Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

Split from this thread: Bhikkhu Analayo's Lectures on the Madhyama-āgama.

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo's Lectures on the Madhyama-āgama (#p376218)

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Apr 03, 2016 5:37 am

"Yes, and he's very modest about all of it, which makes listening to his talks such a
pleasure, and makes him so worthy of respect in my opinion. There's never any sense
that he's trying to put down other viewpoints.
"

Judging from the two Satipatthana books, he most often presents the range of interpretations (viewpoints) accurately and dispassionately. Surprisingly, though, he argues for the "bare awareness" take on sati at length (in Vol 1), seemingly following Western modernist sentiment, i.e. arguing against the "memory" dimension of its meaning. Surprising because it seems less than even-handed, and at other places he makes statements that contradict don't seem to follow that theory. The explanation of 'ekāyano' as "direct path" vs exclusive ("the only path") seems also a bit forced; more direct, so to speak, would rendering it as exclusively directed to the goal. (The extensively convoluted ins-and-outs of the whole satipatthana exposition doesn't fit with a sense of simple directness, IMO.)

Some passages are quite brilliant, e.g. at one point he summarizes using the word "dhamma" in 5 of its various senses: (1st book, page 186; emphasis and bracketed comments added):
"Thus contemplation of dhammas [satipatthana 4th method] skilfully applies dhammas (classificatory categories [i.e. Abhidhamma?]) as taught in the Dhamma (the teaching of the Buddha) during contemplation in order to bring about an understanding of the dhamma (principle) of conditionality and lead to the realization of the highest of all dhammas (phenomena): Nibbāna."

I suspect one should take into account that the 1st book was a rework of his doctoral thesis, where he was taking pains to cover all bases; so also a relatively immature work, reflecting s/t more academic flourish than considered insight.

Some of his other monographs are rather markedly dispassionate, i.e. s/w dry.

I was drawn to his work by the enthusiastic recommendation of others who tend to idolize his work. Hence perhaps some kind of expectation, on the one hand, and triggering a closer, more critical approach to reading his stuff, on the other hand.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo's Lectures on the Madhyama-āgama

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi CJMacie,
cjmacie wrote:Surprisingly, though, he argues for the "bare awareness" take on sati at length (in Vol 1), seemingly following Western modernist sentiment, i.e. arguing against the "memory" dimension of its meaning. Surprising because it seems less than even-handed, and at other places he makes statements that contradict don't seem to follow that theory.
I think it depends on how you interpret "bare attention". I thought it was just a catchy phrase to describe what the Visuddhimagga and the Burmese meditation approaches (Mahasi, Goenka, etc, etc) are on about when the refer to "paramattha dhammas". Those sources are hardly modern or Western...

The Power of Mindfulness
An Inquiry into the Scope of Bare Attention and the Principal Sources of its Strength
by Nyanaponika Thera
By bare attention we understand the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens to us and in us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called "bare" because it attends to the bare facts of a perception without reacting to them by deed, speech or mental comment. Ordinarily, that purely receptive state of mind is, as we said, just a very brief phase of the thought process of which one is often scarcely aware. But in the methodical development of mindfulness aimed at the unfolding of its latent powers, bare attention is sustained for as long a time as one's strength of concentration permits. Bare attention then becomes the key to the meditative practice of satipatthana, opening the door to mind's mastery and final liberation.
...
... Particularly in an age like ours, with its superstitious worship of ceaseless external activity, there will be those who ask: "How can such a passive attitude of mind as that of bare attention possibly lead to the great results claimed for it?" In reply, one may be inclined to suggest to the questioner not to rely on the words of others, but to put these assertions of the Buddha to the test of personal experience. ...
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo's Lectures on the Madhyama-āgama

Post by cjmacie »

postby mikenz66 » Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:07 am

"I think it depends on how you interpret "bare attention". "
Absolutely, and that topic (I notice in doing some searching here) is a can of worms that's been sifted through repeatedly and at length on DhammaWheel. Likewise on DharmaOverground – for instance:
http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/gue ... ge/5700969" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Those sources are hardly modern or Western..."
The interpretation of "bare awareness/attention/…" I referred to as "Western modernist sentiment" is largely influenced by the writings of Than-Goeff and Rupert Gethin (all of which have been cited around here extensively, both pro and con, as also in the DhO thread above).

In particular, Gethin's analysis that Nyanaponika's initial use of "bare" was ostensibly referring the avajjana (‘turning towards (the object)’) micro-mind-moment in the Abhidhamma schema of "the cognitive series", which he then apparently elaborated into a factor of higher-order uses of sati. And notably a report from Bhikkhu Bodhi that Nyanaponika was s/w taken aback by how that idea was later exploited in the popular insight-vipassana movement. ("Bhikkhu Bodhi (2006) recalled that when Ven. Nyanaponika would read statements about “bare attention” as interpreted by some of the neo-Vipassanā teachers, he would sometimes shake his head and say, in effect, “But that’s not what I meant at all!”) *

The research into translation issues gets s/w tedious after a while, but I've also just noticed, for instance, how "bare insight" becomes the rendering of Mahasi Sayadaw's ** "suddhavipassanā", where "suddha" (part participle ~ adjective) is in fact more commonly taken as "purified"; compare the closely related noun "suddhi" (as in Visuddhimagga).

* btw, apropos the current discussion thread, note the teacher/student lineage progression: Nyanatiloka Mahathera -- Nyanaponika Thera -- Bhikkhu Bodhi -- Bhikku Analayo.

** In a translation of Mahasi's lectures on the Wheel of Dhamma Sutta.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi CJMacie. As you say, there have been a lot of discussions about bare attention, etc on this board, such as here: New Book on Mindfulness by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

I've expressed my views on this apparent controversy there, so there's no need for me to say more.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo's Lectures on the Madhyama-āgama

Post by Dhammanando »

cjmacie wrote:The research into translation issues gets s/w tedious after a while, but I've also just noticed, for instance, how "bare insight" becomes the rendering of Mahasi Sayadaw's ** "suddhavipassanā", where "suddha" (part participle ~ adjective) is in fact more commonly taken as "purified"; compare the closely related noun "suddhi" (as in Visuddhimagga).
I’m not sure which is to be preferred from a doctrinal point of view, but as far as philology goes “bare” and “purified” are both possible renderings.

Whereas the prefix-modified visuddha and parisuddha are unambiguously concerned with purity, the unmodified suddha has a broader range of meanings, one of which is ‘mere’, ‘simple’, ‘plain’, ‘bare’. In the commentaries it will sometimes be glossed with the delimiting indeclinable particle eva: ‘just’, ‘only’.

For example, the suddhakesā in the Vinaya’s second saṅghādisesa rule is “mere hair” (as contrasted with hair that’s been decorated with garlands, gems or whatever). Or the suddhasaṅkhārapuñja of the Vajirasutta is not a “purified mass of compositions” but a “mere mass of compositions”.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by Dhammanando »

cjmacie wrote:The explanation of 'ekāyano' as "direct path" vs exclusive ("the only path") seems also a bit forced; more direct, so to speak, would rendering it as exclusively directed to the goal. (The extensively convoluted ins-and-outs of the whole satipatthana exposition doesn't fit with a sense of simple directness, IMO.)
I found his arguments for "direct path" quite convincing. Your objection regarding convolutedness might hold water if the cessation of suffering depended on one's doing each and every thing described in the sutta, but plainly it doesn't, for the Ānāpānassatisutta (for example) makes a complete path out of just mindfulness of breathing.

In my opinion, if there is any fault in Anālayo's presentation it's that he is rather too charitable to the exclusive "only path" interpretation.* Firstly, I think it's questionable whether this is really a faithful paraphrase of any of the five commentarial glosses on ekāyana; secondly, even if I were to agree with Anālayo that the fourth gloss can be paraphrased this way, I would still consider it the least probable of the possibilities offered on account of the huge philological and semantic stretch that it requires.

* In saying that I don't mean to suggest that satipaṭṭhāna is not the only way, but merely that this is unlikely to be what is being said here.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

"Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention
Postby mikenz66 » Sun Jun 26, 2016 4:06 am
Hi CJMacie. As you say, there have been a lot of discussions about bare attention, etc on this board, such as here: New Book on Mindfulness by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
I've expressed my views on this apparent controversy there, so there's no need for me to say more.
"

The link/URL in there circles back to the thread that it's in ("Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention").

Then "Search..." on "New Book on Mindfulness by Thanissaro Bhikkhu" comes up with a thread by that name consisting of a half-dozen cryptic exchanges between "dandeLion" and "twelph" -- nothing to see posted by "mikenz66", and very little substantive about Than-Geoff's book.

Maybe some thread where "mikenz66" contributed was fragmented (split-off) into other threads? In this case looks like the main thread (something substantive about Than-Geoff's book?) got lost, renamed, ...?

Anyway, "mikenz66", I'm still looking for your "views on this apparent controversy"... Can you help track them down?

Chris M
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by mikenz66 »

cjmacie wrote: Postby mikenz66 » Sun Jun 26, 2016 4:06 am
Hi CJMacie. As you say, there have been a lot of discussions about bare attention, etc on this board, such as here: New Book on Mindfulness by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
I've expressed my views on this apparent controversy there, so there's no need for me to say more. [/color]"

The link/URL in there circles back to the thread that it's in ("Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention"). ...
Very sorry, I copied the wrong URL. I've fixed it above, and my comments are here:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 20#p201464

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention
Postby Dhammanando » Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:51 pm
cjmacie wrote:
The explanation of 'ekāyano' as "direct path" vs exclusive ("the only path") seems also a bit forced; more direct, so to speak, would rendering it as exclusively directed to the goal. (The extensively convoluted ins-and-outs of the whole satipatthana exposition doesn't fit with a sense of simple directness, IMO
.)

I found his arguments for "direct path" quite convincing. Your objection regarding convolutedness might hold water if the cessation of suffering depended on one's doing each and every thing described in the sutta, but plainly it doesn't, for the Ānāpānassatisutta (for example) makes a complete path out of just mindfulness of breathing.

Maybe I can find an answer then here. The satipatthana sutta maps an elaborately structured path -- almost encyclopedic, as if a reference work rather than an instruction manual. Mahasi S. followers (and others) seem to treat it as if the single most important sutta, "the only way to go", so to speak. Teachings along those lines don't seem to highlight that release does not depend on carrying out each step, although Analayo regularly (in his 2 books) mentions that at many points of practice in the maze the breakthrough to release can happen, as, of course, documented in the many other suttas which he also cites. At another extreme, V. Sujato argues the Satipatthana S is total fabrication, almost doctrinal/political, and things like the Anapanasatisutta more reflect G.Buddha's actual teachings. Is there more than just this spectrum (tangle) of views?
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi again Chris:
cjmacie wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:
"Yes, and he's very modest about all of it, which makes listening to his talks such a
pleasure, and makes him so worthy of respect in my opinion. There's never any sense
that he's trying to put down other viewpoints.
"
...
I was drawn to his work by the enthusiastic recommendation of others who tend to idolize his work. Hence perhaps some kind of expectation, on the one hand, and triggering a closer, more critical approach to reading his stuff, on the other hand.
Note that the admiration I expressed for Bhikkhu Analayo above was around his attitude to discourse, particularly his care in acknowledging other possible interpretations and opinions, rather than the brilliance, or not, of his arguments. This attitude makes it easy to get a lot of value from his talks, even when there is some disagreement with some of his ideas or conclusions.

For me this is an important attribute. Of course, it is not unique. He shares it with a number of other teachers whose talks I have found a lot of value in, including Bhikkhu Bodhi and a number of the Ajahn Chah group monastics (such as Ajahns Amaro, Munindo, Jayasaro...).

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

Dhammanando » Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:14 pm
cjmacie wrote:
The research into translation issues gets s/w tedious after a while, but I've also just noticed, for instance, how "bare insight" becomes the rendering of Mahasi Sayadaw's ** "suddhavipassanā", where "suddha" (part participle ~ adjective) is in fact more commonly taken as "purified"; compare the closely related noun "suddhi" (as in Visuddhimagga).


I’m not sure which is to be preferred from a doctrinal point of view, but as far as philology goes “bare” and “purified” are both possible renderings...

Thank you for the further information on 'suddha', i.e. from Vinaya usage, which is beyond the scope of what most amateur philologists (like myself) are familiar with. The term "mere" is an interesting variant.

My interpretation of the "bare" usage is colored by reaction to the way it's used in popular (lay) teachings, aka "choiceless awareness", which seems to ignore the extent to which unconscious fabrication is present in virtually all attention of an "uninstructed" mind. Teachers at the level of Sayadaws Mahasi and Nyanaponika Thera are, I suspect, using the term in a different sense, where the presence of fabrication is more clearly understood; where there's a sort of mindfulness pressure applied to know and overcome the deeply-rooted tendencies for awareness to fall into conditioned "perception".

Analagously, I've noticed, in closely reading Mahasi's descriptions, that "noting" is used to mean more than just "labeling" the fleeting state-processes; he describes it as more in-depth "knowing" (gnosis – from which the English word "note" derives), rather than simply conceptualizing.

Again, thanks for the perspective. You are off tomorrow on "rains retreat"?

Chris M
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

by mikenz66 » Sun Jun 26, 2016 4:31 pm
... my comments are here:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 20#p201464" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Thanks, that works.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by mikenz66 »

cjmacie wrote: My interpretation of the "bare" usage is colored by reaction to the way it's used in popular (lay) teachings, aka "choiceless awareness", which seems to ignore the extent to which unconscious fabrication is present in virtually all attention of an "uninstructed" mind. Teachers at the level of Sayadaws Mahasi and Nyanaponika Thera are, I suspect, using the term in a different sense, where the presence of fabrication is more clearly understood; where there's a sort of mindfulness pressure applied to know and overcome the deeply-rooted tendencies for awareness to fall into conditioned "perception".
Well, yes, that seems to be the point. You have to observe carefully to be able to figure that out.

And the strength to do that requires quite a lot more effort than some critics realise. There was some discussion here recently:
Allowing Things to Arise (Ven. Sumedho)

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

Sorry for dredging up a way-past thread (brought to my attention by mikenz66), but tracing through it I found a passage that triggered a perspective on meanings of "bare awareness" – a little exercise in Mahasi/Abhidhamma pariyatti. Perhaps someone here can, if it's at all intelligible, help me see if it's in the ballpark (this thread), or in what way misled.

Re: New Book on Mindfulness by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (#p203173) page 5
Postby badscooter » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:26 am
"…Venerable Yuttadhammo's position on mindfulness…"

"According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not."

"So, sati would be better translated as “recognition”,…"

"…what the Buddha really meant in the Satipaṭṭḥāna Sutta, when he said, as quoted earlier, “when walking, one fully comprehends: ‘I am walking’.” It is clear that he did not mean that we should be aware that we are walking, since awareness is common to animals and ordinary people alike. Simply recognizing that we are walking is something that requires no meditative training whatsoever."

"To “fully comprehend” (pajānāti), one must cultivate the mental quality of “sati” or fortified recognition (thīra-saññā) by reminding oneself of the essential nature of the experience, as in “walking”.
Reminding oneself of what one already recognizes in this way is equivalent to arresting the mind’s natural progression into projecting, judging, clinging, seeking, building up, and finally suffering."

I fabricated an interpretation from this that "fortified recognition" occurs in a second mental state-process which constitutes "knowing" of a initial state-process "for what it is". I.e. the first state, e.g. touched-off by some contact (one of 5 or 6 doors/gates) proceeded into "ordinary recognition (saññā)", associating conditioned meaning with the phenomenon. But then immediately a 2nd mental event (at the mind-gate) sees and recognizes that process for what it was; that is to say, it "bares" it by seeing how it evoked association as perception (when it moved from the "bare", in another sense, "adverting" to the stimulus, to the determining of "what it was", i.e. perceptual recognition). This like Sariputta's knowing what he was knowing in MN 111?

This view perhaps "fortified" by memory of a dhamma-talk by one Thuzana Sayadaw (abott of Tatagatha Meditation Center in San Jose, Calif. – a Mahasi-Pandita institution). In expounding on perception (saññā), he pointed out that invariably a 5-door/gate mental event is immediately followed by a mind-door/gate event that is the knowing of the 1st one.

So, hypothesizing that the application of sharp mindfulness at this 2nd event can be what "bares" the true nature, "firm recognition", of the initial phenomenon experienced. So, perhaps the extended sense of "bare" awareness that Nyanaponika meant as so instrumental on the path was extending or transforming idea of the initial "bare" adverting mind-moment (which, as he said, passes in a very brief instant) into a notion of the doubled mental event (two cognitive series, in Abhidhamma-speak) where the 2nd one vividly knows, recognizes the 1st (including it's determining, perception, and impulsions or kammic processing and subsequent registration, including possibly "clinging" or the like); that it "bares" "what it really was" *, reveals the mental processing and reaction of the initial phenomenon. That is to say, knows it with penetrating insight ("Reminding oneself of what one already recognizes" as Venerable Yuttadhammo put it).

This perhaps assumes a pre- or sub-arahant attitude, where one is still pathing, working to transform mundane experiencing.

badscooter concluded: "Do you see any distinctions between the this and Thanissaro's work?"

Than-Geoff isn't much of an Adhidhamma fan – Thai Forest types generally don't seem have elaborate libraries or study Abdhidhamma or the commentaries as the Burmese tend to (to echo a point that twelph subsequently brought-up in the thread) – but the practice of mindfulness to further insight might be seen as a commonality here.

* i.e. suddhavipassana – purified insight?
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Bhikkhu Analayo and bare attention

Post by cjmacie »

Another reflection from dredging up an old thread (Re: New Book on Mindfulness by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (#p205445)), though this s/w more substantial, less hypothetical -- establishing that Nyanaponika was NOT endorsing Krishnamurti's "choiceless awareness".

Postby Dmytro » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:57 pm

[excerpt quoted there from Nyanaponika's "SATIPATTHᾹNA DER WEG DER ACHTSAMKEIT"– "The Path of Mindfulness [the German also suggests "Heedfulness"]" 1979; Chapter V "Mental quietude and clear vision [samadhi & vipassana]", subheading "The value of mental gathering in vipassana training" p.7]

" Es besteht freilich die Gefahr, daß die Eigenart dieser Methode in allzu einseitiger Perspektive verzeichnet wird, als ein extremer Pendelausschlag gegen Übungswege, welche die Konzentration auf ein einziges Objekt in den Mittelpunkt stellen. Man mag etwa meinen, daß willentliche Konzentration auf ein einziges Objekt oder gar jede methodische Übung wegen ihres angeblichen Zwangscharakters verwerflich seien und es ausreichend sei, eine nicht wählende Achtsamkeit lediglich auf das zu richten, was der Tag zuträgt. Dies ist zum Beispiel die Ansicht Krishnamurtis. Diese Einstellung findet auch Unterstützung durch eine vom Einfluß der Psychoanalyse genährte Furcht, daß jeder formende, wählende und ausschließende Eingriff in das geistige Gefüge zu Verkrampfungen, Verdrängungen und schließlich Neurosen führen mag. In all dem liegt ein berechtigter Kern, und gerade die Satipatthāna-Methode hat dem durch ihren «gewaltlosen», zwangfreien Charakter Rechnung getragen, ohne jedoch in die Extreme der vorgenannten Ansichten zu verfallen."

My translation (substantially similar to the GoogleTranslation that tiltbillings cited, slightly more grammatically accurate):

"There's the danger that the special (own) character of this method will be depicted in an overly one-sided perspective, as an extreme pendulum-swing away from practices which center on concentration on a single object.

"One might think that willful concentration on a single object, or in fact any methodical practice, on account of its presumed forcing-character would be objectionable, and it would be enough to direct a non-choosing attention simply on that which the day brings on [which simply arises].
This, for example, is the view of Krishnamutri.

"This attitude also finds support in a fear nourished by the influence of psycho-analysis, that may lead every forming, choosing, and exclusionary intervention in the mental fabric to cramping-up, coercion, and finally neurosis.

"In all these there's a justifiable kernal (of truth), and so the Satipatthana-Method has taken account of them, their "force-less", coercion-free character --
without in fact falling into the extremes of the above named views [including Krishnamurti's]."

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Sep 09, 2012 4:26 pm
"It seems what Ven Nyanaponika is talking about, within the Buddhist context, is a bit different than what Krishnamurti is suggesting."

Clearly, Nyanaponika is here not pledging allegiance to Krishnamurti's view.

(And also because, I would suggest, in the broader context of Nyanaponika's apolgetic for the Mahasi method, that Nyanaponika would surely also be taking into account Mahasi's insistence that the vipassana approach also, critically so, involves concentration – albeit khanika-vipassana-samadhi, or moment-by-moment concentration on what arises (as "deeply seen" - vipassana). This concentration does not try to fixate on the image of a single persisting object (as does jhana-samadhi), BUT does focus on the momentary object with an intensity that Mahasi insists can be/should be every much as strong as absorptive concentration. That is to say, there's nothing so relaxed or carefree (Than-Geoff might say "heedless") about advanced Mahasi vipassana that would put in the same category as Krishnamurti's (or perhaps more light-weight contemporary insight teachings).)

As the very next paragraph in Nyanponika's book confirms:
"Der Buddha, als ein «Kenner der Welt» (loka-vidu) und besonders der Welt des Geistes, lehrte «mit Unterschied» (pariyāyena). Er wußte, daß der Geist in seinen so mannigfachen Stimmungen und Strebungen zuweilen des Anspornens und der Kräfteanspannung bedarf, zuweilen aber des Entspannens und der Beruhigung, und manchmal auch der Aufheiterung und Anregung (Samyutta Nikāya 46.51, 53; Visuddhi-Magga IV); daß der so flatterhafte Geist häufig energische Zügelung braucht (Dhammapada 33-37); daß der so ungefüge durch regelmäßige Übung an Bildsamkeit gewinnt (Anguttara I, 3)."

Paraphrase: The Buddha … knew well that the mind … berife with its moods and strivings … needs both effort and tranquilization… in its fickleness, needs often engergetic brideling (Zuegelung, as with a horse)… to reach the goal. And (in next paragraph down) as per the Middle Way…

P.S. Thanks, all, for the opportunity to nail this issue down (did Nyanaponika derive from Krishnamurti?), which I had run across previously, and had collected Krishnamurti's and Nyanaponika's writings, but had balked at the daunting task of sifting through it all.
Post Reply