Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

Whether you elect to think that or not is your decision, but this is the "Mental Cultivation in the Sutta Pitaka" sub-forum, and if you are seeking teaching outside the scriptures, then this may not be the section of the forum for it.
I understand that. Given that my practice is fully consistent with the texts (scriptures has a rather Christiany sound to it), i have no problem with this forum. And if you think I do, you might then do the proper thing and discuss prvtly with me rather than wasting time publicly.
Whether you seek it inside or outside the suttas is your prerogative, and I ask that you respect the rights of others to choose the same (and vice versa).
Spare the lecture. What I am curious about is what people do, specifically as a practice, using the suttas as a guide. It is not a matter that they cannot do that, or should; not do this or that, it is a matter interest and learning.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: Does the mentioning of the idea of a "simple object" infer the counter-idea of a "complex object"? If so, how would you differentiate between them?
Well, simple objects are simple, complex ones are complex...

That's the whole point. Insight generally seems to be in terms of breaking experience down into simple objects - khandas, sense bases, elements, not trying to wrestle with complex objects like concepts. The thinking about a concept can be broken down into a lot of "simple" processes happening over a considerable period of time.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies (papañcizes), the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,

Thanks for clarifying.

It's not a distinction that I'm aware of the Buddha using in the suttas, but again, if I see anything, I'll let you know.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: It's not a distinction that I'm aware of the Buddha using in the suttas, but again, if I see anything, I'll let you know.
It's a distinction I've demonstrated by quoting suttas...

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

mikenz66 wrote: It's a distinction I've demonstrated by quoting suttas...
To be a little more explicit, the sutta quote above regarding papanca (objectification/conceptual proliferation) seems to be saying that it is a rather complex process, a process that can be broken down into several simpler steps (as can the more common dependent origination sequence).

Similarly, as I sit here, the concept "my body" involves the coming together of a number of sensations and thoughts.

So, are the suttas saying that this "breaking down into simple steps" is an essential part of the insight process?

[Note that I'm trying to avoid taking any philosophical position on "the nature of reality", etc, etc. I'm asking what the suttas say about this matter and what use what they say is for "mental cultivation".]

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:So, are the suttas saying that this "breaking down into simple steps" is an essential part of the insight process?
My understanding is that each serves as an example of the principle of Dhamma principle of idappaccayatā (aka this/that conditionality), and that it is idappaccayatā that is to be seen. That is how I use such sutta instruction in my practice.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

mikenz66 wrote:It's a distinction I've demonstrated by quoting suttas...
Teasing out subtle descriptive distinctions is to think about the Dhamma; incorporating Dhammic descriptions into one's experiential frameworks, up to and including overwriting pre-existing experiential frameworks with Dhammic frameworks, is to think with it such that "the mind becomes concentrated, his corruptions are abandoned, he picks up that sign" as a cook picks up the subtle preferences of his king or royal minister (per SN 47.8).

In this latter sense, bhavana uses the satipatthana categories... not ones such as those to which your phrase, above, refers. Piling on descriptive layers a priori in this way strikes me as papañca-saññā-sankhā.

Perhaps it would be fruitful to examine the fourth tetrad of anapanasati, in this light, in order to see if this distinction is explicitly tendered as a methodology.
tiltbillings wrote:...what people do, specifically as a practice, using the suttas as a guide.
Anapanasati, in my case. It comes highly recommended...
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by chownah »

Mikenz66 wrote: "Are there any suttas where contemplation of conceptual objects leads to insight into the characteristics, etc?"
Mikenz66,
I'm wondering if characteristics are more associated with Right View with effluents and conceptual objects are more associated with Right View without effluents.....if this correlation does exist and taking this as a model then contemplating characteristics leading to insight into conceptual objects would mean the contempation of Right View with effluents progressing to insight to Right View without effluents........and what you are asking would be how does contemplating Right View without effuents lead to insight to Right View with effluents...........or.........your question could be rephrased as, "In what way does contemplating Right View without effluents yield insight into the meaning of things held by Right View with effluents....
Does this fit in with what you are thinking at all?
chownah
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

Thanks Dave,
daverupa wrote: Perhaps it would be fruitful to examine the fourth tetrad of anapanasati, in this light, in order to see if this distinction is explicitly tendered as a methodology.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"[4] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on inconstancy'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on dispassion'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on cessation'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on relinquishment': On that occasion the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He who sees with discernment the abandoning of greed & distress is one who watches carefully with equanimity, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.
Seems the same as the Satipatthana Sutta, but without the detailed explanation of the various mental qualities (dhammas).

:anjali:
Mike
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by Nyana »

mikenz66 wrote:As I pointed out on a couple of recent threads:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 84#p155954" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 12#p156504" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 22#p156368" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
it is well known that in the suttas we find two descriptions.
One in terms of "beings"/"concepts" and one in terms of various "subdivisions" (khandhas/sense bases/elements, etc).
These "subdivisions" are also concepts.
mikenz66 wrote:Similarly, as I sit here, the concept "my body" involves the coming together of a number of sensations and thoughts.
The body is also one of those "subdivision" dhammas, i.e. the body sensory sphere (kāyāyatana) & the body component (kāyadhātu). In the suttas it's common to find these dhammas listed simply as kāya, and so on.
mikenz66 wrote:So, are the suttas saying that this "breaking down into simple steps" is an essential part of the insight process?
It's part of the process but not the culmination of the process. Cf. Udāna 8.2 "For one who sees, there is nothing."
mikenz66 wrote:[Note that I'm trying to avoid taking any philosophical position on "the nature of reality", etc, etc. I'm asking what the suttas say about this matter and what use what they say is for "mental cultivation".]
Well, this query is bound up with these questions such as what is conceptual and what is real and so on. Indian Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike spent well over 1000 years debating and arguing over this issue.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

mikenz66 wrote:Seems the same as the Satipatthana Sutta, but without the detailed explanation of the various mental qualities (dhammas).
The Satipatthanasamyutta of the Samyutta Nikaya (47.*) offers... a less agglutinative approach to satipatthana, which I feel allows for a very detailed approach. For example, SN 47.40 distinguishes the establishment of mindfulness (which includes the red text you've referenced) from the development of mindfulness; this last is "satipatthanabhavana", and involves "contemplating the nature of origination...", "...vanishing...", and "...origination & vanishing..." in the four categories.

Here, and in the quote you provide, watching closely with equanimity is to see with discernment the abandoning of greed & distress (BB: covetousness & displeasure). This use of equanimity is brought up again at SN 54.10, in the Anapanasatisamyutta. This is a clear instruction, and numerous subtleties such as these are explicated throughout the many Suttas in these sections of the Samyutta.

Given the potential expansiveness of these topics, I want to stay closely focused within the domain of the OP, to wit: there is no "two truths" description given anywhere throughout these sections, even though the Buddha is careful to make distinctions such as satipatthana/satipatthanabhavana, or anapanasati/anapanasatisamadhi. At no point does a "two truths" description seem to clarify any aspect of these practices, and therefore I think the interpolation is unwarranted and unhelpful, perhaps even obfuscatory.

What does holding a two truths notion actually help you to understand?
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

daverupa wrote: What does holding a two truths notion actually help you to understand?
Not so much a "notion" as the "approach" of breaking experience down into simpler bits.

Since that's what most people I've paid attention to seem to teach as part of their approach it's interesting to find that it's not universal.

:anjali:
Mike
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by chownah »

mikenz66 wrote:
daverupa wrote: What does holding a two truths notion actually help you to understand?
Not so much a "notion" as the "approach" of breaking experience down into simpler bits.
I studied to be a teacher at university and they taught that different people have different learning styles and one of the differences they discussed was that some people are analytic while some are holistic (holisitic isn't the word they used but I've forgotten it).....the analytic learners like to see a concept divided up logically into pieces and they can get a good grasp of the whole by looking at the pieces.....holistic learners like to study the concept as a whole and through this they can come to an understanding of its various logical components.....with respect to this they suggested that a good teacher should observe students carefully and try to see which ones are which and try to have both approaches expressed in a lesson plan....and then when implementing the lesson plan the best approach can be used for each student.......maybe this is what the Buddha was doing?
Since that's what most people I've paid attention to seem to teach as part of their approach it's interesting to find that it's not universal.
It might be that you "pay attention" to those who take an analytical approach (aren't you science oriented....scientists are generally analytical learners but not always) as it resonates best with you.....and I would say that as as broad generalisation Westerners tend to go more for the analytic approach more than Asians do....also...I think that I agree that most of what I've seen has been analytical.....it seems that the holistic method is just sometimes overlooked...for instance in Nayanatiloka's Dictionary the section on Satipatthana (the Foundations of Mindfulness) contains this:
"These 4 contemplations are in reality not to be taken as merely separate exercises, but on the contrary, at least in many cases, especially in the absorptions, as things inseparably associated with each other. Thereby the Satipathāna Sutta forms an illustration of the way in which these 4 contemplations relating to the 5 groups of existence khandha simultaneously come to be realized, and finally lead to insight into the impersonality of all existence."
I'm wondering how many people just sort of skip over this paragraph or give it a cursory look because it does not give any information about the individual pieces....but really this paragraph (in my view) is key in understanding how to understand Satipathana and how to utilize it properly.......but then you were looking for sutta references and this paragraph is only Nayanatiloka's views...I guess......

I guess my previous post did not resonate?....after giving it some thought I sort of discarded that idea although I do think that how the influence of insights can cross over between RVwithE and RVwithoutE might be somthing to think about....My view is that sometimes it seems like there is a big gap between RVwith/withoutE and I'm always looking at what might bridge that gap since to me the gap seems inappropriate sort of....but maybe not....I don't know....

chownah
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

mikenz66 wrote:
daverupa wrote: What does holding a two truths notion actually help you to understand?
Not so much a "notion" as the "approach" of breaking experience down into simpler bits.
By breaking experience down into simpler bits, can you give me an example of what you mean here? Are you suggesting that one is encouraged to see experience in terms of khandas, or ayatanas, or dhatus? That seeing this is what needs to be trained in, say, Tetrad IV of anapanasati? I want to be sure I understand how you see it.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two "truths"/"descriptions" and meditation in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Chownah,
chownah wrote: I studied to be a teacher at university and they taught that different people have different learning styles and one of the differences they discussed was that some people are analytic while some are holistic (holisitic isn't the word they used but I've forgotten it).....
...
Yes, that's a good summary. Thanks for the input.
chownah wrote: I guess my previous post did not resonate?....after giving it some thought I sort of discarded that idea although I do think that how the influence of insights can cross over between RVwithE and RVwithoutE might be somthing to think about....My view is that sometimes it seems like there is a big gap between RVwith/withoutE and I'm always looking at what might bridge that gap since to me the gap seems inappropriate sort of....but maybe not....I don't know....
I'm afraid I didn't really follow that very well. I'll try to read it again...

:anjali:
Mike
Post Reply