The natural ability to separate mind (or mind-essence, to
use Dzogchen terminology) and mind objects is clearly reflected
in the Pali language. There are actually two different verbs
meaning “to be,” and they correspond to the conventional or
conditioned, and to the unconditioned. The verb “hoti” refers
to that which is conditioned and passes through time. These
are the common activities and the labels of various sense
impressions that we use regularly, and, for the most part,
unconsciously. Everyone agrees, for example, that water is
wet, the body is heavy, there are seven days in the week, and
I am a man.
The second verb, “atthi,” refers to the transcendental qualities
of being-ness. Being-ness, in this case, does not imply a
becoming, the world of time or identity. It reflects the unconditioned,
the unmanifest nature of mind
I suppose the meditator cultivating the satipatthanas would now have to confront the transcendental and unconditioned Hindrances when this occurs to him/her -
And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves?
There is the case where a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances?
There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that 'There is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' He discerns how there is the arising of unarisen sensual desire. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of sensual desire once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of sensual desire that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining hindrances: ill will, sloth & drowsiness, restlessness & anxiety, and uncertainty.)
Kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati?
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati pañcasu nīvaraṇesu. Kathañca pana, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati pañcasu nīvaraṇesu?
Idha , bhikkhave, bhikkhu santaṃ vā ajjhattaṃ kāmacchandaṃ ‘atthi me ajjhattaṃ kāmacchando’ti pajānāti, asantaṃ vā ajjhattaṃ kāmacchandaṃ ‘natthi me ajjhattaṃ kāmacchando’ti pajānāti; yathā ca anuppannassa kāmacchandassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa kāmacchandassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa kāmacchandassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
Why, o why, do otherwise good monks make gaffes like this?[/quote]
Because it is not a gaffe. Ajahn Amaro was appointed at a young age as abbott of one of the Forest Traditions leading western monasteries because of his palpable attainment.
You will find him and a number of other spiritual descendents of Luang Por Chah using Pali in a creative and living way.
This is of course is upsetting to some...and the Forest Tradition we may conclude, is not their way.
But it is not bad scholarship....it is a conscious eschewel of scholarship.
What this illustrates vividly is the fact that the Forest Tradition is rooted in the experiential...not in the Sutta tradition.
As such they feel able to tale liberties with the Pali. They bend it to reflect experience rather than use language to create a model of anticipated experience.
Luang Por Chah said repeatedly " The only book worth reading is the book of the heart ".
This was not a flippant throw away remark, he meant it.
The Forest Tradition have a working knowledge of Pali, as much as it tales to encourage the real work on the cushion.
The results of this non scholastic approach can be see anytime one has contact with the Forest Sangha...
Their wisdom , humour and vitality are inspiring.
