Goenka on elimination of sankharas

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby Mkoll » Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:04 pm

suttametta wrote:
Mkoll wrote:
suttametta wrote:Buddha said all 12 links are unreal.

Hi SM,

Can you explain what you mean by this and provide a reference if possible?

Thank you.


His famous saying, see the world as foam.

I take that to mean he's saying to develop a perception as a strategy for gaining insight. He's not making an ontological statement, which is the interpretation that I pulled from that sentence.

:shrug:
Peace,
James
User avatar
Mkoll
 
Posts: 2454
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby convivium » Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:40 pm

according to thanissaro (the suttas) only through stream entry can you 'eliminate' sankaras; otherwise, you can only develop 'equanimity' to them. that's what he told me when i asked about this.
Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php
User avatar
convivium
 
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 7:13 am

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby Sylvester » Mon Feb 10, 2014 4:21 am

culaavuso wrote:Are anusaya fed or starved through intentional action? Are the āsavā fed or starved through intentional action? If the future condition of the anusaya and āsavā depends on our present intentions, as the notion of right effort seems to suggest, then to what extent should the anusaya and āsavā in the present be viewed as the result of past intentions?



Hi culaavuso

I think the citations furnished by daverupa would furnish the answer. This issue of the connection between defilements and intentions is also hinted at in MN 19 -

Yaññadeva bhikkhave bhikkhu bahulamanuvitakketi anuvicāreti tathā tathā nati hoti cetaso.

Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness.


So, to your 1st and 2nd queries, I would say that for the most part, an anusaya is indeed fed and starved through intentional action. But that does not seem to be a universal truth, as suggested by AN 3.101 -

Tasmiṃ pahīne tasmiṃ vyantīkate athāparaṃ dhammavitakkāvasissanti. So hoti samādhi na ceva santo na ca paṇīto na paṭippassaddhiladdho na ekodibhāvādhigato, sasaṃkhāraniggayhavāritavato. Hoti so bhikkhave samayo, yaṃ taṃ cittaṃ ajjhattaññeva santiṭṭhati, sannisīdati, ekodihoti, samādhiyati. So hoti samādhi santo paṇīto paṭippassaddhiladdho ekodibhāvādhigato, na sasaṃkhāraniggayhavāritavato.

When he is rid of them, there remain only thoughts of the Dhamma. His concentration is neither calm nor refined, it has not yet attained serenity or unity, and is kept in place by the fabrication of forceful restraint. But there comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, grows unified & concentrated. His concentration is calm & refined, has attained serenity & unity, and is no longer kept in place by the fabrication of forceful restraint.

Ven T's translation


This contrast between the samādhi which is sasaṃkhāraniggayhavāritavata, versus the more refined and unified samādhi which is na sasaṃkhāraniggayhavāritavata is not unique to the Pali suttas. The Chinese parallel to AN 3.101 in SA 1246 also speaks of this distinction, where sasaṃkhāraniggayhavāritavata samādhi is rendered as 三昧有行所持 (the samādhi which is controlled/held up with sankhāra).

What this does suggest is that defilements that hinder meditation can eventually be starved to the point that Right Effort drops out of the picture, when the inclination of the mind has built up enough momentum to be (for want of a better word) "good". Leaving aside how the Comy is forced to interpret tena in MN 44 as an instrumental involving supramundane jhanas, MN 44 also suggests that each of the jhāna attainments are bereft of specific anusaya, principally, I suspect due to the absence of intentions in the jhānas.

Re your 3rd query -

...to what extent should the anusaya and āsavā in the present be viewed as the result of past intentions?


I think the idea that best accounts for these would be better known as the mūlā (roots) of lobha (greed), dosa (aversion/hate) and moha (delusion). Again I turn to SN 12.38. Having established that the structure of the sutta precludes the verb anuseti from being synonymous with either ceteti or pakappeti, we are then left to ask, where else can the anusaya come from, if they are not present intentions?

I suspect the reason why Ven T has elected to translate anuseti with the more active sense of "obsesses" lies in this aspect of his model of the formations and kamma. See his translation of this passage of AN 6.63 -

Cetanāhaṃ bhikkhave kammaṃ vadāmi, cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti kāyena vācāya manasā.

Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect.


He has translated cetayitvā as a gerund, but the more common use of -tva is as an absolutive, such as BB's translation "Having intended...".

This simultaneity sense that informs his model of the anusaya seems to stem from his interpretation of the locative absolute formula used in idappaccayatā. Since sati is the locative form of a present participle, he says that -

The Buddha expressed this/that conditionality in a simple-looking formula:

(1) When this is, that is.
(2) From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
(3) When this isn't, that isn't.
(4) From the stopping of this comes the stopping of that.

— AN 10.92

There are many possible ways of interpreting this formula, but only one does justice both to the way the formula is worded and to the complex, fluid manner in which specific examples of causal relationships are described in the Canon. That way is to view the formula as the interplay of two causal principles, one linear and the other synchronic, that combine to form a non-linear pattern. The linear principle — taking (2) and (4) as a pair — connects events, rather than objects, over time; the synchronic principle — (1) and (3) — connects objects and events in the present moment. The two principles intersect, so that any given event is influenced by two sets of conditions: input acting from the past and input acting from the present. Although each principle seems simple, the fact that they interact makes their consequences very complex [§10].

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... index.html


IMHO, this is wrong, on 2 counts. On doctrinal grounds, this interpretation contradicts the 2 Ariyasavaka Suttas (SN 12.49 - 50). On grammatical grounds, he is ignoring the distinction in Pali grammar between locative absolutes from present participles of action verbs versus existential verbs (such as atthi that gives us santa).

Dependant Origination is not a process model; all of the relationships in there are logic statements of what is necessary to cause something. Time has no place in the formula, which therefore makes DO very amenable to being applied across any length of time. The reason why the process model has crept into the interpretation of DO lies in the scattering of alternate formulations which use hetupaccaya, instead of just paccaya. Any good Abhidharmika would insist that hetu must be given its special and distinct meaning as proximate cause, thereby leading to DO being used as a process model. I follow the interpretation that hetu has been included in some alternate formulations as a redaction device using the waxing syllables rule, such that the rhythm simply reinforces paccaya, without disturbing the main meaning of paccaya as necessary condition.

:anjali:
Sylvester
 
Posts: 1501
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby pulga » Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:34 pm

Sylvester wrote:What this does suggest is that defilements that hinder meditation can eventually be starved to the point that Right Effort drops out of the picture, when the inclination of the mind has built up enough momentum to be (for want of a better word) "good". Leaving aside how the Comy is forced to interpret tena in MN 44 as an instrumental involving supramundane jhanas, MN 44 also suggests that each of the jhāna attainments are bereft of specific anusaya, principally, I suspect due to the absence of intentions in the jhānas.


Nice to see you back, Sylvester.

The Mahāsāropamasutta refers to a “perpetual liberation” (asamayavimokkha).

So tāya sīlasampadāya na majjati nappamajjati na pamādaṃ āpajjati, appamatto samāno samādhisampadaṃ ārādheti. So tāya samādhisampadāya attamano hoti, no ca kho paripuṇṇasaṅkappo. So tāya samādhisampadāya na attānukkaṃseti, na paraṃ vambheti. So tāya samādhisampadāya na majjati nappamajjati na pamādaṃ āpajjati, appamatto samāno ñāṇadassanaṃ ārādheti. So tena ñāṇadassanena attamano hoti, no ca kho paripuṇṇasaṅkappo. So tena ñāṇadassanena na attānukkaṃseti, na paraṃ vambheti. So tena ñāṇadassanena na majjati nappamajjati na pamādaṃ āpajjati, appamatto samāno asamayavimokkhaṃ ārādheti. Aṭṭhānametaṃ, bhikkhave, anavakāso yaṃ so bhikkhu tāya asamayavimuttiyā parihāyetha.

He does not become intoxicated with that attainment of virtue; he does not grow negligent and fall into negligence. Being diligent, he achieves the attainment of concentration. He is pleased with that attainment of concentration, but his intention is not fulfilled. He does not, on account of it, laud himself and disparage others. He does not become intoxicated with that attainment of concentration; he does not grow negligent and fall into negligence. Being diligent, he achieves knowledge and vision. He does not, on account of it, laud himself and disparage others. He does not become intoxicated with that knowledge and vision; he does not grow negligent and fall into negligence. Being diligent, he attains perpetual liberation. And it is impossible for that bhikkhu to fall away from that perpetual deliverance. MN 29 (Ven. Bodhi's translation)


http://suttacentral.net/mn29/en

See also the Mahāsuññatasutta:

So vatānanda, bhikkhu saṅgaṇikārāmo saṅgaṇikarato saṅgaṇikārāmataṃ anuyutto gaṇārāmo gaṇarato gaṇasammudito sāmāyikaṃ vā kantaṃ cetovimuttiṃ upasampajja viharissati asāmāyikaṃ vā akuppanti–  netaṃ ṭhānaṃ vijjati. Yo ca kho so, ānanda, bhikkhu eko gaṇasmā vūpakaṭṭho viharati tassetaṃ bhikkhuno pāṭikaṅkhaṃ sāmāyikaṃ vā kantaṃ cetovimuttiṃ upasampajja viharissati asāmāyikaṃ vā akuppanti–  ṭhānametaṃ vijjati.

"Indeed, Ananda, it is impossible that a monk who delights in company, enjoys company, is committed to delighting in company; who delights in a group, enjoys a group, rejoices in a group, will enter & remain in the awareness-release that is temporary and pleasing, or in the awareness-release that is not-temporary and beyond provocation. But it is possible that a monk who lives alone, withdrawn from the group, can expect to enter & remain in the awareness-release that is temporary and pleasing, or in the awareness-release that is not-temporary and beyond provocation. MN 122 (Ven. Thanissaro's translation)


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
pulga
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby SarathW » Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:32 am

Initially Anåpåna meditation is but a tool to concentrate
the mind. At this stage no attention is given to sensations,
thoughts, emotions, and similar mental phenomena. The
attention of the mind is meant to stay with the simple awareness
of the physical touch of air brushing over the skin below
the nose, above the upper lip. In this case the three unwholesome
roots, i.e., lobha (greed), dosa (anger, aversion), and
moha (delusion), are held in abeyance and what is left are the
Three Wholesome Roots : alobha (non-greed), adosa (nonanger),
and amoha (knowledge, understanding). This
momentary concentration of the mind on physical phenomena
results in a temporary mental purity which in Buddhism
is called samådhi.
To come to a lasting purity of mind, according to Buddhism,
matter and mental aggregates have to be observed in
the light of their constant change (anicca), their unsatisfactoriness
(dukkha), and the absence of an “I,” a lasting personality
or soul (anattå). By experiencing these characteristics,
or indeed, any one characteristic, a person can attain
freedom from all attachment, and thus reach the end of
suffering.

Page 19:

http://www.internationalmeditationcentr ... ourses.pdf
SarathW
 
Posts: 1819
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby Unrul3r » Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:24 pm

Two suttas that can be helpful for this discussion.

AN 4.195 - Vappa Sutta wrote:On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling among the Sakyans at Kapilavatthu in the Banyan Tree Park. Then Vappa the Sakyan, a disciple of the Nigaṇṭhas, approached the Venerable Mahāmoggallāna, paid homage to him, and sat down to one side. The Venerable Mahāmoggallāna then said to him:

“Here, Vappa, if one is restrained by body, speech, and mind, then, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge, do you see anything on account of which taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon such a person in future?”

“I do see such a possibility, Bhante. In the past one did an evil deed whose result has not yet ripened. On that account taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon a person in some future.”

While this conversation between the Venerable Mahāmoggallāna and Vappa the Sakyan was underway, in the evening the Blessed One emerged from seclusion and went to the attendance hall. He sat down on the appointed seat and said to the Venerable Mahāmoggallāna:

“What, Moggallāna, was the discussion that you were engaged in just now? And what was the conversation of yours that was underway?”

[The Venerable Mahāmoggallāna here relates his entire conversation with Vappa the Sakyan, concluding:]

“This, Bhante, was the conversation I was having with Vappa the Sakyan when the Blessed One arrived.”

Then the Blessed One said to Vappa the Sakyan:

“If, Vappa, you would agree with what you deem agreeable and disagree with what you deem disagreeable; and if, when you do not understand the meaning of my words, you would question me about them further, saying: ‘How is this, Bhante? What is the meaning of this?’; then we might discuss this.”

“Bhante, I will agree with the Blessed One to what I deem agreeable and disagree with what I deem disagreeable; and when I do not understand the meaning of his words, I will question him about them further, saying: ‘How is this, Bhante? What is the meaning of this?’ So let’s discuss this.”

(1) “What do you think, Vappa? Those taints, distressing and feverish, that might arise because of bodily undertakings do not occur when one refrains from them. He does not create any new kamma and he terminates the old kamma having contacted it again and again. The wearing away is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise. Do you see, Vappa, anything on account of which taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon such a person in future lives?”

“No, Bhante.”

(2) “What do you think, Vappa? Those taints, distressing and feverish, that might arise because of verbal undertakings do not occur when one refrains from them. He does not create any new kamma and he terminates the old kamma having contacted it again and again. The wearing away is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise. Do you see, Vappa, anything on account of which taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon such a person in future?”

“No, Bhante.”

(3) “What do you think, Vappa? Those taints, distressing and feverish, that might arise because of mental undertakings do not occur when one refrains from them. He does not create any new kamma and he terminates the old kamma having contacted it again and again. The wearing away is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise. Do you see, Vappa, anything on account of which taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon such a person in future?”

“No, Bhante.”

(4) “What do you think, Vappa? With the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge, those taints, distressing and feverish, that arise with ignorance as condition no longer occur. He does not create any new kamma and he terminates the old kamma having contacted it again and again. The wearing away is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise. Do you see, Vappa, anything on account of which taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon such a person in future?”

“No, Bhante.”

“A bhikkhu thus perfectly liberated in mind, Vappa, achieves six constant dwellings. Having seen a form with the eye, he is neither joyful nor saddened, but dwells equanimous, mindful and clearly comprehending. Having heard a sound with the ear . . . Having smelled an odor with the nose . . . Having experienced a taste with the tongue . . . Having felt a tactile object with the body . . . Having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind, he is neither joyful nor saddened, but dwells equanimous, mindful and clearly comprehending.

“When he feels a feeling terminating with the body, he understands: ‘I feel a feeling terminating with the body.’ When he feels a feeling terminating with life, he understands: ‘I feel a feeling terminating with life.’ He understands: ‘With the breakup of the body, following the exhaustion of life, all that is felt, not being delighted in, will become cool right here.’

“Suppose, Vappa, a shadow is seen on account of a stump. Then a man would come along bringing a shovel and a basket. He would cut down the stump at its foot, dig it up, and pull out the roots, even the fine rootlets and root-fibers. He would cut the stump into pieces, split the pieces, and reduce them to slivers. Then he would dry the slivers in the wind and sun, burn them in a fire, and reduce them to ashes. Having done so, he would winnow the ashes in a strong wind or let them be carried away by the swift current of a river. Thus the shadow that depended on that stump would be cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so that it is no more subject to future arising.

“So too, Vappa, a bhikkhu thus perfectly liberated in mind achieves six constant dwellings. Having seen a form with the eye . . . Having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind, he is neither joyful nor saddened, but dwells equanimous, mindful and clearly comprehending. When he feels a feeling terminating with the body, he understands . . . ‘With the breakup of the body, following the exhaustion of life, all that is felt, not being delighted in, will become cool right here.’”

When this was said, Vappa the Sakyan, a disciple of the Nigaṇṭhas, said to the Blessed One:

“Suppose, Bhante, there was a man in quest of profit who raised horses for sale, but he would not gain a profit and instead would only reap weariness
and distress. Just so, in quest of profit, I attended upon the foolish Nigaṇṭhas, but I did not gain a profit and instead only reaped weariness and distress. Starting today, whatever confidence I had in the foolish Nigaṇṭhas, I winnow in a strong wind or let it be carried away by the current of a river.
“Excellent, Bhante! . . . Let the Blessed One consider me as a lay follower who from today has gone for refuge for life.”


SN 12.25: Bhumija Sutta wrote:Staying at Savatthi. Then Ven. Bhumija, arising from his seclusion in the late afternoon, went to Ven. Sariputta. On arrival, he exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "Friend Sariputta, there are some brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made. There are other brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are other-made. Then there are other brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made & other-made. And then there are still other brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously. In this case, friend Sariputta, what is the Blessed One's doctrine? What does he teach? Answering in what way will I speak in line with what the Blessed One has said, not misrepresent the Blessed One with what is unfactual, and answer in line with the Dhamma so that no one whose thinking is in line with the Dhamma will have grounds for criticism?"

"The Blessed One, my friend, has said that pleasure & pain are dependently co-arisen. Dependent on what? Dependent on contact. One speaking in this way would be speaking in line with what the Blessed One has said, would not be misrepresenting the Blessed One with what is unfactual, and would be answering in line with the Dhamma so that no one whose thinking is in line with the Dhamma would have grounds for criticism.

"Whatever brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made, even that is dependent on contact. Whatever brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are other-made, even that is dependent on contact. Whatever brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made & other-made, even that is dependent on contact. Whatever brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously, even that is dependent on contact.

"That any brahmans & contemplatives — teachers of kamma who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made — would be sensitive to pleasure & pain otherwise than through contact: that isn't possible. That any brahmans & contemplatives — teachers of kamma who declare that pleasure & pain are other-made... self-made & other-made... who declare that pleasure & pain are neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously — would be sensitive to pleasure & pain otherwise than through contact: that isn't possible."

Now it so happened that Ven. Ananda overheard this conversation between Ven. Sariputta & Ven. Bhumija. Then he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he reported the entire conversation to the Blessed One.

[The Blessed One said:] "Excellent, Ananda. Excellent. One rightly answering would answer as Ven. Sariputta has done.

"I have said, Ananda, that pleasure & pain are dependently co-arisen. Dependent on what? Dependent on contact. One speaking in this way would be speaking in line with what I have said, would not be misrepresenting me with what is unfactual, and would be answering in line with the Dhamma so that no one whose thinking is in line with the Dhamma would have grounds for criticism.

"Whatever brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made, even that is dependent on contact. Whatever brahmans & contemplatives, teachers of kamma, who declare that pleasure & pain are other-made... self-made & other-made... neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously, even that is dependent on contact.

"That any brahmans & contemplatives — teachers of kamma who declare that pleasure & pain are self-made — would be sensitive to pleasure & pain otherwise than through contact: that isn't possible. That any brahmans & contemplatives — teachers of kamma who declare that pleasure & pain are other-made... self-made & other-made... neither self-made nor other-made, but arise spontaneously — would be sensitive to pleasure & pain otherwise than through contact: that isn't possible.

"When there is a body, pleasure & pain arise internally with bodily intention as the cause; or when there is speech, pleasure & pain arise internally with verbal intention as the cause; or when there is intellect, pleasure & pain arise internally with intellectual intention as the cause.

"From ignorance as a requisite condition, then either of one's own accord one fabricates bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure & pain arise internally, or because of others one fabricates bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure & pain arise internally. Either alert one fabricates bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure & pain arise internally, or unalert one fabricates bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure & pain arise internally. (Similarly with verbal & intellectual fabrications.)

"Now, ignorance is bound up in these things. From the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance, there no longer exists [the sense of] the body on account of which that pleasure & pain internally arise. There no longer exists the speech... the intellect on account of which that pleasure & pain internally arise. There no longer exists the field, the site, the dimension, or the issue on account of which that pleasure & pain internally arise."
User avatar
Unrul3r
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:29 pm
Location: Porto, Portugal

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby mikenz66 » Thu Mar 13, 2014 7:22 am

See also this excerpt from AN 8.12 Sīha:


culaavuso wrote:
AN 8.12: Sīha Sutta wrote:I assert that bad unwholesome qualities—bodily, verbal, and mental misconduct—are to be burned up. I say that someone is a tormentor when he has abandoned the bad unwholesome qualities that are to be burned up; when he has cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, obliterated them so that they are no more subject to future arising.


This seems to be an interesting parallel to the notion of burning up kamma in meditation. Suppressing the hindrances and cultivating insight would be a way to "burn up" these unwholesome qualities, and since the qualities are defined in terms of misconduct it is implied that burning up these qualities is putting an end to unwholesome kamma.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=20145&p=282335#p282256

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10139
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Goenka on elimination of sankharas

Postby Unrul3r » Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:01 am

mikenz66 wrote:See also this excerpt from AN 8.12 Sīha:


culaavuso wrote:
AN 8.12: Sīha Sutta wrote:I assert that bad unwholesome qualities—bodily, verbal, and mental misconduct—are to be burned up. I say that someone is a tormentor when he has abandoned the bad unwholesome qualities that are to be burned up; when he has cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, obliterated them so that they are no more subject to future arising.


This seems to be an interesting parallel to the notion of burning up kamma in meditation. Suppressing the hindrances and cultivating insight would be a way to "burn up" these unwholesome qualities, and since the qualities are defined in terms of misconduct it is implied that burning up these qualities is putting an end to unwholesome kamma.

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 35#p282256

:anjali:
Mike


Indeed. One can also find a reference in Ud 3.1:

Kamma Sutta: Action (Ud 3.1) wrote:I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. And on that occasion a certain monk was sitting not far from the Blessed One, his legs crossed, his body held erect, enduring fierce pains, sharp & severe, that were the result of old kamma — mindful, alert, without suffering. The Blessed One saw him sitting not far away, his legs crossed, his body held erect, enduring fierce pains, sharp & severe, that were the result of old kamma — mindful, alert, and not struck down by them.

Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:

For the monk who has left
all kamma behind,
shaking off the dust of the past,
steady, unpossessive,
Such: There's no point in telling anyone else.


In the burmese tipitaka it's called Kammavipākaja Sutta
User avatar
Unrul3r
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:29 pm
Location: Porto, Portugal

Previous

Return to Theravada Meditation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests