Bhante Vimalaramsi

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Cittasanto »

Khalil Bodhi wrote:Sadhu Bhante! I really appreciate your detailed analysis and will certainly be reading it more than once.
Yes certainly worth re reading for a number of reasons Thank-you!
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
amtross
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:39 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by amtross »

Dhammanando wrote: ...
Had he done so, he would have discovered that all the Pali words that occur in binary opposition to passambhati have to do with agitation or disturbance or turbulence. Passambhati and its derivatives NEVER occur in opposition to any of the Pali words denoting tightness or tenseness. ...

Bhante, I was under the impression that disturbance/agitation/turbulence in the mind would result from (depend on?) clinging to some sort of craving in the mind (i.e. aversion or desire). At least that's how it seems to me. Do you have a different understanding? I ask because I was also under the impression that craving was usually experienced as a tightness in the mind but your statement seems to indicate that disturbance and tightness in the mind are not intrinsically related. I would be very interested in your thoughts on these points in case I am misunderstanding some very fundamental aspects of the practice.

Thanks,
sean
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by chownah »

Dhammanando,
So do you suggest the term "calming bodily formations" rather than "tranquilising bodily formations"?
chownah
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by tiltbillings »

2600htz wrote:Anyways im still not sure in a good way what are the simmilarities and differences in other matters, because i don´t understand in a good way the Burmese vipassana/Mahasi Sayadaw/Joseph G. method.
Listening to Joseph G.’s talks is a good place to start.

-Do they use momentary concentration or any simmilar kind of concentration? what is concentration for them?
I would be somewhat careful in taking Vimalaramsi’s characterization of these things as being how they are understood and practiced by vipassana practitioners.

While generally meditative concentration hold steady on one object or object set, momentary concentration refers to concentrated attention given to whatever arises in awareness at “this moment.” The practice of noting helps to cultivate both the awareness and concentration of what arises as it arises. The level of concentration can be very significant while the objects of awareness are the rise and fall of the seen, heard, touched, smelled, tasted, and cognized.
-In the refered topic u did say: "The point is that the more one pointed concentration the more likely the concentration is to suppress the hindrances, which is, of course, not eradicating them via insight.". Do u agree with this supressing or not?
It all depends upon the type of practice being done, but:
  • Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be. -- MN 10
The more clearly one sees (with no need to conceptualize about) the rise and fall of sense-desire, the more clearly one sees its nature, and in seeing its nature of sense-desire, the less likely one is going to get lost in it.
-Do they go throw the jhanas? what type of jhanas?
Jhana is a confusing concept. Here are a couple of threads that might help see things from something of a different point of view:

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 97#p140097" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 39#p166339" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These two talks here are worth listening to:

http://www.dharmaseed.org/talks/?search ... =-rec_date" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-They don´t think vipassana can happen with the practice of Brahma-Viharas?
Insight happens where it happens.
-They switch from samatha to vipassana? they are strictly vipassana? they joke samatha and vipassana?
I think you mean yoke, not joke, and I think the two above talks may address that.
-How does insight exacly comes to be?
It is a matter of directly seeing, clearly comprehending, what is seen (and the rest), not filtering the seen through conceptual expectations, wants, needs and imaginings.
-They also always see D.O or is D.O just one of many different insight?
Which is an interesting question. Do you see the Dhamma? Or is this a way of talking about things after the fact of insight?
Well, it seems i did extend too much so it might be a lot of trouble to answer, so do it as you please, in a short or long way :)

With metta.[/b]

:namaste:
No trouble to answer at all, though I am sorry for being a bit late with getting back to you.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
2600htz
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by 2600htz »

Dhammanando wrote:
Khalil Bodhi wrote:Hi All,

I have heard some criticisms of late of Bhante Vimalaramsi and would be interested in hearing why some people have an issue or issues with him.
  • passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ assasissāmī’ ti sikkhati; ‘passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ passasissāmī’ ti sikkhati.
    [...]
    passambhayaṃ cittasaṅkhāraṃ assasissāmī’ ti sikkhati; ‘passambhayaṃ cittasaṅkhāraṃ passasissāmī’ ti sikkhati.


    He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the bodily formation.’
    [...]
    He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the mental formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the mental formation.’

These two lines —the final parts of the first and second tetrads of the Ānāpānassati Sutta (MN. 118)— are what Ven. Vimalaraṃsī cites as "proof texts" in support of his notion that the sine qua non of Buddhist bhāvanā is the willed relaxing of a supposed "tight mental fist" in one's head. As far as I know, it is on these passages alone that his theory is based. (If he has at any time cited others, then I welcome correction).

My first "issue" with Ven. Vimalaraṃsī is his claim that the above two modes of ānāpānassati are in some manner, or for some reason, of much greater moment than all the others. This is merely the venerable's personal opinion, for in the Suttas the Buddha doesn't single out any of the sixteen modes as meriting greater attention than the others.


Moving on to a more serious problem, it seems to me that the above passages simply cannot sustain the interpretation that the venerable imposes upon them. When citing these passages he is wont to present his case rather tersely, but when the reasoning is unpacked, it seems to go something like this:

1. The Buddha instructs the yogāvacara to tranquillize the bodily formation while breathing in and out.
2. To tranquillize means to relax.
3. That which is in need of relaxing must be something tense, tight or strained.
4. This tense, tight or strained thing may be tropologized as a "tight mental fist".
5. This mental fist is composed of attachment, aversion and self-view.
6. Willed relaxation of this "fist" brings about the letting go of attachment, etc.
7. Repeatedly doing so leads to the purification of the mind and attainment of the noble paths and fruits.

I'm not sure if I've got the latter stages of his thinking exactly right (it's ages since I last read him), but for present purposes it doesn't really matter, because the mischief lies in points 2 and 3.

In English usage the primary sense of the verb "to tranquillize" is to calm someone/something that is agitated or disturbed. The word has also a secondary sense —largely occurring in medical contexts— where it means to relax that which is tight or strained. A person suffering from stress and tension, for example, may take a tranquillizer.

Now Vimalaraṃsī's argument requires one to assume that the secondary sense of the English verb "to tranquillize" is the primary sense of the Pali verb "passambhati", (or if not that, then it is at least the sense that the Buddha had in mind when he taught the Ānāpānassati Sutta).

And what's wrong with that? What's wrong is that the venerable ought not to have assumed anything of the kind. Rather than making the linguistically naïve assumption of there being a perfect symmetry between the semantic range of "passambhati" and that of "tranquillize", he ought to have investigated how "passambhati" and related words (passaddha, passaddhi, passambhayaṃ, etc.) are used in the Suttas. Had he done so, he would have discovered that all the Pali words that occur in binary opposition to passambhati have to do with agitation or disturbance or turbulence. Passambhati and its derivatives NEVER occur in opposition to any of the Pali words denoting tightness or tenseness.

This is not of course to say that the method devised by Ven. Vimalaraṃsī may not be an effective practice, but merely that it is not nearly so well-grounded in the Suttas as he imagines it to be.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando
Hello Dhammanando:

Thanks for the reply!,

1) I never heard in V. Vimalaramsi instructions that the person should pay less attention to the rest of the "sixteen modes" of the anapanasati .
On the contrary, i heard many times that it was a complete set of instructions, a flow, not to be taken as single threats.
But, he did say two things:

-"[1] Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.'

Meaning the person just needs to discern, without the need to focus, causing extra attention on the matter.

-He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' [4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'
[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'

"The person trains something", meaning its an efford, something that takes a little more than just a passive stand.


2) While many times V. Vimalamrasi uses the word "relax" in the sense of "relaxing that which is tight or strained" (in the head, but not just in head, also in any other part of the body),
he also use the word in the sense of "calming something that is agitated or disturbed" (specially when talking about calming mental states or restlessness-agitation in the body).

Anyways, since what is agitated or disturbed can be relaxed, and what is tight or strained can be taken as agitation, im lost in what would be the practical difference between
those two. Could you please explain it a little more?.


With metta.
2600htz
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by 2600htz »

tiltbillings wrote:
2600htz wrote:Anyways im still not sure in a good way what are the simmilarities and differences in other matters, because i don´t understand in a good way the Burmese vipassana/Mahasi Sayadaw/Joseph G. method.
Listening to Joseph G.’s talks is a good place to start.

-Do they use momentary concentration or any simmilar kind of concentration? what is concentration for them?
I would be somewhat careful in taking Vimalaramsi’s characterization of these things as being how they are understood and practiced by vipassana practitioners.

While generally meditative concentration hold steady on one object or object set, momentary concentration refers to concentrated attention given to whatever arises in awareness at “this moment.” The practice of noting helps to cultivate both the awareness and concentration of what arises as it arises. The level of concentration can be very significant while the objects of awareness are the rise and fall of the seen, heard, touched, smelled, tasted, and cognized.
-In the refered topic u did say: "The point is that the more one pointed concentration the more likely the concentration is to suppress the hindrances, which is, of course, not eradicating them via insight.". Do u agree with this supressing or not?
It all depends upon the type of practice being done, but:
  • Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be. -- MN 10
The more clearly one sees (with no need to conceptualize about) the rise and fall of sense-desire, the more clearly one sees its nature, and in seeing its nature of sense-desire, the less likely one is going to get lost in it.
-Do they go throw the jhanas? what type of jhanas?
Jhana is a confusing concept. Here are a couple of threads that might help see things from something of a different point of view:

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 97#p140097" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 39#p166339" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These two talks here are worth listening to:

http://www.dharmaseed.org/talks/?search ... =-rec_date" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-They don´t think vipassana can happen with the practice of Brahma-Viharas?
Insight happens where it happens.
-They switch from samatha to vipassana? they are strictly vipassana? they joke samatha and vipassana?
I think you mean yoke, not joke, and I think the two above talks may address that.
-How does insight exacly comes to be?
It is a matter of directly seeing, clearly comprehending, what is seen (and the rest), not filtering the seen through conceptual expectations, wants, needs and imaginings.
-They also always see D.O or is D.O just one of many different insight?
Which is an interesting question. Do you see the Dhamma? Or is this a way of talking about things after the fact of insight?
Well, it seems i did extend too much so it might be a lot of trouble to answer, so do it as you please, in a short or long way :)

With metta.[/b]

:namaste:
No trouble to answer at all, though I am sorry for being a bit late with getting back to you.
Hello:

Thanks Tiltbillings, i will listen to one of the dhamma talks u linked and then answer.

With metta.
Brizzy
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:58 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Brizzy »

Manapa wrote:
Khalil Bodhi wrote:Sadhu Bhante! I really appreciate your detailed analysis and will certainly be reading it more than once.
Yes certainly worth re reading for a number of reasons Thank-you!
I have read the post several times and I am still unsure of its reasoning's. At the same time I am rather surprised by the framing of the post.
Perhaps if Bhante wanted to make a truer evaluation of Bhante V, then a personal dialogue between the two could help clear up any concerns he has about any mischief.

Metta

:smile:
Ignorance is an intentional act.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Cittasanto »

Brizzy wrote:
I have read the post several times and I am still unsure of its reasoning's. At the same time I am rather surprised by the framing of the post.
Perhaps if Bhante wanted to make a truer evaluation of Bhante V, then a personal dialogue between the two could help clear up any concerns he has about any mischief.

Metta

:smile:
if that is the only thing you got from it :(
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Brizzy
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:58 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Brizzy »

Manapa wrote:
Brizzy wrote:
I have read the post several times and I am still unsure of its reasoning's. At the same time I am rather surprised by the framing of the post.
Perhaps if Bhante wanted to make a truer evaluation of Bhante V, then a personal dialogue between the two could help clear up any concerns he has about any mischief.

Metta

:smile:
if that is the only thing you got from it :(
Indeed.

Metta

:smile:
Ignorance is an intentional act.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi Chownah,
So do you suggest the term "calming bodily formations" rather than "tranquilising bodily formations"?
"Calming", "tranquillising", "pacifying" — I think they're all about equally fine. My grumble was about Ven. Vimalaraṃsī's "relaxing". It's his habit to insert this in brackets after "tranquillising".

Best wishes,
Dhammanando
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi Brizzy,
I have read the post several times and I am still unsure of its reasoning's.
Then to put it as simply as I can:

Ven. Vimalaramsi attributes an especial importance to those modes of anapanassati that involve calming the bodily and mental formation. There is no evidence in the Suttas that they have an especial importance.

Ven. Vimalaramsi takes the Pali phrase translated as "...tranquillizing the bodily formation..." to mean that something tight or tense needs relaxing. This seems a highly improbable interpretation, for there is no evidence that the verb passambhati ever means "to relax".
At the same time I am rather surprised by the framing of the post.
Really? Why are you rather surprised? When the OP is a query as to whether anyone has an issue with a modern teacher whose teachings have generated controversy, you might have good cause for surprise if my contribution had been a post on, say, the history of test match cricket or the life-cycle of the humpback salmon. But what cause for surprise when it's nothing more or less than what the OP was soliciting?
Perhaps if Bhante wanted to make a truer evaluation of Bhante V, then a personal dialogue between the two could help clear up any concerns he has about any mischief.
When the concerns are justified no amount of dialogue will clear them up. Reading the venerable's books on the Ānāpānassati Sutta and Mettabhāvanā, as well as his series of posts to DSG some years ago, I am satisfied that the two criticisms I made in my post are justified.

And lest my use of mischief in the earlier post be misunderstood . . .

According to the Oxford Dictionary in phrases like "the mischief lies in..." and "the mischief of it is that..." the word "mischief" means the most vexatious feature of something. Naturally it wasn't my intention to suggest that Ven. Vimalaraṃsī was being mischievous.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi 2600htz
1) I never heard in V. Vimalaramsi instructions that the person should pay less attention to the rest of the "sixteen modes" of the anapanasati .
I wrote of Ven. Vimalaraṃsī treating the "tranquillizing bodily and mental formations" modes of ānāpānassati as being of "greater moment" — more consequential — than the the other modes. An example of this can be seen in his book on the Ānāpānassati Sutta. After quoting the lines: "He trains thus: 'I shall breath in tranquilizing the bodily formation'; he trains thus: 'I shall breath out tranquilizing the bodily formation.'" the venerable remarks:
  • This simple statement is the most important part of the meditation instructions. It instructs one to notice the tightness, which arises in the head with every arising of a consciousness, and let that tightness go, while on the in-breath and out-breath. Then one feels their mind open up, expand, relax and become tranquil.
    (Vimalaraṃsī's emphasis)
So, the venerable maintains that tranquillizing the bodily formation is the "most important part of the meditation instructions." If this is the "most important part", then it follows that the other parts are less important.

In the introduction to the same book, the venerable states:
  • The method described here is taken directly from the Sutta itself and its results can be seen clearly and easily when one practices according to the instructions on the Sutta. The author would like to emphasize that the instructions in this book are not his "own opinion", but is actually the Lord Buddha's own instruction given in a clear and precise way. It can be called the "Undiluted Dhamma", because it comes directly from the Suttas themselves, without a lot of additions or free-lance ideas.
    (My emphasis)
This is in contrast to Buddhaghosa, whom the venerable takes to task for introducing concepts such as access concentration, uggaha-nimitta, paṭibhāga-nimitta, etc., into his exposition of ānāpānassati:
  • For example, the Visuddhi Magga talks about having a sign (nimitta in Pali, this can be a light or other visualized mind-made pictures) arise in the mind at certain times when one is practicing jhana meditation (absorption concentration [appana samādhi] or when one gets into access concentration [upacara samādhi] or even in momentary concentration [khanika samādhi]. With each type of 'concentration' a nimitta of some kind arises. When this happens one is practicing a 'concentration' type of meditation practice, which the Bodhisattva rejected as being the way to Nibbāna! However, if one were to check the Suttas, the description of nimittas arising in the mind has never been mentioned. And, if it were very important, it would be mentioned many times. The Lord Buddha never taught concentration techniques, having nimittas (signs) arising, or the chanting of mantras. These are forms of Hindu practices that have sneaked into Buddhism for a few hundred years. Their influences can be seen in the 'concentration practices' and in the Tibetan Buddhist styles of meditation, as well as, in other popular commentaries like the Visuddhi Magga. Thus, the current ways of practicing "concentration" do not conform to the descriptions given in the Suttas.
    One must always honestly and openly investigate what is being said and then check it against the Suttas. It is best that one does this not with just part of the Sutta but the whole Sutta itself, because taking out one or two lines from various sections can cause confusion.
So, given that the venerable is taking his stand on the Suttas, deems it an error to introduce or to rely upon notions not found in the Suttas (preferably found "many times in the Suttas"), and assures his readers that he is not peddling any dodgy "opinions ... additions or free-lance ideas," who can doubt that his admirers will be overjoyed to see his own exposition of bhāvanā evaluated by the very same standards that he applies to that of Buddhaghosa?

Where, then, in the Suttas (preferably "many times in the Suttas") is "tranquillising the bodily formation" stated to be "the most important part" of ānāpānassati? The answer is that nowhere is such a thing stated. Hence my remark that this is just the venerable's opinion. It's "an addition", if you will. It's "a free-lance-idea".

In reply to my my second objection, you say:
2) While many times V. Vimalamrasi uses the word "relax" in the sense of "relaxing that which is tight or strained" (in the head, but not just in head, also in any other part of the body), he also use the word in the sense of "calming something that is agitated or disturbed" (specially when talking about calming mental states or restlessness-agitation in the body).
As "relaxing" doesn't fall within the semantic range of "passambhati", nor within the scope of the practical explanation of "tranquillizing the bodily formation" given in the Ānāpānakathā of the Paṭisambhidāmagga, I think it's a mistake on the venerable's part to introduce the idea at all, regardless of what other actions he might prescribe to supplement it. Or at least he cannot do so and still claim that his method is "not his "own opinion", but is actually the Lord Buddha's own instruction given in a clear and precise way . . . .the "Undiluted Dhamma", because it comes directly from the Suttas themselves, without a lot of additions or free-lance ideas."

As it is, it is the very first gloss that he offers when explaining "tranquillising the bodily formation." To quote again:
  • [Tranquillising the bodily formation] instructs one to notice the tightness, which arises in the head with every arising of a consciousness, and let that tightness go, while on the in-breath and out-breath. Then one feels their mind open up, expand, relax and become tranquil.
By way of contrast, let's take a look at the oldest extant record (and the only canonical description we have) of what it means to tranquillise the bodily formation in ānāpānassati, the Ānāpānakathā of the Paṭisambhidāmagga. The author of this exposition, traditionally given as Sāriputta, begins very sensibly by defining the key term "bodily formation" (which, by the way, I notice Ven. Vimalaraṃsī has neglected to do):
  • "'Tranquillising the bodily formation (passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ), I shall breathe in,' thus he trains himself; 'tranquillising the bodily formation, I shall breathe out,' thus he trains himself."

    "Bodily-formation (kāyasaṅkhāraṃ)": long in-breaths, long out-breaths, short in-breaths, short out-breaths, breathing in experiencing the whole body, breathing out experiencing the whole body — these things are bodily properties; being bound up with the body they are bodily formations.
In other words, "bodily formation" is to be understood as comprising all the modes of breath previously itemized in the first tetrad. Essentially this is a more expansive version of the short definition given by the bhikkhunī Dhammadinnā in the Cullavedalla Sutta (MN. 44):
  • "But, lady, what is the bodily formation? ..."
    "In-breathing and out-breathing, friend Visākha, are the bodily formation..."
    "But, lady, why are in-breathing and out-breathing the bodily formation? ..."
    "Friend Visākha, in-breathing and out-breathing are bodily, these are states bound up with the body; that is why in-breathing and out-breathing are the bodily formation." (MN. 44)
Sāriputta then offers a series of glosses on "tranquillizing" (passambhayaṃ):
  • He trains himself by tranquillising (passambhento), causing to cease (nirodhento), pacifying (vūpasamento), those bodily formations.
No mention of relaxing any "tight mental fists" in one's head or body or mind or anywhere else. No words that could by any stretch of the imagination have to do with relaxing anything.

The author then makes a distinction between gross and subtle bodily formations, according to whether or not the long breaths, short breaths, etc., are coarse enough to generate bodily motion:
  • Such bodily formations whereby there is bending backward, sideways, all ways, forward, shaking, trembling, moving of the body — "'tranquillising the bodily formation, I shall breathe in,' thus he trains himself; 'tranquillising the bodily formation, I shall breathe out,' thus he trains himself."
    Such bodily formations whereby there is no bending backward, sideways, all ways, forward, shaking, trembling, moving of the body — "'Tranquillising the quiet and subtle bodily formation, I shall breathe in,' thus he trains himself; 'tranquillising the quiet and subtle bodily formation, I shall breathe out,' thus he trains himself."
In the final part, which I won't quote (you can download Ñāṇamoli's translation from ATI) the author gives the simile of the gong to show how breathing can continue despite the tranquillizing of it, and then relates the tetrad to the three aggregates of training, sati and sampajañña, faculties, powers, factors of awakening, etc.
Anyways, since what is agitated or disturbed can be relaxed, and what is tight or strained can be taken as agitation, im lost in what would be the practical difference between those two.
In the Araṇavibhaṅga Sutta (MN. 139) the Buddha taught that for the sake of non-conflict his disciples ought not to override normal linguistic usage (samaññaṃ nātidhāveyya).

If I'm holding a glass of water and my hand is shaking, the water will be disturbed. If I set the glass down on an immobile, non-vibrating surface, the water will become calm. I will have calmed the water. Or, the water's disturbance will have subsided. Its agitation will have been quelled. But what an eccentric and irregular locution to say: "Dhammanando has relaxed the water" or "Dhammanando has caused the water has relaxed itself" !

Likewise in Pali, as far as I can tell, it would be an "overriding of normal usage" to equate passambhati with any verbs that have to do with loosening or relaxing.
Could you please explain it a little more?
I hope this post will clarify matters.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
Khalil Bodhi
Posts: 2250
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:32 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Khalil Bodhi »

:goodpost: Thanks Bhante! Sadhu!
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind — this is the teaching of the Buddhas.
-Dhp. 183

The Stoic Buddhist: https://www.quora.com/q/dwxmcndlgmobmeu ... pOR2p0uAdH
My Practice Blog:
http://khalilbodhi.wordpress.com
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Ben »

Thank you, Ajahn!
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi all,

I'll be heading back up to my hermitage tomorrow or the day after. I'll try to post a reply to Sean's post tomorrow, but after that I won't be participating further in the thread (no dial-up connection on the mountain where I live).

All the best to you all for this new year. :smile:

Best wishes,
Dhammanando
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Post Reply