judgment-free awareness

[tiltbillings]

Thus, although sati furnishes the necessary information for a wise deployment of right effort, and will monitor the countermeasures by noting if these are excessive or deficient, sati nevertheless remains an aloof quality of uninvolved, detached observation. Sati can interact with other, much more active factors of the mind, yet by itself it does not interfere.

Uninvolved and detached receptivity...

Mind the gap.

This is a quote? If so, please cite its source.

[daverupa]

Thus, although sati furnishes the necessary information for a wise deployment of right effort, and will monitor the countermeasures by noting if these are excessive or deficient, sati nevertheless remains an aloof quality of uninvolved, detached observation. Sati can interact with other, much more active factors of the mind, yet by itself it does not interfere.

Uninvolved and detached receptivity...

Mind the gap.

This is a quote? If so, please cite its source.

Apologies - I've provided it since it's missing from the earlier quote given by bodom.

[tiltbillings]

Apologies - I've provided it since it's missing from the earlier quote given by bodom.

And to add what is missing from your quote:

• Sati can interact with other, much more active factors of the mind, yet by
  itself it does not interfere.
  
  Uninvolved and detached receptivity as one of the crucial characteristics
  of sati forms an important aspect in the teachings of several
  modern meditation teachers and scholars. They emphasize that
  the purpose of sati is solely to make things conscious, not to eliminate
  them. Sati silently observes,like a spectator at a play, without in
  any way interfering. Some refer to this non-reactive feature of sati as
  "choiceless" awareness. "Choiceless" in the sense that with such
  awareness one remains impartially aware, without reacting with
  likes or dislikes. Such silent and non-reactive observation can at
  times suffice to curb unwholesomeness, so that an application of sati
  can have quite active consequences. Yet sati's activity is confined to
  detached observation. That is, sati does not change experience, it
  deepens it.
  
  This non-interfering quality of sati is required to enable one clearly
  to observe the building up of reactions and their underlying
  motives. As soon as one becomes in any way involved in a reaction,
  the detached observational vantage point is immediately lost. The
  detached receptivity of sati enables one to step back from the situation
  at hand and thereby to become an unbiased observer of one's
  subjective involvement and of the entire situation. This detached
  distance allows for a more objective perspective, a characteristic
  illustrated in the above-mentioned simile of climbing a tower.
  
  This detached but receptive stance of satipatthiina constitutes a
  "middle path", since it avoids the two extremes of suppression and
  reaction." The receptivity of sati, in the absence of both suppression
  and reaction, allows personal shortcomings and unjustified reactions
  to unfold before the watchful stance of the meditator, without
  being suppressed by the affective investment inherent in one's
  self-image. Maintaining the presence of sati in this way is closely related
  to the ability to tolerate a high degree of "cognitive dissonance",
  since the witnessing of one's own shortcomings ordinarily
  leads to unconscious attempts at reducing the resulting feeling of
  discomfort by avoiding or even altering the perceived information.
  
  This shift towards a more objective and uninvolved perspective
  introduces an important element of sobriety into self-observation.
  The element of "sobriety" inherent in the presence of sati comes up
  in an entertaining canonical description of a particular celestial
  realm, whose divine inhabitants get so "intoxicated" with sensual
  indulgence that they lose all sati. As a consequence of being without
  sati, they fall from their elevated celestial position and are reborn in
  a lower realm. The reverse case is also documented in another discourse,
  in which negligent monks, reborn in an inferior celestial realm, on regaining
  their sati are at once able to ascend to a higher realm. Both these instances
  point to the edifying power of sati and its wholesome repercussions.
  
  Sati as a mental quality is closely related to attention (manasikiira),
  a basic function which, according to the Abhidhammic analysis, is
  present in any kind of mental state. This basic faculty of ordinary
  attention characterizes the initial split seconds of bare cognizing of
  an object, before one begins to recognize, identify, and conceptualize.
  Sati can be understood as a further development and temporal
  extension of this type of attention, thereby adding clarity and depth
  to the usually much too short fraction of time occupied by bare attention
  in the perceptual process. The resemblance in function between
  sati and attention is also reflected in the fact that wise
  attention (yoniso manasikiira) parallels several aspects of satipaithiina
  contemplation, such as directing attention to antidotes for the
  hindrances, becoming aware of the impermanent nature of the
  aggregates or of the sense-spheres, establishing the awakening factors,
  and contemplating the four noble truths.
  
  This "bare attention" aspect of sati has an intriguing potential,
  since it is capable of leading to a "de-automatization" of mental
  mechanisms." Through bare sati one is able to see things just as they
  are, unadulterated by habitual reactions and projections. By bringing
  the perceptual process into the full light of awareness, one becomes
  conscious of automatic and habitual responses to perceptual
  data. Full awareness of these automatic responses is the necessary
  preliminary step to changing detrimental mental habits.
  
  Sati as bare attention is particularly relevant to restraint at the
  sense doors (indriya samvara). In this aspect of the gradual path, the
  practitioner is encouraged to retain bare sati in regard to all sense-input.
  Through the simple presence of undisrupted and bare mindfulness,
  the mind is "restrained" from amplifying and proliferating
  the received information in various ways. This guardianship role of
  sati in relation to sense-input is alluded to in those similes that declare
  saiipaithana to be the proper "pasture" for a meditator and
  which compare sati to the gatekeeper of a town.
  
  According to the discourses, the purpose of restraining the senses
  is to avoid the arising of desires (abhijjha) and discontent
  (domanassa). Such freedom from desires and discontent is also an aspect
  of satipaiihiina contemplation, mentioned in the "definition"
  part of the discourse. Thus the absence of reactions under the influence
  of desires and discontent is a common feature of both satipaithana
  and sense-restraint. This goes to show that there is a
  considerable degree of overlap between these two activities.
  
  To sum up, sati entails an alert but receptive equanimous observation.
  Viewed from the context of actual practice, a predominantly
  receptive sati is then enlivened by the quality of being diligent
  (atapi), and supported by a foundation in concentration (samadhi).
  Analayo SATIPATTHANA, pages 58-61.

[daverupa]

Apologies - I've provided it since it's missing from the earlier quote given by bodom.

And to add what is missing from your quote:

Hmm... but that was already posted just a little bit ago... minus the purple bits, of course... now we finally have the whole thing, but also two posts that are inadequate and wordy... plus all this meta.

Sorry about all this.

[tiltbillings]

Apologies - I've provided it since it's missing from the earlier quote given by bodom.

And to add what is missing from your quote:

Hmm... but that was already posted just a little bit ago... minus the purple bits, of course... now we finally have the whole thing, but also two posts that are inadequate and wordy... plus all this meta.

Sorry about all this.

No need to be sorry. Analayo's wordy words are still worth reading, and those who don't like his stuff and who don't like reading long texts won't read it anyway.

(In looking again at Bodom's msg, I knew I should have stayed in bed longer. I did not catch the Bodom's quote was an edited version of what it in the book. You are quite correct, it is a bit repetitive. I simply did have bit I quoted in PDF. Oh, well. I see a nap in my future.)

[Mkoll]

Context is everything.

And this is another important shortcoming of secular mindfulness practice. It is virtually divorced from the other important parts of Buddhism, that of virtue and wisdom. Sure, the teachers may give the Buddha's teachings some lip service but it is minimal at best and downright distorted at worst. NB that this is just my experience.

It's like removing the bran and germ from whole wheat berries when turning them into white flour.

We are not talking about 'secular mindfulness practice" here.

I never said you were.

All the same, I will try to remember not to quote another person's comment to make a point that's unrelated to their comment.

[last]

" ...may do little to help eradicate the root causes of the greedy..." So, basically the purpose of meditation practice is to get a perception that you can then think about as a way of gaining insight into it.

"And what is the perception of inconstancy? There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — reflects thus: 'Form is inconstant, feeling is inconstant, perception is inconstant, fabrications are inconstant, consciousness is inconstant.' Thus he remains focused on inconstancy with regard to the five clinging-aggregates. This, Ananda, is called the perception of inconstancy.

"And what is the perception of not-self? There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — reflects thus: 'The eye is not-self, forms are not-self; the ear is not-self, sounds are not-self; the nose is not-self, aromas are not-self; the tongue is not-self, flavors are not-self; the body is not-self, tactile sensations are not-self; the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self.' Thus he remains focused on not-selfness with regard to the six inner & outer sense media. This is called the perception of not-self.

One can do that, and it has its place, but there is also simply directly seeing these things without the medium conceptual thinking, and it is that which is the transformative, freeing insight.

So you can directly see that the ideas are not-self, without the medium conceptual thinking?

[tiltbillings]

So you can directly see that the ideas are not-self, without the medium conceptual thinking?

What can you see directly?

[last]

So you can directly see that the ideas are not-self, without the medium conceptual thinking?

What can you see directly?

I never claimed to see anything directly, but you said that "there is also simply directly seeing these things without the medium conceptual thinking".

So instead of asking me, you should answer, which of the following can you see directly?

Form is inconstant, feeling is inconstant, perception is inconstant, fabrications are inconstant, consciousness is inconstant ;The eye is not-self, forms are not-self; the ear is not-self, sounds are not-self; the nose is not-self, aromas are not-self; the tongue is not-self, flavors are not-self; the body is not-self, tactile sensations are not-self; the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self.

[tiltbillings]

So you can directly see that the ideas are not-self, without the medium conceptual thinking?

What can you see directly?

I never claimed to see anything directly, but you said that "there is also simply directly seeing these things without the medium conceptual thinking".

So instead of asking me, you should answer, which of the following can you see directly?

I asked you to get some sort of handle on where you are coming from. That is still remains unclear.

Form is inconstant, feeling is inconstant, perception is inconstant, fabrications are inconstant, consciousness is inconstant ;The eye is not-self, forms are not-self; the ear is not-self, sounds are not-self; the nose is not-self, aromas are not-self; the tongue is not-self, flavors are not-self; the body is not-self, tactile sensations are not-self; the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self.

The Buddha gave these instructions: "Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya." What one sees directly, following these teachings, is the experience of interdependent rise and fall of the nama/rupa, the all. This is not an intellectual/conceptual process, as in: "oh, there is some "form" and that is anicca and it is anatta."

Take a look at this: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 56#p262125 and http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p271272 It may give you some idea of what I am driving at.

[Sanjay PS]

If one keeps on steadfastly walking on the Noble Eight Fold Path of Sila , Samadhi and Panna , all kinds of doubts and vexations gradually loose their hold (or rather correctly said, the letting go of all views becomes that much more easier )

Faith is an all important ingredient , which one should have in generous , unending copious measures in their hearts . The other day , i was reading about the last years of Venerable Ajhan Chah , the heart stirred so much , that the salt that rolled down , were nothing but the unshakeable drops of resolve , born of the nectar of faith.

i have come across quite a few posts that say the teachings of Venerable Ajhan Chah and other Great Saints of Dhamma is found to be contrary . If one only reads through using the lens of the language , then yes , the words will sound contrary . However , it is not with the lens of language or with the hearing aid of the ear that one should infer that what is being said , it is wisdom that makes the all important difference in imbibing the Noblest Teaching that one can ever come across . All we have to do is to keep reviewing our sincere resolve of our journey amidst the high mountains and valleys of Sila , Samadhi and Panna .

sanjay

[Sanjay PS]

The heart of the path is SO simple. No need for long explanations. Give up clinging to love and hate, just rest with things as they are. That is all I do in my own practice. Do not try to become anything. Do not make yourself into anything. Do not be a meditator. Do not become enlightened. When you sit, let it be. When you walk, let it be. Grasp at nothing. Resist nothing. Of course, there are dozens of meditation techniques to develop samadhi and many kinds of vipassana. But it all comes back to this - just let it all be. Step over here where it is cool, out of the battle. - Ajahn Chah STILL FOREST POOL

“Patiently allowing utterly frustrating dilemmas to be present in our here-and-now, judgment-free awareness – this is the path of purification.” -- Ajahn Munindo

These words are so full of deep wisdom . Not easy to reach such depths, but the effort has to be on . Thank you Tilt for sharing these enriching quotes . Arhant , Venerable Ajhan Chah , as like all and every Arhant , stresses the most essential pre-requsiite in reaching such depths ; " Morality is the Father and Mother of Nature "

No preaching to it , no blind faith , no emotional bargains , just the fact of the matter , should someone really be serious in progressing on the path of Dhamma.

sanjay

[last]

A practical view on karma,
rebirth and nirvana from
Ajahn Chah

The Buddha comprehensively investigated
conditioned phenomena and so was able to let it
all go. The five khandhas were let go of, and the
knowing carried on merely as an impartial
observer of the process. If he experienced
something positive, he didn’t become positive
along with it. He simply observed and remained
aware. If he experienced something negative, he
didn’t become negative. And why was that?
Because his mind had been cut free from such
causes and conditions. He’d penetrated the Truth.
The conditions leading to rebirth no longer
existed.
This is the knowing that is certain and reliable.
This is a mind that is truly at peace. This is what
is not born, doesn’t age, doesn’t get sick, and
doesn’t die.This is neither cause nor effect, nor
!dependent on cause and effect. It is independent
of the process of causal conditioning. The causes
then cease with no conditioning remaining. This
mind is above and beyond birth and death, above
and beyond happiness and sorrow, above and
beyond both good and evil. What can you say? It
is beyond the limitations of language to describe
it. All supporting conditions have ceased and any
attempt to describe it will merely lead to
attachment. The words used then become the
theory of the mind.

Source: ajahnchah.org

So judgment-free awareness is not born?
And it doesn't die?

It is born at the moment when a person stops responding to the objects sensed by the 6 senses.

It dies at the moment when a person starts responding to the same.

[piotr]

Hi,

My problem with the topic are the chosen words in it. Miriam-Webster Dictionary defines judgement as:

• : an opinion or decision that is based on careful thought
  
  : the act or process of forming an opinion or making a decision after careful thought : the act of judging something or someone
  
  : the ability to make good decisions about what should be done
  
  — http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/judgment

I have no idea why one would like to make oneself inconsiderate or foolish when it comes to decision what kind of actions one would like to take. Yet I understand that this is not the point of the quotes provided by tiltbillings. But it seems to me that the word choice done in OP is quite bad (Yes, this is a judgement ).

[tiltbillings]

In reference to the above two msgs, this section is Insight Meditation, which is what, I do believe, the OP quotes are about. It certainly is the context within which I am referencing them. I certainly do not need to buy into or defend Ven Chah's particular take on Buddhist soteriology, as we see it here. That is not what I am referencing in the quote by him in the OP. In this context, just to clarify, I am talking about meditation practice.