Goenka on elimination of sankharas

[SarathW]

Does past Sankhara = past Kamma?
Does both mean the same?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Is there any sutta reference that clearly states that PAST, EXISTING sankharas can be eliminated through mindfulness of sensations?
If so, why did the arahants still have to suffer for their past kamma?

More fundamentally, are there suttas that even talk about the notion of "PAST, EXISTING sankharas" (i.e. specific sankharas that existed, and continue to exist through to the present), nevermind the means for their elimination?

The closest I can think of is this...

SN 35.145: Kamma Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"Monks, I will teach you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak.

"Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma.

"And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma.

"And what is the cessation of kamma? Whoever touches the release that comes from the cessation of bodily kamma, verbal kamma, & mental kamma: This is called the cessation of kamma.

"And what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is called the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma.

"So, monks, I have taught you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Whatever a teacher should do — seeking the welfare of his disciples, out of sympathy for them — that have I done for you. Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you."

It seems the Noble Eightfold Path is the answer to a lot of questions!

Metta,
Retro.

[pilgrim]

I believe Goenka's method is firmly within Vedananupassana. I am trying to understand his explanation of the mechanics behind its efficacy.

[mikenz66]

[Regarding Anapanasati and where to watch the breath...]
Yes it does. Parimukham. Mukha is face. Pari is in front. I'm sorry we can't get along. I don't agree with many things. I respect your opinions. I suppose, because this is a Theravada site, it is nt appropriate to challenge the Theravada vision of dharma. I revere the suttas. The other stuff, not so much.

I'm sure we can get along.

Regarding Anapanasati, your interpretation is the interpretation of the Theravada Commentaries. Some modern commentators disagree:

To the fore (parimukham): The Abhidhamma takes an etymological approach to this term, defining it as around (pari-) the mouth (mukham). In the Vinaya, however, it is used in a context (Cv.V.27.4) where it undoubtedly means the front of the chest. There is also the possibility that the term could be used idiomatically as "to the front," which is how I have translated it here.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .html#fn-2

See also this thread:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5636

In any case, my point is that there is almost nothing in the suttas that read like the meditation instructions in the books and talks by modern teachers such as Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Ajahn Brahm, Mahasi Sayadaw, Goenka, Ajahn Buddhadasa, and so on.

I don't actually see that as a problem. The satipatthana suttas say to be aware of vedena. Whether you do that by scanning (as in Goenka's instructions), or observing it whenever it becomes prominent, without specifically looking for it (as in, for example, Mahasi Sayadaw's approach) doesn't imply a disagreement over Dhamma. These teachers simply offer practical advice on how to implement the sutta instruction:

Herein, monks, a monk when experiencing a pleasant feeling knows, "I experience a pleasant feeling"; when experiencing a painful feeling, he knows, "I experience a painful feeling"; ...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nysa.html

:anjali:
Mike

[Sylvester]

I'm rather inclined to agree with Mr Goenka, as what he says about saṅkhāra looks like a discussion of the anusaya. Here's a fairly standard exhortation regarding the establishment of equanimity (as a cetasika/emotional response) in reaction to the different types of feelings felt as pleasure and pain (as kāyika/hedonic tone)-

Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there arises what is felt either as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain. If, when touched by a feeling of pleasure, one relishes it, welcomes it, or remains fastened to it, then one's passion-obsession gets obsessed. If, when touched by a feeling of pain, one sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats one's breast, becomes distraught, then one's resistance-obsession gets obsessed. If, when touched by a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling, then one's ignorance-obsession gets obsessed. That a person — without abandoning passion-obsession with regard to a feeling of pleasure, without abolishing resistance-obsession with regard to a feeling of pain, without uprooting ignorance-obsession with regard to a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, without abandoning ignorance and giving rise to clear knowing — would put an end to suffering & stress in the here & now: such a thing isn't possible.

etc etc for the other 5 sense faculties, followed by the contra-case:

Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there arises what is felt either as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain. If, when touched by a feeling of pleasure, one does not relish it, welcome it, or remain fastened to it, then one's passion-obsession doesn't get obsessed. If, when touched by a feeling of pain, one does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, beat one's breast or become distraught, then one's resistance obsession doesn't get obsessed. If, when touched by a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one discerns, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, & escape from that feeling, then one's ignorance-obsession doesn't get obsessed. That a person — through abandoning passion-obsession with regard to a feeling of pleasure, through abolishing resistance-obsession with regard to a feeling of pain, through uprooting ignorance-obsession with regard to a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, through abandoning ignorance and giving rise to clear knowing — would put an end to suffering & stress in the here & now: such a thing is possible.

MN 148 - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

What Ven Thanissaro translates as "obsession" are rendered elsewhere as "latent tendency" (anusaya).

Take a look at SN 12.38 for the role of the anusaya as the most basic and fundamental form of saṅkhāra that drives rebirth - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

These sort of "temporary" samatha moments, when one's anusaya (tendency) does not anuseti (underlie) the feeling would qualify as the case praised in SN 12.38 -

But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness.

NB - "obsess" here is anuseti, the operative verb for anusaya)

Take a close look at AN 4.233 if you can at the Pali. 4 types of kamma are described - dark kamma, light kamma, light-&-dark kamma, and kamma that leads to the destruction of kamma. The first 3 are described by the verb abhisankharoti, but no such verb is applied to the 4th. Its usage in the suttas suggests that abhisankharoti is one of the verb forms associated with saṅkhāra.

One's anusaya are moulded by one's habits that develop into one's character (whether in this life or the next). Notwithstanding the Western view that portrays the Buddhist theory of kamma as requiring intentional action to be ethically significant, this is actually not borne out by the suttas. Even "unconscious" habitual responses that are not "intentional" or made unawares qualify as saṅkhāra that push one into rebirth. Look at SN 12.25 where abhisankharoti is again implicated with the saṅkhāra, even if done asampajāna (unconsciously).

What Mr Goenka presents actually has doctrinal support, but it does require one to look at the most subtle form of saṅkhāra to make sense.

[gavesako]

In his comments on MN 101, Ven. Thanissaro is at pains to emphasise the difference between the Jain and the Buddhist approach to overcome all pain:

The second important point touched on in this sutta — how to put an end to pain and suffering — relates to the first. If the cause of present suffering were located exclusively in the past, no one could do anything in the present moment to stop that suffering; the most that could be done would be to endure the suffering while not creating any new kamma leading to future suffering. Although this was the Jain approach to practice, many people at present believe that it is the Buddhist approach as well. Meditation, according to this understanding, is the process of purifying the mind of old kamma by training it to look on with non-reactive equanimity as pain arises. The pain is the result of old kamma, the equanimity adds no new kamma, and thus over time all old kamma can be burned away.

In this sutta, however, the Buddha heaps ridicule on this idea. First he notes that none of the Niganthas have ever come to the end of pain by trying to burn it away in this way; then he notes that they have based their belief in this practice entirely on their faith in their teacher and their approval of his ideas, but neither faith nor approval can act as guarantees of the truth. As he illustrates with his simile of the man shot with an arrow, only a person who has succeeded in going beyond pain would be in a position to speak with authority of the method that actually puts an end to pain. (What is not mentioned in this sutta is the Nigantha idea that the practice of austerities, to succeed completely in burning away old kamma, must culminate in a suicide by starvation. Thus there could be no living person who would be able to vouch for the efficacy of their method.)

The Buddha then provides his own account of how meditation actually works in putting an end to pain and suffering. His discussion shows that the problem underlying pain is not past action, but passion — in the present — for the causes of pain. In other words, pain is not inevitable. Present suffering can be prevented by changing one's understanding of, and attitude toward, the cause of suffering in the present. The Buddha illustrates this principle with the simile of a man in love with a woman: As long as he feels passion for her, he will suffer when he sees her enjoying the company of another man; when, seeing the connection between his suffering and his passion, he abandons that passion, he will no longer suffer from that cause.

Thus the practice must focus on ways to understand and bring about dispassion for the causes of stress and pain here and now. As the Buddha points out in MN 106, equanimity plays an important role in this practice, but it can also become an object for passion and delight, which would then stand in the way of true release. Thus he notes here that, in some cases, dispassion can arise simply from on-looking equanimity directed at the causes of stress. In other cases, it can come only through exertion: the mental effort — through the fabrications of directed thought, evaluation, and perception — to develop the discernment needed to see through and abandon any and all passion.

The remainder of the sutta is devoted to a standard map of how the practice develops over time, showing how the proper mixture of on-looking equanimity combined with fabrication and exertion can lead to dispassion, and through dispassion to release from all stress and suffering.


"And how is striving fruitful, how is exertion fruitful? There is the case where a monk, when not loaded down, does not load himself down with pain, nor does he reject pleasure that accords with the Dhamma, although he is not fixated on that pleasure. He discerns that 'When I exert a [physical, verbal, or mental] fabrication against this cause of stress, then from the fabrication of exertion there is dispassion. When I look on with equanimity at that cause of stress, then from the development of equanimity there is dispassion.' So he exerts a fabrication against the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion, and develops equanimity with regard to the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity. Thus the stress coming from the cause of stress for which there is dispassion through the fabrication of exertion is exhausted & the stress resulting from the cause of stress for which there is dispassion through the development of equanimity is exhausted.

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

[Sylvester]

Good grief. As if the establishment of equanimity by overcoming 2 anusayas is -

1. Equivalent to burning up old kamma; and
2. One does not strive to do so.

Sometimes I wish the good ajahn would desist with these strawman attacks.

[gavesako]

I think he does this on purpose after hearing from many Goenka practitioners who use this kind of language ("letting the old sankharas become exhausted" etc.) implying that it is the best way to reach liberation, whereas for some people other methods might be necessary. One technique does not fit all individuals, that is his main criticism probably.

[kirk5a]

I'm rather inclined to agree with Mr Goenka, as what he says about saṅkhāra looks like a discussion of the anusaya.

Great analysis Sylvester, that's really interesting thanks. The anusaya are an Important topic in my estimation.

[Monkey Mind]

Pilgrim, if you are looking for Mr. Goenka's explanation, you might benefit from reading his discourses on the Satipatthana Sutta:
http://store.pariyatti.org/Satipatthana ... _1814.html

[Monkey Mind]

Regarding the other comments about focusing exclusively on the past kamma or sankharas, that is not what Mr. Goenka is suggesting. You have to develop equanimity with current experiences first, before you are able to interact with past sankharas.

[Mkoll]

One's anusaya are moulded by one's habits that develop into one's character (whether in this life or the next). Notwithstanding the Western view that portrays the Buddhist theory of kamma as requiring intentional action to be ethically significant, this is actually not borne out by the suttas. Even "unconscious" habitual responses that are not "intentional" or made unawares qualify as saṅkhāra that push one into rebirth. Look at SN 12.25 where abhisankharoti is again implicated with the saṅkhāra, even if done asampajāna (unconsciously).

Thank you for presenting that sutta.

Habits are in turn moulded by one's intentional actions. The unconscious habitual responses I have developed out of ignorance have at their root volitional actions of the past. If prompted by others and undeliberately, I perform an action out of habit, there is ignorance present in that action and thus past volitional actions (dependent origination). From past intention arises habit which may become unconscious, undeliberate, and prompted by others. Ethical significance does require intentional action, just not necessarily in the present. That's my interpretation after reading the sutta. So I would amend (as emphasized) your statement as follows.

Notwithstanding the Western view that portrays the Buddhist theory of kamma as requiring present intentional action to be ethically significant, this is actually not borne out by the suttas.

What do you think?

[suttametta]

Feelings (vedanā) of pleasure, pain or neutral are the ripening (phala) of past actions (kamma). Sankhara are not the past. They are present intentions about the future. Sankhara is, as they say in the South, "fixing to," when we are about to do something. Sankhara are the present volitions of body, speech and mind conditioned by lobha, dosa and moha, which are in turn conditioned by vedanā. The moha is the most important part, the moha is papanca about past, present and future kamma phala (which are unreal), based on lobha and dosa (and all kilesa) about the vedanā. Vedanā are always the main experience, bc these are the phala.

I don't understand the terminology that says these rise to the surface. I don't understand where they are arising from or to what surface. I've heard the Hindu masters speak in this way, as if there is a deep cleaning to do. Yogacara also have an idea of layers over a storehouse where seeds of habits dwell. I don't accept this idea. Buddha said all 12 links are unreal. If you are sitting and start to get up, it's the body sankhara. The reason one is getting up is lobha, dosa or moha, and often papanca, which is an outgrowth of these. But if you have sati, then these don't continue. Sati short circuits that loop. If you keep sati it develops into the bhojanga and jhana.

It makes more sense to me to say the asavas try to flow out. The urges (tanha) of body, speech and mind appear and cause one to want to leave the seat and externalize inner experience. By keeping four foundations then these also don't develop. This is basic 12 links. Anapanasati is the best tool against this I know. The breath need is the most basic vedanā/tanha.

[SarathW]

Hi SM
I like your line of thinking, which will support from the attched.

P337:

http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/buddh ... gsurw6.pdf


It seems U Ba Khin is not technically correct, though he seems to expereince what he says.
(See my previous link)
In the same link Goenka very clearly showed us how this technic works.
Basically he said that the objective is to understand the no self nature of the process.
Which is Inline with the following.

==============
Feeling (vedanaa)
In the Abhidhamma context the word "feeling" signifies the affective experience of an object; it does not imply emotion, which comes under a different heading. Feeling is associated with every type of consciousness. Like the citta itself it is of momentary duration, arising and perishing in an instant. This arising and perishing occur in rapid succession, so much so that they create an illusion of compactness and stability obscuring the momentariness. But the momentariness can be experienced through the practice of mindfulness. It will then be realized that there is no self or agent that experiences the feeling. There is only the arising and disappearing of an impersonal process. As long as we do not see how this impersonal process occurs we will be led to believe that feeling is the self, or the self possesses feeling, or feeling is in the self, or the self is in feeling. These beliefs keep us bound to suffering — to sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el322.html

[Mkoll]

Buddha said all 12 links are unreal.

Hi SM,

Can you explain what you mean by this and provide a reference if possible?

Thank you.