What role does Abhidhamma play in your practice?

[phil]

Hi all

One thing that confuses me these days is Abhidhamma and what role it can play in practice for people of limited understanding. How can objects of such fleeting nature be objects of awareness for us? Is it actually nimatta that is object of awareness, the after image that if I understand correctly is kind of copied and goes on after the objects have risen and fallen away in a flash? I'm thinking that Abhidhamma can only be understood as a model of how the most profoundly developed minds could cognize objects and for the rest of us, it is just theory.

I'm posting this question in this corner because I'd rather not invite responses from people who reject Abhidhamma, or belittle its importance. I'm particularly curious to hear from pt1 (?) who I noticed asked very excellent questions about Abhidhamma at DSG, but who is a meditator. I was impressed by your ability to continue to learn from Nina and others despite differences in attitudes towards practice. Or from Chris or others who are meditators but keen on Abhidhamma as well.

So how do you (all) see Abhidhamma within your practice? What are you finding from it that you don't find fully served by the suttanta? Again, I'm not asking this to dispute Abhidhamma. I'm hoping to have my Abhidhamma studies kick-started again.

Metta,

Phil

[mikenz66]

Hi Phil,

From a practice point of view the Burmese teachers (such as Mahasi Sayadaw/U Pandita, U Ba Kin/Goenka, Pa Auk Sayadaw, etc) use terminology ("sense doors", "mind moments", etc) and maps ("stages of insight") that is heavily based on the Abhidhamma, Commentaries, and Visuddhimagga. A lot of "insight" teachers in the west are using some sort of derivative of the Mahasi approach. As are many Thai and Malaysian teachers. Therefore, I find it useful to have some idea of the structure that they are working from.

Of course the Khun Sujin students at DSG have their own particular "practise can't be controlled since there is no self" interpretation. Of course, this correct in an ultimate sense, as all teachers I have any respect for teach, and it is something meditators start to get glimpses of for themselves after a while. But in my view their argument overlooks the fact that until we have some awakening we are mostly working with concepts and a self. See my thread on "conceptual and non-conceptual" http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2986.

Metta
Mike

[mikenz66]

In addition, the link that Bodom posted in this thread about the Visuddhimagga: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3174 is relevant.

At http://www.sirimangalo.org/ you'll find Mahasi-derived meditation teachings http://www.sirimangalo.org/vipassana and talks on the Visuddhimagga and Abdhidhamma http://www.sirimangalo.org/audio_index by Ven Silandanda.

Metta
Mike

[puthujjana]

I have only read the first two chapters of "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" yet and I found it very helpful in my practice.

The most helpful for me was to learn what is meant by sati. When the Buddha was talking about mindfulness, he didn't meant simple attention, but a beautiful cetasika rooted in (at least) non-greed and non-hate.

Further, I liked the ethical teachings which one can derive from reading all the lists about cittas and cetasikas.

I think that there are a lot of informations in the Abhidhammapitaka which can be used in (meditation-) practice.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings puthujjana,

The most helpful for me was to learn what is meant by sati. When the Buddha was talking about mindfulness, he didn't meant simple attention, but a beautiful cetasika rooted in (at least) non-greed and non-hate.

Interesting. Are you able to comment perhaps, in that context, on the following passage from the Satipatthana Sutta... the most definitive sutta on the subject of sati, mindfulness?

"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

The bolded sections would appear to be logically impossible (given that there can only be one mindstate at a time), if sati is to be strictly understood as a "beautiful cetasika rooted in (at least) non-greed and non-hate".

I'm not trying to disparage Abhidhamma here... merely working out how what is said can be reconciled with the suttas. If Abhidhamma is ever going to play much of a role in my practice, it's going to have to be because it complements and conforms with the suttas.

Metta,
Retro.

[puthujjana]

Hej Retro,

Are you able to comment perhaps, in that context, on the following passage from the Satipatthana Sutta... the most definitive sutta on the subject of sati, mindfulness?

Unfortunately, I'm not.

Anyway, I would say that these unwholesome states of mind are unmindful moments of conciousness. During meditation, the citta which arises thereafter takes them with wise attention as it's object and is a wholesome citta accompanied by wholesome concomitants such as sati.

I think it's all explainable with the abhidhammic teaching of momentarism.

However, I'm not able to do so and what I have written above is just a guess...



btw (maybe slightly off-topic): Bhante Gunaratana wrote an article on what mindfulness is and what it isn't (during vipassana meditation): http://www.bhavanasociety.org/resource/ ... vipassana/

with metta

[bodom]

As far as textual study it doesn't. I prefer to read my own mind than read about it.

[Cittasanto]

here is a translation of the Vibhanga Version of the satipatthana sutta
from page 12/13

Mindful. Herein, what is mindfulness?
That which is mindfulness, recollection, recall, mindfulness, remembrance, bearing (in mind), not loosing, not confusing,
mindfulness, the Faculty of Mindfulness, the Strength of Mindfulness, Right Mindfulness - this is called mindfulness.
With this mindfulness he is endowed, truly endowed, having attained, truly attained, being possessed, truly possessed, furnished (with it).
Because of this mindful is said.
After removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world.
Herein, what is the world?
For sure it is the body world, also the world of the five constituent groups (of mind and body) that provide fuel for attachment - this is called world.

[mikenz66]

Hi Retro,

Interesting. Are you able to comment perhaps, in that context, on the following passage from the Satipatthana Sutta... the most definitive sutta on the subject of sati, mindfulness?

"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

The bolded sections would appear to be logically impossible (given that there can only be one mindstate at a time), if sati is to be strictly understood as a "beautiful cetasika rooted in (at least) non-greed and non-hate".

I hope some of our Abhidhamma experts can comment, but I suspect that what you have bolded is not necessarily sati. The Sutta is about the development of sati. We had a brief discussion here: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1151 about how saññā (perception) http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... 3%B1%C4%81 is a proximate cause for the arising of sati, and most of what we describe as "minfulness" in meditation is, in fact saññā. In any case, in the Abhidhamma model the citta rise and fall rapidly, so presumably there could be alternating citta with and without sati.

Of course, as you are probably aware, Abhidharmas from some of the other early sects disagree on the issue of whether sati can only arise with beautiful citta...

Metta
Mike

[Cittasanto]

Hi Mike read my quote above which is a direct quote from the Abhidhamma Vibhanga

[mikenz66]

Hi Manapa,

Yes, thanks for the PDF.

Here is part of the section that Retro quoted:

Idha bhikkhu saragam va cittam "saragam me cittan"-ti pajanati,
Here a monk when the mind has passion knows "my mind has passion"

Metta
Mike

[Ben]

Hi everyone

Some years ago I embarked on some Dhamma study to satisfy my own hunger for an intellectual understanding of the Dhamma to complement my own practice-based understanding. In my opinion, bhavana-maya-panna, the wisdom that arises from the direct penetration of the nature of mind and matter through mental cultivation is pre-eminent in importance, but as my teacher says, patipatti (practice) and pariyatti (study) should go hand-in-hand. One's practice is more effective when combined with study. As part of my study and with the recommendation of Ajahn Dhammanando, I read 'A comrehensive manual of the Abhidhamma' edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi and I continue to refer to it. It was brilliant as it illuminated so many things about the Dhamma for me. Has it directly effected my practice? Probably not directly, but indirectly - definitely. I should also point out that the ACM is not Abhidhamma Pitaka proper, as it is a commentary based on the ancient commentary Abhidhammatthasangaha attrubuted to Acariya Anuruddha. But as Ajahn mentioned to me, it is an excellent gateway to the Abhidhamma Pitaka.
I also recommend ACM to anyone serious about the Dhamma. Even if one feels that the Abhidhamma is 'surplus to needs', I still feel it would be a beneficial exercise for you to at least develop a rudimentary understanding of concepts and theories contained within the Abhidhamma Pitaka.
Kind regards

Ben

[bodom]

Thanks for the post Ben. ACM by Bodhi has been on my wishlist for quite sometime now. I look forward to reading it.

[Ben]

Hi Bodum
If you were living closer, I would loan you my copy.
metta

Ben

[pt1]

I'm particularly curious to hear from pt1...
So how do you (all) see Abhidhamma within your practice? What are you finding from it that you don't find fully served by the suttanta? Again, I'm not asking this to dispute Abhidhamma. I'm hoping to have my Abhidhamma studies kick-started again.

Hi Phil,

Seeing that you singled me out, I’ll try give a bit more detailed response (knowing you like long posts) and hoping to encourage your abhi studies.

The first thing that comes to mind is precision. I.e. when reading a sutta, I’d always end up with several possible interpretations and wondering which one is correct - even after considering the context, the audience, different translations, then consulting the commentaries by modern teachers (which can vary quite a lot in opinion, etc). In that situation it becomes very hard to figure out how do Buddhist teachings apply to my experiences, which are just as hard to make sense of. I mean, it’s pretty hard to nail down what exactly is the experience of mindfulness, or awareness, or more subtle stuff like vicara, passaddhi, etc, even without different people giving different definitions.

With abhidhamma (and old commentaries) though, there’s a very high precision on what exactly is meant by a certain term, so at least on that side there’s less confusion, so then it only remains to figure out how do confused experiences on my side relate to that.

Secondly (since I know you’re keen on sila these days), it really helps tremendously in observing daily experiences more accurately. I.e. since learning about a/kusala roots and other cetasikas, rapid change of cittas, etc, it is now possible to be aware of such situations for example when giving a gift – there’s a brief metta and generosity, then in the next split-second there’s conceit about it, then there’s aversion that there wasn’t enough gratitude from the other person, then there’s blaming myself for feeling aversion, then there’s remembering the goodnes of the act of giving, etc, etc, and all that in the space of a couple of seconds. Before I mostly didn’t notice all that. Not that you couldn’t get hints on all this from the suttas, but with abhidhamma it all becomes much more blatantly obvious and hard to ignore. So, I’d say abhidhamma helps with figuring out what’s kusala and what’s akusala, which I believe is the preliminary requirement for insight.

Thirdly, when it comes to meditation, which I believe is what you wanted to know, I mostly do samatha, so on that front it also works to nail down the differences between mental factors involved and whether they are akusala or kusala – i.e. is there chanda or lobha, is there right or wrong concentration, right or wrong effort, is there passaddhi or is it attachment to a concept of calm, etc. So, it helps again with accuracy and being more vigilant – abhidhamma makes it blatantly obvious how horribly fast a kusala moment can grow into an akusala one, even if all that you have on your mind is the breath.

Anyway, all this is still, I believe, a conceptual level of understanding, i.e. no stages of insight yet, nor seeing the ultra-rapid change of cittas, nor the difference between a pannatti nimitta and a navattaba nimitta, etc. So I’d say abhidhamma is very helpful even if panna is not on the ultra-fast level of discerning individual dhammas and cittas. And still, I think anyone can see that the mind changes at least a dozen times per second, so even at this point, abhidhamma is very much applicable (i.e. all that about rapidity of cittas, the 3 marks, different a/kusala states, etc) and will eventually lead towards the point when the accuracy of seeing increases to insight-level speeds.

Of course, when it comes to things we can’t yet see directly, I find it’s kind of helpful to know about them a bit and then just move on, instead of going too far into intellectual speculation about it. In fact I don’t see any difference here between approaching the suttas, or abhidhamma+sutta. So, kind of keep the focus where it is most helpful practically. I.e. if there’s interest in sila, then it’s very helpful to keep reconsidering what is metta, what is generosity, what’s the near enemy, what’s the far enemy, what’s the proximate condition, what are co-nascent mental factors in each of those, etc. In this way it becomes easier to recognise all this in real-life and abhidhamma can provide a wealth of hints there. Obviously not much point yet going into too much speculation about navattaba etc.

Hopefully, once akusala and kusala are thoroughly understood in experience, then insight proper becomes possible, and at that point abhidhamma will really shine imo, as it’s all about insight in the fist place. In fact, I have to admit that I couldn’t really understand what’s exactly meant by insight until abhidhamma. And I wish I could get it all just from the suttas, but, probably don't have enough kusala accumulations for that, so I need more detailed abhi explanations to make it all a little more obvious and easier to notice in real-life.

Best wishes

[pt1]

Thanks for the post Ben. ACM by Bodhi has been on my wishlist for quite sometime now. I look forward to reading it.

You can read it online:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=hxo ... q=&f=false

Best wishes

[mikenz66]

Hi Ben, others,

I read 'A comrehensive manual of the Abhidhamma' edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi and I continue to refer to it. ...

I also found that very useful, and the last chapter has a summary of concentration practises and stages of insight (as in the Visuddhimagga). It is all accessible on-line, but I'd rather have a paper copy...
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=hxo ... q=&f=false

I also found Nina van Gorkom's Abhidhamma in Daily Life http://www.zolag.co.uk/ebook.html useful. It covers much of the same material, but in a less comprehensive and more conversational style. In fact, I found it useful to work through the two books in parallel...

Metta
Mike

[tiltbillings]

So how do you (all) see Abhidhamma within your practice? What are you finding from it that you don't find fully served by the suttanta?

What do you mean by Abhidhamma? Are you talking abouty the Abhidhamma Pitaka texts or much later works such as the Abhidhammattha Sangaha?

[cooran]

Phil said: So how do you (all) see Abhidhamma within your practice? What are you finding from it that you don't find fully served by the suttanta? Again, I'm not asking this to dispute Abhidhamma. I'm hoping to have my Abhidhamma studies kick-started again.

Hello Phil,

I found that a good grounding in the Abhidhamma saved me from the all-too-common error of thinking that understanding the Suttas was fairly straight forward, and all that was necessary. For me, the Abhidhamma is the primary school area of Buddhadhamma which needs to be thoroughly grasped, otherwise the higher level courses in the Suttas are misunderstood. Certainly, the Abhidhamma is essential in understand Anicca and Anatta and Dukkha - particularly Anatta - and basic to progress in meditation.

metta
Chris

[phil]

Hi Bodom

As far as textual study it doesn't. I prefer to read my own mind than read about it.

Well,couldn't it be said that reading one's own mind without a kind of roadmap of the eventual destination could mean going off in directions dictated by delusionary understanding etc, that having Abhidhamma as a landmark of perfected understanding is more likely to set us in the right direction? (And again, having posted in this corner, I'm assuming that we who are discussing in this thread agree that Abhidhamma represents the most perfectly crystallized expression of the Buddha's understanding. Fair enough if one doesn't see it that way, I'm just attempting to do so now, but let's work with that hypotheses if discussing here, thanks.)

Metta,

Phil