🟩 On kāyagatāsati and kāye kāyānupassī, Part 2 (Week of 1/16/22)

Where we gather to focus on a single discourse or thematic collection from the Sutta Piṭaka (new selection every two weeks)
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

🟩 On kāyagatāsati and kāye kāyānupassī, Part 2 (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by SDC »

:reading:


Initially, I had no plans to expand this two-week thematic session beyond direct mentions of kāyagatāsati (mindfulness of the body), but after preparing portions of MN 10 and some of the suttas from SN 47, where we start seeing instances of kāye kāyānupassī (contemplating body in body), I thought it would be useful to bring out as much meaning as we can from this phrase by dedicating so time to it. I will be a little less formal than usual with how I present this week. Below you will find several excerpts arranged in an order that will hopefully allow the meaning to build as we read.

We are going to treat this thread as a sub-session of sorts (first installment from last week: On kāyagatāsati). While the following suttas are no doubt describing mindfulness of the body, they seem to be describing something a bit different in terms of what is being done with the recollection that is set up. The contemplation of "body in body" is on the insight end of the spectrum. One is literally thinking about what knowledge they can gather from having set up mindfulness of the body rightly. We did see that in some of the selections from last week, but most were simply emphasizing the importance of the development and what the setup is based upon, while this next batch gets into more of what can be done with it. Next week we will see how MN 119 takes mindfulness of the body in the direction of jhana prior to insight.

Thank you to those who have participated so far, and I am looking forward to further discussion. I realize I've asked a lot of the group this week and hope that those who are reading are getting something useful from this review. :smile:


:reading:

SN 47.40 wrote:“Bhikkhus, I will teach you the establishment of mindfulness, and the development of the establishment of mindfulness, and the way leading to the development of the establishment of mindfulness. Listen to that….

“And what, bhikkhus, is the establishment of mindfulness? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating feelings in feelings … mind in mind … phenomena in phenomena, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. This is called the establishment of mindfulness.

“And what, bhikkhus, is the development of the establishment of mindfulness? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the nature of origination in the body; he dwells contemplating the nature of vanishing in the body; he dwells contemplating the nature of origination and vanishing in the body—ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating the nature of origination in feelings … He dwells contemplating the nature of origination in mind … He dwells contemplating the nature of origination in phenomena... This is called the development of the establishment of mindfulness.

“And what, bhikkhus, is the way leading to the development of the establishment of mindfulness? It is this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view … right concentration. This is called the way leading to the development of the establishment of mindfulness.”
Note the distinction between "establishment of mindfulness" and the "development of the establishment". Correct me if I'm wrong, but taking only this description into consideration, this seems to be saying that in order to "develop the establishment" of "body in the body", there must be contemplation of nature of origination, vanishing and both origination and vanishing. This must be done ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, i.e., after mindfulness is set up rightly, see how things are understood in that set up.

Next, we see the necessity of feeling:
SN 12.37 wrote:“Bhikkhus, this body is not yours, nor does it belong to others. It is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by volition, as something to be felt.
The feeling is used to contemplate origination and vanishing:
SN 36.7 wrote:“And how, bhikkhus, is a bhikkhu mindful? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating feelings in feelings … mind in mind … phenomena in phenomena, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. It is in such a way that a bhikkhu is mindful.

“And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu exercise clear comprehension? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is one who acts with clear comprehension when going forward and returning; when looking ahead and looking aside; when drawing in and extending the limbs; when wearing his robes and carrying his outer robe and bowl; when eating, drinking, chewing his food, and tasting; when defecating and urinating; when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, speaking, and keeping silent. It is in such a way that a bhikkhu exercises clear comprehension.

“A bhikkhu should await his time mindful and clearly comprehending. This is our instruction to you.

“Bhikkhus, while a bhikkhu dwells thus, mindful and clearly comprehending, diligent, ardent, and resolute, if there arises in him a pleasant feeling, he understands thus: ‘There has arisen in me a pleasant feeling. Now that is dependent, not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on this very body. But this body is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen. So when the pleasant feeling has arisen in dependence on a body that is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, how could it be permanent?’ He dwells contemplating impermanence in the body and in pleasant feeling, he dwells contemplating vanishing, contemplating fading away, contemplating cessation, contemplating relinquishment. As he dwells thus, the underlying tendency to lust in regard to the body and in regard to pleasant feeling is abandoned by him.

“Bhikkhus, while a bhikkhu dwells thus, mindful and clearly comprehending, diligent, ardent, and resolute, if there arises in him a painful feeling, he understands thus: ‘There has arisen in me a painful feeling. Now that is dependent, not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on just this body. But this body is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen. So when the painful feeling has arisen in dependence on a body that is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, how could it be permanent? ’ He dwells contemplating impermanence in the body and in painful feeling, he dwells contemplating vanishing, contemplating fading away, contemplating cessation, contemplating relinquishment. As he dwells thus, the underlying tendency to aversion in regard to the body and in regard to painful feeling is abandoned by him.

“Bhikkhus, while a bhikkhu dwells thus, mindful and clearly comprehending, diligent, ardent, and resolute, if there arises in him a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he understands thus: ‘There has arisen in me a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. Now that is dependent, not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on just this body. But this body is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen. So when the neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling has arisen in dependence on a body that is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, how could it be permanent?’ He dwells contemplating impermanence in the body and in neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he dwells contemplating vanishing, contemplating fading away, contemplating cessation, contemplating relinquishment. As he dwells thus, the underlying tendency to ignorance in regard to the body and in regard to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling is abandoned by him.
Feeling is paramount in the reflection (inseparable), the body is still the basis. Body is the pillar we saw it described as last week. Through feeling, on the basis of the body, there is the contemplation of impermanence, vanishing, fading away, cessation and relinquishment.

A little something on dispassion on the basis of knowledge of the elements - this will further come out in the MN selections next week:
SN 12.61 wrote:“Bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling might experience revulsion towards this body composed of the four great elements; he might become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it. For what reason? Because growth and decline is seen in this body composed of the four great elements, it is seen being taken up and laid aside. Therefore the uninstructed worldling might experience revulsion towards this body composed of the four great elements; he might become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it.
Would like to shift into mindfulness of breathing, which as we know is an aspect of mindfulness of the body:
Iti 85 wrote:This was said by the Lord…

“Bhikkhus, live contemplating the foulness of the body. Let mindfulness of breathing be inwardly well established before you. Live contemplating the impermanence of all formations.

“For those who live contemplating foulness in the body, the tendency to lust with regard to the element of beauty is abandoned. When mindfulness of breathing is inwardly well established before one, the tendencies of extraneous thoughts to produce vexation of mind remain no more. For those who live contemplating the impermanence of all formations, ignorance is abandoned and knowledge arises.”

Contemplating foulness in the body,
Being mindful of in-and-out breathing,
Ever ardent and seeing clearly
The calming down of all formations:

Such a bhikkhu who sees rightly
Is thereby well released.
Accomplished in knowledge, at peace,
That sage has overcome all bonds.
Just like we saw last week, the unattractive (here as "foulness") is found in line with mindfulness of the breathing since both are partaking in the setup of mindfulness of the body, i.e. the correction of the perversion/inversion described in SN 8.4, AN 4.49 and Snp 2.7.

Now as we all know, there are not many instances where we find "body in the body" clearly defined. I am hoping what little I've gather here can help:
AN 6.117 wrote:Bhikkhus, without having abandoned six things, one is incapable of contemplating the body in the body. What six? Delight in work, delight in talk, delight in sleep, delight in company, not guarding the door of the sense faculties, and being immoderate in eating. Without having abandoned these six things, one is incapable of contemplating the body in the body.

Bhikkhus, having abandoned six things, one is capable of contemplating the body in the body. What six? Delight in work, delight in talk, delight in sleep, delight in company, not guarding the door of the sense faculties, and being immoderate in eating. Having abandoned these six things, one is capable of contemplating the body in the body.
Just note how much of the behavior and lifestyle has to be reined in to make use of this contemplation.

For this next one, please pay particular attention to "one among the bodies":
MN 118 wrote:“And how, bhikkhus, does mindfulness of breathing, developed and cultivated, fulfil the four foundations of mindfulness?

“Bhikkhus, on whatever occasion a bhikkhu, breathing in long, understands: ‘I breathe in long,’ or breathing out long, understands: ‘I breathe out long’; breathing in short, understands: ‘I breathe in short,’ or breathing out short, understands: ‘I breathe out short’; trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body of breath’; trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body of breath’; trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the bodily formation’; trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the bodily formation’—on that occasion a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body as a body, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world. I say that this is a certain body among the bodies, namely, in-breathing and out-breathing. That is why on that occasion a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body as a body, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world.
The insight here seems to be that the body, as it has been understood through the breath, puts some distance between the body and knowledge of the body. That the body understood by way of breathing, is one among the bodies. One among the many ways this body manifests perhaps?

This next line seems to imply that body is to be understood by way of contemplating "body in the body":
SN 47.38 wrote:Tassa kāye kāyānupassino viharato kāyo pariññāto hoti. Kāyassa pariññātattā amataṁ sacchikataṁ hoti.
As he dwells thus contemplating the body in the body, the body is fully understood. Because the body has been fully understood, the Deathless is realized.
In other words, however the body manifests it must be understood as twofold. How it's found with its nature? For instance, if the body is healthy and comfortable, that is how it has manifest, but that healthy comfortable body that appears is available on account of food, functioning senses, functioning organs, breathing, etc., which is also a body that is unattractive and subject to death. It seems "body in the body" is functional in the sense that it is the means of getting to the insight - taking the body in whatever way it has manifest, and through that manifestation, get to the knowledge about that body that makes the whole thing possible. I think we will see this more so in the cemetery contemplations in MN 10/119, where the insight is, "This body to is of the same nature, it will be like that, it is not exempt from that fate." Perhaps this is also why clear comprehension and body position matters - we are trying to find the body however it is in order to contemplate that nature which does not appear directly.

This one seems to bring this out. Note, "it is not seen as it is" and, "Governed by ignorance, the fool thinks it's lovely":
Snp 1.11 wrote:Walking and standing,
sitting and lying down,
extending and contracting the limbs:
these are the movements of the body.

Linked together by bones and sinews,
plastered over with flesh and hide,
and covered by the skin,
the body is not seen as it is.

It’s full of guts and belly,
liver and bladder,
heart and lungs,
kidney and spleen,

spit and snot,
sweat and fat,
blood and synovial fluid,
bile and grease.

Then in nine streams
the filth is always flowing.
There is muck from the eyes,
wax from the ears,

and snot from the nostrils.
The mouth sometimes vomits
bile and sometimes phlegm.
And from the body, sweat and dirt.

Then there is the hollow head
all filled with brains.
Governed by ignorance,
the fool thinks it’s lovely.

And when it lies dead,
bloated and livid,
discarded in a charnel ground,
the relatives forget it.

It’s devoured by dogs,
by jackals, wolves, and worms.
It’s devoured by crows and vultures,
and any other creatures there.

A wise mendicant here,
having heard the Buddha’s words,
fully understands it,
for they see it as it is.

“As this is, so is that,
as that is, so is this.”
They’d reject desire for the body
inside and out.

That wise mendicant here
rid of desire and lust,
has found the deathless peace,
extinguishment, the imperishable state.

This two-legged body is dirty and stinking,
full of different carcasses,
and oozing all over the place—
but still it is cherished!

And if, on account of this body,
someone prides themselves
or looks down on others—
what is that but a failure to see?
Just two quick shots from the Theragāthā and Thergāthā to hopefully give a bit of perspective to what may be meant by contemplating the body "internally and externally". This is commonly understood as referring to others, but below are two examples that seem to be describing otherwise. The insight does not seem to apply to other bodies:
Thag 2.26 wrote:I examined this body,
all of it, inside and out.
Internally and externally
my body appeared hollow.
Thig 5.4 wrote:“Nandā, see this bag of bones as
diseased, filthy, and rotten.
With mind unified and serene,
meditate on the ugly aspects of the body:

as this is, so is that,
as that is, so is this.
A foul stink wafts from it,
it is the fools’ delight.”

Reviewing my body in such a way,
tireless all day and night,
having broken through
with my own wisdom, I saw.

Being diligent,
properly investigating,
I truly saw the body
both inside and out.

Then, growing disillusioned with my body,
I became dispassionate within.
Diligent, detached,
I’m quenched and at peace.

Remember, this week and last are all about setting up context. Next week we will hopefully bring it all together.

Please share your thoughts and feel free to bring anything from last week's On kāyagatāsati. :smile:
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by asahi »

Imo externally does not refers to others . Make no sense to meditate on other person body .
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by mikenz66 »

My impression from listening to various people, including Bhikkhu Bodhi, whose translation is quoted above from SN47.40, https://suttacentral.net/sn47.40, is that "body in the body" is a rather clumsy rendering, but is the best he can come up with.
"Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. "
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kāye kāyānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ;
Here is Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote on AN1.402:
The Pāli phrase kāye kāyānupassī viharati is usually translated either as I have rendered it here or as “[he] dwells contemplating the body as a body.” The question is sometimes raised which of these two is more accurate. I believe that 7:6, IV 13–15, supports my rendering here. We there read ekacco puggalo sabbasaṅkhāresu aniccānupassī viharati, and in the following suttas: sabbasaṅkhāresu dukkhānupassī viharati, sabbadhammesu anattānupassī viharati, and nibbāne sukhānupassī viharati. These are best rendered: “Some person dwells contemplating impermanence in all conditioned phenomena,” “dwells contemplating suffering in all conditioned phenomena,” “dwells contemplating non-self in all phenomena,” and “dwells contemplating happiness in nibbāna.” They could not be rendered: “Some person dwells contemplating impermanence as all conditioned phenomena” … “contemplating happiness as nibbāna.” In each case, the word conjoined with anupassī is the aspect that is contemplated, and the word in the locative case is the sphere in relation to which that aspect is contemplated. Analogously, in kāye kāyānupassī viharati, the kāya conjoined with anupassī is the aspect that is contemplated (the “bodiness” of the body) and the locative kāye is the domain in relation to which that aspect is contemplated. Strictly speaking kāyānupassī does not actually mean “contemplating the body,” but “a body-contemplator.” Thus a very literal translation of the phrase would be: “He dwells as a body-contemplator in relation to the body.” Since such a rendering would sound awkward in English, I fall back on the familiar “contemplating the body in the body.” Similar considerations apply to the other three satipaṭṭhānas.
In any case, it's probably best not to read too much into the Pali idiom.

Bhikkhu Sujato drops the attempt to reproduce the Pali word for word:
"It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. "
Thanissaro Bhikkhu has: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN47_38.html
There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful, —subduing greed & distress with reference to the world.
:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by Sam Vara »

mikenz66 wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:18 am My impression from listening to various people, including Bhikkhu Bodhi, whose translation is quoted above from SN47.40, https://suttacentral.net/sn47.40, is that "body in the body" is a rather clumsy rendering, but is the best he can come up with.
"Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. "
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kāye kāyānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ;
Here is Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote on AN1.402:
The Pāli phrase kāye kāyānupassī viharati is usually translated either as I have rendered it here or as “[he] dwells contemplating the body as a body.” The question is sometimes raised which of these two is more accurate. I believe that 7:6, IV 13–15, supports my rendering here. We there read ekacco puggalo sabbasaṅkhāresu aniccānupassī viharati, and in the following suttas: sabbasaṅkhāresu dukkhānupassī viharati, sabbadhammesu anattānupassī viharati, and nibbāne sukhānupassī viharati. These are best rendered: “Some person dwells contemplating impermanence in all conditioned phenomena,” “dwells contemplating suffering in all conditioned phenomena,” “dwells contemplating non-self in all phenomena,” and “dwells contemplating happiness in nibbāna.” They could not be rendered: “Some person dwells contemplating impermanence as all conditioned phenomena” … “contemplating happiness as nibbāna.” In each case, the word conjoined with anupassī is the aspect that is contemplated, and the word in the locative case is the sphere in relation to which that aspect is contemplated. Analogously, in kāye kāyānupassī viharati, the kāya conjoined with anupassī is the aspect that is contemplated (the “bodiness” of the body) and the locative kāye is the domain in relation to which that aspect is contemplated. Strictly speaking kāyānupassī does not actually mean “contemplating the body,” but “a body-contemplator.” Thus a very literal translation of the phrase would be: “He dwells as a body-contemplator in relation to the body.” Since such a rendering would sound awkward in English, I fall back on the familiar “contemplating the body in the body.” Similar considerations apply to the other three satipaṭṭhānas.
In any case, it's probably best not to read too much into the Pali idiom.

Bhikkhu Sujato drops the attempt to reproduce the Pali word for word:
"It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. "
Thanissaro Bhikkhu has: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN47_38.html
There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful, —subduing greed & distress with reference to the world.
:heart:
Mike
Good point. Our rendering of the Pali can be misleading as well as clumsy. "Regarding the body, he is a body-contemplator" seems to make the most sense in that context, although it is not an elegant way of putting things. But in context, there are lots of things we normally do "regarding the body" (i.e. "with respect to the body"; we move it around, we ignore it, we gratify its desires, etc....) Maybe "With respect to the body..." is actually better, because "regarding" already has a watching or meditative connotation in English which is not present in the locative case. Certainly "The body in the body" sends me off into speculative thought because it has connotations of the Kantian "thing in itself" (Ding an sich) and the feeling that I am not experiencing it "correctly".
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2283
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by mjaviem »

Good, my interpretation was that we need to see it correctly and not in a wrong way. But this "He dwells as a body-contemplator in relation to the body.”" has a different tone.

Note: I wonder why it cannot be rendered like "dwells contemplating 'bodiness' in the body".
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by SDC »

mikenz66 wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:18 am My impression from listening to various people, including Bhikkhu Bodhi, whose translation is quoted above from SN47.40, https://suttacentral.net/sn47.40, is that "body in the body" is a rather clumsy rendering, but is the best he can come up with.
"Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. "
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kāye kāyānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ;
Here is Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote on AN1.402:
The Pāli phrase kāye kāyānupassī viharati is usually translated either as I have rendered it here or as “[he] dwells contemplating the body as a body.” The question is sometimes raised which of these two is more accurate. I believe that 7:6, IV 13–15, supports my rendering here. We there read ekacco puggalo sabbasaṅkhāresu aniccānupassī viharati, and in the following suttas: sabbasaṅkhāresu dukkhānupassī viharati, sabbadhammesu anattānupassī viharati, and nibbāne sukhānupassī viharati. These are best rendered: “Some person dwells contemplating impermanence in all conditioned phenomena,” “dwells contemplating suffering in all conditioned phenomena,” “dwells contemplating non-self in all phenomena,” and “dwells contemplating happiness in nibbāna.” They could not be rendered: “Some person dwells contemplating impermanence as all conditioned phenomena” … “contemplating happiness as nibbāna.” In each case, the word conjoined with anupassī is the aspect that is contemplated, and the word in the locative case is the sphere in relation to which that aspect is contemplated. Analogously, in kāye kāyānupassī viharati, the kāya conjoined with anupassī is the aspect that is contemplated (the “bodiness” of the body) and the locative kāye is the domain in relation to which that aspect is contemplated. Strictly speaking kāyānupassī does not actually mean “contemplating the body,” but “a body-contemplator.” Thus a very literal translation of the phrase would be: “He dwells as a body-contemplator in relation to the body.” Since such a rendering would sound awkward in English, I fall back on the familiar “contemplating the body in the body.” Similar considerations apply to the other three satipaṭṭhānas.
In any case, it's probably best not to read too much into the Pali idiom.

Bhikkhu Sujato drops the attempt to reproduce the Pali word for word:
"It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. "
Thanissaro Bhikkhu has: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN47_38.html
There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful, —subduing greed & distress with reference to the world.
:heart:
Mike
Many thanks for the additional material, Mike!

I think the drop by Ven. Sujato is risky, although "aspect of the body" doesn't abandon the distinction between the aspect and the nature. What seems critical to know - according to these many suttas - is that the nature of the body is not immediately evident in how the body appears at any given time. Between breathing, postures and movements, one can recognize the body as it is most immediately, and then know it as that body that is also impermanent, not-self, subject to change, and out there made of elements functioning on its own.

How do you feel about "body-contemplator"? Seems to reinforce conceit and self-view. In the end, the contemplation is towards the body, doer or not.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by SDC »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:39 am Certainly "The body in the body" sends me off into speculative thought because it has connotations of the Kantian "thing in itself" (Ding an sich) and the feeling that I am not experiencing it "correctly".
If it were meant as a juxtaposition of two identical notions of the body, then I fully agree, but it seems the sutta is saying to take the body in one way and see it in relation to another. I'm taking it as a way of bringing the understanding from one of affection and ownership to dispassion and relinquishment. As I see it in these suttas, the only way to do that is to start with the body as it is immediately and then see it in relation to a broader nature, the body in a way that does not appear.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by SDC »

mjaviem wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 11:08 am Note: I wonder why it cannot be rendered like "dwells contemplating 'bodiness' in the body".
I think that could work too.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2283
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by mjaviem »

SDC wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 5:09 pm ...
How do you feel about "body-contemplator"? Seems to reinforce conceit and self-view...
True. It seems to do that.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by Sam Vara »

SDC wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 5:21 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:39 am Certainly "The body in the body" sends me off into speculative thought because it has connotations of the Kantian "thing in itself" (Ding an sich) and the feeling that I am not experiencing it "correctly".
If it were meant as a juxtaposition of two identical notions of the body, then I fully agree, but it seems the sutta is saying to take the body in one way and see it in relation to another. I'm taking it as a way of bringing the understanding from one of affection and ownership to dispassion and relinquishment. As I see it in these suttas, the only way to do that is to start with the body as it is immediately and then see it in relation to a broader nature, the body in a way that does not appear.
I'm not sure what you mean by "take the body in one way and see it in relation to another". But that's a minor detail of expression, as I agree entirely with the bit about moving from affection and ownership to dispassion.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by SDC »

Sam Vara wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 6:08 pm
SDC wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 5:21 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:39 am Certainly "The body in the body" sends me off into speculative thought because it has connotations of the Kantian "thing in itself" (Ding an sich) and the feeling that I am not experiencing it "correctly".
If it were meant as a juxtaposition of two identical notions of the body, then I fully agree, but it seems the sutta is saying to take the body in one way and see it in relation to another. I'm taking it as a way of bringing the understanding from one of affection and ownership to dispassion and relinquishment. As I see it in these suttas, the only way to do that is to start with the body as it is immediately and then see it in relation to a broader nature, the body in a way that does not appear.
I'm not sure what you mean by "take the body in one way and see it in relation to another". But that's a minor detail of expression, as I agree entirely with the bit about moving from affection and ownership to dispassion.
Meaning, you have the body there breathing, or sitting or walking, or however it appears; perhaps comfortable, not in any pain, and see that in relation to what the body is, fundamentally: a body out there in the world, made of elements, subject to elements, subject to change, breathing on its own, with senses that have preferences, there to use. One body is known based on what appears and the other body is known based on what is discerned (based on instructions). The goal seems to be to develop the body in a way that the appearance of body, more and more is known to have the nature of that broader body. That way there is dispassion all around in regard to body: "As he dwells thus contemplating the body in the body, the body is fully understood. Because the body has been fully understood, the Deathless is realized." -SN 47.38
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by mikenz66 »

SDC wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 5:09 pm Many thanks for the additional material, Mike!

I think the drop by Ven. Sujato is risky, although "aspect of the body" doesn't abandon the distinction between the aspect and the nature. What seems critical to know - according to these many suttas - is that the nature of the body is not immediately evident in how the body appears at any given time. Between breathing, postures and movements, one can recognize the body as it is most immediately, and then know it as that body that is also impermanent, not-self, subject to change, and out there made of elements functioning on its own.

How do you feel about "body-contemplator"? Seems to reinforce conceit and self-view. In the end, the contemplation is towards the body, doer or not.
I don't disagree with your analysis: "What seems critical to know - according to these many suttas - is that the nature of the body is not immediately evident in how the body appears at any given time." But I'm not sure that we need to burden the Pali idiom with that.

We start by
"... observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. ".
That leads to:
"When the body is completely understood they realize the deathless."
as you say...

:heart:
Mike
Last edited by mikenz66 on Mon Jan 17, 2022 7:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by Sam Vara »

SDC wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 7:01 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 6:08 pm
SDC wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 5:21 pm

If it were meant as a juxtaposition of two identical notions of the body, then I fully agree, but it seems the sutta is saying to take the body in one way and see it in relation to another. I'm taking it as a way of bringing the understanding from one of affection and ownership to dispassion and relinquishment. As I see it in these suttas, the only way to do that is to start with the body as it is immediately and then see it in relation to a broader nature, the body in a way that does not appear.
I'm not sure what you mean by "take the body in one way and see it in relation to another". But that's a minor detail of expression, as I agree entirely with the bit about moving from affection and ownership to dispassion.
Meaning, you have the body there breathing, or sitting or walking, or however it appears; perhaps comfortable, not in any pain, and see that in relation to what the body is, fundamentally: a body out there in the world, made of elements, subject to elements, subject to change, breathing on its own, with senses that have preferences, there to use. One body is known based on what appears and the other body is known based on what is discerned (based on instructions). The goal seems to be to develop the body in a way that the appearance of body, more and more is known to have the nature of that broader body. That way there is dispassion all around in regard to body: "As he dwells thus contemplating the body in the body, the body is fully understood. Because the body has been fully understood, the Deathless is realized." -SN 47.38
Ah, OK, thanks! :anjali:
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2283
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by mjaviem »

mikenz66 wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 7:35 pm ...
We start by
"... observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. ".
...
What does it mean "an aspect of the body"?
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: 📍 Sub-session to "On Kāyagatāsati" (Week of 1/16/22)

Post by asahi »

SDC wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:29 am SN 47.40"]“

“And what, bhikkhus, is the establishment of mindfulness? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body,
比丘們!什麼是四念住呢?比丘們!這裡,比丘住於在身上隨觀身 。

Fyi if we follow the agama ,

It means , contemplating the bodies alongside while abides on the bodies .
No bashing No gossiping
Locked