consciousness does not become distracted
because of having the sign of the faint in- and
out-breaths as object.

This being so, there is production of awareness
of wind, and there is production of the in-and
out breathing, and there is production of
respiration-mindfulness, and there is production
of respiration-mindfulness concentration, and
accordingly the wise do enter into, and emerge
from, that attainment.
It is quite clear, the text talks about in- out- breath as something, which calms down (from gross to subtle). The quote, which you cited, and where it talks about actual body moving, is a bit confusing for me. After mentioning these bodily movements, the text goes on objecting that (some kind of) practice would lead to concentration and that it is not ānāpānasati at all (this is the beginning of what I quoted, ignore the text in brackets). But then it says, that it would lead to concentration, and talks about gross and subtle breath. I'm not 100% sure what is objected there, but it might be it is actually the idea that calming should be done for actual body. Anyway, the breath here also seems to be the object of calming down.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

It seem Patisambhida also considers breath as bodily formations.
Agree.
I am not disputing this.
What I am saying is bodily formations are not restricted to in and out the breath.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question 4 re- MN118 Anapanasati Sutta

Post by SarathW »

Calming the
bodily formation, I shall breathe in,’ thus he
trains himself; ‘calming the bodily formation, I
shall breathe out,
Isn't this sentence proves that in and out breath is not only the bodily formation?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Post Reply