PDA

View Full Version : Nibbana: Buddha's word about it ..(plus Anapanasati)



Stefos
29 Apr 12, 01:12
Hi everyone,

I have undertaken to again revisit Nibanna and what it means.

In the past, I've had numerous discussions with Atheists who supposedly possessed an understanding about this matter, only to find out they did not cite any source material at all (i.e. Suttas, Abhidamma or commentaries).

So, In the Ittivutaka, the Buddha mentions "The Unborn", here it is:

"There exists, monks, that which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned."

The Buddha goes on to say that essentially this is the goal of meditation and of course sila, panna, etc.

Now, My understanding is that in Theravada and in the pre "18 schools period" the 4 brahmaviharas are mentioned as meditations, metta-bhavana, the kasinas and jhanas are mentioned also. However, the Buddha mentoned Vipassana as the meditation of release from Samsara, I believe.

If Vipassana is the meditation of release from Samsara, how do the rest of the meditational "topics" per se meet with that towards a Nibbana goal?

Sorry for the verboseness but I really see no other way of expressing this! :mrgreen:

Thank you,
Stefos ;D

Element
29 Apr 12, 05:15
I have undertaken to again revisit Nibanna and what it means.

So, In the Ittivutaka, the Buddha mentions "The Unborn", here it is:

"There exists, monks, that which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned."
hi Stefos

the "Unborn" is certainly one definition of Nibbana but, more simply, the Nikayas also define Nibbana as the cessation of greed, hatred & delusion. therefore, the mind without greed, hatred & delusion experiences the unborn (of non-becoming) and remaining unconditioned by greed, hatred & delusion.

the more simple definition of Nibbana may make the more esoteric definition of Nibbana more clear


Now, My understanding is that in Theravada and in the pre "18 schools period" the 4 brahmaviharas are mentioned as meditations, metta-bhavana, the kasinas and jhanas are mentioned also. However, the Buddha mentoned Vipassana as the meditation of release from Samsara, I believe. If Vipassana is the meditation of release from Samsara, how do the rest of the meditational "topics" per se meet with that towards a Nibbana goal?
'Vipassana' means 'clearly seeing' the impermanence (rise & fall; appearance & disappearance), unsatisfactoriness & selflessness of phenomema. Jhana (mental stillness, purity & clarity) enables excellent vipassana to occur because if the mind cannot remain constantly clear, then constantly seeing the impermanence of mental objects cannot occur.

Jhana also causes certain mental objects (such as feelings) to manifest in way that is more pronounced than normal and therefore allows the true nature of these mental objects (such as feelings) to be seen more clearly.

the 4 brahmaviharas simply (but indirectly) help develop jhana because ill-will/hatred/anger/etc are obstacles to jhana. but to develop jhana, the mind must practise more than just the 4 brahmaviharas. the mind must also practise letting go

kind regards

;D

Deshy
29 Apr 12, 14:34
If Vipassana is the meditation of release from Samsara, how do the rest of the meditational "topics" per se meet with that towards a Nibbana goal?



I am not too sure if the statement "Vipassana is the meditation of release" is accurate. IMO, the prominence here is jhana. "Jhana-induced vipassana is the path to release".

There are a lot of debates as to what the Buddha's unique discovery was: jhana or vipassana. I have a feeling the kind of jhana leading to wisdom is unique to Buddhism because real jhana is not achievable without the noble 8-fold path which the Buddha discovered. Sila (morality), samadhi (tranquility) and panna (wisdom) are developed through the 8-fold path. Without mastering the 8-fold path, real jhana is not possible.

Vipassana (direct insight) happens naturally in a mind that is free from the five hindrances. It is the five hindrances that nourish ignorance. Jhana occurs in meditation as the mind becomes free from the five hindrances. Therefore, it is jhana-induced insight that leads to Nibbana, imo.

In MN 36, the Buddha recalls rapture and pleasure of jhana and how he discerned jhana as the path to awakening:


"I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then following on that memory came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.'

Deshy
29 Apr 12, 14:42
Although the metta-bhavana and numerous kasinas are used by some, the Buddha gave prominence to the breath as the meditation object in the Anapanasati sutta.

Goofaholix
30 Apr 12, 02:13
Nibbana meaning cooling off, the word comes from letting your pot stand for a while to cool down after cooking, you'd nibbana it for a while. Another metaphor for Nibbana is a candle flame going out, as has been pointed out this is the extinguishing of greed, aversion, and delusion.

Vipassana means clear seeing as has been pointed out, you don't need meditation for clear seeing to take place, however in it's modern usage Vipassana has come to mean a mode of meditation that is designed to promote clear seeing. Particularly clear seeing of impermanence, unsatisfactioriness, and not self which leads to release from greed, aversion, and delusion.

Jhana can also contribute to clear seeing but the trouble is you need to put aside a lot of time and be in condusive conditions with the right state of mind and the guidance of a teacher to make it work and not get caught up in it. This is why in modern times, for lay people at least, Vipassana oriented techniques or a Vipassana oriented approach are encouraged by most teachers.

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 02:32
Hi everyone,

The Buddha did mention that "Here unconditioned consciousness ceases to exist" (See Anguttara & Digha Nikayas, I believe).

A particularly old debate is "Gradual vs. Sudden" enlightenment, which of course, really is theoretical in once sense because of the actual need for practice. Please don't misunderstand me to think that my definition of practice means "blood, sweat & tears" as it does not.

Krishnamurti was keen to describe "practice" as something one did without force and without a fixed point, something that I all to often see in reading Theravada works from various authors, not the Nikayas themselves. Interesting point!

Pre-Nibbanic states are not new to "Buddhism" as the Buddhas' teachers were not Buddhists and from my research, the Buddha took up an Upanishadic stance in accepting them as teachers and in doing pranayama or as the Digha Nikaya states "experiencing violent winds when stopping the in/out breaths out of the mouth, mouth & nose, and mouth/nose/ears and mouth/nose/ears/closing the eyes"

Comments?
Thank you,
Stefos

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 02:35
Hi Deshy,

No sir/ma'am/miss I don't believe so.

If one carefully reads the Sattipatthana Sutta, the Buddha put emphasis on awareness, not whether the breath is long or short.

Don't mean to be polemical but I do think this is an EXTREMELY important point.

Thank you,
Stefos

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 02:41
hi Stefos

the "Unborn" is certainly one definition of Nibbana but, more simply, the Nikayas also define Nibbana as the cessation of greed, hatred & delusion. therefore, the mind without greed, hatred & delusion experiences the unborn (of non-becoming) and remaining unconditioned by greed, hatred & delusion.

the more simple definition of Nibbana may make the more esoteric definition of Nibbana more clear


'Vipassana' means 'clearly seeing' the impermanence (rise & fall; appearance & disappearance), unsatisfactoriness & selflessness of phenomema. Jhana (mental stillness, purity & clarity) enables excellent vipassana to occur because if the mind cannot remain constantly clear, then constantly seeing the impermanence of mental objects cannot occur.

Jhana also causes certain mental objects (such as feelings) to manifest in way that is more pronounced than normal and therefore allows the true nature of these mental objects (such as feelings) to be seen more clearly.

the 4 brahmaviharas simply (but indirectly) help develop jhana because ill-will/hatred/anger/etc are obstacles to jhana. but to develop jhana, the mind must practise more than just the 4 brahmaviharas. the mind must also practise letting go

kind regards

;D

Hi Element,

I believe that Nibbana is also a Transcendental experience also and not only a "release" from self sir/ma'am/miss.

I don't perceive that the Buddha taught the 8 fold path, jhanas, metta-bhavana, etc. only to say "Well, Nibbana is a psycho-physiological state and when you die, "you're" dead, in truth." Please understand that I am not stating that YOU are saying this! I'm only rhetorically speaking, as it were.

The Buddha entered into ParaNibbana at his death. Not only this but the iddhis caused by the Buddha speak of a transcendental background & source as well.

What do you think?
Thank you,
Stefos

Deshy
30 Apr 12, 07:57
Hi Deshy,

No sir/ma'am/miss I don't believe so.

If one carefully reads the Sattipatthana Sutta, the Buddha put emphasis on awareness, not whether the breath is long or short.

Don't mean to be polemical but I do think this is an EXTREMELY important point.

Thank you,
Stefos

The "EXTREMELY important point" IMO is that without noble right concentration (samma samadhi), vipassana can be quite fruitless. This is why I said "jhana-induced vipassana".

Element
30 Apr 12, 11:30
If one carefully reads the Sattipatthana Sutta, the Buddha put emphasis on awareness, not whether the breath is long or short.

Don't mean to be polemical but I do think this is an EXTREMELY important point.
hi Stefos

you may not believe me but the Buddha did not actually speak the Satipatthana Sutta because it does not bear the characteristics of a sutta spoken by Buddha, i.e., in proper sequence & order. the Satipatthana Sutta is simply a disorderly compilation of various teachings Buddha gave. the path to Nibbana cannot be understood by following the Satipatthana Sutta

the Buddha gave prominence to the breath as the meditation object in the Anapanasati sutta.

in the Anapanasati sutta, Buddha said:


Anapanasati that one has developed & made much of perfects the four foundations of mindfulness

in SN 54.11, it is reported Buddha said:


Bhikkhus, if any wanderers of other sects ask you: "In what dwelling, friends, did the Blessed One generally dwell during the rains residence? - being asked thus, you should answer those wanderers thus: "During the rains residence, friends, the Blessed One generally dwelt in the concentration by mindfulness with breathing".

If anyone speaking rightly could say of anything: "It is a noble dwelling, a divine dwelling, the Tathagata's dwelling", it is of concentration by mindfulness with breathing that one could rightly say this.
what is an EXTREMELY important point is this, namely, the Anapanasati sutta includes the vipassana meditation resulting in Nibbana, in which the Satipatthana sutta does not:


FOURTH TETRAD

(13) He trains himself; constantly contemplating impermanence I shall breathe in. He trains himself; constantly contemplating impermanence I shall breathe out.

(14) He trains himself; constantly contemplating fading away I shall breathe in. He trains himself: constantly contemplating fading away I shall breathe out.

(15) He trains himself: constantly contemplating quenching [Nibbana] I shall breathe in. He trains himself: constantly contemplating quenching I shall breathe out.

(16) He trains himself: constantly contemplating tossing back I shall breathe in. He trains himself: constantly contemplating tossing back I shall breathe out.

Bhikkhus, this is how Anapanasati that one has developed and made much of has great fruit and great benefit.

thus Buddha taught:


So if a monk should wish: 'May neither my body be fatigued nor my eyes, and may my mind, through lack of clinging, be released from fermentations (asava),' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness with in-&-out breathing.

Dipa Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html)

kind regards ;D

Element
30 Apr 12, 11:46
I don't perceive that the Buddha taught the 8 fold path, jhanas, metta-bhavana, etc. only to say "Well, Nibbana is a psycho-physiological state and when you die, "you're" dead, in truth." Please understand that I am not stating that YOU are saying this! I'm only rhetorically speaking, as it were.
Buddha taught Nibbana is a psychological freedom and, at death: "the five aggregates end."

Buddha taught psychologically:


What I teach now as before, O monks, is [only] suffering and the cessation of [freedom from] suffering.

Alagaddupama Sutta

Buddha taught psychologically:


So then, bhikkhus, the holy life is led not for, gain, honour and fame, not for the endowment of virtues, not for the endowment of concentration, not for the endowment of knowledges and vision. Bhikkhus, it is for the unshakeable release [freedom] of mind that is the essence and fulfilment of the holy life .

The Major Discourse on Heartwood (http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/029-mahasaropama-sutta-e1.html)

Buddha taught:


Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents: what is he on the break-up of the body, after death?

Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form is inconstant... Feeling... Perception... Fabrications... Consciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is unsatisfactory. That which is unsatisfactory has ceased and gone to its end'.

Very good, my friend Yamaka. Very good.

Yamaka Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.085.than.html)


Regards ;D

Element
30 Apr 12, 11:55
Krishnamurti was keen to describe "practice" as something one did without force and without a fixed point, something that I all to often see in reading Theravada works from various authors, not the Nikayas themselves.
This is because the simplicity of the Nikayas are difficult to comprehend where there is a lack of proper trust & discernment.

The Nikayas state about proper concentration:


And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go, attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.

SN 48.9 & 10 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html)


This was said by the Lord...Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu should so investigate that as he investigates, his consciousness is not distracted and diffused externally, and internally not fixed, and so that by not grasping anything he remains undisturbed. If his consciousness is not distracted and diffused externally, and internally not fixed, and if by not grasping anything he remains undisturbed, then there is no coming into existence of birth, ageing, death and suffering in the future. (John D. Ireland)

Iti 3.45 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.3.050-099.than.html)


Now what, monks, is noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions? Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort & right mindfulness — is called noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions.

Maha-cattarisaka Sutta: The Great Forty (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html)

Element
30 Apr 12, 12:09
A particularly old debate is "Gradual vs. Sudden" enlightenment, which of course, really is theoretical in once sense because of the actual need for practice.

Pre-Nibbanic states are not new to "Buddhism" as the Buddhas' teachers were not Buddhists and from my research, the Buddha took up an Upanishadic stance in accepting them as teachers and in doing pranayama or as the Digha Nikaya states "experiencing violent winds when stopping the in/out breaths out of the mouth, mouth & nose, and mouth/nose/ears and mouth/nose/ears/closing the eyes"

Comments?
Sure.

Buddha rejected the pranayama that bore him no result. Buddha realised the violent pranayama he formerly practised was a fruitless path. Buddha explained in his 1st sermon:


Bhikkhus, these two extremes ought not to be cultivated by one gone forth from the house-life. What are the two? There is devotion to indulgence of pleasure in the objects of sensual desire, which is inferior, low, vulgar, ignoble and leads to no good; and there is devotion to self-torment, which is painful, ignoble and leads to no good.

Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting Rolling the Wheel of Truth (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html)
Buddha did not teach of "sudden" full enlightenment. Full enlightenment is gradual. But the 1st stage of initial enlightenment, i.e., stream-entry, is certainly sudden. But sudden enlightenment is not full enlightenment. Buddha taught four stages of enlightenment.

Kind regards ;D

Element
30 Apr 12, 20:47
...the Buddha put emphasis on awareness, not whether the breath is long or short. Don't mean to be polemical but I do think this is an EXTREMELY important point.
hi again, Stefos

what exactly is awareness? is it awareness of the discursive mind? what exactly is the purpose or goal of awareness?

in my understanding, when the mind has genuine awareness, it is silent. when the mind is aware & silent, it naturally converges with the in & out breathing

do not many esoteric Hindu traditions designate the breathing in & out as one of the "signs" of God? in Buddhism, the in & out breathing is the preliminary "sign" of right awareness. the Bible reports Jesus Christ "breathed" the Holy Spirit onto his disciples. what is "spirit" other than "breath"? is the Holy Spirit not Anapanasati?

to alienate Anapanasati from 'awareness' does not conform with most meditative traditions

regards ;D

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 23:01
hi again, Stefos

what exactly is awareness? is it awareness of the discursive mind? what exactly is the purpose or goal of awareness?

in my understanding, when the mind has genuine awareness, it is silent. when the mind is aware & silent, it naturally converges with the in & out breathing

do not many esoteric Hindu traditions designate the breathing in & out as one of the "signs" of God? in Buddhism, the in & out breathing is the preliminary "sign" of right awareness. the Bible reports Jesus Christ "breathed" the Holy Spirit onto his disciples. what is "spirit" other than "breath"? is the Holy Spirit not Anapanasati?

to alienate Anapanasati from 'awareness' does not conform with most meditative traditions

regards ;D

It depends essentially Element WHOM you ask, Doesn't it?
The Vedantist says be aware of being, that's it.
The Theravadan says be aware of body, breath, thought, etc.
The Christian says be aware of your fallen nature & God's spirit inside you at all times.

Awareness means various things in various spiritualities sir.

I will agree with you that "genuine" awareness is born from a silent mind or better yet IN silent perception of mind.
I do not believe that the mind converges w/the in & out breath, as the brain (OR mind?) sends out various waves of Theta, Beta, Delta and Alpha wavelengths each brainwave length denotes a different function of brain at least.

The word "Hindu" is inaccurate as "Hindu" denotes a HUGE umbrella encompassing spiritualities which are Atheistic, Nihilistic, and Deistic.

Regarding Jesus, the New Testament says he breathed upon him, in English, however what does the Greek say?
Furthermore, Jesus being God gave them the gift of the Holy Spirit, the New Testament says.

Finally sir, No I am not saying that anapanasati is separate from awareness. The issue is, is that the focus is understanding and not "Gee, that REALLY was a long breath" yes the breath is understood but not obsessed over, If I could say that.

Thank you,
Stefos

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 23:09
Sure.

Buddha rejected the pranayama that bore him no result. Buddha realised the violent pranayama he formerly practised was a fruitless path. Buddha explained in his 1st sermon:


Buddha did not teach of "sudden" full enlightenment. Full enlightenment is gradual. But the 1st stage of initial enlightenment, i.e., stream-entry, is certainly sudden. But sudden enlightenment is not full enlightenment. Buddha taught four stages of enlightenment.

Kind regards ;D

Understood sir.

Enlightenment, according to the Nikayas, is not a fixed point however the "self" does get transcended.

Regarding the "Gradual vs. Sudden" debate:
It all can become a matter of semantics IF one just assumes anything one wants.
I say this in order to put proper perspective on meditation.

Krishnamurti was keen about this point as he disbelieved "methods" to enlightenment.
The man never dismissed meditation or awareness but put them in proper context, if you read his works.

Having said that, Krishnamurti's Choiceless Awareness and Dzogchen's Naked Awareness is the same thing actually.

I believe that what the Buddha taught was also Choiceless Awareness but people have taken it to be a "method" such as many erroneously stating that "concentration is meditation" when it is not, Not according to Buddhadhamma or Krishnamurti or Dzogchen or Vedanta, for that matter.

Be well sir,
Stefos

Goofaholix
30 Apr 12, 23:36
in my understanding, when the mind has genuine awareness, it is silent. when the mind is aware & silent,


Agreed, though one can be aware of a busy thinking mind also but it is harder and when one is there is a sense of silence that is somehow bigger and deeper than all the chatter, which is what I assume you are referring to.



it naturally converges with the in & out breathing

Why? I would would have said it naturally converges on whatever is appropriate to be aware of at the time. If at the time one is practising anapanasati then yes, if practising a different technique then maybe not, if eating lunch or walking or doing any number of other activities then awareness should converge of the activity at hand not on the in & out breathing specifically.



do not many esoteric Hindu traditions designate the breathing in & out as one of the "signs" of God? in Buddhism, the in & out breathing is the preliminary "sign" of right awareness. the Bible reports Jesus Christ "breathed" the Holy Spirit onto his disciples. what is "spirit" other than "breath"? is the Holy Spirit not Anapanasati?

to alienate Anapanasati from 'awareness' does not conform with most meditative traditions


The breathing in & out is a preliminary sign of being alive, placing ones awareness on breathing in & out is a very good way of developing the minds capacity to be aware, probably the best way to start for beginners, but it's not the only way. Understanding the difference between the process of breathing and the process of awareness that monitors breathing among other things doesn't consititute alienation, it sows a deeper understanding of the mind-body processes.

In my experience giving all importance to one meditation technique is a good recipe for getting into a rut with it.

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 23:39
Sure.

Buddha rejected the pranayama that bore him no result. Buddha realised the violent pranayama he formerly practised was a fruitless path. Buddha explained in his 1st sermon:


Buddha did not teach of "sudden" full enlightenment. Full enlightenment is gradual. But the 1st stage of initial enlightenment, i.e., stream-entry, is certainly sudden. But sudden enlightenment is not full enlightenment. Buddha taught four stages of enlightenment.

Kind regards ;D

Hi again Element,

A BIG disclaimer first: This is a sincere question coming from a sincere heart. I don't desire to argue. PLEASE understand this. Thank you.

I'm curious to know something sir, miss, ma'am:

Do you believe that Theravada is the "original" teaching of the Buddha?

My research has shown that there were other "schools" who held different Abhidhammas who were Pre-Mahayana.
Ch'an, Dzogchen, Mahayana, etc. reflect another aspect of Buddhist school.

It seems as if sometimes modern Buddhists say "This is it" and "This is not it" yet I see no research done. Honestly.

The Buddha, to me, taught ONE specific goal and ONE specific body of teachings not a syncretistic system of "buddhism" such as what my friend told me which is practiced in some places in Thailand nor the, in my opinion, the Pure Land cult. Indonesia also is notorious for syncretism as well.

Ultimately, I want to understand what the Buddha originally taught and see how changes happened.

Thank you,
Stefos

Stefos
30 Apr 12, 23:46
Agreed, though one can be aware of a busy thinking mind also but it is harder and when one is there is a sense of silence that is somehow bigger and deeper than all the chatter, which is what I assume you are referring to.



Why? I would would have said it naturally converges on whatever is appropriate to be aware of at the time. If at the time one is practising anapanasati then yes, if practising a different technique then maybe not, if eating lunch or walking or doing any number of other activities then awareness should converge of the activity at hand not on the in & out breathing specifically.



The breathing in & out is a preliminary sign of being alive, placing ones awareness on breathing in & out is a very good way of developing the minds capacity to be aware, probably the best way to start for beginners, but it's not the only way. Understanding the difference between the process of breathing and the process of awareness that monitors breathing among other things doesn't consititute alienation, it sows a deeper understanding of the mind-body processes.

In my experience giving all importance to one meditation technique is a good recipe for getting into a rut with it.

My experience with breath and mind:

I have panic attacks and I perceive that when I have panic attacks the breath is erratic and is slower unless my panic spikes and then the breathing becomes faster until full blown panic ensues. Not a fun place to be, let me tell you!

When angry, I notice the breath becoming more "deliberate" in the in and out breath.

To me, "watching the breath" is not Anapanasati, it is "watching the breath." To me, REAL Anapanasati is awareness of breath, body, etc.
I really do not appreciate concentration being taught as meditation, i.e. in many modern "meditation" groups.
It simply and truly is not.

The Sutta is deep. "Watching the breath" is not.

Thank you,
Stefos

Goofaholix
01 May 12, 00:21
I have panic attacks and I perceive that when I have panic attacks the breath is erratic and is slower unless my panic spikes and then the breathing becomes faster until full blown panic ensues. Not a fun place to be, let me tell you!

When angry, I notice the breath becoming more "deliberate" in the in and out breath.

This is a good example of how awareness can help one identify a problem early on, because you've learned to be aware of the breathing you can identify a problem arising early on. The same is true of awareness of the sensations in the body, you might notice a faster heartbeat, tightness in the stomach, heat etc.

The idea is when you notice this is to place your awareness on the sensations in the body or the breathing etc rather than on the situation that is triggering it, the thoughts, the story etc. Get interested in the arising and passing away that you can observe in the body and observe them objectively without reacting further and they will cease to control the outcome.

I've never had a panic attack myself but I do believe this approach as taught by the Buddha can help anyone overcome these kinds of things.

Deshy
01 May 12, 04:41
My experience with breath and mind:

I have panic attacks and I perceive that when I have panic attacks the breath is erratic and is slower unless my panic spikes and then the breathing becomes faster until full blown panic ensues. Not a fun place to be, let me tell you!

When angry, I notice the breath becoming more "deliberate" in the in and out breath.

To me, "watching the breath" is not Anapanasati, it is "watching the breath." To me, REAL Anapanasati is awareness of breath, body, etc.
I really do not appreciate concentration being taught as meditation, i.e. in many modern "meditation" groups.
It simply and truly is not.

The Sutta is deep. "Watching the breath" is not.

Thank you,
Stefos

Buddha said in the DO that in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications.


In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications.

MN 44

When you have panic attacks and you focus on the breath and calm the breath, the body calms down. This is why doctors ask you to take a deep breath and count to 10. By calming the breath, your body calms down. This is how you watch your body and breath in anapanasati. This is how you reflect how the breath qualifies as a bodily fabricator - taking fast breaths and watching how they affect your body -taking longer breaths and watching how they affect your body.

Anapanasati is the practice whereas satipatthana is just a set of instructions to be put into effect while doing the practice. As a single sutta alone, satipatthana has no flow. As you practice anapanasati, you essentially put into effect the salient points of the satipatthana sutta.

Deshy
01 May 12, 04:49
I want to understand what the Buddha originally taught



Then I suggest you actively investigate the sutta pitaka of the pali Canon because that is the earliest available source of Dhamma today.

Deshy
01 May 12, 05:12
Quoted from the Samyutta-nikaya


Bhikkhus, Mindfulness with Breathing that one has developed and make much of, has great fruit and great benefit.

Even I myself, before awakening, when not yet enlightened, while still a Bodhisatva (Buddha to be), lived in this dwelling (way of life) for the most part. When I lived mainly in this dwelling, the body was not stressed, the eyes were not strained, and my mind was released from the asava (corruptions, cankers) through non-attachment.

For this reason, should anyone wish "may my body be not stressed, may my eyes be not strained, may my mind be released from the asava through non-attachment," then that person ought to attend carefully in his heart to this Mindfulness with Breathing meditation

Element
01 May 12, 10:30
I do not believe that the mind converges w/the in & out breath...I am not saying that anapanasati is separate from awareness. The issue is, is that the focus is understanding and not "Gee, that REALLY was a long breath"...

Having said that, Krishnamurti's Choiceless Awareness and Dzogchen's Naked Awareness is the same thing actually. I believe that what the Buddha taught was also Choiceless Awareness but people have taken it to be a "method" such as many erroneously stating that "concentration is meditation" when it is not, Not according to Buddhadhamma or Krishnamurti or Dzogchen or Vedanta, for that matter.

Do you believe that Theravada is the "original" teaching of the Buddha? My research has shown that there were other "schools" who held different Abhidhammas who were Pre-Mahayana. Ch'an, Dzogchen, Mahayana, etc. reflect another aspect of Buddhist school.
thank you, Stefos

my reply: the mode of reasoning above seems rather problematic, because, as characterised by the content, it fragments

i have sensed criticism of the Theravada school and i have myself have criticised the Theravada school on the same grounds

the Theravada school has created "techniques" due to not understanding natural manifestation

but the "natural awareness" schools can equally be criticised because they have not taken natural awareness far enough

let us face the facts. KM largely taught a form of introspection for individuals to learn to be aware of "themselves"; to be free of social conditioning & to cultivate internal emotional intelligence. thus, KM recommended choiceless awareness so an individual does not suppress, condemn or indulge but, instead, learns. but what is beyond this level of inquiry, KM rare spoken in detail about

when the mind is naturally silent, with no thoughts, for the whole of the meditation, a natural manifestation occurs. what else is jhana but the internal manifestation of letting go & Anapanasati.

Anapanasati and jhana are not things fragmented from the body of the Buddha's teachings, in the way some & the Theravada often explain. instead, Anapanasati is the direct natural result of abandoning craving & attachment, as prescribed in the Four Noble Truths

the Dhamma states:


Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

Maha-hatthipadopama Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.028.than.html)

to end, there is little benefit in dismissing a road not travelled

warm regards ;D

Element
01 May 12, 11:18
The issue is, is that the focus is understanding and not "Gee, that REALLY was a long breath"
awareness of long & short breathing is actually not part of the real training. awareness of long & short breathing is just a sign that some concentration (i.e., stable unified clear sensitive awareness) is manifesting

the real depth of Anapanasati begins at the 3rd stage, where the Buddha used the words: "He trains himself". the words: "He trains himself" means the three trainings of higher morality, higher concentration & higher wisdom are fully engaged. Higher wisdom is fully engaged because the practitioner has mastered the art of letting go & remaining free of craving

there are fourteen stages of training in samatha & vipassana mentioned below, manifesting in full scale vipassana in the fourth tetrad

this is the Buddha's description of the natural manifestation towards Nibbana. it is wise to not dismiss it. in fact, most do not even understand what the Buddha was explaining in each stage

ask 100 university professors what: "experiencing the mind-conditioner" means and most would probably be clueless

kind regards ;D



FIRST TETRAD

(1) While breathing in long he fully comprehends: I breathe in long. While breathing out long he fully comprehends: I breathe out long.

(2) While breathing in short he fully comprehends: I breathe in short. While breathing out short he fully comprehends: I breathe out short.

(3) He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing all bodies I shall breathe in. He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing all bodies I shall breathe out.

(4) He trains himself: calming the body-conditioner I shall breathe in. He trains himself: calming the body-conditioner I shall breathe out.

SECOND TETRAD

(5) He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing piti I shall breathe in. He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing piti I shall breathe out.

(6) He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing sukha I shall breathe in. He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing sukha I shall breathe out.

(7) He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing the mind-conditioner I shall breathe in. He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing the mind-conditioner I shall breathe out.

(8) He trains himself: calming the mind-conditioner I shall breathe in. He trains himself: calming the mind-conditioner I shall breathe out.

THIRD TETRAD

(9) He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing the mind I shall breathe in. He trains himself: thoroughly experiencing the mind I shall breathe out.

(10) He trains himself: gladdening the mind I shall breathe in. He trains himself: gladdening the mind I shall breathe out.

(11) He trains himself: concentrating the mind I shall breathe in. He trains himself: concentrating the mind I shall breathe out.

(12) He trains himself: liberating the mind I shall breathe in.

FOURTH TETRAD

(13) He trains himself; constantly contemplating impermanence I shall breathe in. He trains himself; constantly contemplating impermanence I shall breathe out.

(14) He trains himself; constantly contemplating fading away I shall breathe in. He trains himself: constantly contemplating fading away I shall breathe out.

(15) He trains himself: constantly contemplating quenching I shall breathe in. He trains himself: constantly contemplating quenching I shall breathe out.

(16) He trains himself: constantly contemplating tossing back I shall breathe in. He trains himself: constantly contemplating tossing back I shall breathe out.

Anapanasati Sutta

Element
01 May 12, 11:19
I would would have said it naturally converges on whatever is appropriate to be aware of at the time. If at the time one is practising anapanasati then yes, if practising a different technique then maybe not, if eating lunch or walking or doing any number of other activities then awareness should converge of the activity at hand not on the in & out breathing specifically.

thanks Goofaholix

mmm...i am not so inclined to agree. if eating lunch, with silent receptive mind, consciousness converges on breathing. similarly, if walking with silent receptive mind, consciousness converges on breathing. if typing, with silent receptive mind, consciousness can converge on breathing. sitting back & reading, rolling the mouse, the mind converges with breathing


Placing ones awareness on breathing in & out is a very good way of developing the minds capacity to be aware, probably the best way to start for beginners, but it's not the only way.
it may sound unusual to say, but, imo, 'placing' ones awareness on breathing is, imo, not really related to Anapanasati. imo, such a phrase is non-sequitur in respect to Buddha-Dhamma because the establishment of mindfulness is maintaining the mind free from craving. There is only one essential practise in supramundane Buddhism, which is abandoning craving, attachment, liking & disliking.

Buddha-Dhamma explains:


Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

Maha-hatthipadopama Sutta

The Four Noble Truths explain:


The origin of suffering, as a noble truth, is this: It is the craving that produces new becoming accompanied by enjoyment and lust; liking this and liking that; in other words, craving for sensual desires, craving to be, craving not to be.

Cessation of suffering, as a noble truth, is this: It is remainderless fading and ceasing, giving up, relinquishing, letting go and rejecting, of that same craving.

This origin of suffering, as a noble truth, can be abandoned. This origin of suffering, as a noble truth, has been abandoned.

Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

Let us take the later stages of Anapanasti as examples. Can placing ones awareness on rapture be practised? Can placing ones awareness on the mind with anger be practised? Of course not. The rapture must manifest as a result of practise; from the purification of the mental formations within the body; from tranquilising the breath/body. The anger must arise before placing awareness on it can occur.

The breathing steps are the same. They do not manifest from "placing ones awareness on the breathing". Imo, placing ones awareness on the breathing is hatha-yoga rather than Buddha's mindfulness practise.

Naturally, we do not have the accept what i am saying. It is just an opinion. Instead, we need to stop placing our awareness on the breathing until the mind becomes aware of the breathing without placing its awareness on the breathing. Then was can verify for ourselves that we do not need to place our awareness on the breathing for the mind to become aware of the breathing.

Further, when the mind becomes aware of the breathing without placing its awareness on the breathing, we can continue to not place awareness on the breathing even though the mind become more & more aware of the breathing.

Imo, this is the Buddha's training, namely, not attaching or clinging to anything. Placing ones awareness on the breathing is, arguably, a form of clinging. And no! It is not a skilful means. It is simply training wheels for beginners. But in real practise where: 'He trains himself', I suggest the mind deliberately does not place attention on the breathing. Instead, the mind remains free & void. When the mind remains free & void, the breathing can certainly come to the mind & the mind can converge with the breathing.

Ajahn Buddhadasa explained:


As for samadhi, an empty mind is the supreme samadhi, the supremely focused firmness of mind. The straining and striving sort of samadhi isn't the real thing and the samadhi which aims at anything other than non-clinging to the five khandas is micchasamadhi (wrong or perverted samadhi). You should be aware that there is both micchasamadhi and sammasamadhi (right or correct samadhi). Only the mind that is empty of grasping at and clinging to 'I' and 'mine' can have the true and perfect stability of sammasamadhi. One who has an empty mind has correct samadhi.

'Heart-wood from the Bo Tree'

Buddha explained:


One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view.

MN 117
These dhammas are connected. These dhammas are not disconnected. These dhammas are not fragmented.

Buddha-Dhamma explains:


Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

Maha-hatthipadopama Sutta


To me, "watching the breath" is not Anapanasati, it is "watching the breath."
It seems we agree. 'Anapanasati' is 'mindfulness with breathing' (rather than mindfulness 'of' breathing).

With metta :joker:

Element
01 May 12, 12:08
Buddha said in the DO that in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications.
Indeed. All skiful dhammas are connected; rather than disconnected. The 2nd link of DO are the objects of the 1st two satipatthana (to be calmed) and the 1st link of DO are the things that the 3rd and 4th satipatthana comprehend & eradicate ;D

Aloka
01 May 12, 12:30
I would would have said it naturally converges on whatever is appropriate to be aware of at the time. If at the time one is practising anapanasati then yes, if practising a different technique then maybe not, if eating lunch or walking or doing any number of other activities then awareness should converge of the activity at hand not on the in & out breathing specifically.

thanks Goofaholix

mmm...i am not so inclined to agree. if eating lunch, with silent receptive mind, consciousness converges on breathing. similarly, if walking with silent receptive mind, consciousness converges on breathing. if typing, with silent receptive mind, consciousness can converge on breathing. sitting back & reading, rolling the mouse, the mind converges with breathing


Hi Element,

I'm not clear about what you're saying here -for example if I am walking with a silent receptive mind and I need to cross a busy road, then my awareness will be primarily focussed with what's happening with the traffic on the road and my passage through it, rather than with breathing.

Just as an off-topic aside, today I came across a sutta I hadn't read before which mentions consciousness -




SN 12.38 Cetana Sutta : Intention.

Staying at Savatthi... [the Blessed One said,] "What one intends, what one arranges, and what one obsesses about: This is a support for the stationing of consciousness. There being a support, there is a landing [or: an establishing] of consciousness. When that consciousness lands and grows, there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.

continued:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.than.html




Anyway, sorry....back to topic again ;D

Goofaholix
01 May 12, 20:14
mmm...i am not so inclined to agree. if eating lunch, with silent receptive mind, consciousness converges on breathing. similarly, if walking with silent receptive mind, consciousness converges on breathing. if typing, with silent receptive mind, consciousness can converge on breathing. sitting back & reading, rolling the mouse, the mind converges with breathing

Why? To what purpose? Why converge with only one activity in the mind-body process? There are four foundations of mindfulness, why limit the mind to a very small part of our experience? Yes one needs to do this if one wants to develop Jhana, but still it’s a means to an end not an end in itself.


it may sound unusual to say, but, imo, 'placing' ones awareness on breathing is, imo, not really related to Anapanasati. imo, such a phrase is non-sequitur in respect to Buddha-Dhamma because the establishment of mindfulness is maintaining the mind free from craving. There is only one essential practise in supramundane Buddhism, which is abandoning craving, attachment, liking & disliking.

True, and the answer is not in the breath it’s in the awareness.


Let us take the later stages of Anapanasti as examples. Can placing ones awareness on rapture be practised? Can placing ones awareness on the mind with anger be practised? Of course not.

Of course it can, though there is no meditation technique described as such. The point of awareness though, as I understand it, is that it is non-discrimantory it is aware of whatever is appropriate to be aware of at the time, it’s not focussed on one object at the exclusion of others.

Of course some meditation techniques encourage placing awareness on one object at the exclusion of others, but this is a means to an end it’s not that the answers are all contained in the breathing if one can only stare at it long enough without flinching. One doesn’t progress on the path by developing breathing, one progresses by developing awareness among other things.


The breathing steps are the same. They do not manifest from "placing ones awareness on the breathing". Imo, placing ones awareness on the breathing is hatha-yoga rather than Buddha's mindfulness practise.

I really don’t see the difference between “converging on” and "placing ones awareness on”, perhaps the former is effortless whereas the latter is with effort, is this what you mean?


Naturally, we do not have the accept what i am saying. It is just an opinion. Instead, we need to stop placing our awareness on the breathing until the mind becomes aware of the breathing without placing its awareness on the breathing. Then was can verify for ourselves that we do not need to place our awareness on the breathing for the mind to become aware of the breathing.


Why get wound up about the breathing at all? if one technique is not really working for you then use a different technique.

However if one does choose the breath as the primary object then for most people there will be a period where you have to deliberately keep placing awareness on the breath before this becomes easy and natural.


Further, when the mind becomes aware of the breathing without placing its awareness on the breathing, we can continue to not place awareness on the breathing even though the mind become more & more aware of the breathing.

This is fine if breathing is the most important activity at the time, and for concentration based sitting meditation breathing is often the most important activity at the time. However when crossing the street or performing brain surgery etc breathing is not the most important activity at the time.



Imo, this is the Buddha's training, namely, not attaching or clinging to anything. Placing ones awareness on the breathing is, arguably, a form of clinging. And no! It is not a skilful means. It is simply training wheels for beginners. But in real practise where: 'He trains himself', I suggest the mind deliberately does not place attention on the breathing. Instead, the mind remains free & void. When the mind remains free & void, the breathing can certainly come to the mind & the mind can converge with the breathing.

This is my point, and the mind can equally not converge with the breathing.



It seems we agree. 'Anapanasati' is 'mindfulness with breathing' (rather than mindfulness 'of' breathing).


Yes, that’s probably a better way of describing it.

Looking at the title of this thread I’m a bit confused how it came to be about one specific meditation technique.

Stefos
01 May 12, 22:58
thank you, Stefos

my reply: the mode of reasoning above seems rather problematic, because, as characterised by the content, it fragments

i have sensed criticism of the Theravada school and i have myself have criticised the Theravada school on the same grounds

the Theravada school has created "techniques" due to not understanding natural manifestation

but the "natural awareness" schools can equally be criticised because they have not taken natural awareness far enough

let us face the facts. KM largely taught a form of introspection for individuals to learn to be aware of "themselves"; to be free of social conditioning & to cultivate internal emotional intelligence. thus, KM recommended choiceless awareness so an individual does not suppress, condemn or indulge but, instead, learns. but what is beyond this level of inquiry, KM rare spoken in detail about

when the mind is naturally silent, with no thoughts, for the whole of the meditation, a natural manifestation occurs. what else is jhana but the internal manifestation of letting go & Anapanasati.

Anapanasati and jhana are not things fragmented from the body of the Buddha's teachings, in the way some & the Theravada often explain. instead, Anapanasati is the direct natural result of abandoning craving & attachment, as prescribed in the Four Noble Truths

the Dhamma states:



to end, there is little benefit in dismissing a road not travelled

warm regards ;D

Thank you Element for clarifying.

My thoughts sir:

There is really only One Buddhadhamma not many and not developments upon developments of Buddhist sects.
You see, I don't put the Nikayas on a pedastal and say "THIS is it" because other Buddhist schools existed whose Nikayas are not around any longer. Nor do I say the Pali Nikayas are the "final word" but I believe that they contain elements of the "final word" of the Buddha.

For example:
The Buddha was said to have been all knowing. He must have known about prana and its' flow in the body, the chakras and their functions, and the nadis and their purpose. Only Vajrayana even mentions this and I see no issue with it.

Regarding what "X,Y, Z" (Buddhist term/concept actually means):
Many people have "put what X,Y, Z means back in the Buddha's mouth" and I don't necessarily believe that that was right, What do I mean?
This: We have no reliable proof outside of the Vinaya and certain Nikayas as to what Pre "18 school" Buddhism looked like.
Many Theravadas and Mahayanists and Vajrayanists take their works and say "THIS is what the Buddha meant by X, Y, Z"

To my thinking mind, this makes no sense.

Therefore, even after "reverse engineering" the current understanding of Anapanasati/4 Jhanas/4 Brahmaviharas, etc. and tracing HOW/WHY so many different schools came about would show the student what the Buddha really taught only to a certain degree and not to a definitive point.

Having said ALL that, what you say is correct. Dismissing things without looking into them is just as insensitive as Embracing things without looking into them. I have done much research Element and I've also experienced some "interesting" things happen to me as a result of putting what the Buddha and K.M. and what Dzogchen teach into practice (not "work" :mrgreen:)

THAT I assure you of sir.

Incidentally, I own the PTS Samyutta/Digha/Majjhima/Anguttara Nikayas along with the Dhammasangani & Vibhanga, Udana, Itivuttaka, Suttanipata and Dhammapada. I will probably buy the entire Vinaya Pitaka next as well! Wowie!

May you always be well,
Stefos

Element
02 May 12, 10:51
There are four foundations of mindfulness, why limit the mind to a very small part of our experience?
hi G

the Anapanasati Sutta appears to explain each stage is done with awareness of breathing. thus there appears to be a depth to Anapanasati that is far deeper. Buddha instructed perfecting Anapanasati perfects the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. therefore, it appears quite obvious Anapanasati is not different from Satipatthana and Satipatthana is not different from Anapanasati


True, and the answer is not in the breath it’s in the awareness.
the breath is held to be the 'preliminary sign' of an awareness free from craving, which is abiding in the 4NTs. therefore, it appears quite obvious, practising the 4NTs is not different to practising Anapanasati and practising Anapanasati is not different to practising the 4NTs. it appears practising Anapanasati is practising the 4NTs. Buddha-Dhamma explains:


Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

Maha-hatthipadopama Sutta


The point of awareness though, as I understand it, is that it is non-discrimantory it is aware of whatever is appropriate to be aware of at the time, it’s not focussed on one object at the exclusion of others.
the Anapanasati Sutta appears to explain each stage is done with awareness of breathing. there appears to be a depth to Anapanasati that is beyond, i.e., far deeper, than what many believe. Buddha instructed perfecting Anapanasati perfects the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. it appears obvious Anapanasati is not different from Satipatthana and Satipatthana is not different from Anapanasati

when aware of rapture (which must manifest due to awareness of breathing), the mind is also aware of breathing. when aware of the quality of mind, the mind is also aware of breathing. when aware of impermanence, the mind is also aware of breathing. when aware of sankhara (conditioning; cause & effect relationships), the mind is also aware of breathing. this is Anapanasati, as described in the sutta. it appears obvious Anapanasati is not focussing on one object at the exclusion of others

in short, it appears superficial view of Anapanasati will limit the scope of practise that is possible. for example, the 9th stage of Anapanasati is not ultimately related to thoughts. ultimely, the 9th stage of Anapanasati is practised with complete samadhi were the object of awareness is underlying ('energy' of) defilement itself (rather than thought/mental words)


One doesn’t progress on the path by developing breathing, one progresses by developing awareness among other things..
i very thoroughly enjoy reading your posts on this forum. but i must disagree thoroughly with this view here. the path of samatha-vipassana can fully progress by developing Anapanasati, as buddha taught. as i suggested, we can limit ourselves here by overlooking a road not travelled


I really don’t see the difference between “converging on” and "placing ones awareness on”, perhaps the former is effortless whereas the latter is with effort, is this what you mean?
at SN 48.9 & 10, buddha taught the practitioner develops jhana by making letting go (relinquishment; abandonment; vossaga) the sole object. when jhana occurs, feelings of rapture & bliss manifest, which, on that level of samadhi, form the basis of the 2nd Satipatthana

so what is the difference? for me, using effort is not letting go. by using effort, the mind can suppress. by suppressing, there can be limited spaciousness for the mental formations stored within the physical body to rise up, dissolve & purify

an analogy can be used of a bird in a cage. the stress formations stored within the physical body are like the bird in the cage. crushing the bird will not remove the bird from the cage. but opening the door of the cage will allow the bird to fly out of the cage

buddha taught in places that the practitioner develops samadhi, a factor of the path, by making letting go the sole object

as for the hatha yoga methods common in Theravada, these were explained by Achariya Buddhaghosa rather than Buddha.


Why get wound up about the breathing at all? if one technique is not really working for you then use a different technique.
because Buddha explained Anapanasati also as the 8FP. but, yes, if it is not really working for you then use a different technique


However if one does choose the breath as the primary object then for most people there will be a period where you have to deliberately keep placing awareness on the breath before this becomes easy and natural..
sure. but once the mind is under control, when it can maintain concentration, it can abandon this "placing"


Looking at the title of this thread I’m a bit confused how it came to be about one specific meditation technique.
how? Deshy and Element went on a ranting rampage because Anapanasati seemed to not be viewed in its fullness

with metta

:hands:

Element
02 May 12, 11:11
For example:
The Buddha was said to have been all knowing. He must have known about prana and its' flow in the body, the chakras and their functions, and the nadis and their purpose. Only Vajrayana even mentions this and I see no issue with it.
hi Stefos

in my opinion, in the Pali reports, buddha emphasised the mind rather than the body; emphasised wisdom rather than samadhi. in yoga, there is bakti yoga (devotion), karma yoga (service), hatha yoga (prana energy) and raga yoga (wisdom yoga). buddha seemed to emphasis raga yoga but the various buddhist schools seems to emphasise the kind of yoga that suits them.


May you always be well
thank you :hands:

srivijaya
02 May 12, 13:08
at SN 48.9 & 10, buddha taught the practitioner develops jhana by making letting go (relinquishment; abandonment; vossaga) the sole object. when jhana occurs, feelings of rapture & bliss manifest, which, on that level of samadhi, form the basis of the 2nd Satipatthana

so what is the difference? for me, using effort is not letting go. by using effort, the mind can suppress. by suppressing, there can be limited spaciousness for the mental formations stored within the physical body to rise up, dissolve & purify

Hi Element,
Absolutely spot on. A great post and a wonderful exposition on the profundity and effectiveness of Anapanasati. Whilst the Suttas contain some thinly covered material, Anapanasati, is not of this kind - as Buddha emphasizes it time and time again.

I have often wondered how more obvious could Buddha have been in propagating it as his recommended meditative system? Yet nowadays it seems as if folks are happy to dismiss it as either irrelevant, too simple, too difficult or even (and I've read this elsewhere) "dangerous".

The level of disregard and disinformation is very sad. Threads like this help set things right.
:hands:

Deshy
02 May 12, 16:12
Yes, irrespective of the fact that anapanasati is the practice recommended by the Buddha over and over again, the sutta's coverage could be quite misleading to someone who compares it with a sutta in the Diga nikaya. In reality, anapanasati is extremely profound. As an example from modern-day anapanasati practitioners, I would recommend AB's book which covers all stages of the sutta in detail.

Goofaholix
02 May 12, 22:05
the Anapanasati Sutta appears to explain each stage is done with awareness of breathing. thus there appears to be a depth to Anapanasati that is far deeper. Buddha instructed perfecting Anapanasati perfects the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. therefore, it appears quite obvious Anapanasati is not different from Satipatthana and Satipatthana is not different from Anapanasati


The Satipatthana Sutta explains all four foundations of mindfulness, the breath (not anapansati specifically) is only mentioned in connection with mindfulness of the body. Of course it’s an important gateway sure, a good friend along the way no doubt.


it appears quite obvious, practising the 4NTs is not different to practising Anapanasati and practising Anapanasati is not different to practising the 4NTs. it appears practising Anapanasati is practising the 4NTs. Buddha-Dhamma explains:


Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

Maha-hatthipadopama Sutta


Now we’re getting silly, I’m not sure whether you are downgrading the 4NT to a meditation technique or upgrading a meditation technique to the problem and solution to life as we know it.

The curious thing about that quote is it says nothing about the breath in general or anapanasati specifically


the Anapanasati Sutta appears to explain each stage is done with awareness of breathing. there appears to be a depth to Anapanasati that is beyond, i.e., far deeper, than what many believe. Buddha instructed perfecting Anapanasati perfects the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. it appears obvious Anapanasati is not different from Satipatthana and Satipatthana is not different from Anapanasati

I don’t disagree. However the Buddha did not just teach one meditation technique he suggested a whole raft of meditation techniques, more importantly he taught a whole new approach and purpose to meditation specifically and life in general.


when aware of rapture (which must manifest due to awareness of breathing), the mind is also aware of breathing. when aware of the quality of mind, the mind is also aware of breathing. when aware of impermanence, the mind is also aware of breathing. when aware of sankhara (conditioning; cause & effect relationships), the mind is also aware of breathing. this is Anapanasati, as described in the sutta. it appears obvious Anapanasati is not focussing on one object at the exclusion of others


The mind can be aware of those things, and the breathing seemingly simultaneously or in quick succession, yes I agree anapanasati is not focussing on one object at the exclusion of others, though it can be practised that way. I also understand that anapanasati is not just about the nostrils and upper lip and that it would be a mistake to view it that way.

What I don’t agree with is the notion that anapanasati is the only way to develop awareness of the four foundations of mindfulness, which on the surface of it appears is what you are saying.


in short, it appears superficial view of Anapanasati will limit the scope of practise that is possible. for example, the 9th stage of Anapanasati is not ultimately related to thoughts. ultimely, the 9th stage of Anapanasati is practised with complete samadhi were the object of awareness is underlying ('energy' of) defilement itself (rather than thought/mental words)

Agreed, of course this only matters if the technique you are choosing to practise is in fact anapanasati. At the end of the day whatever technique one chooses it’s a means to an end not an end in itself, it’s the mind we are interested in training not the breathing.


i very thoroughly enjoy reading your posts on this forum. but i must disagree thoroughly with this view here. the path of samatha-vipassana can fully progress by developing Anapanasati, as buddha taught. as i suggested, we can limit ourselves here by overlooking a road not travelled

I agree you can fully progress with one technique provided you don’t get in a rut with it. In my experience this is very easy to do if one doesn’t develop skills in more than one technique and doesn’t learn to recognise the state of mind at the time and doesn’t learn to vary the approach depending on the state of mind at the time.

Too much emphasis on one technique and not enough on the state of mind the technique is intended to develop leads to a can’t see the woods for the trees type practice in my experience and from what I’ve observed of other meditators.


so what is the difference? for me, using effort is not letting go. by using effort, the mind can suppress. by suppressing, there can be limited spaciousness for the mental formations stored within the physical body to rise up, dissolve & purify

Agreed, practice should eventually become effortless however most/all people go through a period of putting forth effort before they learn to let go and allow effortlessness, this effort is not lost as it also helps develop self discipline.


how? Deshy and Element went on a ranting rampage because Anapanasati seemed to not be viewed in its fullness


Sure it’s not uncommon for people to not appreciate the progression laid out in the anapanasati sutta but that doesn’t warrant equating it with the purpose and foundational teaching of the Buddhadamma.

Stefos
02 May 12, 23:24
hi Stefos

in my opinion, in the Pali reports, buddha emphasised the mind rather than the body; emphasised wisdom rather than samadhi. in yoga, there is bakti yoga (devotion), karma yoga (service), hatha yoga (prana energy) and raga yoga (wisdom yoga). buddha seemed to emphasis raga yoga but the various buddhist schools seems to emphasise the kind of yoga that suits them.


thank you :hands:

Hi Element,

Yes sir. Buddha DID emphasize mind rather than body. However, he understood both!

The forms of Yoga today do "cater" to people's various bents/intentions....it is what it is.

Let's not forget the salient issue in this: The Buddhas' 2 teachers who taught him those forms of meditation were not Jains nor were they Buddhists. In my research, the were adherents of Upanishadic thought and the Buddha used their teachings.

This is a very commonly and of course, conveniently overlooked thing. Upanishads ------> Brahman (personal & impersonal)

As I've stated before, in the time of the Buddha both Brahman and Atman had a whole variety of various meanings which were contradictory.
The Buddha also used those states taught by his 2 former teachers as steps to Nibbana, "whatever that is."
It is after the sphere, taught by the Buddhas' former teacher, that the Buddha gained/reached Nibbana.

Interesting indeed.

Thank you,
Stefos

Stefos
02 May 12, 23:33
Hi Element,
Absolutely spot on. A great post and a wonderful exposition on the profundity and effectiveness of Anapanasati. Whilst the Suttas contain some thinly covered material, Anapanasati, is not of this kind - as Buddha emphasizes it time and time again.

I have often wondered how more obvious could Buddha have been in propagating it as his recommended meditative system? Yet nowadays it seems as if folks are happy to dismiss it as either irrelevant, too simple, too difficult or even (and I've read this elsewhere) "dangerous".

The level of disregard and disinformation is very sad. Threads like this help set things right.
:hands:

Hi Srivijaya,

The MAIN thing that concerns me about how "meditation" is being taught today is as a set of separate parts being taught to reach Nibbanna.

Meditative states are subjective with objective "signs" as such.

For someone to say that meditation is "step by step" is not only tacky but wrong.
Integration is what the Buddha taught, as found in the Nikayas and not disjointed "meditional topics" as might be commonly misunderstood in a gradualistic type of mindset.

It is all very strange to read about "Buddhist meditation" now a days.

Thank you,
Stefos

Element
03 May 12, 00:02
Yes sir. Buddha DID emphasize mind rather than body. However, he understood both!
Yes sir. Buddha certainly understood both but freedom from suffering is something mental. A body, with perfectly purified & flowing chakras (nervous system) may occur during the peak of mental & physical life but they will one day pass. Thus, Buddha placed no importance on such peaks of physical being but rather non-attachment towards it. Kind regards ;D

Element
03 May 12, 00:13
Let's not forget the salient issue in this: The Buddhas' 2 teachers who taught him those forms of meditation were not Jains nor were they Buddhists. In my research, the were adherents of Upanishadic thought and the Buddha used their teachings.
Actually, this issue is irrelevent in Buddhism. In Buddhism, the salient basis of faith is Buddha was 'Sammasambuddha', meaning Perfectly & Fully Self-Enlightened Without A Teacher Who Starts the Buddhist Religion. Every day, millions of Buddhists chant:


Arahaṃ sammā-sambuddho bhagavā.

The Blessed One is Worthy & Rightly Self-awakened.

Buddhaṃ bhagavantaṃ abhivādemi.

I bow down before the Awakened, Blessed One.

When Prince Siddhartha left the palace, he rejected what his two teachers taught him. What his two teachers taught him are unrelated to the essence of Buddhism. This is why, after abandoning his two teachers, Prince Siddharta searched for six years until becoming Buddha.

Kind regards ;D



In this way did Alara Kalama, my teacher, place me, his pupil, on the same level with himself and pay me great honor. But the thought occurred to me, 'This Dhamma leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to stilling, to direct knowledge, to Awakening, nor to Unbinding, but only to reappearance in the dimension of nothingness.' So, dissatisfied with that Dhamma, I left.

In this way did Uddaka Ramaputta, my companion in the holy life, place me in the position of teacher and pay me great honor. But the thought occurred to me, 'This Dhamma leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to stilling, to direct knowledge, to Awakening, nor to Unbinding, but only to reappearance in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.' So, dissatisfied with that Dhamma, I left.

Ariyapariyesana Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html)

Element
03 May 12, 00:26
The Satipatthana Sutta explains all four foundations of mindfulness, the breath (not anapansati specifically) is only mentioned in connection with mindfulness of the body. Of course it’s an important gateway sure, a good friend along the way no doubt.

Sure it’s not uncommon for people to not appreciate the progression laid out in the anapanasati sutta but that doesn’t warrant equating it with the purpose and foundational teaching of the Buddhadamma.
hi G

i can only reply by recommending to actually read the Anapanasati Sutta. it represents the foundational teachings of Buddhadhamma because all insight is contained within the sixteen stages. study, practise & realisation is the individual responsibility of each buddhist

with metta

;D

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 02:14
i can only reply by recommending to actually read the Anapanasati Sutta. it represents the foundational teachings of Buddhadhamma because all insight is contained within the sixteen stages. study, practise & realisation is the individual responsibility of each buddhist


Well I had another read through the sutta looking for the smoking gun that indicates it is Buddhism in a nutshell, or that anapanasati is the only way of developing the mind in terms of the Buddhist path, I’ve come up empty.

There is nothing that indicates that the technique outlined is the only technique, actually it doesn’t really read to me like a meditation technique at all rather a process of insight.

There is nothing in there that equates anapanasati with the four noble truths as you suggested.

There is little about the other foundational principles of Buddhism eightfold path is referred to but not explained, there is nothing relating to the three characteristics, or dependant origination etc.

If I could take one sutta to a desert island with me this would be a candidate though.

One of the first thing I noticed after the intro is it tells in a series of paragraphs how in this community there are monks who have developed this or that faculty/fruition etc and culminates that there are monks devoted to mindfulness of the in and out breathing. The implication is there are some monks who develop this practice and presumably some who don’t, if you assume all do then you’d also have to assume all were arahants as per the first of the series.

It then goes into detail on how mindfulness of the in and out breathing is practised but as it goes on it’s more and more talking about the mind and how the process of insight is developed. So to me this sutta is about how a well known (at the time) meditation technique can be used to develop insight as expounded by the Buddha and is in no way saying this is the only way such insight can be developed.

Pegembara
03 May 12, 04:47
Here is a sutta regarding mental training with regards to mastery over the mind. The last resort when all fails is to apply force/exertion to overcome the defilements.

Quote:

"There is the case where evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — arise in a monk while he is referring to and attending to a particular theme. He should attend to another theme, apart from that one, connected with what is skillful. etc

"If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to this other theme, connected with what is skillful, he should scrutinize the drawbacks of those thoughts: 'Truly, these thoughts of mine are unskillful, these thoughts of mine are blameworthy, these thoughts of mine result in stress.' As he is scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts, those evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. etc

"If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts, he should pay no mind and pay no attention to those thoughts. etc

"If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is paying no mind and paying no attention to those thoughts, he should attend to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts. etc

"If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts, then — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he should beat down, constrain, and crush his mind with his awareness. As — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he is beating down, constraining, and crushing his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. etc

"Now when a monk... attending to another theme... scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts... paying no mind and paying no attention to those thoughts... attending to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts... beating down, constraining and crushing his mind with his awareness... steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it and concentrates it: He is then called a monk with mastery over the ways of thought sequences. He thinks whatever thought he wants to, and doesn't think whatever thought he doesn't. He has severed craving, thrown off the fetters, and — through the right penetration of conceit — has made an end of suffering and stress."

Vitakka santhana Sutta

Element
03 May 12, 05:43
Here is a sutta regarding mental training with regards to mastery over the mind. The last resort when all fails is to apply force/exertion to overcome the defilements.
this sutta is not really related to Anapanasati. struggling with the hindrances is not the development of Anapanasati. the sutta states:


I don't say that there is mindfulness with in-&-out breathing in one of lapsed mindfulness and no alertness

Now how is mindfulness with in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit?

There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; always mindful he breathes out.

MN 118

in more detail:


After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore.

Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells with an awareness devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of covetousness. Abandoning ill will & anger, he dwells with an awareness devoid of ill will, sympathetic with the welfare of all living beings. He cleanses his mind of ill will & anger. Abandoning sloth & drowsiness, he dwells with an awareness devoid of sloth & drowsiness, mindful, alert, percipient of light. He cleanses his mind of sloth & drowsiness. Abandoning restlessness & anxiety, he dwells undisturbed, his mind inwardly stilled. He cleanses his mind of restlessness & anxiety. Abandoning uncertainty, he dwells having crossed over uncertainty, with no perplexity with regard to skillful mental qualities. He cleanses his mind of uncertainty.

MN 38

Element
03 May 12, 06:07
Well I had another read through the sutta looking for the smoking gun that indicates it is Buddhism in a nutshell, or that anapanasati is the only way of developing the mind in terms of the Buddhist path, I’ve come up empty.


And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation (nirodha) of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment (vossaga), release & letting go of that very craving.

SN 56.11


There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor for awakening dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation (nirodha), resulting in relinquishment (vosagga).

MN 118 (Anapanasati Sutta)


And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go (vossaga), attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.

SN 48.10


This is how the seven factors for awakening are developed & pursued so as to bring clear knowing & release to their culmination."

MN 118

****


There is nothing that indicates that the technique outlined is the only technique, actually it doesn’t really read to me like a meditation technique at all rather a process of insight.
there is no technique in the Anapanasati Sutta, apart from establishing mindfulness


One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness.

One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right resolve: This is one's right mindfulness.

MN 117


Now how is mindfulness with in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit?

There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; always mindful he breathes out.

MN 118

****


There is nothing in there that equates anapanasati with the four noble truths as you suggested.


And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation (nirodha) of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment (vossaga), release & letting go of that very craving.

SN 56.11


There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor for awakening dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation (nirodha), resulting in relinquishment (vosagga).

MN 118 (Anapanasati Sutta)


And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go (vossaga), attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.

SN 48.10


[14] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on dispassion [literally, fading].' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on dispassion.'

[15] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on cessation (nirodha).' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on cessation.'

[16] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on relinquishment.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on relinquishment.'

MN 118

****


There is little about the other foundational principles of Buddhism eightfold path is referred to but not explained, there is nothing relating to the three characteristics or dependant origination etc.


[13] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on inconstancy.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on inconstancy.'

MN 118


What is inconstant is unsatisfactory. What is unsatisfactory is not-self.

SN 22.76


[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to all kaya.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to all kaya.'

[4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabricator (kaya sankhara).' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabricator.'

[7] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to mind fabricator (citta sankhara).' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to mind fabricator.'

[8] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming the mind fabricator.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming the mind fabricator.'

MN 118


And what are fabricators? These three are fabricators: bodily fabricator, verbal fabricator, mental fabricator. These are called fabricator.

Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta: Analysis of Dependent Co-arising


These three fabricators, friend Visakha: bodily fabricators, verbal fabricators & mental fabricators.

In-&-out breaths are bodily fabricators. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabricators. Perceptions & feelings are the mental fabricator.

But why are in-&-out breaths bodily fabricators? Why are directed thought & evaluation verbal fabricators? Why are perceptions & feelings mental fabricators?

In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabricators. Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabricators. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabricators.

MN 44

:peace:

Aloka
03 May 12, 08:44
Regarding the practice of Anapanasati, in Chapter 7 -page 81- of "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond" (some of which can be read at Google Books), Ajahn Brahm states the following:





He (the Buddha) went to a quiet stretch of forest on the banks of a great river, sat on a cushion of grass under a shady fig tree, and meditated. The method of meditation that he used was anapana-sati, mindfulness of the in and out breaths.

Through the practice he entered jhana, emerged, and quickly gained the insights of enlightenment. Henceforth he was called the Buddha.

The Buddha continued to teach anapanasati for the remainder of his life. It was the method that had given him enlightenment, the meditation practice par excellence, and he imparted the same method to all his disciples both in the monastery and in the city.

This foremost method of meditation is bequeathed to us today in the original Buddhist texts as part of many suttas, but in particular as the Anapanasati Sutta of the Majjhima collection (MN 118).




http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CrTRvmN9wQUC&pg=PA273&lpg=PA273&dq=mindfulness+bliss+and+beyond+ch+7&source=bl&ots=NYzZetfeCA&sig=ri803xYiNueVpvqzBYad6zV4BYc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6ECiT8qvNcSu0QXNyrTwCA&sqi=2&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false








:hands:

andyrobyn
03 May 12, 08:56
Interesting discussion.
My understanding of the distinction between " focusing on " and " focusing with " the breath is that this happens in degrees overtime with meditation practice.
On a daily basis ( after many hours of sitting meditation practice ) I will return to focus on my breath if I need to and this enables me to keep moving forward.

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 09:44
there is no technique in the Anapanasati Sutta, apart from establishing mindfulness


Yes, just as I said.

Lots of quotes in there, none really support the points I was challenging as far as I can see,

I see a lot about establishing mindfulness, awareness, cessation, relinquishment but nothing that indicates the "of the breath" part is of primary importance, nothing to indicate it's anything but a means.

It's all about the mind, not about the breath.

andyrobyn
03 May 12, 09:47
Regarding the practice of Anapanasati, in Chapter 7 -page 81- of "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond" (some of which can be read at Google Books), Ajahn Brahm states :





:hands:

I like this book ( I have it and will now plan to read it again this weekend ).

As a friend of mine who is a composer has written about in lyrics to his modern music the type of bliss we seek is like being in a padded cell - not sure if that says a lot to others - lol.

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 09:52
Regarding the practice of Anapanasati, in Chapter 7 -page 81- of "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond" (some of which can be read at Google Books), Ajahn Brahm states the following:

Of course Goenka says he was practising body sweeping vipassana under the bodhi tree and so on... who's right? the fact is it's all just conjecture. I don't doubt by that stage he had a level skilfulness not to be bound by one particular technique because at the end of the day it's not technique that matters it's the state of mind that is cultivated.

Element
03 May 12, 11:29
I see...nothing that indicates the "of the breath"..
yes, because the above notion is non-sequitur. it has been suggested from the outset 'anapanasati' is 'mindfulness with breathing', where the breathing arises as the sign (nimitta) of the mind established in samma samadhi. mindfulness of the breathing is non-sequitur & the stuff of blind faith (aka superstition) because mindfulness means 'to remember' (see this link (http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299) @ DW). only mental objects can be remembered, such as right view & right intention. in & out breathing cannot be remembered. that is impossible. even when practising Hindu hatha yoga, the mind can only be mindful of awareness of breathing, i,.e., to remember to be aware of the breathing. that which is aware of the breathing is consciousness (vinnana) and not mindfulness (sati)

it does not matter how many renowned translators & bhikkhus use the term 'mindfulness of breathing', their translations are equally non-sequitur & superstitious

:joker:

Element
03 May 12, 11:31
Ajahn Brahm states the following:


He (the Buddha)... used mindfulness of the in and out breaths.

:hands:
superstition. it does not exist :joker:

Buddha taught Dhamma is to be verified by each wise (introspective) person for themselves (paccatum veditabo vinnuhi)

Aloka
03 May 12, 11:43
Ajahn Brahm states the following:


He (the Buddha)... used mindfulness of the in and out breaths.

:hands:
superstition. it does not exist :joker:

Buddha taught Dhamma is to be verified by each wise (introspective) person for themselves (paccatum veditabo vinnuhi)


As we have beginners here I gave that reference to show people who are not familiar with the sutta the importance Ajahn Brahm (as well as some other teachers) gives to it.

Naturally I understand the difference between "with " and "of" breathing, though I've no idea how "of" is considered to be superstition.

.

Element
03 May 12, 11:52
Naturally I understand the difference between "with " and "of" breathing, though I've no idea how "of" is considered to be superstition.
mindfulness means 'to remember' (see this link (http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299) @ DW). only mental objects can be remembered, such as right view & right intention. in & out breathing cannot be remembered because it is a physical object. even when practising Hindu hatha yoga, the mind can only be mindful of awareness of breathing, i,.e., to remember to be aware of the breathing. that which is aware of the breathing is consciousness (vinnana) and not mindfulness (sati)

Ajahn Jayasaro explains:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpCy9Tb73gw&feature=player_embedded

Buddha taught Dhamma is to be verified by each wise (introspective) practitioner for themselves (paccatum veditabo vinnuhi)

there is no such thing as mindfulness of breathing, just as there is no Tooth Fairy & no Flying Spagetti Monster

;D

Aloka
03 May 12, 11:56
mindfulness means 'to remember'

I already know that. I also watched and posted that same Ajahn Jayasaro video as in #53, in the thread that you're referencing from DW.

What I'm asking is how people who say 'of breathing' are superstitious ?

Element
03 May 12, 12:01
What I'm asking is how people who say 'of breathing' are superstitious ?

for the 3rd time:


mindfulness means 'to remember' (see this link @ DW). only mental objects can be remembered, such as right view & right intention. in & out breathing cannot be remembered because it is a physical object. even when practising Hindu hatha yoga, the mind can only be mindful of awareness of breathing, i,.e., to remember to be aware of the breathing. that which is aware of the breathing is consciousness (vinnana) and not mindfulness (sati)

:peace:

Element
03 May 12, 12:07
I know that. I also watched and posted that same Ajahn Jayasaro video #53 in the thread you're referencing at DW.
yes, but did you listen :confused:

AJ said: mindfulness is part of the concentration group rather than part of the wisdom group

this means mindfulness is used to stabilise the mind rather than discern the object

AJ said that which discerns the object is sampajanna (clear comprehension), which is part of the wisdom group of dhamma

sampajanna has the same root at panna (wisdom), vinnana (consciousness), nana (knowledge), etc

:flower:

Aloka
03 May 12, 12:07
What I'm saying isn't about the video.

....and again, I don't see your connection with "superstition" which to me is related to the supernatural or cultural religious rites and rituals.

Element
03 May 12, 12:09
....and again, I don't see the connection with "superstition" which to me is related to the supernatural or cultural religious rites and rituals.
superstition is belief is what cannot be verified. mindfulness of breathing cannot be verified because the breathing cannot be directly remembered. breathing can be cognised via body consciousness but it cannot be remembered via memory

:bunny:

Element
03 May 12, 12:11
So to me this sutta is about how a well known (at the time) meditation technique can be used to develop insight...
imo, no. placing attention on breathing, i.e., hatha yoga, was a well known (at the time) meditation technique

but using the 8FP, i.e., completely letting go & abandoning craving, including relinquishing 'self-view', to establish samadhi, was introduced by Buddha

thus it is a different quality of breath awareness, a different quality of samadhi and a different quality of jhana

such is why the Buddha used the term 'mindfulness with breathing' rather than 'awareness of breathing'

the suttas report:


Now what, monks, is noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions? Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort & right mindfulness — is called noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions.

MN 117 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html)


Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. In one of right speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right knowledge, right release comes into being. Thus the learner is endowed with eight factors and the arahant with ten.

MN 117


And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a noble disciple, making relinquishment (vossaga) the sole object, attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.

SN 48.9 & 10 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html)

Ajahn Buddhadasa explains:


As for samadhi, an empty mind is the supreme samadhi, the supremely focused firmness of mind. The straining and striving sort of samadhi isn't the real thing and the samadhi which aims at anything other than non-clinging to the five khandas is micchasamadhi (wrong or perverted samadhi). You should be aware that there is both micchasamadhi and sammasamadhi (right or correct samadhi). Only the mind that is empty of grasping at and clinging to 'I' and 'mine' can have the true and perfect stability of sammasamadhi. One who has an empty mind has correct samadhi.

Heart-wood from the Bo Tree

:flower:

Deshy
03 May 12, 18:02
I see a lot about establishing mindfulness, awareness, cessation, relinquishment but nothing that indicates the "of the breath" part is of primary importance, nothing to indicate it's anything but a means.

It's all about the mind, not about the breath.

Maybe. Irrespective of the fact that the Buddha attained Nibbana by using the anapanasati practice and it is what he mostly recommended to his disciples, we cannot completely deny the possibility of relinquishment through other techniques like the metta meditation for instance. However, without mastering the noble 8-fold path, I don't think Nibbana is possible. Can you please explain how noble right concentration (or stillness) (samma samadhi) can be achieved by practicing satipattana alone?

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 21:10
imo, no. placing attention on breathing, i.e., hatha yoga, was a well known (at the time) meditation technique but using the 8FP, i.e., completely letting go & abandoning craving, including relinquishing 'self-view', to establish samadhi, was introduced by Buddha

That was my point.


such is why the Buddha used the term 'mindfulness with breathing' rather than 'awareness of breathing'

As I previously agreed with you 'mindfulness/awareness with breathing' is a better description than 'mindfulness/awareness of breathing' and I think anybody who has practised it correctly for a period of time comes to appreciate this intuitively. Though they may not get hung up with words and continue to refer to it in common usage with the “on” this does not necessarily indicate wrong view or wrong practise any more than if I say I went to work “on” the bus when in actual fact I went to work “in” the bus.

I really don’t see the point in debating the semantics of it when nobody is disagreeing with you.

What I did disagree with in the first post of yours that I replied to was the implication I saw (rightly or wrongly) that mindfulness must of necessity be in relation to the breath “when the mind is aware & silent, it naturally converges with the in & out breathing” and my point was it naturally converges on whatever is appropriate at the time.

Then there was “to alienate Anapanasati from 'awareness' does not conform with most meditative traditions”, now in common modern usage Anapanasati means specifically means mindfulness at the nostrils (as opposed to the abdomen for example) or the full progressive process we see outlined in the Anapanasati sutta. My point was this method is not the only way to cultivate mindfulness/awareness and it’s better not to get fixated on a method because it's the quality of mind that is developed that is important not the object it is deveoped with.

So can we stop talking about the semantics of with vs on already.

Element
03 May 12, 21:34
Goofaholix...can you please explain how noble right concentration (or stillness) (samma samadhi) can be achieved by practicing satipattana alone?
yes, thanks ;D

Element
03 May 12, 21:35
...mindfulness of the in and out breathing...is in no way saying this is the only way such insight can be developed.
so in what other ways can insight can be developed? :confused: thanks ;D

Element
03 May 12, 21:46
As I previously agreed with you 'mindfulness/awareness with breathing' is a better description than 'mindfulness/awareness of breathing'
I was not using the terms mindfulness & awareness synonymously.

Mindfulness of breathing is non-sequitur but awareness of breathing is OK (for a hatha yoga practise)


and I think anybody who has practised it correctly for a period of time comes to appreciate this intuitively.
i disagree. if how 'mindfulness' (sati) functions is not discerned then it is not really being practised properly.


Though they may not get hung up with words
It is not being hung up on words. it is discerning & using mindfulness properly in practise.


I really don’t see the point in debating the semantics of it when nobody is disagreeing with you.

but you are disagreeing with me


What I did disagree with in the first post of yours that I replied to was the implication I saw (rightly or wrongly) that mindfulness must of necessity be in relation to the breath “when the mind is aware & silent, it naturally converges with the in & out breathing” and my point was it naturally converges on whatever is appropriate at the time.
i disagree and continue to hold when the mind is empty in meditation, free from craving, the grossest sense object will be the breathing in & out. thus, it follows the Law of Nature that the mind will inevitably become conscious of the in & out breathing, even when it does not make the deliberate intention to do so


now in common modern usage Anapanasati means specifically means mindfulness at the nostrils
Goenka and Dhamma Wheel do not comprise of "common modern usage".


So can we stop talking about the semantics of with vs on already.
i do not see "semantics" as the issue. calling a dog a "cat" is not semantics. instead, it is a misperceiving of what is going on. it is not discerning what mindfulness actually is and how it is actually used.

all the best :peace:

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 21:55
so in what other ways can insight can be developed? :confused: thanks ;D

Mindfulness in general for a start, mindfulness with whatever is being experienced at the time including but not limited to the breath.

Element
03 May 12, 22:00
Mindfulness in general for a start mindfulness with whatever is being experienced at the time...
yes, but what exactly is "mindfulness" here?

you seem to be referring to awareness/consciousness of things rather than sati (mindfulness; remembrance).

in Satipatthana, mindfulness seems to mean:


He..is mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

my view is mindfulness in Satipatthana is not "contemplating the body in the body" etc

instead, it is remembering to keep the mind in a state so contemplating (being conscious of) the body in the body comes to fruition

even when intentionally placing the mind onto meditation objects, mindfulness is remembering to that (rather than daydreaming)

;D


Herein (in this teaching) a monk lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, putting aside, in this world, covetousness and grief; he lives contemplating feelings in feelings, ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, putting aside, in this world, covetousness and grief; he lives contemplating mind in mind, ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, putting aside, in this world, covetousness and grief; he lives contemplating dhamma in dhamma , ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, putting aside, in this world, covetousness and grief.

Satipatthana Sutta: The Foundations of Mindfulness

andyrobyn
03 May 12, 22:11
You are making good progress with expressing the process, as I know it from experience. Language, with all it's semantics makes it very difficult. I get what Element means by superstition.

Element
03 May 12, 22:12
He..is mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.
equals practising the Four Noble Truths

;D


Anapanasati Sutta

And how is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination?

On whatever occasion a monk breathing in long discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, discerns, 'I am breathing out long'; or breathing in short, discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, discerns, 'I am breathing out short'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&... out sensitive to the entire body'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out calming bodily fabrication': On that occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I tell you, monks, that this — the in-&-out breath — is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out sensitive to rapture'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out sensitive to pleasure'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out sensitive to mental fabrication'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out calming mental fabrication': On that occasion the monk remains focused on feelings in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I tell you, monks, that this — careful attention to in-&-out breaths — is classed as a feeling among feelings,[6] which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on feelings in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out sensitive to the mind'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out satisfying the mind'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out steadying the mind'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out releasing the mind': On that occasion the monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I don't say that there is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing in one of lapsed mindfulness and no alertness, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the mind in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

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.

"This is how mindfulness of in-&-out breathing is developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination.

Element
03 May 12, 22:16
Mindfulness in general for a start, mindfulness with whatever is being experienced at the time including but not limited to the breath.
for example, if one is consciously aware of hunting animals or having an adulterous sexual affair, is that "mindfulness"? :confused:

of course it is not because although the mind is aware (conscious) of what it is doing, the mind is has not remembered to practise Dhamma

sati = remembrance

hunting sati = remembering to use the appropriate weapon for hunting certain animals

samma sati = remembering to apply dhamma principles, such as not hunting animals :bunny:

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 22:20
I was not using the terms mindfulness & awareness synonymously.

Point taken, people sometimes do, I sometimes do, though to me they are different.


i disagree. if how 'mindfulness' (sati) functions is not discerned then it is not really being practised properly.

I specifically described a scenario where it is[/B} discerned, use of language does not confirm or deny the presence of discernment and besides I didn’t use the word “of’ anyway.


It is not being hung up on words. it is discerning & using mindfulness properly in practise.

It’s being deliberately pedantic, continuing to argue a point that nobody else is discussing.


i disagree and continue to hold when the mind is empty in meditation, free from craving, the [B]grossest sense object will be the breathing in & out. thus, it follows the Law of Nature that the mind will inevitably become conscious of the in & out breathing, even when it does not make the deliberate intention to do so

Of course it will, when the body and mind settles then the breath is obvious, and I agree it’s one of the grossest objects one will experience. So why focus on that? Why settle for that? why make a big thing of that? There is so much experience happening, many much more subtle than the breath, why give all importance to just one? This is not what the Anapanasati sutta tells us to do and there is no need to make a deliberate intention to single out one object specifically as it’s the state of mind not the objects the mind is aware of that’s important.


Goenka and Dhamma Wheel do not comprise of "common modern usage".

Correct.


ii do not see "semantics" as the issue. calling a dog a "cat" is not semantics. instead, it is a misperceiving of what is going on. it is not discerning what mindfulness actually is and how it is actually used.

Nobody is calling a dog a cat, nobody is misperceiving of what is going on, and if you take your focus off semantics you might notice we are actually saying the same thing.

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 22:21
instead, it is remembering to keep the mind in a state so contemplating (being conscious of) the body in the body comes to fruition

even when intentionally placing the mind onto meditation objects, mindfulness is remembering to that (rather than daydreaming)


Correct.

Element
03 May 12, 22:27
So why focus on that? Why settle for that?
One is not focusing on that or settling on that.

The mind is abiding free from craving, abiding in the Noble Truths. The breath is just there. The breath is 'thus'; 'suchness' (tathata)


There is so much experience happening, many much more subtle than the breath.
Such as? :confused:

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 22:28
for example, if one is consciously aware of hunting animals or having an adulterous sexual affair, is that "mindfulness"? :confused:

Hunting animals is a story, having an adulterous affair is a story. While in the midst of those stories experience arises in contact with the six sense doors, mindfulness is remembering to place awareness with that experience. In such a situation giving importance to the breath at the expense of the rest of experience is not mindfulness.

Choosing not to do those things because they are wrong is sila, choosing not to do those things because one has observed the negative affects through the application of mindfulness, among other things, is panna.

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 22:29
The mind is abiding free from craving, abiding in the Noble Truths. The breath is just there. The breath is 'thus'; 'suchness' (tathata)


Excellent, progress!

Element
03 May 12, 22:36
...mindfulness is remembering to place awareness with that experience.
alternately, mindfulness is remembering to act appropriately

Buddha said:


One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view.

One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right resolve: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right resolve.

One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right speech: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right speech.

One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right action: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right action.

One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right livelihood.

MN 117


Choosing not to do those things because they are wrong is sila, choosing not to do those things because one has observed the negative affects through the application of mindfulness, among other things, is panna.
alternately, observing the negative effects is wisdom (panna)...choosing to not do those things is mindfulness (sati)

;D

Element
03 May 12, 22:37
Excellent, progress!
better progress is earning a living...got to go to the office...

:hands:

Goofaholix
03 May 12, 23:51
better progress is earning a living...got to go to the office...

:hands:


Make sure you go in the bus not on the bus.

Stefos
06 May 12, 01:04
Hi everyone,

I am very shocking and saddened about the number of posts which posit the Buddha as a "psychologist" essentially.

It is clear based on the Pali Nakayas, anyway, that he understood transcendental things as well as psychological/mental states.

To reduce the Buddha down to the level of "psychologist" is not correct and this is exactly what one does when one says "Nibbanna is for here and now" without stating that it is a state beyond convention and relativity to be experience after ego death and physical death.

The Buddha is made to look like a "feel better about yourself by getting over your "self" " self help guru! Is this so? No, in my view.

Thank you,
Stefos

andyrobyn
06 May 12, 01:22
Hi Stefos,

I think your description of a psychologist as one whose science and purpose is to make the individual feel better is amiss ....
interestingly to me, it is not often that I find myself going into bat for psychology in any way, as I am here -lol

Stefos
06 May 12, 01:34
Hi Stefos,

I think your description of a psychologist as one whose science and purpose is to make the individual feel better is amiss ....
interestingly to me, it is not often that I find myself going into bat for psychology in any way, as I am here -lol

Hi andyrobyn,

The Nikayas have the Buddha stating the analogy that he is a physician removing the poisoned arrow from a man who will die without the arrow being removed. (See Digha Nikaya, I believe)

The 4 Noble Truths actually were used in the Buddha's day by physicians to examine, diagnose, establish the remedy and apply the remedy.

Therefore I do believe that the Buddha as "psychologist making the individual feel better" to be fully true and then some.

I just happen to extend that to say, the Buddha taught Nibbanna as a here and now "thing" as well as it having it's essence beyond time and space as well.

Thank you,
Stefos

alfred
06 May 12, 02:06
I couldnt agree more you hit the nail squarely on the head.I applaude you.Are we on a spiritual path? lets all get a grip!!!!!!
Hi everyone,

I am very shocking and saddened about the number of posts which posit the Buddha as a "psychologist" essentially.

It is clear based on the Pali Nakayas, anyway, that he understood transcendental things as well as psychological/mental states.

To reduce the Buddha down to the level of "psychologist" is not correct and this is exactly what one does when one says "Nibbanna is for here and now" without stating that it is a state beyond convention and relativity to be experience after ego death and physical death.

The Buddha is made to look like a "feel better about yourself by getting over your "self" " self help guru! Is this so? No, in my view.

Thank you,
Stefos

Stefos
06 May 12, 21:51
Hi alfred,

I'm shocked to see the HUGE amount of materialism in this particular forum!

Saddening indeed! What are people being taught and what to they believe?

"Pray to Buddha for enlightenment?" "The mind is just a bio-physical process?"

Transcendental reality BEYOND one's "self view" is what the Buddha taught.

If this nonsense isn't stopped, then "Hey, Buddhism means what you want it to mean" will be the authentic teaching of the Buddha

Be well sir and Pranams to the Buddha,
Stefos

Aloka
06 May 12, 22:36
I'm shocked to see the HUGE amount of materialism in this particular forum!

Saddening indeed! What are people being taught and what to they believe?

"Pray to Buddha for enlightenment?" "The mind is just a bio-physical process?"

Transcendental reality BEYOND one's "self view" is what the Buddha taught.

If this nonsense isn't stopped, then "Hey, Buddhism means what you want it to mean" will be the authentic teaching of the Buddha




Just a reminder to avoid complaining about the material in the website forums or about our members in public, we have a complaints procedure outlined in the Code of Conduct, thanks.

Aloka
06 May 12, 23:11
To reduce the Buddha down to the level of "psychologist" is not correct and this is exactly what one does when one says "Nibbanna is for here and now" without stating that it is a state beyond convention and relativity to be experience after ego death and physical death.


Could you further explain what you mean by Nibanna is a state to be experienced after physical death, please Stephos ?

Please also give URL links to evidence from the suttas to support your statement.

Goofaholix
06 May 12, 23:46
I am very shocking and saddened about the number of posts which posit the Buddha as a "psychologist" essentially.

It is clear based on the Pali Nakayas, anyway, that he understood transcendental things as well as psychological/mental states.

To reduce the Buddha down to the level of "psychologist" is not correct and this is exactly what one does when one says "Nibbanna is for here and now" without stating that it is a state beyond convention and relativity to be experience after ego death and physical death.

Debunking and leaping to the defense of the Pali Nikayas at the same time?

It is interesting that when you like something from the Pali Nikayas you are happy to express shock that others disagree with your interpretation while at the same time on another thread you are dodging things you don't like from the Pali Nikayas by invoking the 2 schools out of 18 clause and that you can't trust the Pali Nikayas.

This is not scholarship, everything is uncertain but that doesn't mean it can't be used for the benefit of ourselves and others.

Start with the core themes and build understanding based on that.

It is safer to start with what is verifiable, logical, and sensible and build on that. We can be confident that Buddhism is a very good psychology, through practise and observing the fruits, there are other parts of the teaching we can't verify and I think it's would be imprudent to take them as our foundation, equally imprudent to dismiss them altogether.

Esho
07 May 12, 00:00
"Pray to Buddha for enlightenment?"

The teachings of Gotama Buddha do not ask for praying but for understanding, practice and evaluation of its results.


"The mind is just a bio-physical process?"

Mind is an output of brain's function. If one gets drunk, or takes drugs, mind -and consciousness- will be altered and neither understanding nor meditation can be performed properly.

Also it can be surprising for some people to see many of the properties of mind performed by computers where some of this mind properties are done better than the human mind like some calculations or, the same way, that some machines can perform better some physical movements, that those performed by humans.

I think there is no reason to panic about this, anytime we can develop the Noble View taught by Buddha in terms of ethical conduct, wisdom and meditation from where suffering is to be quenched.


Transcendental reality BEYOND one's "self view" is what the Buddha taught.

Buddha's teachings are about Dukkha, its origin, its cessation and the path to its cessation, as it is told here:


"What I have revealed is: 'This is Suffering, this is the Arising of Suffering, this is the Cessation of Suffering, and this is the Path that leads to the Cessation of Suffering.' And why, monks, have I revealed it?

"Because this is related to the goal, fundamental to the holy life, conduces to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, tranquillity, higher knowledge, enlightenment and Nibbaana, therefore I have revealed it.

"Therefore, monks, your task is to learn: 'This is Suffering, this is the Arising of Suffering, this is the Cessation of Suffering, this is the Path that leads to the Cessation of Suffering.' That is your task."

Simsapa Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.031.wlsh.html)



;D

Stefos
19 May 12, 02:29
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkHREw19eg8

Hi Element,

You sir are the ONLY "Buddhist" that I trust, as of this posting, on this sub-forum, that understands my perspective.

I applaud you.

Thank you kindly,
Stefos