Samma samadhi: Sujin Boriharnwanaket

[tiltbillings]

. . . However if nama-rupa is name-and-form . . . .

I have quoted this several times in various different threads:

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).

STRONG ROOTS by Jake Davis, page 190-1. http://www.dharma.org/bcbs/Pages/docume ... gRoots.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is from a detailed, scholarly discussion of the Mahasi Sayadaw practice and of its movement to the West.

As for how nama-rupa gets translated, that has been a struggle for Western students of Buddhism over the years. I talk about “the mind/body process,” though I am not sure I would to commit to this as a formal expression or as a formal translation of nama-rupa, but it is, in a conventional sense, what we have to work with; it is all we have to work with. I do not see the mind as separate thing from the body, thus mind/body, and it is an ongoing conditioned and conditioning process that we “can only directly know phenomena within this ‘world of experience’” – that is, viññāṇa.

Your comment is reasonable (and insightful, thanks) and appropriate to the Mahasi Sayadaw teachings:

The Mahasi method of labelling helps to differentiate between name and form and consciousness. The labelling constitutes the name (concept) applied to the sensory form. It is useful to samma samadhi (hence the relationship of this to the overall topic) in the sense of curtailing conceptual proliferation by stopping at the label (name). By inhibiting papanca via labelling, samadhi is strengthened and in time, the act of labelling itself is dropped because it involves comparatively more papanca than the concentrated mind would naturally possess. With the cultivation of samma samadhi and the dismantling of name-and-form, consciousness will be seen as such, without the nama-rupa overlay.

Let me add this text, which I have referenced several times in this (or one of these threads) that is to the point:

AN IV.24
Kalaka Sutta
At Kalaka's Park
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Saketa at Kalaka's park. There he addressed the monks: "Monks!"

"Yes, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said: "Monks, whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & priests royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That do I know. Whatever in the cosmos — with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & priests, their royalty & common people — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know. That has been realized by the Tathagata, but in the Tathagata1 it has not been established.2

"If I were to say, 'I don't know whatever in the cosmos... is seen, heard, sensed, cognized... pondered by the intellect,' that would be a falsehood in me. If I were to say, 'I both know and don't know whatever in the cosmos... is seen, heard, sensed, cognized... pondered by the intellect,' that would be just the same. If I were to say, 'I neither know nor don't know whatever in the cosmos... is seen, heard, sensed, cognized... pondered by the intellect,' that would be a fault in me.

"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer.

"When hearing...

"When sensing...

"When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer.

Thus, monks, the Tathagata — being the same with regard to all phenomena that can be seen, heard, sensed, & cognized — is 'Such.' And I tell you: There's no other 'Such' higher or more sublime.

"Whatever is seen or heard or sensed
and fastened onto as true by others,
One who is Such — among the self-fettered —
wouldn't further claim to be true or even false.

"Having seen well in advance that arrow
where generations are fastened & hung
— 'I know, I see, that's just how it is!' —
there's nothing of the Tathagata fastened."

[mikenz66]

Hi Retro,

I hope that clears up the reasons behind my line of enquiry. I accept that it might seem rather abstract if one did not know where I was going with it.

Thanks, those are useful comments. Perhaps if you expressed your original comment as: "It depends how you interpret the Pali term nama-rupa" it would have been clearer that you were interested in the meaning rather than which particular English words were picked by the translator.

The part of this: http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... dic3_n.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; relevant to the current discussion:

The third of the seven purifications see: visuddhi the purification of views, is defined in Vis.M XVIII as the;correct seeing of mind-and-body,; and various methods for the discernment of mind-and-body by way of insight-meditation vipassanā are given there. In this context, 'mind' nāma comprises all four mental groups, including consciousness.

[chandrafabian]

Dear friends,
Allow me to participate ?
Kevin's claim is not supported by Visuddhi Magga. Visuddhi Magga (English version) clearly says direct Vipassana method,
as practice by Mahasi sayadaw and Ledi Sayadaw/Goenka.
To Kevin: read Visuddhi Magga, topic: Panna niddesa start chapter with ditthi visuddhi niddesa page 679.

[Virgo]

Dear friends,
Allow me to participate ?
Kevin's claim is not supported by Visuddhi Magga. Visuddhi Magga (English version) clearly says direct Vipassana method,
as practice by Mahasi sayadaw and Ledi Sayadaw/Goenka.
To Kevin: read Visuddhi Magga, topic: Panna niddesa start chapter with ditthi visuddhi niddesa page 679.

If you read the whole section on Panna you will see that soil and the first two purifcations of the trunk must come before that. Also, you have misunderstood that section, in and of itself, nevermind the fact that the rest of the soil and trunk are not present in Mahasi and Goenka method.

Be well,

Kevin

[mikenz66]

Hi Kevin,

Perhaps you could comment directly on the passage in Sayadaw Mahasi's "Progress of Insight", which is based on his understanding of the Visuddhimagga.
http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... Analytical" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It starts, of course, with Purification of Conduct. I think we can take that as read.

The part you seem concerned about is Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind. Can you point out where this description is substantially different from the descriptions in Vism Chapter XVIII, part of which you kindly posted here: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... =60#p80816.

1. Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind

Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically as follows: "The rising (upward movement) of the abdomen is one process; the falling (downward movement) is another; sitting is another; touching is another," etc. In this way he comes to know how to distinguish each bodily process that he notices. Further he realises: "The knowing of the rising movement is one process; the knowing of the falling movement is another." In that way he comes to know each mental act of noticing. Further he realises: "The rising movement is one process; the knowing of it is another. The falling movement is one process; the knowing of it is another," and so on. In that way he comes to know how to distinguish each bodily and mental process. All that knowledge comes from simply noticing, not from reasoning; that is to say, it is knowledge by direct experience arrived at by the mere act of noticing, and not knowledge derived from ratiocination.

Thus, when seeing a visual object with the eye, the meditator knows how to distinguish each single factor involved: "The eye is one; the visual object is another; seeing is another, and knowing it is another." The same manner applies in the case of the other sense functions.

For at the time, in each act of noticing, the meditator comes to know analytically the mental processes of noticing, and those of thinking and reflecting, knowing them for himself through direct knowledge by his experience thus: "They have the nature of going towards an object, inclining towards an object, cognizing an object." On the other hand, he knows analytically the material processes going on in the whole body — which are here described as "the rising and falling movements of the abdomen," "sitting," etc., knowing them thus: "These have not the nature of going or inclining towards an object, or of cognizing an object." Such knowing is called "knowing matter (or the body) by its manifestation of non-determining." For it is said in the Mula-Tika, the "Principal Sub-commentary" to the Abhidhamma Vibhanga: "In other words, 'non-determining' (as in the passage quoted) should be understood as having no faculty of cognizing an object."

Such knowledge as this, which analyses in each act of noticing both the bodily process noticed and the mental process engaged in noticing, according to their true essential nature, is called "analytical knowledge of body and mind."

When that knowledge has come to maturity, the meditator understands thus: "At the moment of breathing in, there is just the rising movement of the abdomen and the knowing of the movement, but there is no self besides; at the moment of breathing out, there is just the falling movement of the abdomen and the knowing of the movement, but there is no self besides." Understanding it thus in these and other instances, he knows and sees for himself by noticing thus: "There is here only that pair: a material process as object, and a mental process of knowing it; and it is to that pair alone that the terms of conventional usage 'being,' 'person' or 'soul,' 'I' or 'another,' 'man' or 'woman' refer. But apart from that dual process there is no separate person or being, I or another, man or woman."

Mike

[Virgo]

Hi Kevin,

Perhaps you could comment directly on the passage in Sayadaw Mahasi's "Progress of Insight", which is based on his understanding of the Visuddhimagga.
http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... Analytical" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It starts, of course, with Purification of Conduct. I think we can take that as read.

The part you seem concerned about is Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind. Can you point out where this description is substantially different from the descriptions in Vism Chapter XVIII, part of which you kindly posted here: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... =60#p80816.

1. Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind

Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically as follows...

Mike

First of all, the soil is still missing. It has not been shown where the soil is taught. Second of all, the first purification of mind is not explained. Mahasi seems to think that through bare attention to arising physical and mental phenomena that one becomes clear about mentallity and materiallity. However, it is not gone over by way of any one of the five classifications given in the Visuddhimmagga (given in chapter 18 Visuddhimagga). The mental classifications are not given, the way of reflection on them is not given. The information that if it does not become clear quickly that then one must regard only materiallity excusitvely first and only then mentallity when materiallity becomes abundantly clear is left out. Not only are these things missing, but the way to regard mentallity and materiallity given by Mahasi is actually greatly different from anything actually in the Visuddhimagga. In the Visuddhimagga they are all mental excercises of contemplation, never simple bare awareness excercises. Furthermore, after one understands that all phenomena are only nama and rupa, none of the classifications for looking at the conditions that cause first materiallity and then mentallity to arise are given. That means that there is no mention of reviewing the cause for their respective arisings by way of either Kamma and Fruition, or by way of Dependent Origination in order, etc. Therefore, it is obvious that those things comprising of the second purifcation are completely absent from the Mahasi technqiue. Please bare in mind that Buddhagosa is clear that the purifications must be done in order for them to be effective. The methods given by Mahasi are completely different or just absent in most cases. No one can deny this if they chapter 14 through 22 of the Visuddhimagga where all the information is found.


Kevin

[tiltbillings]

First of all, the soil is still missing.

Looking at one book is hardly representative of how, on the ground, the Mahasi Sayadaw method is taught. Having done several 3 month retreats, being taught by Mahasi Sayadaw trained teachers, the comment that the soil is is missing is meaningless. The soil is very much part of the teaching that goes on during the retreat within the context of meditation.

Mahasi seems to think that through bare attention to arising physical and mental phenomena that one becomes clear about mentallity and materiallity.

One does, by direct perception. While conceptual knowledge is important, and can direct one's practice, the reality is that it is the actual seeing in of the rise and fall of the mind/body process that cultivates the arising of insight.

The structure to the practice that is taught by Mahasi Sayadaw moves along the Seven Stages as found in the VM:

I. Purification of Conduct (sila-visuddhi)
The Method of Insight in Brief
II. Purification of Mind (citta-visuddhi)
III. Purification of View (ditthi-visuddhi)
1. Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind (nama-rupa-pariccheda-ñana)
IV. Purification by Overcoming Doubt (kankha-vitarana-visuddhi)
2. Knowledge by Discerning Conditionality (paccaya-pariggaha-ñana)
3. Knowledge by Comprehension (sammasana-ñana)
4. Knowledge of Arising and Passing Away (udayabbaya-ñana) in its weak stage, involving the Ten Corruptions of Insight
V. Purification by Knowledge and Vision of What Is Path and Not Path (maggamagga-ñanadassana-visuddhi)
VI. Purification by Knowledge and Vision of the Course of Practice (patipada-ñanadassana-visuddhi) (including mature Knowledge of Arising and Passing Away)
5. Knowledge of Dissolution (bhanga-ñana)
6. Awareness of Fearfulness (bhayatupatthana-ñana)
7. Knowledge of Misery (adinava-ñana)
8. Knowledge of Disgust (nibbida-ñana)
9. Knowledge of Desire for Deliverance (muncitu-kamyata-ñana)
10. Knowledge of Re-observation (patisankhanupassana-ñana)
11. Knowledge of Equanimity about Formations (sankhar'upekkha-ñana)
12. Insight Leading to emergence (vutthanagamini-vipassana-ñana)
13. Knowledge of Adaptation (anuloma-ñana)
14. Maturity Knowledge (gotrabhu-ñana)
VII. Purification by Knowledge and Vision (ñanadassana-visuddhi)
15. Path Knowledge (magga-ñana)
16. Fruition Knowledge (phala-ñana)
17. Knowledge of Reviewing (paccavekkhana-ñana)
18. Attainment of Fruition (phalasamapatti)
19. The Higher Paths and Fruitions

In the Visuddhimagga they are all mental excercises of contemplation, never simple bare awareness excercises.

So? Again, while mental - read conceptual - exercises can be of value, there is far more value in directly seeing the functioning of the mind/body process directly: in the seen just the seen, in the heard just the heard, etc. is itself enough for full awakening. This is the basis of insight. It moves the practice and the teaching from just being a head trip, which what your reading of the VM is making the VM. I have yet to see a justification for your particular take on the VM.

Also, Kevin, don't blow off retro's point.

[tiltbillings]

Dear friends,
Allow me to participate ?

You are very welcome here.

[mikenz66]

Hi Kevin,

First of all, the soil is still missing. It has not been shown where the soil is taught. Second of all, the first purification of mind is not explained. Mahasi seems to think that through bare attention to arising physical and mental phenomena that one becomes clear about mentallity and materiallity. However, it is not gone over by way of any one of the five classifications given in the Visuddhimmagga (given in chapter 18 Visuddhimagga).

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then. Of course, as Tilt says, this is just a short summary, not detailed instructions, but it is talking about how the core concepts of Vsm XVIII, how nama-rupa are understood, in a way that seems to me to be compatible.

http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... Analytical
Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically as follows: "The rising (upward movement) of the abdomen is one process; the falling (downward movement) is another; sitting is another; touching is another," etc. In this way he comes to know how to distinguish each bodily process that he notices. Further he realises: "The knowing of the rising movement is one process; the knowing of the falling movement is another." In that way he comes to know each mental act of noticing. Further he realises: "The rising movement is one process; the knowing of it is another. The falling movement is one process; the knowing of it is another," and so on. In that way he comes to know how to distinguish each bodily and mental process.

Vism XVIII.14.
Another discerns 'materiality' in his person briefly thus : 'Any kind of materiality whatever all consists of the four primary elements, and he likewise discerns the mind base and a part of the mental base as 'mental'. Then he defines mentality-materiality in brief thus: 'This mentality and this materiality are called "mentality-materiality"'.

http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... Analytical
Such knowledge as this, which analyses in each act of noticing both the bodily process noticed and the mental process engaged in noticing, according to their true essential nature, is called "analytical knowledge of body and mind."

Vism XVIII.37
The correct vision of mentality and materiality, which, after defining
mentality-materiality by these various methods, has been established
on the plane of non-confusion by overcoming the perception of a being,
is what should be understood as purification of view. Other terms for it
are 'defining of mentality-materiality' and 'delimitation of formations'.

Mike

[tiltbillings]

Oh, no. Mike, you are formulating a good argument.

Hi Kevin,

First of all, the soil is still missing. It has not been shown where the soil is taught. Second of all, the first purification of mind is not explained. Mahasi seems to think that through bare attention to arising physical and mental phenomena that one becomes clear about mentallity and materiallity. However, it is not gone over by way of any one of the five classifications given in the Visuddhimmagga (given in chapter 18 Visuddhimagga).

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then. Of course, as Tilt says, this is just a short summary, not detailed instructions, but it is talking about how the core concepts of Vsm XVIII, how nama-rupa are understood, in a way that seems to me to be compatible.

http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... Analytical
Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically as follows: "The rising (upward movement) of the abdomen is one process; the falling (downward movement) is another; sitting is another; touching is another," etc. In this way he comes to know how to distinguish each bodily process that he notices. Further he realises: "The knowing of the rising movement is one process; the knowing of the falling movement is another." In that way he comes to know each mental act of noticing. Further he realises: "The rising movement is one process; the knowing of it is another. The falling movement is one process; the knowing of it is another," and so on. In that way he comes to know how to distinguish each bodily and mental process.

Vism XVIII.14.
Another discerns 'materiality' in his person briefly thus : 'Any kind of materiality whatever all consists of the four primary elements, and he likewise discerns the mind base and a part of the mental base as 'mental'. Then he defines mentality-materiality in brief thus: 'This mentality and this materiality are called "mentality-materiality"'.

http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... Analytical
Such knowledge as this, which analyses in each act of noticing both the bodily process noticed and the mental process engaged in noticing, according to their true essential nature, is called "analytical knowledge of body and mind."

Vism XVIII.37
The correct vision of mentality and materiality, which, after defining
mentality-materiality by these various methods, has been established
on the plane of non-confusion by overcoming the perception of a being,
is what should be understood as purification of view. Other terms for it
are 'defining of mentality-materiality' and 'delimitation of formations'.

Mike

[Virgo]

Oh, no. Mike, you are formulating a good argument.

Let's be honest, you haven't even read the text. That's why I'm not sure why I am even still debating with you. Example: You still think the soil can be understood through noting things when it is clear in the text that they are subjects that one studies before beginning contemplation and are to be fully undestood before beginning the contemplations of the trunk( there are many quotes like one should "ask one's teacher" about "knotty points" and so on). Only after these things are understood can one approach the trunk.. which Mahasi doesn't even do because he doesn't give the classifications

[mikenz66]

Oh, no. Mike, you are formulating a good argument.

Let's be honest, you haven't even read the text.

I'm sorry that you have to resort to simply repeating that statement rather than comparing the understandings of nama-rupa expressed in the various texts, which might actually be an interesting thing to do, and which I have been trying to encourage by quoting appropriate passages.

Mike

[tiltbillings]

Let's be honest, you haven't even read the text.

You like saying things like that, but the thing is, Kevin, Mike just gave a mini-lesson in good argumentation, something you have not even remotely approached. Even if I had not read the text, formulating a good argument would present both side clearly and accurately, with a careful discussion and demonstration of one's thesis. As of yet, not done.

That's why I'm not sure why I am even still debating with you. Example: You still think the soil can be understood through noting things

I never said that, which is another of an on going number of examples of your misrepresenting what I have said, which makes it quite clear you cannot be trusted to accurately represent the opposing position and calls into doubt even your representation of the VM's position.

when it is clear in the text that they are subjects that one studies before beginning contemplation and are to be fully undestood before beginning the contemplations of the trunk( there are many quotes like one should "ask one's teacher" about "knotty points" and so on). Only after these things are understood can one approach the trunk.. which Mahasi doesn't even do because he doesn't give the classifications

Well, Kevin, that is what you say, but you have yet to back it up. You are the one making the claim, so it is up to you to show it is true. When you actually present a good argument, I'll more than happy to fully engage it. As of yet it is just you saying a bunch of unsupported stuff.

[Virgo]

Oh, no. Mike, you are formulating a good argument.

Let's be honest, you haven't even read the text.

I'm sorry that you have to resort to simply repeating that statement rather than comparing the understandings of nama-rupa expressed in the various texts, which might actually be an interesting thing to do, and which I have been trying to encourage by quoting appropriate passages.

Mike

Mike, my last reply was to Tilt, not you. I know you are looking at the Vism actively to try and understand this. I commend that.

However, Mahasi doesn't teach D.O. in detail (as part of the soil) before his commencing his meditation retreats. This is an important point. Because, as part of the soil, one needs to understand it to approach the trunk. That is because, in the second purification, one of the methods of reviewing the causes of the arising of the nama and rupa you now can clearly differentiate conceptually in your experience from attending to the first purification is by way of Dependent Orgiination. That is just one example of the absence of many parts of the teaching. I also find fault in many other areas.

Kevin

[Virgo]

That's why I'm not sure why I am even still debating with you. Example: You still think the soil can be understood through noting things

I never said that

Actually you did. In the same post where you listed the 16 insight knowledges and the paths and fruits from the Vsm to try to argue that Mahasi teaches in line with the Visuddhimagga. Of course he says that his thing leads to the sixteen insight knowledges. Who wouldn't? It says nothing about how the actual practice he teaches is in conformity with the truth as laid out in the Visuddhimagga.

Kevin