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 manas » Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:13 am

Zom wrote:So - as far as I understood - everyone agrees that "awareness in/to the present moment " is a vital part of meditation ,)
So the only disputable point is how to call this awareness - "sati" or not "sati" (or - "included into sati")? Does that really matter?
Hi Zom,

I used to think that sati was "awareness in/to the present moment " but I read somewhere (by a very reputable monk-scholar) that really strictly speaking this is a misleading definition. We are instructed to be aware of/in the four frames of reference; body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects, and if we are focussed there we will, naturally, be in the present as well. If you mean that the mind should actually be here, right now, aware of itself and/or it's object, and not lost in some thought - then yes, I do know what you mean. But I think that we need to be careful in how we define it, because it subtly changes the meaning and thus how someone might practise it. Sati has to be present for us to cognize the object in a useful way. But it is the object itself that needs to be standing out clearly, and so in a way sati is just a tool, like our hands that reach out to catch a ball, we keep our eyes on the ball, not on our hands. Sometimes I feel that when sati is at it's brightest, it operates invisibly, in that only the object is manifest.

Anyway, this is such an interesting subject...there is so much to learn. Even just a clear and consistent definition of sati that everyone can agree on, it seems to be hard to find!

with metta
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 2109
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby chownah » Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:45 am

It seems that a major point of concern here has been whether being mindful of the present moment is sati....or not. My question is if one is truly in the present moment that what else could they be aware of if not body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects? In the exact present moment what else could there be?
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:45 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:In other words, one thinks oneself to awakening.

What Dmytro said does not warrant this contemptuous "one thinks oneself to awakening" one-liner that sometimes gets bandied around here.
It is no more contemptuous than are Dmytro's various strawman attacks on the idea of mindfulness vis a vis sati.

Let us look at the OP: "He mentions the Sutta-nipata passages, which I will quote: . . . I don't see here any trace of "present moment awareness" meaning of sati."

What Ven Analayo actually said:

Sati as present moment awareness is similarly reflected in the presentations
of the Patisambhiddimagga and the Visuddhimagga, according
to which the characteristic quality of sati is "presence"
(upatthiina), whether as a faculty (indriya), as an awakening factor
(bojjhanga), as a factor of the noble eightfold path, or at the moment
of realization.19
Thus mindfulness being present (upatthitasati) can be understood
to imply presence of mind, in so far as it is directly opposed to
absent-mindedness (mutthassati); presence of mind in the sense
that, endowed with sati, one is wide awake in regard to the present
moment.20 Owing to such presence of mind, whatever one does or
says will be clearly apprehended by the mind, and thus can be more
easily remembered later on.21
Sati is required not only to fully take in the moment to be remembered,
but also to bring this moment back to mind at a later time. To
"re-collect", then, becomes just a particular instance of a state of
mind characterized by "collectedness" and the absence of distraction.22
This twofold character of sati can also be found in some verses
in the Sutta Nipiita, which instruct the listener to set out with sati,
subsequent to an instruction given by the Buddha.23 In these instances
sati seems to combine both present moment awareness and
remembering what the Buddha had taught.


19 Paps I 16;Patis I 116;and Vism 510.
20 Cf. S I 44, where sati is related to wakefulness. A related nuance occurs at Vism 464,
which relates sati to strong cognition (thirasanna).
21 The opposite case is documented at Vin II 261,where a nun failed to memorize the
training rules for lack of sati.
22 Nanananda 1993: PA7·
23 Sn 1053;Sn 1066;and Sn 1085.
Ven Analayo is making a far more nuanced and reasonable argument than our critic is allowing for (or seems to understand).
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: 19409
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:12 am

Ven Analayo wrote:Sati as present moment awareness is similarly reflected in the presentations of the Patisambhiddimagga and the Visuddhimagga, according
to which the characteristic quality of sati is "presence"
(upatthiina), whether as a faculty (indriya), as an awakening factor
(bojjhanga), as a factor of the noble eightfold path, or at the moment
of realization.19
19 Paps I 16;Patis I 116;and Vism 510.



Dmytro in his OP wrote:Regarding his reference to Patisambhidamagga and Visuddhimagga, and the word "upatthāna". This word is one of the components of the compound "satipatthana". As explained in the Patisambhidamagga-Atthakatha 2.509, upatthāna refers to the sati being established on the particular basis (arammana). (See the Pali quote at http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5656 ). "Upatthāna" does not mean "presence".


PTS Dictionary:

Upaṭṭhahati & ˚ṭṭhāti

Upaṭṭhahati & ˚ṭṭhāti [upa + sthā, cp. upatiṭṭhati] 1 (trs.) to stand near or at hand (with acc.), to wait on, attend on, serve, minister, to care for, look after, nurse (in sickness) Vin i.50, 302; iv.326; M iii.25; S i.167; A iii.94; v.72; Sn 82 = 481 (imper. ˚ṭṭhahassu); J i.67 (ppr. ˚ṭṭhahamāna), 262 (ppr. ˚ṭṭhahanto); iv.131; v.396; Dpvs ii.16; PvA 19, 20. -- aor. upaṭṭhahi PvA 14, 42, 82. -- inf. upaṭṭhātuŋ A v.72; PvA 20. -- ger. upaṭṭhahitvā PvA 76. -- grd. upaṭṭhātabba Vin i.302; PvA 20. -- pp. upaṭṭhita (q. v.). -- 2. (intrs.) to stand out or forth, to appear, to arise, occur, to be present M i.104 sq.; A iv.32; J iv.203 (mante anupaṭṭhahante since the spell did not occur to him); v.207; Miln 64; ThA 258. <-> aor. upaṭṭhāsi J i.61; iv.3; PvA 42. -- Caus. I. upaṭṭheti; Caus. II. upaṭṭhapeti & ˚ṭṭhāpeti (q. v.). -- Pass. upaṭṭhīyati J iv.131 (ppr. ˚ṭṭhiyamāna), & upaṭṭhahīyati A iii.94 (ppr. ˚ṭṭhahiyamāna).

Upaṭṭhāka

Upaṭṭhāka [fr. upa + sthā, cp. BSk. upasthāka M Vastu i.251, and upasthāyaka Divy 426; Av. Ś. i.214; ii.85, 112.] a servitor, personal attendant, servant, "famulus". Ānanda was the last u. of Gotama Buddha (see D i.206; Th 1, 1041 f.; ThA in Brethren loc. cit.; Vin i.179 (Sāgato u.), 194; ii.186; iii.66; iv.47; D i.150 (Nāgita); S iii.113; A i.121; iii.31, 189; J i 15, 100 (a merchant's); ii.416; Pug 28; DhA ii.93; VvA 149; PvA 211. -- agg˚ main follower, chief attendant D ii.6; gilān˚ an attendant in sickness, nurse Vin i.303; A i.26; sangh˚ one who looks after the community of Bhikkhus Vin i.216; A i.26; iii.39. -- dupaṭṭhāka & supaṭṭhāka a bad (& good) attendant Vin i.302.
-- kula a family entertaining (or ministering to) a thera or a bhikkhu, a family devoted to the service of (gen.) Vin i.83 (Sāriputtassa), 213; iii.62, 66, 67; iv.283, 286; VvA 120.

Upaṭṭhāna

Upaṭṭhāna (nt.) [fr. upa + sthā] -- 1. attendance, waiting on, looking after, service, care, ministering A i.151, 225; Sn 138; J i.226, 237, 291; ii.101; iv.138; vi.351. Ps i.107; ii.7 sq., 28, 230; PvA 104, 145 (paccekabuddhassa), 176; VvA 75 (ther˚); Sdhp 560. -- 2. worship, (divine) service D iii.188 sq. (˚ŋ gacchati); PvA 122. Buddh˚ attendance on a Buddha PvA 93; ThA 18. <-> 3. a state room J iii.257.
-- sambhāra means of catering, provisions PvA 20. -- sālā hall for attendance, assembly room, chapel [cp. BSk. upasthāna -- śālā Divy 207] Vin i.49, 139; ii.153, 208; iii. 70 (at Vesālī); iv.15, 42; D ii.119 (at Vesālī); S ii.280; v.321; A ii.51, 197; iii.298; DhA i.37, 38; iii.413.

http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philol ... li.1693671
I would say the Ven Analayo is on good ground here.
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: 19409
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:06 am

Dukkhanirodha wrote:IMO this paragraph makes it very clear that the practice of sati involves the observation of phenomena in the present moment, and in this context there is little room IMO for remembrance.

Without an ongoing ability to remember what we are doing we cannot function in the world, and there can be no meaningful observation of presently occurring phenomena. For example, Clive Wearing has no capacity to retain short-term memories and lives in a vacuum of the immediate present with no context or experience of continuity.

Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ground » Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:19 am

Dukkhanirodha wrote:IMO this paragraph makes it very clear that the practice of sati involves the observation of phenomena in the present moment, and in this context there is little room IMO for remembrance.


If there is no remembrance at all then "observation" is not what the word "observation" implies.
I mean there are certainly such blank states where physical data enter the sense doors without there being any awareness of anything. "observation of phenomena" implies "awareness of phenomena" which in turn implies at least re-cognition of phenomena qua mere phenomena which already is an act of remembrance.
If there is not remembrance that there are what is called "phenomena" in conventional terms how could one observe these?
There does not have to be gross thought like "this is a phenomenon" for remembrance to occur.


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby chownah » Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:37 am

If we do not observe phenomena in the present moment then in which moment do we observe them?

Is a remembrance just a thought that arises that we ascribe to being something that happened in the past?...but isn't the rememberance actually happening in the present moment.....isn't it just a present thought about our views of something we ascribe to the past?
It seems unlikely that a remembrance is thinking IN the past....it is just thinking ABOUT the past but the thinking is happening in the present moment...I guess....I'd like to be notified if I've made some major blunder in this view....
Also, I'm still wondering about my question, If one is truly in the present moment then what else could they be aware of if not body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects? In the exact present moment what else could there be?

chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Sekha » Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:06 am

An additional element occured to me, which sustains the standpoint adopted by Ven. Analayo and Tilt:

from Mahasatipatthana Sutta wrote:Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu araññagato vā rukkhamūlagato vā suññāgāragato vā nisīdati pallaṅkaṃ ābhujitvā ujuṃ kāyaṃ paṇidhāya parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā. So satova assasati, satova passasati.

A bhikkhu, having gone to the forest or having gone at the root of a tree or having gone to an empty room, sits down folding the legs crosswise, setting kāya upright, and setting sati parimukhaṃ. Being sato, he breathes in, being sato he breathes out.

http://www.suttapitaka.net/formulae/vivitta.html#c

How could it be possible to set remembrance on any spot of the body? IMO this interpretation does not fit in this context. It makes much more sense to understand it as "presence of mind" as suggested by Ven. Analayo.
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli

http://www.buddha-vacana.org
User avatar
Sekha
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 am
Location: French Guiana

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Sekha » Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:19 am

Ñāṇa wrote:Without an ongoing ability to remember (...) there can be no meaningful observation of presently occurring phenomena.

TMingyur wrote:If there is no remembrance at all then "observation" is not what the word "observation" implies.
I mean there are certainly such blank states where physical data enter the sense doors without there being any awareness of anything. "observation of phenomena" implies "awareness of phenomena" which in turn implies at least re-cognition of phenomena qua mere phenomena which already is an act of remembrance.
If there is not remembrance that there are what is called "phenomena" in conventional terms how could one observe these?
There does not have to be gross thought like "this is a phenomenon" for remembrance to occur.

For both these posts: no one said the ability to remember should be absent. What was said is that the mind should be present.


Mahasatipatthana Sutta instructions in ending § of each section: wrote:Yāvadeva ñāṇamattāya paṭissatimattāya anissito ca viharati.

Thus he develops his awareness to such an extent that there is mere understanding along with mere awareness.

http://tipitaka.org/stp-pali-eng-parallel#3

VRI comments: Yāvadeva ñāṇamattāya paṭissatimattāya [Thus he develops his awareness to such an extent that there is mere understanding along with mere awareness.] The mind of the meditator at this stage is absorbed in the wisdom of anicca (the arising and passing away of sensations), with no identification beyond this awareness. With the base of this awareness he develops understanding with his own experience. This is paññā (wisdom). With his awareness thus established in anicca, there is no attraction to the world of mind and matter.
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli

http://www.buddha-vacana.org
User avatar
Sekha
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 am
Location: French Guiana

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ground » Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:39 am

Dukkhanirodha wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:Without an ongoing ability to remember (...) there can be no meaningful observation of presently occurring phenomena.

TMingyur wrote:If there is no remembrance at all then "observation" is not what the word "observation" implies.
I mean there are certainly such blank states where physical data enter the sense doors without there being any awareness of anything. "observation of phenomena" implies "awareness of phenomena" which in turn implies at least re-cognition of phenomena qua mere phenomena which already is an act of remembrance.
If there is not remembrance that there are what is called "phenomena" in conventional terms how could one observe these?
There does not have to be gross thought like "this is a phenomenon" for remembrance to occur.

For both these posts: no one said the ability to remember should be absent. What was said is that the mind should be present.

What you actually said was this:
Dukkhanirodha wrote:IMO this paragraph makes it very clear that the practice of sati involves the observation of phenomena in the present moment, and in this context there is little room IMO for remembrance.

and "little room" certainly does not mean "absence".

But now you are speaking of "ability" without explicitly stating whether this "ability to remember" is manifesting through remembering or not.

But your quotes imply "restriced" remembering ("restriced" alluding to your "little room for"): "Thus he develops his awareness to such an extent ..." and "with no identification beyond this awareness".
Again "to such an extent" and "not beyond this awareness" implying this "little room for" remembrance.


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:53 am

chownah wrote:Is a remembrance just a thought that arises that we ascribe to being something that happened in the past?

It's more subtle than this. Sati in this sense is the remembrance of what one is doing as they are doing it from moment to moment. Sampajañña is the full awareness of what is being experienced from moment to moment. Satisampajañña requires recognition (saññā) of what is occurring as it occurs within the context of individuated particulars (i.e. phenomena which have been previously learned and can therefore be identified). None of these mental functions require thoughts.

chownah wrote:Also, I'm still wondering about my question, If one is truly in the present moment then what else could they be aware of if not body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects? In the exact present moment what else could there be?

Yes, but the question is: Is this alone an effective way to develop and maintain skillful mental qualities? Or should the satipaṭṭhānā be interpreted to indicate a more specific training regimen? That is, one picks one of the meditation subjects as object support (i.e. kāyānupassanā), then abandons carnal joy and pleasure and develops non-carnal joy and pleasure (i.e. vedanānupassanā), and recognizes the difference between limited and afflicted states of mind vs. expansive states of mind (i.e. cittānupassanā), and engages in the appropriate categories of phenomena to (a) abandon any further occurrences of hindrances, and (b) develop insight (i.e. dhammānupassanā).

Support for this latter interpretation can be found in the Satipaṭṭhānavibhaṅga, which takes the subject of the 32 parts of the body as an example of the object support, then explicitly differentiates the distinctions between full awareness (sampajañña) and mindfulness (sati), and so on.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ancientbuddhism » Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:27 pm

A comment I made in my earlier post got lost in the editing.

With reference to the context of sati in Ānāpānasati/Satipaṭṭhāna work, I think Analayo covered that accurately, although I don’t have the time at present to go over the relevant section to confirm why.

Although I already mentioned this here, in my opinion, sati is best understood in its context and when that context is Ānapānasati/Satipaṭṭhāna contemplative work, it is for the practitioner to stay on task with the object of contemplation, in ānāpāna to develop calm with breathing, and then to the examination of states at feeling and mind.
Fingers walk the darkness down
Mind is on the midnight
Gather up the gold you've found
You fool, it's only moonlight.
If you try to take it home
Your hands will turn to butter
You better leave this dream alone
Try to find another. – Townes Van Zandt ‘Lungs’

Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)

A Handful of Leaves
User avatar
ancientbuddhism
 
Posts: 662
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Sekha » Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:14 pm

TMingyur wrote:What you actually said was this:
Dukkhanirodha wrote:IMO this paragraph makes it very clear that the practice of sati involves the observation of phenomena in the present moment, and in this context there is little room IMO for remembrance.

and "little room" certainly does not mean "absence".

But now you are speaking of "ability" without explicitly stating whether this "ability to remember" is manifesting through remembering or not.

Ok, I got your point. The way I formulated my idea was not clear enough, so I reformulate: "...and in this context there is little room IMO for an interpreation of sati as meaning remembrance."

I didn't mean to say that there is no faculty of memory at all present in the mind


TMingyur wrote:But your quotes imply "restriced" remembering ("restriced" alluding to your "little room for"): "Thus he develops his awareness to such an extent ..." and "with no identification beyond this awareness".
Again "to such an extent" and "not beyond this awareness" implying this "little room for" remembrance.

Sorry, I really don't see what you mean.
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli

http://www.buddha-vacana.org
User avatar
Sekha
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 am
Location: French Guiana

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby chownah » Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:21 pm

Nana,
Thanks for your reply.
Ñāṇa wrote:
chownah wrote:Is a remembrance just a thought that arises that we ascribe to being something that happened in the past?

It's more subtle than this. Sati in this sense is the remembrance of what one is doing as they are doing it from moment to moment. Sampajañña is the full awareness of what is being experienced from moment to moment. Satisampajañña requires recognition (saññā) of what is occurring as it occurs within the context of individuated particulars (i.e. phenomena which have been previously learned and can therefore be identified). None of these mental functions require thoughts.

Great....then remembrance in this sense seems to have more of a meaning of "staying on task" then it has to do with anything associated with the past....is this right?
Ñāṇa wrote:
chownah wrote:Also, I'm still wondering about my question, If one is truly in the present moment then what else could they be aware of if not body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects? In the exact present moment what else could there be?

Yes, but the question is: Is this alone an effective way to develop and maintain skillful mental qualities? Or should the satipaṭṭhānā be interpreted to indicate a more specific training regimen?

I usually think of sati as being more than just part of a "training regimen"....but maybe I'm wrong. In any event, regardless of if we are in training or not it does seem to me that it is important for people to know if body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects are really all there is to be experienced in the present moment (or if this is wrong) and it is only in the present moment that things can be expereinced (or if this is wrong).....it seems to me that some are expressing views that seem to be pointing to the possibility that there is some other moment in which things can be experienced (other than the present moment) and I have seen this view inferred in other threads as well. I think it is not too far afield to say that if one fully accepted and maintains awareness that there is only the present moment and all experience is only happening in the present moment for now and for forever and at the same time sees how it is present conditions which give rise to experience......then most of the work of following the path would be accomplished......I guess.....not sure....anyway for me the basic ideas that we should be absolutely sure that we do not stray from are that there is only experience in the present moment and the only things we can experience can be catalogued as being either body, feelings, mind, and mind-object.........on top of this base you can construct a training regimen but without that base I don't think one will progress very far.....but maybe I'm wrong...
Thanks again for your reply....it has really helped me get a better understanding of the ongoing discussion.....
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:30 pm

ancientbuddhism wrote:Although I already mentioned this here, in my opinion, sati is best understood in its context and when that context is Ānapānasati/Satipaṭṭhāna contemplative work, it is for the practitioner to stay on task with the object of contemplation, in ānāpāna to develop calm with breathing, and then to the examination of states at feeling and mind.

Yes, I think that the function of "stay[ing] on task with the object of contemplation" offers a good indication of sati as a mental factor, and fits well with the definitions given in the Dhammasaṅgaṇī, the Vibhaṅga, the Milindapañha, and so on.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby Nyana » Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:36 pm

chownah wrote:Great....then remembrance in this sense seems to have more of a meaning of "staying on task" then it has to do with anything associated with the past....is this right?

I think so.

Ñāṇa wrote:In any event, regardless of if we are in training or not

We practice until everything we encounter in life becomes integrated as an aspect of training.

Ñāṇa wrote:it does seem to me that it is important for people to know if body, feelings, mind, and mind-objects are really all there is to be experienced in the present moment (or if this is wrong) and it is only in the present moment that things can be expereinced (or if this is wrong)

I think you have it right on both counts.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby dhamma follower » Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:53 pm

What a fascinating discussion!

IMHO, there are two concepts that seem to easily confuse our understanding of sati:

1. Remembrance: we often equate remembrance to thinking. But it is not. Actually, remembrance is just a mental factor which arises and performs the function of remember, together with a citta knowing an object at that every moment. Sati is also a mental factor, if we consider that way, then it is easier to make the connection between the two.

To understand the remembering aspect of sati, just think about the moment between a state of forgetfulness to a moment of awareness. What the mind knows at that very moment? It knows it has been forgetful, and also what has been forgotten - that is remembrance -sati at work.

2. Present moment: What is the present moment? Time is created by the mind.

For practitioners, we feel that we are in the present moment when there is no thinking of past or future, or where we are aware of what is occuring in our body and mind, right?
But are we actually aware of every dhamma that arises and passes away? There are billions of them in each second. Are we sure we are aware of the moment of arising to the moment of passing away of each dhamma in its minute existence?

With practice, we know that the more we are "in the present moment", the more we feel like catching a fish in the water with only one hand, as phenomena arise and pass away extremely fast.

That means "being in the present moment"- so to speak- doesn't negate the remembering aspect of sati, because when sati remembers two or three or hundreds previous dhammas, we are still perfectly in the "present moment".

I believe that it is where sampajana becomes stronger that it see better the working of sati in details.

The first vipassana nana consists of understanding nama and rupa separately, as dhammas, no person , that means sampajana is strong enough to see sati remembering the "dhammas" that have arised.

My understanding is that, from the vipassana stages, sati goes further than remember learnt right view, to directly remember "dhammas", establishing thus a superior kind of right view.

Regards,
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby retrofuturist » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:01 pm

Greetings DF,

dhamma follower wrote:1. Remembrance: we often equate remembrance to thinking. But it is not.

Interesting you say that, because the dictionary seems to suggest otherwise.

think: to have a conscious mind, to some extent of reasoning, remembering experiences, making rational decisions, etc.

remember: to recall to the mind by an act or effort of memory; think of again: I'll try to remember the exact date.
to retain in the memory; keep in mind; remain aware of: remember your appointment with the dentist.


Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/think and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/remember

dhamma follower wrote:Actually, remembrance is just a mental factor which arises and performs the function of remember

Back to the dictionary again for a moment...

tautology: needless repetition of an idea, especially in words other than those of the immediate context, without imparting additional force or clearness, as in “widow woman.”

It might be better to talk about rememberance up front, as is, rather than abstact out cittas and assign them functions. If anything is a case of conceptual "thinking", it is that...

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: 14657
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby dhamma follower » Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:20 am

Greetings DF,

dhamma follower wrote:1. Remembrance: we often equate remembrance to thinking. But it is not.

Interesting you say that, because the dictionary seems to suggest otherwise.

think: to have a conscious mind, to some extent of reasoning, remembering experiences, making rational decisions, etc.

remember: to recall to the mind by an act or effort of memory; think of again: I'll try to remember the exact date.
to retain in the memory; keep in mind; remain aware of: remember your appointment with the dentist.


Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/think and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/remember


It is precisely the point I tried to make. I don't think a common sense dictionary can be used to explain reality as in the light of the wisdom of the Buddha.
I guess you could find a definition of the"self" in the same dictionary and it would not be the same than what the Buddha taught about the same subject.

It might be better to talk about rememberance up front, as is, rather than abstact out cittas and assign them functions. If anything is a case of conceptual "thinking", it is that...


I did,
We all know those moments where we see someone familiar yet can not tell who is the person nor where we've met him. Then "bang", it springs up and we "remember". It's happens in just one thought moment. It is not so much an activity stretching over a period of time...

may be i'd better use "one small fraction of second" in stead of "one thought moment".

Realising materiality and mentality is an advanced stage of the practice. Talking about that requires using of words and concepts. Even the Buddha had no other way. Explaining reality in details help a receptive reader to apprehend reality in a deeper way, that's why when the Buddha gave talks on the five khandas, the six-sense media etc... people could get enlightenned.

Regards,
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Objection to the Views of Venerable Analayo

Postby ground » Mon Nov 28, 2011 2:17 am

dhamma follower wrote:1. Remembrance: we often equate remembrance to thinking. But it is not.

Yes. I would equate remembrance to re-cognition. Re-cognition of a pattern in bare chaotic sense data requires remembrance. And that certainly cannot be called "thinking" because it happens sort of "spontaneously", like a flash ... but it is remembrance of a pattern learned earlier.

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests