Dmytro wrote:. . .
- Bhikkhu Bodhi Page15
We should remember that sati, in the context of satipaṭṭhāna practice, is always practiced
as part of an’anupassanā,’ and this word helps to bring out the role of sati.
Dmytro wrote:. . .
Well, it seems that Ven Bodhi and Gethin would differ from Dmytro's assessment the "only" use of sati in the suttas. And I am sure you have seen in Goldstein's teachings it is a bit more sophisticated than merely "whatever-comes-up." And also. as others have pointed out, Ven Thanisarro's teachings are not really all that different from what one might find from a good vipassana teacher.danieLion wrote:The importance of memory and remembering seems minimized, neglected or absent in the bare awareness approach, and seeing this shortcoming was one of the reasons I began looking at and employing alternative approaches (like Rev. T's). Properly understanding right mindfulness as right remembering makes a world of difference for practice. I tend to take right mindfulness as right remembering quite literally. From a psychological perspective, memory is notoriously unreliable and deceitful. Training our minds, then, necessarily involves confronting our propensities to ignorance and delusion via forgetting, denial, minimizing and other psychological strategies. In order to stop deceiving ourselves, we have to start not only remembering better but also uncovering the ways our memory twists events to conform to our beliefs that we are permanent, non-deluded selves. From my experience this is much harder (if not impossible) to do with a whatever-comes-up mindset.Dmytro wrote:Yes, 'remembrance, memory' is the only use of 'sati' in the suttas.
Well possibly worth remembering that the words like "remembrance, memory" have a fairly broad level of meaning within the English language and may suggest different meanings to different people and in different contexts. I guess it would be the same with pali and "sati". Are remembrance and memory non verbal activities of the brain? Is that how people perceive them?Dmytro wrote:Yes, 'remembrance, memory' is the only use of 'sati' in the suttas.tiltbillings wrote:As if that is the only use of sati in the suttas.
.
Which is precisely so with many terms used within the Pali suttas. It is not always safe to go by the mere lexigraphical meaning, as we see in these two looks at the issue:Mr Man wrote:Well possibly worth remembering that the words like "remembrance, memory" have a fairly broad level of meaning within the English language and may suggest different meanings to different people and in different contexts. I guess it would be the same with pali and "sati".Dmytro wrote:Yes, 'remembrance, memory' is the only use of 'sati' in the suttas.tiltbillings wrote:As if that is the only use of sati in the suttas.
.
I don't need it.tiltbillings wrote:I do not see a conflation with what Ven Bodhi has had to say. You'll need to spell it out.
Which is to say that sati is not simply remembering. From the same book, page 32, Gethin: "What is meant, I think, is that sati is understood as a quality of mind that 'stands near' or 'serves' the mind; it watches over the mind. One might say that it is a form of 'presence of mind'."Dmytro wrote:Rupert Gethin, current President of the Pali Text Society, was the person whose book initiated my study of 'sati' and other Pali terms.
He writes:
"To find a similarly succinct definition of mindfulness in the texts of early Buddhism is not so easy. Such definitions as there are are rather different incharacter. In response to the question ‘what is the faculty of sati?’ we are told that someone who has sati ‘possesses perfect sati and understanding: he is someone who remembers and recollects what was done and said long before’ (S V 197–98). Another early response to a direct question about the characteristics of sati is found in the Milindapanha (Mil 37–38) where it is explained that sati has two characteristics (lakkhana): ‘calling to mind’ (apilapana) and ‘taking possession’(upaganhana). Thus sati is explained as calling to mind wholesome and unwholesome qualities such that the meditator is in a position to know which qualities are the ones he should pursue and which are the ones he should not; this is likened to the manner in which a king’s treasurer constantly reminds the king of his glory and property. Secondly, sati is said to follow the outcome of qualities andso to know which qualities are beneficial and which are not with the result that the meditator can remove those which are not helpful and take possession of those which are helpful; this is likened to the manner in which a king’s adviser keeps the king informed about what is and is not beneficial.The early Abhidhamma literature (see Dhs 16) lists a number of terms that are intended to illustrate the nature of sati and which are of some interest: recollection (anussati), recall (patissati), remembrance (saranata), keeping in mind (dharanata), absence of floating (apilapanata), absence of forgetfulness (asammussanata).
These ancient definitions and the Abhidhamma list of terms seem to be rather at odds with the modern clinical psychotherapeutic definition of mindfulness, and even perhaps with the more recent Buddhist definitions of mindfulness offered by way of exposition of the practice of satipatthana."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/99110733/On-S ... ethin-2011" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Another place where Rupert Gethin explains the original meaning of 'sati' is his excellent book 'The Buddhist Path to Awakening':
"What the Milindapanha account is suggesting, I think, is that sati should be understood as what allows awareness of the full range and extent of dhammas; sati is an awareness of things in relation to things, and hence an awareness of their relative value. Applied to the satipatthanas presumably what this means is that sati is what causes the practitioner of yoga to 'remember' that any feeling he may experience exists in relation to a whole variety or world of feelings that may be skilful or unskilful, with faults or faultless, relatively inferior or refined, dark or pure. The idea is probably clearest with the regard to feeling (vedana), but, of course, should be extended to cover body (kaya), mind (citta) and dhammas."
That is a very odd response. Ven Bodhi is not obviously, nor by implication conflating sati, with anupassanā, and certainly not that you have shown.Dmytro wrote:I don't need it.tiltbillings wrote:I do not see a conflation with what Ven Bodhi has had to say. You'll need to spell it out.
That's right. It's remembering in relationship to the other seven path factors.tiltbillings wrote:Which is to say that sati is not simply remembering.
The interesting issue is: what does "remembering' mean? What does "remembering" mean in terms of the practice? Dmytro seems to quotes Wallace approvingly:danieLion wrote:That's right. It's remembering in relationship to the other seven path factors.tiltbillings wrote:Which is to say that sati is not simply remembering.
And as I said: Okay. He described three different functions, all of which can, to some degree depending upon what is being done in terms of one's practice, overlap. It is this one -- present-centered recollection in the sense of maintaining unwavering attention to a present reality -- that is the meditative core of what is called vipassana meditation, but that does not mean the other two are not also at play to varying degrees.Dmytro wrote:A mindful balance: What did the Buddha really mean by "mindfulness?"
Alan Wallace
http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha344.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The primary meaning of sati, on the other hand, is recollection, nonforgetfulness. This includes retrospective memory of things in the past, prospectively remembering to do something in the future, and present-centered recollection in the sense of maintaining unwavering attention to a present reality. The opposite of mindfulness is forgetfulness, so mindfulness applied to the breath, for instance, involves continuous, unwavering attention to the respiration. Mindfulness may be used to sustain bare attention (manasikara), but nowhere do traditional Buddhist sources equate mindfulness with such attention.
Well, you may think what you want, but I know my needs very well. If you would like me to clarify something, please say so.tiltbillings wrote:That is a very odd response. Ven Bodhi is not obviously nor by implication conflating sati with anupassanā, and certainly not that you have shown.Dmytro wrote:I don't need it.tiltbillings wrote:I do not see a conflation with what Ven Bodhi has had to say. You'll need to spell it out.
tilt wrote:That is a very odd response. Ven Bodhi is not obviously nor by implication conflating sati with anupassanā, and certainly not that you have shown.Dmytro wrote:I don't need it.
I think we are having a miscommunication here, and I apologize. Let me clarify. I am asking to you clarify your suggestion Ven Bodhi is conflating things, because the text you quoted did not clarify anything in terms of your statement: "Well, Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi remains a pupil of Ven. Nyanaponika, who conflated 'sati' with 'bare attention'." It is this statement that needs clarification so I can see your point about the possible "conflation."Well, you may think what you want, but I know my needs very well. If you would like me to clarify something, please say so.
There indeed seems to be a miscommunication.tiltbillings wrote:I think we are having a miscommunication here, and I apologize. Let me clarify. I am asking to you clarify your suggestion Ven Bodhi is conflating things, because the text you quoted did not clarify anything in terms of your statement: "Well, Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi remains a pupil of Ven. Nyanaponika, who conflated 'sati' with 'bare attention'." It is this statement that needs clarification so I can see your point about the possible "conflation."
Satipatthana-Vibhanga clearly shows that 'sati' isn't a part of 'anupassana', and these two play very different roles, though they work together.We should remember that sati, in the context of satipaṭṭhāna practice, is always practiced as part of an’anupassanā,’ and this word helps to bring out the role of sati.
What Ven Bodhi said:Dmytro wrote:
The passage from Satipatthana-Vibhanga I quoted illustrates the key misinterpretation by the English Pali translation tradition - in the words of Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi:
Satipatthana-Vibhanga clearly shows that 'sati' isn't a part of 'anupassana', and these two play very different roles, though they work together.We should remember that sati, in the context of satipaṭṭhāna practice, is always practiced as part of an’anupassanā,’ and this word helps to bring out the role of sati.