Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Dmytro » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:27 am

tiltbillings wrote:
Dmytro wrote:Sati (remembrance) means either recollection of past events, or remembrance in the present. In the context of Satipatthana, it's remembrance in the present.
And how is that different from what Ven Analayo has put forth?

Dmytro wrote:Ven. Analayo writes that in the context of Satipatthana, 'sati' isn't related to memory, but means instead "present moment awareness", "bare attention", etc.
Does not answer my question, nor does it help when you take what Ven Analayo has to say out of it full context.


OK, I will rephrase. I wrote that in the context of Satipatthana, sati is remembrance, i.e. is related to memory. Ven. Analayo writes that in this context, 'sati' isn't related to memory. That's the difference.
User avatar
Dmytro
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Ben » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:29 am

This might be of interest:

The mental factor "mindfulness" (sati-cetasika), called diversely satipatthàna, satindriya, sati-bala, sammà-sati magganga, this is Sati-sambojjhanga, the Enlightenment-factor "Mindfulness".

-- Bodhipakkhiya-dhamma Dipani, Ledi Sayadaw, http://www.noblepath.info/recommended_b ... ayadaw.pdf

kind regards,

Ben
"Only those who take to meditation with good intentions can be assured of success. With the development of the purity and the power of the mind backed by the insight into the ultimate truth of nature, one might be able to do a lot of things in the right direction for the benefit of mankind."

Sayagyi U Ba Khin


Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief
UNHCR Syria Emergency Relief AppealTyphoon Haiyan Relief AppealKiva: (person to person micro-finance)

e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com
User avatar
Ben
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15790
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Land of the sleeping gods

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:31 am

Dmytro wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Dmytro wrote:Sati (remembrance) means either recollection of past events, or remembrance in the present. In the context of Satipatthana, it's remembrance in the present.
And how is that different from what Ven Analayo has put forth?

Dmytro wrote:Ven. Analayo writes that in the context of Satipatthana, 'sati' isn't related to memory, but means instead "present moment awareness", "bare attention", etc.
Does not answer my question, nor does it help when you take what Ven Analayo has to say out of it full context.


OK, I will rephrase. I wrote that in the context of Satipatthana, sati is remembrance, i.e. is related to memory. Ven. Analayo writes that in this context, 'sati' isn't related to memory. That's the difference.
Okay, thanks, and in this I'll go with Ven Analayo. He makes a better case.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:45 am

Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:Okay, then what is the "relentless tyranny of the empirical consciousness?" And this -- 'That is, the "myth of the given"' -- means what? While these expressions may mean something to you two, they very may not mean anything to others reading this, which is to say, then, the response does not answer the question in the context it was asked.

How about this (as a rough approximation, which I'll allow Geoff to improve on).... it's the taking of that which is experienced as being objectively real, rather than rightly seeing whatever is experienced as a fabrication. Put another way, it relates to not correctly seeing the whirlpool/vortex that exists between consciousness and name-and-form, and therefore falsely assuming that the sense-consciousness has not been cognitively fashioned with respect to nama-rupa. Thus, in the context of vipassana/satipatthana, it pertains to not recognising that the very object you are "perceiving" is in fact a 'mind-made' fabrication, which came to be on account of that nama-rupa <> vinnana relationship. It does not exist as an experienced and conditioned phenomena with the three characteristics, outside of that nama-rupa/vinnana context.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14522
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:53 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:Okay, then what is the "relentless tyranny of the empirical consciousness?" And this -- 'That is, the "myth of the given"' -- means what? While these expressions may mean something to you two, they very may not mean anything to others reading this, which is to say, then, the response does not answer the question in the context it was asked.

How about this (as a rough approximation, which I'll allow Geoff to improve on).... it's the taking of that which is experienced as being objectively real, rather than rightly seeing whatever is experienced as a fabrication. Put another way, it relates to not correctly seeing the whirlpool/vortex that exists between consciousness and name-and-form, and therefore assuming that the consciousness has not been fashioned with respect to nama-rupa.

Metta,
Retro. :)
I certainly do not know of any Buddhist meditation practice that advocates taking what is experienced as objectively real, but is seeing the conditioned rise and fall of the mind/body (inclusive of "consciousness") process is a nice way of seeing that there is no thing upon which to stand, also, in time, that there is no standee.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:00 am

Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:I certainly do not know of any Buddhist meditation practice that advocates....

Non-sequitir defence.

This line of enquiry came up in response to your question, "So, where in all of this are we free of conceptual structuring, papañca?", which I assume you have now answered as per your post immediately above (though I'm not sure we regard nama-rupa the same way).

It is not about defend or attack.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14522
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:03 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

I certainly do not know of any Buddhist meditation practice that advocates

Non-sequitir defence.

This line of enquiry came up in response to your questions "So, where in all of this are we free of conceptual structuring, papañca?", which I assume you have now answered (though I'm not sure we regard nama-rupa the same way)

Metta,
Retro. :)
I can assure that how ever I regard nama-rupa, it is the correct way.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:04 am

Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:I can assure that how ever I regard nama-rupa, it is the correct way.

... and I am equally sure that that is how you will continue to regard it.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14522
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:37 pm

tiltbillings wrote:You seem to be implying that apologetics is not a good thing, but like anything it depends.

Of course.

tiltbillings wrote:As far as my protest and complaints go, they certainly are a valid response to the those who are, to use your word, unconcerned about accurately portraying the Burmese vipassana traditions.

I was speaking of a lack of interest in Burmese vipassanā in general. If one isn't tied to the thought-world of the Vissudhimagga, then Burmese vipassanā doesn't really have much to offer that's especially interesting or important.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:36 pm

tiltbillings wrote:I certainly do not know of any Buddhist meditation practice that advocates taking what is experienced as objectively real....

This is either a disingenuous statement or you are uninformed (or misinformed) about the Vipassanā meditation traditions which are based upon the view presented in the Visuddhimagga and further elaborated in post-Visuddhimagga commentaries.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Sekha » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:40 pm

Dmytro wrote:
Dukkhanirodha wrote:Can you explain then how it would make sense that the ability to recollect the past would be developped by observing the reality of the body and mind in the present moment, otherwise than by the way explained in the twofold definition I gave above (see immediately previous post)?


Sati (remembrance) means either recollection of past events, or remembrance in the present. In the context of Satipatthana, it's remembrance in the present.

and can you explain how then you understand "remembrance in the present" as being fundamentally different from "awareness in the present"?


Dmytro wrote:
Dukkhanirodha wrote:and that your views are in contradiction with those of at least two of the greatest meditation teachers we have today: Pa Auk Sayadaw and SN Goenka (for the latter I can easily provide the proof).

I would appreciate if you would provide the definition of 'sati' by Ven. Pa Auk Sayadaw and S N Goenka.

Goenka:
There are certain passages in the Buddha’s discourses where sati has the meaning of "memory." (Dīgha-nikāya: VRI I. 411; II. 374; PTS I. 180; II. 292). This is especially true when he refers to the special ability of remembering past lives which is developed by means of the practice of the jhānas (deep absorption concentration). But in the context of Satipaṭṭhāna, the practice of Vipassana, leading not to the jhānas but to purification of mind, sati can only be understood to mean awareness of the present moment rather than a memory of the past (or a dream of the future).

For Pa Auk there is probably no particular definition given by him. As stated above, he uses the word "mindfulness" to translate sati in the context of meditation practice and that seems to be good enough for him.


Dmytro wrote:
Dukkhanirodha wrote:I also bring under your attention that you have still not provided a satisfactory response to the contextual analysis I proposed.
This answer looks very much like an attempt to drown the fish. (...)
(...)
I consider my answer highly relevant and reliable, since it comes from the Theravada tradition itself.

It seems you grant a lot of credit to the late Theravada tradition. I don't see any valid ground for this. Rather, the only thing I consider as highly relevant and reliable is right practice with aroused effort for a long time.
Canki sutta (MN 95) wrote:'something may be fully accepted by oral tradition, and yet it may be empty, hollow, and false'

Sandaka Sutta (MN 76) wrote:when 'some teacher is a traditionalist, one who regards oral tradition as truth, he teaches a Dhamma by oral tradition, by legends handed down, by what has come down in scriptures, but when a teacher is a traditionalist, one who regards oral tradition as truth, some is well remembered and some is wrongly remembered, some is true and some is otherwise'.


Dmytro wrote:If you will provide a precise explanation of this passage from the suttas themselves, I will appreciate it.

I have already provided it to you quite some time ago. viewtopic.php?f=16&t=10583&start=20#p161171
litterally I understand 'parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā' as 'setting the presence of the mind at the moustache area'

and I repeat again: you are not able to provide a proper translation of 'parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā' since it would look like:
'setting the recollection/remembrance at the moustache area'



Dmytro wrote:
Dukkhanirodha wrote:All sixteen talks had been prepared in English, and then read in English by the Sayadaw

So I am afraid you are forced to admit that it happens that you are wrong

I admit that I have mistaken, in that the talks were prepared in English.
Nevertheless, the usage of the term 'mindfulness' is strongly dictated by the Western Buddhist traditions. Very few people dared to use different term for 'sati'. So the usage of the term 'mindfulness' proves very little.

I think i will stop trying to argue with you because you openly refuse to admit the evidence, which reveals your lack of intellectual honesty. Pa Auk sayadaw does accept mindfulness as a valid translation of sati into english, workable in the context of the practice. It proves that your views are in contradiction with those of the greatest meditation teachers, and that the interpretation of sati as "mindfulness" is backed-up by them.

This is not a playground for anyone to show off their erudition. We are discussing the precious teaching we got from 2600 back in time and we have to be very careful about each of our declarations since there is a danger to mislead the readers of our posts.
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli

http://www.buddha-vacana.org
User avatar
Sekha
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby dhamma follower » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:59 pm

Dmytro wrote:Hi Dhamma Follower,

Similarly, the definition of 'sati' through four satipatthanas dosnt mean that the definition of "remembrance" (sati) is "being focused" (anupassana).



Hi Dmytro,

I didn't say that sati was "being focused". What i said was that sati doesn't only mean to remember to distinguish the wholesome from the unwholesome, but also means remembering ( i'd call it recording, actually) the working of the five khandas as they arise. It is not so much about the remembrance aspect of sati, but about the object of this "remembrance" .

Without this "recording" of the arising of different dhammas here and now, how sampajana can come to know the characteristics of reality?

And as I've said in an earlier post, sati can only do recording of different dhammas in details when sampajana becomes stronger, and in turn, from what sati records about reality, sampajana increases.

This understanding, I think, is supported by the gradual order of subtleties as shown in the Mahasatipatthana.

This is the reason why sati-sampajana go in tandem in the Maha satipatthana sutta, I think.

Regards,
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby dhamma follower » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:04 pm

dhamma follower wrote:Tilakkhana is not remembered, but understood by panna.

Again, the recognition of impermanence always relies on memory and is therefore always inferential. And since the recognition of unsatisfactoriness and the recognition of selflessness are based upon the recognition of impermanence they too are inferential.[/quote]

Hi Nana,

Would you provide textual support for this?

By Inferential, do you mean through a kind of mental process, no direct understanding?


Regards
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby dhamma follower » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:13 pm

Ñāṇa wrote:
Sati functions to direct awareness away from the five strands of sensual pleasure and place.


The above seems to conflict with what we read here:

Bhikkhus, the bhikkhu following my Teaching knows[49] the mind accompanied by passion,[50] as 'Mind with passion'; he knows the mind unaccompanied by passion, as 'Mind without passion'; he also knows the mind accompanied by anger,[51] as 'Mind with anger'; he also knows the mind unaccompanied by anger, as 'Mind without anger'; he also knows the mind accompanied by bewilderment,[52] as 'Mind with bewilderment'; he also knows the mind unaccompanied by bewilderment, as 'Mind without bewilderment'; he also knows the indolent state of mind,[53] as 'Indolent state of mind'; he also knows the distracted state of mind,[54] as 'Distracted state of mind'; he also knows the developed state of mind,[55] as 'Developed state of mind'; he also knows the undeveloped state of mind,[56] as 'Undeveloped state of mind': he also knows the inferior state of mind, as 'Inferior state of mind'; he also knows the superior state of mind,[57] as 'Superior state of mind'; he also knows the mind in a state of concentration,[58] as 'Mind in a state of concentration'; he also knows the mind not in a state of concentration,[59] as 'Mind not in a state of concentration'; he also knows 'the liberated state of mind,[60] as 'Liberated state of mind'; he also knows the unliberated state of mind,[61] as 'Unliberated state of mind'.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .bpit.html

Reagrds,
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:36 pm

Dukkhanirodha wrote:and can you explain how then you understand "remembrance in the present" as being fundamentally different from "awareness in the present"?


I'm not Dmytro, but I'd like to jump in. As Nana pointed out, "awareness" is vinnana. The "consciousness" as it is used in the context of Dhamma always means an awareness of something. When you're conscious of something (whether deluded or not)... it's actually always in the present. How would you differentiate that from the definition of sati as an "awareness in the present"?

What does it mean to be "mindful"of something? What does that entail to you? To me, it means that you're holding something "in mind" as consistently as possible. This is what the word "remembrance" means. In the context of Dhamma, you're always mindful of the Buddha's teachings. You're mindful about doing your practice in the context of the Dhamma. That is "remembrance."

Also, I think another issue in here might have to do with time... some people seem to think that "remembrance" implies that one is dwelling in the past, and that the "mindfulness" implies that one is living in present. This kind of thinking is in error. There is actually no such thing as a "present moment"... it's all impermanence.

Trying to fixate oneself in the "present moment" is to risk grappling with eternalism. The "present moment" is to anicca in the same way that "self" is to anatta. For the longest time, I would be a bit confused why many people seem to want define the "mindfulness" as (solely) being aware of the present moment. If you actually paid attention to your practice, you can clearly see that it's an illusion. It's exactly the same as trying to find a "self".

Trying to cultivate the "awareness of the present moment" seems to be the same as trying to cultivate the awareness of "self". You're basically trying to see something that just isn't there. I guess that's maybe why these people want to define "mindfulness" in that way... they want to find some comfort by settling themselves into the "permanence" of the present moment. It's very subtle... and causes a lot of dukkha, as can be seen in this thread.

When you "remember" something, it always becomes a part of the "present moment" anyway. So what's the issue, really?

:anjali:
Last edited by beeblebrox on Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:14 pm, edited 7 times in total.
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:38 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:I can assure that how ever I regard nama-rupa, it is the correct way.

... and I am equally sure that that is how you will continue to regard it.

Metta,
Retro. :)
It was a joke, son, a joke, However what is not a joke, when I refer to the mind/body process, if I were to be asked what I mean, though this all can be talked about in various, and sometime very complex ways, I would say, keeping it simple, just six things: the conditioned rise and fall what is seen, what is heard, what is smelled, what is tasted, what is touched, what cognized, as the Buddha said: "you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself."
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:41 pm

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:You seem to be implying that apologetics is not a good thing, but like anything it depends.

Of course.

tiltbillings wrote:As far as my protest and complaints go, they certainly are a valid response to the those who are, to use your word, unconcerned about accurately portraying the Burmese vipassana traditions.

I was speaking of a lack of interest in Burmese vipassanā in general. If one isn't tied to the thought-world of the Vissudhimagga, then Burmese vipassanā doesn't really have much to offer that's especially interesting or important.
So, your opinion, but the reality is very different, thank the Buddha.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:02 pm

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:I certainly do not know of any Buddhist meditation practice that advocates taking what is experienced as objectively real....

This is either a disingenuous statement or you are uninformed (or misinformed) about the Vipassanā meditation traditions which are based upon the view presented in the Visuddhimagga and further elaborated in post-Visuddhimagga commentaries.
And this enters into a set of topics the moves far afield from the OP, but has been discussed at length here, and, of course, it never, ever is so black and white as what you are trying to make it.

In his study of Mahasi Sayadaw vipassana practice STRONG ROOTS, Jake Davis, page 190-1, states:
Recall that from the perspective of the Buddha’s teachings in the Pali, the ‘All’ {SN IV 15} is composed entirely of phassa, contact between sense base and sense object. We can only directly know phenomena within this ‘world of experience’, so from the Theravadin perspective, we cannot know whether there really exists a ‘brain’ or a ‘body’ apart from moments of intellectual consciousness, of seeing (the image of a brain), and so on. The discourses of the Pali describe an individual world of experience as composed of various mental and physical factors, nama and rupa. These two are not the separate, independent worlds that Rene Descartes envisioned.

"…the Buddha spoke of the human person as a psychophysical personality (namarupa). Yet the psychic and the physical were never discussed in isolation, nor were they viewed as self-subsistent entities. For him, there was neither a ‘material-stuff’ nor a ‘mental-stuff’, because both are results of reductive analyses that go beyond experience."53

The physical and mental aspects of human experience are continually arising together, intimately dependent on one another.

53 Kalupahana 1976: 73, refers to D.15{II,62}, where the Buddha speaks of both
physicality and mentality mutually dependent forms of contact (phassa).
Physicality is described as contact with resistance (pat.ighasamphassa),
mentality as contact with concepts (adhivacanasamphassa).
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:11 pm

beeblebrox wrote:What does it mean to be "mindful"of something? What does that entail to you? To me, it means that you're holding something "in mind" as consistently as possible. This is what the word "remembrance" means. In the context of Dhamma, you're always mindful of the Buddha's teachings. You're mindful about doing your practice in the context of the Dhamma. That is "remembrance."
Have you read anything Ven Analayo has written on the subject?

Also, I think another issue in here might have to do with time... some people seem to think that "remembrance" implies that one is dwelling in the past, and that the "mindfulness" implies that one is living in present. This is in error. There is actually no such thing as a "present moment"... it's all impermanence.

Trying to fixate oneself in the "present moment" is to risk grappling with eternalism. The "present moment" (or "time," actually, as it is divided up by people in the past, present, and future) is to anicca in the same way that "self" is to anatta.
There is no fixation on the "present moment." It is a matter of staying present with the experience of the rise and fall of one's mind/body process, as the Buddha said: "you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself."

For the longest time, I would be a bit confused why many people seem to want define the "mindfulness" as (solely) being aware of the present moment. If you actually paid attention to your practice, you can clearly see that it's an illusion. It's exactly the same as trying to find a "self".

Trying to cultivate the "awareness of the present moment" seems to be the same as trying to cultivate a "self". You're basically trying to see the permanence of something that just isn't there. I guess that's maybe why these people want to define "mindfulness" in that way... they want to find some comfort by finding some permanence in the present moment. It's very subtle... and causes a lot of dukkha, as can be seen in this thread.

When you "remember" something, it always becomes a part of the "present moment" anyway. So what's the issue, really?
What you seem to be doing here, as several folks are, is trying to make concrete some thing that is quite fluid.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18361
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:27 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Have you read anything Ven Analayo has written on the subject?


No, but I would like to. The post was directed at Dukkhanirodha, not him.

There is no fixation on the "present moment." It is a matter of staying present with the experience of the rise and fall of one's mind/body process, as the Buddha said: "you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself."


Exactly... there is no present moment, only what is experienced.

What you seem to be doing here, as several folks are, is trying to make concrete some thing that is quite fluid.


The intention was to show how fluid it can be. :)

:anjali:
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Shaswata_Panja and 7 guests