insight into emotions

[Freawaru]

Hi Kim,

You have made it hard for me to comment on your responses to my post by picking it into chunks that are often too small to be meaningful, so I'll start half way through.

Sorry.

May I remind you ...
Three Hindrances aka Three Obstacles:
Aversion aka Anger aka Hatred
Attachment aka Greed aka Desire
Ignorance

Sure, but here neither anger, nor hatred nor greed refers to an emotion. These terms, or rather the original term that was translated into anger, refers to a reaction to the feeling (vedana) translated as "pleasant". I think this sutta explains it nicely:

Pleasant feeling induces greed...
Painful feeling produces hate...
Neither-painful-nor-pleasant neutral feeling
causes neglect & thus generates ignorance...
http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/II/Bo ... eeling.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pleasant feelings (vedana) arise due to contact with the senses. Mind (citta) is such a sense just as the body senses. The emotion anger is that what is contacted, the object, not the "dosa" that leads to clinging. Think of physical pain, does all physical pain lead to hate or anger in the emotional sense? I don't think so. Actually, I think the emotion fear is more common reaction to physical pain ("what is wrong? Will it heal? What if not?). Dosa is more properly translated as "aversion" as this describes better what happens. When a painful feeling arises we try to avoid it, we don't accept it, we want it to go away and pleasant feelings to return. This wanting for pleasant feelings is called "greed" but it is not a greed for money or wealth or fame or anything like that but simply the wanting of pleasant feeling, whatever it is for oneself.

You are expanding the word 'instinct' far beyond its real meaning.
I objected - mildly - to calling anger and other emotions 'instincts' before, but calling ideology an instinct makes nonsense of your argument.
Here's the Wikipedia definition:

Instinct is the inherent disposition of a living organism toward a particular behavior. The fixed action patterns are unlearned and inherited. The stimuli can be variable due to imprinting in a sensitive period or also genetically fixed. Examples of instinctual fixed action patterns can be observed in the behavior of animals, which perform various activities (sometimes complex) that are not based upon prior experience, such as reproduction, and feeding among insects. Sea turtles, hatched on a beach, automatically move toward the ocean, and honeybees communicate by dance the direction of a food source, all without formal instruction. Other examples include animal fighting, animal courtship behavior, internal escape functions, and building of nests. Another term for the same concept is innate behavior.
Instinctual actions - in contrast to actions based on learning which are served by memory and which provide individually stored successful reactions built upon experience - have no learning curve, they are hard-wired and ready to use without learning. Some instinctual behaviors depend on maturational processes to appear.
Biological predispositions are innate biologically vectored behaviors that can be easily learned. For example in one hour a baby colt can learn to stand, walk, glide, skip, hop and run. Learning is required to fine tune the neurological wiring reflex like behavior. True reflexes can be distinguished from instincts by their seat in the nervous system; reflexes are controlled by spinal or other peripheral ganglia, but instincts are the province of the brain.

In these terms, hunger and pain are simply sensations, emotions are perhaps 'biological predispositions', the suckling reflex is an instinct, and ideology is clearly learned behaviour.

I don't think so. While the explicit ideology depends on experience and memory and is influence by others the ability to think and act according to an ideology, to believe and accept it's values, is a genetic disposition. Like language. The ability to learn a language is genetic encoded, but the explicit language one learns (such as English or Thai) depends on the environment. There are other - purely mental - instincts in our human gene code, f.e. one is called "formal thinking". When this instinct is opened one can learn mathematics and other formal systems much better than before (also is more fun). It is the same with ideology, this instinct is opened at a certain state of mental development (makes no sense to teach it a three month old), but then the explicit ideology one learns differ. But once this instinct has opened the person will feel a need to have an ideology, a set pattern of values, of what is good and what is bad, something he or she can base the thinking, planing, and acting on. This need is just as instinctive as the need of the sea turtles, hatched on a beach, that automatically move toward the ocean. A person in whom this instincts opens will automatically search for a fitting ideology.

I agree that it's interesting to observe all of these kinds of things going on within ourselves, but I think we need to discriminate more carefully between them.

I always like that

There is a separate problem with trying to deal with 'instinct' in a Buddhist context: it is a concept which does not appear at all (AFAIK) in the suttas. I actually did a search for the term (only in the suttas) on Access to Insight and came with no results - zero - in about 1100 documents.

You have to look for how the mind is when an instinct dominates. Is it scattered or not? Is it surpassable or unsurpassable? Does an emotion lead to concentration or not? This is not in the suttas as it is a matter of experience of direct insight. There are too many instincts, too many emotions, if at all they can only appear as examples not as general rules.

This is right, but even a Vulcan with unsurpassable logic has to admit that it only takes one fact to make statements like "in general experiencing anger is wrong" incorrect.

I'm sorry, but that is a clear error of logic - "in general experiencing anger is wrong" can only be disproven by a majority, or at least a significant minority, of countervailing facts. (In general, crows are black, and that's true even if there are a few albino crows around.)

Yes, you are right. That is a logical wrong statement. Let me see ... I rephrase it: The general statement "all angry responses during all possible situations are bad" only requires one opposite fact to prove it wrong. Better?

I actually must have expressed myself poorly, by the way, since you ended up thinking I said 'experiencing anger is wrong.' I didn't quite say it, and I didn't quite mean it, and I'm sorry that I may have led you astray. Giving in to anger, letting it rule one's behaviour, is what is wrong.

We agree here. It is important to stay in control even when mind and body are suffused with the emotion anger.

[christopher:::]

Hi All,

there is something else I want to ask regarding meditating on emotions. Another kind of experience I experienced both in every-day situation as well as during sittings.

The experience is that I observe my mind and body during the emotionally altered state but in addition something else, seemingly unrelated is happening in my mind. I mean, unrelated to the external situation and the emotional processes, but still somewhat connected. Or, using an analogy, if we compare the emotional processes in mind and body as the drums/rhythm in music the "something else" is like a melody, not related but not completely disconnected either. This "something else" or the "melody" can differ, it can be intense boredom, or joy, amusement, bliss, physical ecstasy of the kind I only know from jhana, a vast empty space, or the experience of a heart bursting impression of beauty (and some others I don't know the words for).

I am not yet quite sure what exactly happens or why and how. I suspect that the concentration that arises due to the emotion in combination with me observing it somehow triggers this - in any case I would like to know more about this strange and unexpected effect.

Has anybody else experienced this or heard about it or knows the name of these kind of experiences in Theravada?

Hi Freawaru,

Have you had the chance to talk with a teacher or advanced practitioner about this? I've heard a Vipassana instructor once advise to treat such experiences as passing moments of mind and simply return concentration to the breath...

A teacher might also challenge the idea that there is a "me" that observes such things and triggers this.

[rowyourboat]

Hi Freewaru

It does seem you may be missing a part of the practice:

"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Right view as you know is the first step of the Noble Eightfold Path- everything follows on from that, as per the Mahacattasarika sutta. The idea that aversion (the broader umbrella term under which anger falls under -dosa, patigha call it what you will) is to be abandoned is rooted in this right view- under kamma (roots), under rebirth (causes), under devas (and how not to get get there) under the idea that enlightenment is to be had (what is to be abandoned).

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Abandon one quality, monks, and I guarantee you non-return. Which one quality? Abandon aversion as the one quality, and I guarantee you non-return."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#iti-001" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Anger is IMO an instinct- but as all instincts go they are useful in animals that lack higher brain function- (call it panna) because it provides automatic motivation- you dont have to think. However in human beings this function is now outdated - and indeed superfluous. The instinct to eat and store food now creates vast amounts of suffering and obesity for example- better to use your thinking brain. A person who worries to get things done will think that worrying is essential- but the person who gets things done without worry knows that it is not. Similarly a person who gets angry will think that it is essential- but it is not. In fact all these instincts/emotions get in the way of panna and the quest for Buddhist enlightenment.

Another way of looking at Right view is using the four noble truths- The first being that five aggregate (ie- read everything) is unsatisfactory- hence nibbana is the only ultimately worthwhile goal. This is a truth to be arrived at- not something that is understood through common logic. Finding utility in anger in furthering samsaric existence is a statement of ignorance. It almost goes without saying that a use can be found for anything in this world. There is good and bad in everything in this realm (quoting ven sariputta there). Its a bit like saying cancer is good because it creates jobs for doctor- but it causes uncountable deaths. In case of anger- mostly our own.

RYB

[Freawaru]

Hi rowyourboat,

Hi Freewaru

It does seem you may be missing a part of the practice:

"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes. But right view arises from clear knowing.

"Clear knowing is the leader in the attainment of skillful qualities, followed by conscience & concern. In a knowledgeable person, immersed in clear knowing, right view arises.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thus it is my priority to become able to stay aware regardless of what happens.

Right view as you know is the first step of the Noble Eightfold Path- everything follows on from that, as per the Mahacattasarika sutta. The idea that aversion (the broader umbrella term under which anger falls under -dosa, patigha call it what you will) is to be abandoned is rooted in this right view- under kamma (roots), under rebirth (causes), under devas (and how not to get get there) under the idea that enlightenment is to be had (what is to be abandoned).

It is not possible that dosa means the emotion anger as sampajanna is stable during emotions as I described in my original post. The mechanism is a different one:

"He doesn't assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. His consciousness changes & is unstable, but his consciousness doesn't — because of the change & instability of consciousness — alter in accordance with the change in consciousness. His mind is not consumed with any agitations born from an alteration in accordance with the change in consciousness or coming from the co-arising of (unskillful mental) qualities. And because his awareness is not consumed, he feels neither fearful, threatened, nor solicitous.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Unskillfull mental qualities such as anger change and created an instability of consciousness, but the other consciousness - the observing one - remains unchanged, stable. Awareness means to be aware of anger and other emotions. Right view can only arise due to these conditions.

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Abandon one quality, monks, and I guarantee you non-return. Which one quality? Abandon aversion as the one quality, and I guarantee you non-return."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#iti-001" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What is the Pail term of aversion here ? Is it dosa?

Anger is IMO an instinct- but as all instincts go they are useful in animals that lack higher brain function- (call it panna) because it provides automatic motivation- you dont have to think. However in human beings this function is now outdated - and indeed superfluous. The instinct to eat and store food now creates vast amounts of suffering and obesity for example- better to use your thinking brain. A person who worries to get things done will think that worrying is essential- but the person who gets things done without worry knows that it is not. Similarly a person who gets angry will think that it is essential- but it is not. In fact all these instincts/emotions get in the way of panna and the quest for Buddhist enlightenment.

If instincts would get in the way of panna Liberation from them would not be possible. The whole point is that panna leads to independence. Don't kill that animal you speak about, the animal you deem superfluous - treat it with compassion.

Another way of looking at Right view is using the four noble truths- The first being that five aggregate (ie- read everything) is unsatisfactory- hence nibbana is the only ultimately worthwhile goal.

Yes, but nibbana does not refer to coma.

[Freawaru]

Hi Christopher,

Hi Freawaru,

Have you had the chance to talk with a teacher or advanced practitioner about this?

Yes, but it was from the Tibetan Buddhism point of view. The technique is called "dealing with emotions" in Tibetan Buddhism and it is a vipassana technique. I would simply like to know the Theravada name, too.

[christopher:::]

Hi Christopher,

Hi Freawaru,

Have you had the chance to talk with a teacher or advanced practitioner about this?

Yes, but it was from the Tibetan Buddhism point of view. The technique is called "dealing with emotions" in Tibetan Buddhism and it is a vipassana technique. I would simply like to know the Theravada name, too.

Seems like it would fit in with Vipassana, definitely, and Mindfulness Practice, observing mind states and emotions as they arise. You might find these to be helpful:

RIGHT MINDFULNESS (Samma Sati), by Bikkhu Bodhi

The Path of Concentration and Mindfulness, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

[Freawaru]

Hi Christopher,

Thank you very much for the links

Seems like it would fit in with Vipassana, definitely, and Mindfulness Practice, observing mind states and emotions as they arise. You might find these to be helpful:

RIGHT MINDFULNESS (Samma Sati), by Bikkhu Bodhi

Looks like this kind of practice (observing the mind during emotional altered states) is labeled under either cittanupassana or dhammanupassana or both due to the complexity of it.

The Path of Concentration and Mindfulness, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Ah, guess emotions are my "eggs" for the time being

[christopher:::]

Ah, guess emotions are my "eggs" for the time being

Freawaru, have you checked out this discussion? You might find some helpful ideas there...

Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

[PeterB]

Hi All,

there is something else I want to ask regarding meditating on emotions. Another kind of experience I experienced both in every-day situation as well as during sittings.

The experience is that I observe my mind and body during the emotionally altered state but in addition something else, seemingly unrelated is happening in my mind. I mean, unrelated to the external situation and the emotional processes, but still somewhat connected. Or, using an analogy, if we compare the emotional processes in mind and body as the drums/rhythm in music the "something else" is like a melody, not related but not completely disconnected either. This "something else" or the "melody" can differ, it can be intense boredom, or joy, amusement, bliss, physical ecstasy of the kind I only know from jhana, a vast empty space, or the experience of a heart bursting impression of beauty (and some others I don't know the words for).

I am not yet quite sure what exactly happens or why and how. I suspect that the concentration that arises due to the emotion in combination with me observing it somehow triggers this - in any case I would like to know more about this strange and unexpected effect.

Has anybody else experienced this or heard about it or knows the name of these kind of experiences in Theravada?

Hi Freawaru,

Have you had the chance to talk with a teacher or advanced practitioner about this? I've heard a Vipassana instructor once advise to treat such experiences as passing moments of mind and simply return concentration to the breath...

A teacher might also challenge the idea that there is a "me" that observes such things and triggers this.

I know no Theravada teacher teacher who would suggest that there is no me to observe phenomena rising Chris.
What they would suggest is that the self of sense is changing and has no permanence. Not that it has no existence.

[christopher:::]

The experience is that I observe my mind and body during the emotionally altered state but in addition something else, seemingly unrelated is happening in my mind. I mean, unrelated to the external situation and the emotional processes, but still somewhat connected.

Hi Freawaru,

Have you had the chance to talk with a teacher or advanced practitioner about this? I've heard a Vipassana instructor once advise to treat such experiences as passing moments of mind and simply return concentration to the breath...

A teacher might also challenge the idea that there is a "me" that observes such things and triggers this.

I know no Theravada teacher teacher who would suggest that there is no me to observe phenomena rising Chris.
What they would suggest is that the self of sense is changing and has no permanence. Not that it has no existence.

Could you say more, Peter?

How does "the self of sense is changing and has no permanence" differ from the "idea that there is a "me" that observes such things and triggers this" and "treat such experiences as passing moments of mind" ..?

With metta and interest,

[PeterB]

While the particular mix of khandas last they have a real but transient existence. That gives rise to the "I" sense. It has a reality, but not an unchanging reality. Its pain is painful, its joy is joyful, its lust is lustful its peace is peaceful.
But it is also subject to anicca and anatta. So it is real, but transient.
Just as the refraction from a pigeons neck is an actual phenomenon, although the display of colours are due to refraction rather intrinsic to the pigeons feathers.
But we cant deduce therefore that those colours have no reality. Their reality is of a different order.
Just so the khandas have reality, but not permanent unchanging reality.
This is one way in which the Theravada parts company from Nagarjuna.

[christopher:::]

Thanks Peter. Excellent explanation. That is what i was trying to (clumsily perhaps) make reference to, the arising of the "I" sense, which creates a sense of separation between self and world, self and experience--- "my" emotions, "my" ideas, etc...

As relates to anatta and dependent origination, as have been discussing here...

Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

"We develop views, ideas, opinions, standpoints that are not [equanamous] but that tend to become aspects of "My Self." And this means there's a certain fragmentation that occurs, my self as an experience in the way I'm using it is something that splits away from experience and thereby thinks it has the experience. "Here I am having this, I can get this, I can do this, I can make this happen" and so forth.

We descend from what was an essential integrity and essential wholeness back into behavioral dualism. And then of course the whole thing begins to break down because for a certain amount of time we are able to "do" the calm, "do" the metta, "get" the anicca going but its becoming much more dishonest in a way. It becomes a strategy rather then a realization. One is no longer meeting the experience fully and embracing it fully."

~Ajahn Sucitto