Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Greetings,

A very well-written back to basics look at meditation by Ajahn Sumedho.

We tend to overlook the ordinary. We are usually only aware of our breath when it’s abnormal, like if we have asthma or when we’ve been running hard. But with anapanasati we take our ordinary breath as the meditation object. We don’t try to make the breath long or short, or control it in any way, but to simply stay with the normal inhalation and exhalation. The breath is not something that we create or imagine; it is a natural process of our bodies that continues as long as life lasts, whether we concentrate on it or not. So it is an object that is always present; we can turn to it at any time. We don’t have to have any qualifications to watch our breath. We do not even need to be particularly intelligent — all we have to do is to be content with, and aware of, one inhalation and exhalation. Wisdom does not come from studying great theories and philosophies, but from observing the ordinary...............................

Full article: http://www.amaravati.org/abm/english/do ... 03ana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - originally published in the Dhamma book, "Now Is The Knowing".



I enjoyed this. For someone such as myself who can't find much time for meditation, it is always helpful to have a guide that brings you back to the very basics.

Metta,
Retro.

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

A very well-written back to basics look at meditation by Ajahn Sumedho.

We tend to overlook the ordinary. We are usually only aware of our breath .... So it is an object that is always present; we can turn to it at any time. We don’t have to have any qualifications to watch our breath. We do not even need to be particularly intelligent — all we have to do is to be content with, and aware of, one inhalation and exhalation.

Full article: http://www.amaravati.org/abm/english/do ... 03ana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - originally published in the Dhamma book, "Now Is The Knowing".

From the Visuddhimagga Viii

211: "Although any meditation subject, no matter what, is successful only in one who is mindful and fully aware, yet any meditation subject other than this one gets more evident as he goes on giving it his attention. But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons..."

retrofuturist wrote:A very well-written back to basics look at meditation by Ajahn Sumedho.

Wisdom does not come from studying great theories and philosophies, but from observing the ordinary...............................

Full article: http://www.amaravati.org/abm/english/do ... 03ana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - originally published in the Dhamma book, "Now Is The Knowing".

:bu

From Venerable Dhammanando

Pariyatti as the Root of the Sāsanā

(From the Atthakathā to Anguttara Nikāya, Ekanipāta, Dutiyapamādādivagga, 42nd sutta)




And in that place [Maṇḍalārāma Monastery in Kallagāma] there arose a discussion among the elders as to whether the root of the Dispensation consisted in practice (paṭipatti) or in study of the Teaching (pariyatti). Those elders who were wearers of rag-robes said, “practice is the root,” and those elders who were teachers of Dhamma said, “study is the root.”

Then some elders said, “we cannot decide between your two opinions merely on the basis of your assertions. Support them by quoting a saying spoken by the Conqueror.”

“It will be no trouble to quote a saying,” replied both sides. Then the elders who were wearers of rag-robes quoted these passages:

“Subhadda, if bhikkhus in this very Dispensation were to live rightly, the world would not be empty of arahants.”

“Your majesty, the Teacher’s Dispensation is rooted in practice and has practice as its pith. While practice is maintained, the Dispensation lasts.”

After listening to these sayings, the elders who were teachers of Dhamma then quoted this saying as proof of their own claim:

“For as long the Suttantas endure, for as long as the Vinaya is taught,
For just that long will there be light, like that after the sun has risen.
But when the Suttantas are no more, and when the Vinaya is forgotten,
There will be darkness in the world, like that after the sun has set.
While the Suttantas are protected, then is practice protected too;
A sage, being grounded in practice, fails not to reach peace from the bonds.”

When this saying was quoted, the elders who were wearers of rag-robes became silent and the speech of the teachers of Dhamma prevailed.

Neither among a hundred bulls, nor among a thousand, will even a single bull ensure the continuance of his line in the absence of a cow. Even so, neither among a hundred bhikkhus intent on insight, nor among a thousand, will even a single bhikkhu penetrate the noble path in the absence of pariyatti.

Marks are engraved in rock to show the location of buried treasure; for as long as those marks endure, the treasure is not reckoned as lost. Even so, for as long as pariyatti endures, the Teacher’s Dispensation is not reckoned to have disappeared.
(Manorathapūraṇī i. 92-3, translation by venerable Dhammanando)


and


The "uninstructed worldling" (p40 of Mulapariyaya) "needs to be taught, because he possesses neither learning(agama) nor achievement. For he who possesses neither the learning running counter to the activity of conceiving because he has neglected to study, question, and discriminate the aggregates (khandhas), elements, sense bases (ayatanas) truths, law of conditionality and foundations of mindfulness etc , nor spiritual achievement

Greetings Robert,

I'm going to have a guess at the nature of your implied objections, since they weren't explicity drawn out.

Ajahn Sumedho's comment "We don’t have to have any qualifications to watch our breath. We do not even need to be particularly intelligent" means literally what it says, not that "We do not even need to be particularly intelligent to realise the Dhamma"... the scope of the statement refers solely to the observation of the breath. Thus the Practice vs Study dichotomy doesn't seem to be of relevance in this instance.

Also, within the text, Ajahn Sumedho is only talking about anapanasati to the point of "upacara samadhi [approaching concentration]", thus the Visuddhimagga reference pointing towards the deeper jhanic levels of anapanasati also seems to be irrelevant. Ajahn Sumedho is speaking of anapanasati as a prelude to vipassana.

Metta,
Retro.

Greetings

Since you just quoted the Visuddhimagga without giving your explanation im going to have to guess that your point is that mindfulness of breathing is very difficult and shouldnt be taught otherwise



I have read an article by him where he states that if you have been mindful of one in breath or one out breath then your doing mindfulness of breathing, thats not to say thats all there is though i think he was trying to put across that one shouldnt be to hard on oneself in attitudes towards meditation


He generally doesnt put meditation or Dhamma across as something difficult and out of reach. He tends to put across the point that Dhamma is something ordinary and so within grasp (not to say that others do the opposite)


I will add some quotes later but on break in work atm

Hi Robers
what is your point(s)?

Greetings


Found that quote where he talks about mindfulness of breath

ONLY ONE BREATH

This morning I was talking to Venerable Subbato and he was saying he never has developed anapanasati, mindfulness of the breath. So I said, 'Can you be mindful of one inhalation?' And he said, 'Oh yes.' 'And of one exhalation?' And he said, 'Yes.' And I said, 'Got it!'

There's nothing more to it than that. However, one tends to expect to develop some special kind of ability to go into some special state. And because we don't do that, then we think we can't do it.

But the way of the spiritual life is through renunciation, relinquishment, letting go not through attaining or acquiring. Even the jhanas* are relinquishments rather than attainments. If we relinquish more and more, letting go more and more, then the jhanic states are natural.

(*jhanas: these are refined states of mind-consciousness experienced through meditative absorption.)

The attitude is most important. To practise anapanasati, one brings the attention onto one inhalation, being mindful from the beginning to the end. One inhalation, that's it; and then the same goes for the exhalation. That's the perfect attainment of anapanasati. The awareness of just that much, is the result of concentration of the mind through sustained attention on the breath. From the beginning to the end of the inhalation, from the beginning to the end of the exhalation. The attitude is always one of letting go, not attaching to any ideas or feelings that arise from that, so that you're always fresh with the next inhalation, the next exhalation, completely as it is. You're not carrying over anything. So it's a way of relinquishment, of letting go, rather than of attaining and achieving.

The dangers in meditation practice is the habit of grasping at things, grasping at states; so the concept that's most useful is the concept of letting go, rather than of attaining and achieving. If you say today that yesterday you had a really super meditation, absolutely fantastic, just what you've always dreamed of, and then today you try to get the same wonderful experience as yesterday, but you get more restless and more agitated than ever before - now why is that? Why can't we get what we want? It's because we're trying to attain something that we remember; rather than really working with the way things are, as they happen to be now. So the correct way is one of mindfulness, of looking at the way it is now, rather than remembering yesterday and trying to get to that state again.

The bit in blue was the part i was trying to paraphrase earlier

The rest can be found here, it makes for a good read

http://www.amaravati.org/abm/english/do ... 13oob.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

hi has anyone heard Ajhan sumedo talking of disenchantment, dispassion and cessation (ie that path of insight)?

Hello rowyourboat, all,

ryb said: hi has anyone heard Ajhan sumedo talking of disenchantment, dispassion and cessation (ie that path of insight)?

Aren't people (including famous bhikkhus) who speak about their own personal experiences going against the MN 122 Maha-suññata Sutta The Greater Discourse on Emptiness recommendation that Dhamma should be taught without reference to self or others? (reference http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

I recall Ven. Dhammanando writing on another list (ws) that "the criticisms of the forest ajahns' presentation of the Dhamma by means of autohagiography tend to be more specific than merely "not seeming proper".

The forest ajahns are for the most part addressing audiences who have not "for a long time listened to the teachings, retained them, discussed them, accumulated them, examined them with their minds, and penetrated them well in terms of their views." Since this is the only reason the Buddha gives Ānanda as to why it is improper for a disciple to go to a teacher to hear discourses, catechisms etc., clearly the advice of the Mahāsuññatasutta only applies to certain disciples — those who already have an adequate pariyatti basis. It does not apply in the case of neophyte disciples."

metta
Chris

Dhamma teachings of Ajahn Sumedho



Whatever you think you are, that's not what you are.



Whenever you suffer, ask yourself: "What am I attached to?"



People who are attached to life are actually attached to death: contemplate that.



The five khandhas are all about death.



Mindfulness is the way out of insanity. The whole world is insane! It's just that some kinds of insanity are agreed upon as 'normal', while those that are not considered normal -- especially if they get anti-social -- they will lock you up for those....



In meditation we are breaking down the illusion that the mind is in the brain. Actually, the brain -- and the whole body -- is in the mind! The brain is more like a radio receiver. Each of us is a separate conscious entity in the universe. We all see the world from here. Consciousness is like light which makes things visible. Each of us is the centre of the universe, the centre of the mandala. That's why we are ultimately alone. Nobody can help you do this practice, it's only up to you.



Learn how to trust and rest in this state of pure knowing: It is like this. It can't be any other way. You need mindfulness (sati) to keep remembering this state and returning to it. This stillness of the mind is non-critical, non-judgemental. It's an intuitive, direct knowing, it's not analytical. This is called nanadassana, or insight knowledge.



Discussing 'Transcendental Dependent Arising' (suffering --> faith --> gladness --> rapture --> calmness --> happiness --> concentration --> knowing and seeing things as they are --> disenchantment --> dispassion --> liberation --> destruction of the effluents): It begins with positive states like 'gladness' and 'happiness', so you would expect it to get better and better, but then it goes to ... disenchantment, or nibbida. It's like when you see some children playing on the sand, with buckets and spades, building sand castles and roads and bridges. I used to play like that when I was young! But then as you get older and you see small children playing in this way, you are no longer interested in it, you become disenchanted with it. And then dispassion arises, you can no longer get involved in the quarrelling and disputes among the children on the playground. You see society, people around you, getting upset and obsessed by such unimportant, trivial things.... That's how the arahant sees the world. And that's liberation. You are no longer fascinated by rebirth. "The holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing more beyond this." You see the dukkha of all conditions, that your desires cannot be satisfied in this conditioned world. But it's not like rejecting the world, either. You still love the children playing with the sand, and you want to help them. Maybe you ask yourself: "So what happens after I die?" But you don't die. What dies? The body dies, but there is no attachment to it. ... Somebody said to me: "There are no arahants in the world anymore." I asked him: "How do you know? Are you omniscient? Maybe there are more arahants in the world than you think."



The jhanas are often spoken of in terms of 'attainment', but it's no attainment at all, it's more like abandoning, or relinquishing. Because jhana is a state when the five hindrances are suppressed or abandoned. By cultivating this spacious, expansive mind, you do actually develop the jhana factors -- like rapture, gladness, etc. -- but they arise naturally, without you trying to attain them.



I see samma-samadhi as wholeness, as a state of balance, or collectedness. Concentration which is dependent on special conditions is not sustainable, because those conditions are not always going to be there.



In Theravada Buddhism, we use words like Unconditioned, Unborn, cessation, or abandoning. But when we approach them with a Western-trained, analytical mind, it often ends up as annihilationism.



Speaking about psychotherapeutic meetings: It's like we take these heavy burdens onto our shoulders, and then we come together and tell each other about how we feel, carrying this weight on our backs! It tends to reinforce the basic delusion that "I am somebody who has a problem, and I have to do this and that in order to solve it." It does not cut off the problem at its root.

(Amaravati winter retreat 1999)

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

A very well-written back to basics look at meditation by Ajahn Sumedho.

We tend to overlook the ordinary. We are usually only aware of our breath when it’s abnormal, like if we have asthma or when we’ve been running hard. But with anapanasati we take our ordinary breath as the meditation object. We don’t try to make the breath long or short, or control it in any way, but to simply stay with the normal inhalation and exhalation. The breath is not something that we create or imagine; it is a natural process of our bodies that continues as long as life lasts, whether we concentrate on it or not. So it is an object that is always present; we can turn to it at any time. We don’t have to have any qualifications to watch our breath. We do not even need to be particularly intelligent — all we have to do is to be content with, and aware of, one inhalation and exhalation. Wisdom does not come from studying great theories and philosophies, but from observing the ordinary...............................

Full article: http://www.amaravati.org/abm/english/do ... 03ana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - originally published in the Dhamma book, "Now Is The Knowing".



I enjoyed this. For someone such as myself who can't find much time for meditation, it is always helpful to have a guide that brings you back to the very basics.

Metta,
Retro.

Nice quote. This practice - letting the breath be a natural process, unstained by mind, is what I call a summary practice. For me it summarizes the entire Dharma. To quote Ajahn Buddhadasa, as he describes how anapanasati is one of the most effective means for realizing emptiness (in a talk about the 13th contemplation):

"There is no question that breathing is taking place. Can you see that there is no breather to be found anywhere? The body is empty, the breath is empty, and you are empty."

gavesako wrote:Dhamma teachings of Ajahn Sumedho
Speaking about psychotherapeutic meetings: It's like we take these heavy burdens onto our shoulders, and then we come together and tell each other about how we feel, carrying this weight on our backs! It tends to reinforce the basic delusion that "I am somebody who has a problem, and I have to do this and that in order to solve it." It does not cut off the problem at its root.

This remark reveals his apparent ignorance re: the view, practice, and experience of psychotherapy and it's potential.

pink_trike wrote:

gavesako wrote:Dhamma teachings of Ajahn Sumedho
Speaking about psychotherapeutic meetings: It's like we take these heavy burdens onto our shoulders, and then we come together and tell each other about how we feel, carrying this weight on our backs! It tends to reinforce the basic delusion that "I am somebody who has a problem, and I have to do this and that in order to solve it." It does not cut off the problem at its root.

This remark reveals his apparent ignorance re: the view, practice, and experience of psychotherapy and it's potential.

Or perhaps he is right: pyscho... does not cut the problem off at its root.

robertk wrote:

pink_trike wrote:

gavesako wrote:Dhamma teachings of Ajahn Sumedho
Speaking about psychotherapeutic meetings: It's like we take these heavy burdens onto our shoulders, and then we come together and tell each other about how we feel, carrying this weight on our backs! It tends to reinforce the basic delusion that "I am somebody who has a problem, and I have to do this and that in order to solve it." It does not cut off the problem at its root.

This remark reveals his apparent ignorance re: the view, practice, and experience of psychotherapy and it's potential.

Or perhaps he is right: pyscho... does not cut the problem off at its root.

Assuming that he actually has had significant, committed, unbiased, subjective (non-intellectualized) experience in the psychotherapeutic environment - and that his understanding of the "root" isn't all a'twined with magical thinking - then psychotherapy likely wasn't a compatible path for him. It should be noted that the psychotherapy profession (at least in the United States) is top heavy with long-term Buddhist practitioners, with the active support of their teachers. Just because the experience of psychotherapy is notably, blessedly free of dogma doesn't mean that there isn't Dharma at work there. It's a good idea not to judge a path by it's form - as more than one of my teachers have said as they supported, taught, and encouraged me in relationship to my professional practice as a psychotherapist.

But if by "root" either he (or you) mean some magical understanding that arises out of a state of religiosity, then I can't comment further.

I was meaning magical understanding of course.