Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

Jack19990101 wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:42 pm Nah - going extra yard to convince somebody, not interesting.
I said my piece, i already had my fun.
fair enough.
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

SDC wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:54 pm ...
Hi @SDC,

I will respond in length probably around tuesday/wednesday
(as I have a deadline due tomorrow..).

I just wanted to let you know that I have read that post of yours and AN 6.7.

.....
With mettā.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by SDC »

Lucilius wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 6:13 pm
SDC wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:54 pm ...
Hi @SDC,

I will respond in length probably around tuesday/wednesday
(as I have a deadline due tomorrow..).

I just wanted to let you know that I have read that post of yours and AN 6.7.

.....
With mettā.
Sounds good. :thumbsup:
“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
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Jack19990101 »

Lucilius wrote: Sat Jun 18, 2022 11:42 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Jun 18, 2022 9:15 pm Well, it's an interesting issue. In the red corner Ven Thanissaro, as the champion of effort. In the blue corner Ven Nyanamoli as the champion of being careful of not generating by aversion to what one is trying to tame and eliminate.
I'm team red corner then XD.

As for trying to get rid of akusala dhamma by generating aversion; that is not skillful. However, the motivation to get rid of akusala dhamma is simply heedfulness (when done correctly), not aversion.
"It is as though I see people walking down a road I know well. To them the way may be unclear. I look up and see someone about to fall into a ditch on the right-hand side of the road, so I call out to him, 'Go left, go left' Similarly, if I see another person about to fall into a ditch on the left, I call out, 'Go right, go right!' That is the extent of my teaching. Whatever extreme you get caught in, whatever you get attached to, I say, 'Let go of that too.' Let go on the left, let go on the right. Come back to the center, and you will arrive at the true Dharma."
https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books2/Ajah ... t_Pool.htm
Ven. Ajaan Chah, good as always XD. Thanks for sharing.

.....
With mettā.
The biggest difference between suppression vs endurance, is the belief that thoughts can be managed.
If one has lost hope that thoughts can be managed, there is only endurance left.
To endure with a peaceful attitude, is to see all dhamma anatta, instead of differentiate dhamma as kusala vs akusala.

if one thinks thoughts can be managed, one should suppress unskillful ones.
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

Jack19990101 wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 2:34 am ...
I thought you had your fun already? XD
(Anyway, welcome back to this discussion.)

Sure, you let go of all dhammas, but only when you reach awakening (see e.g. Snp 5.7 Upasīvamāṇavapucchā Sutta).
But to get there, you have to first let go of akusala dhamma, and develop kusala dhamma (e.g. you let go of the wrong eightfold path (including wrong saṅkappa, i.e. thoughts of lust etc.) and follow the right noble eightfold path) (see e.g. SN 45.8, right effort and SN 45.22 for akusala dhamma). Only when you are on the other shore you can let go of the raft, or else you would drown in the flood (cf. MN 22). So you better differentiate between kusala and akusala dhamma and let go in stages: first let go what is akusala, develop and hang on to what is kusala; once the path is fully developed and you have reached the goal, let go even of kusala dhamma and the noble eightfold path.

Also, it is possible to abandon what is unskillful.

AN 2.19:
“Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’
(transl. Ven. Thānissaro, https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN2_19.html)

.....
With mettā.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by SDC »

Lucilius wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 6:13 pm
Not to throw another wrench in the gears but yet another talk just dropped on the subject. Like the last talk, it directly addresses your concerns. (The timing is interesting. I’m wondering if someone alerted him to this discussion, as it seems based on questions from YouTube comments.)
“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
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

SDC wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 12:30 pm ...
I know.... (^^;;)
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Jack19990101 »

Lucilius wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 10:57 am
Jack19990101 wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 2:34 am ...
I thought you had your fun already? XD
(Anyway, welcome back to this discussion.)

Sure, you let go of all dhammas, but only when you reach awakening (see e.g. Snp 5.7 Upasīvamāṇavapucchā Sutta).
But to get there, you have to first let go of akusala dhamma, and develop kusala dhamma (e.g. you let go of the wrong eightfold path (including wrong saṅkappa, i.e. thoughts of lust etc.) and follow the right noble eightfold path) (see e.g. SN 45.8, right effort and SN 45.22 for akusala dhamma). Only when you are on the other shore you can let go of the raft, or else you would drown in the flood (cf. MN 22). So you better differentiate between kusala and akusala dhamma and let go in stages: first let go what is akusala, develop and hang on to what is kusala; once the path is fully developed and you have reached the goal, let go even of kusala dhamma and the noble eightfold path.

Also, it is possible to abandon what is unskillful.

AN 2.19:
“Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’
(transl. Ven. Thānissaro, https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN2_19.html)

.....
With mettā.
Guess my mind changed since no one is asking me to copy-paste sutta anymore.

That is what I have mentioned - we should maintain comparison between two qualities. Both have their place yet we must know which one is inferior which is superior. so we don't use one to prove other wrong.

To differentiate skillful vs unskillful, it is related to tranquility & concentration practice.
For sati practice, contemplating anicca/anatta, to cultivate wisdom, there is no skillful/unskillful. All are to b examined as long as they arise.

I agree unskillful can be abandoned. one can get into samadhi/jhana, proves it, innit.
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by NotMe »

Jack19990101 wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 1:07 am …… there is no skillful/unskillful. All are to b examined as long as they arise.
I really really want to believe you but I have searched the suttas and I cannot find this part anywhere!

“All are to b ….” Right there! … “to b”….

Maybe you meant “Not to b” ?

Nope. Once again, No suttas. Boy you can make this hard to verify for myself to know. OK once again let me search to be or not to be that is the question.

Edit to add: How embarrassing. I added an E next to the b and anyone with a basic understanding of Pali knows that is an ooops big time!

Let me try try again.

Metta

Edit to edit to add: Need some Pali help with the translation of ‘b’ and its reflective past participle nominative form. In the key of B# please.
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

Jack19990101 wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 1:07 am For sati practice, contemplating anicca/anatta, to cultivate wisdom, there is no skillful/unskillful. All are to b examined as long as they arise.
Even in sati practice, you should distinguish between skillful and unskillful, and you need to be ardent to do the appropriate duty of right effort.

SN 45.8:
“And what, monks, is right mindfulness? (i) 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. (ii) He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. (iii) He remains focused on the mind in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. (iv) He remains focused on dhamma in & of themselves—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. This, monks, is called right mindfulness.”
SN 16.2:
“And how is one ardent? There is the case where a monk, (thinking,) ‘Unarisen evil, unskillful qualities arising in me would lead to what is unbeneficial,’ arouses ardency. (Thinking,) ‘Arisen evil, unskillful qualities not being abandoned in me…’ … ‘Unarisen skillful qualities not arising in me …’ … ‘Arisen skillful qualities ceasing in me would lead to what is unbeneficial,’ he arouses ardency. This is how one is ardent.”
(both translations from Ven. Thānissaro, dhammatalks.org)

.....
With mettā.

PS: sammā-sati and sammā-samādhi overlap.. they are not two seperate practices.
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

@SDC
here it is (sorry for the long wait):
SDC wrote: Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:35 pm ...
SDC wrote: Sat Jun 18, 2022 3:10 am ...
SDC wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:54 pm ...
Just to reiterate, the distinction between dhamma (thoughts/mental objects) and vitakka (type of thoughts: wholesome or unwholesome) seems to be key to making use of what Ajahn Nyanamoli is describing. Most of the suttas being quoted in this thread are only about vitakka [...]

the suttas seem to account for the distinction between endurance and avoidance for dhamma and vitakka respectively. [...]

Picking up those unwholesome signs is what is to be cut off and not tolerated, [...]
Bear the pressure to go in those unwholesome directions. Cut them off immediately if the mind starts to pick them up. Bear the dhamma (mental object) until the sign of the wholesome vitakka is picked up. Bear the dhamma with the available unwholesome pitfalls and don’t accept them if one is picked up.

That seems to be the distinction he is emphasizing. [...]

So, as far as the OP of this thread is concerned, this effort will serve to remove thoughts of sensuality, ill-will and cruelty, through enduring their presence, and at the same time, developing the wholesome direction.
I think I have ferreted out the core of our disagreement...

and I don't think it's a supposed distinction between dhamma and vitakka, as you say; i.e. one "endures" the ("neutral") dhamma (as in one allows the dhamma to persist), but avoids/doesn't "pick up" the akusala "direction" (or "vitakka" as you say; as I said, I disagree with vitakka = "direction", but that actually is beside the point here..) and it's nimitta (e.g. that is connected with lust etc.).

That "avoiding" of the akusala (nimitta and thus "direction") can also be called "enduring"; i.e. "enduring" it's "invitation", i.e. one doesn't accept, delights in, gives in to that "invitation"/"pressure"; one doesn't "pick up" "the akusala".

As Ven. Nyanamoli said:
"There is lust in the mind, that needs to be endured."
The lust here is the nimitta connected to the akusala or the akusala direction, I suppose.
That is to be endured, as in not to be accepted.
In other words, one endures both the dhamma and "vitakka" (in your sense of the word), but the akusala "nimitta" and "vitakka" is not "picked up"/avoided.
I hope I could express why a distinction between dhamma and vitakka is not really of importance.
You endure both, and what is important is that the akusala direction is not "picked up"..
So far, so good..?

...
Our main disagreement seems to be that of what it means to abandon/destroy/remove.

If I understand you correctly, you understand it to be the "not-picking up"/avoiding of that akusala nimitta and/or "direction".

I understand it to mean that one brings that akusala thought (e.g. lust) to absence; i.e. one obliterates it's presence, wipes it out of existence.
In other words, there is no akusala "direction" and its' "invitation"/"pressure" which one could accept or resist/reject/avoid "picking up" anymore. The mind is comeplety free of lust (at temporarily until you reach non-return), when abandoning is successful.
It's not just "not-picking it up"/not accepting/not delighting in lust. The lust must not be present at all in the mind.

And as you said, even when one doesn't "pick up"/accept lust, i.e. you resist it, its' "invitation" or "pressure" may remain. In other words (in such a case) it (the lust) is still present in the mind.

Also, as long as you are "enduring" something, it is necessarily present. You cannot resist (or for that matter give in to) a thought of lust that isn't there.

...
So, in my understanding of abandoning, you have to "deny" these thoughts (the right to exist!), to use the words of Ven. Nyanamoli.
If he would say, that we should "deny" thoughts of lust (in this way; i.e. not "denying" as in lying to oneself that present lust is not present), I would have 0 problems with his teaching in this regard.

But that is something which he says is not to be done. One shouldn't try to destroy/abandon/wipe out of existence/bring to absence (in my sense of the word!) lust etc., and wanting to do so, is also a type of sensuality, according to Ven. Nyanamoli.

That is why I said in my original post, that it seems to me that he is teaches something contrary to the right effort of the suttas, which makes it incompatible with the noble eightfold path, imo.

A simile might illustrate this:

Suppose your land is at war with enemy invaders. There is a difference between not welcoming them but allowing them to be there ("enduring" their presence), i.e. your land is occupied against your will, and actually fighting back, pushing the invaders out of your land/kicking them out, so that they are not present anymore (i.e. no more occupation).

(The invading enemies = akusala thoughts,
your land = your mind.)

The latter is right effort, the former is not. The fact that you are allowing them to be there (although you are not welcoming/accepting/giving in to them) excludes the possibility of you (actively) kicking them out at the same time.
Even if—while you are enduring their occupation—the enemy eventually leaves/retreats 'on their own', it was not through your right effort because of the lack of intention and desire and active effort to kick them out.

The invading enemy (=akusala thoughts) may indeed leave 'on their own' (which still only a suface level observation though... it goes deeper than that. but that would be beyond the scope of this discussion..).
Thus, I am not saying that there can never be removal of akusala thoughts (in my sense! i.e. bringing to absence) while engaging in the practice of "endurance" (at which point the practice of "enduring" the akusala thought/its' "invitation/pressure"" breaks down though, because it is then not there to "endure" anymore..).
What I am saying, however, is that that strategy is very ineffective, inadequate and insufficient, and you probably don't gain much discernment on how to effectivly fight the enemy.

The effort to not welcome/mentally resist akusala thoughts is not enough.
You need to totally wipe them out of existence.


As many suttas consistently say, you shouldn't endure/tolerate akusala dhamma (for a deeper dive into my understanding of the term "akusala dhamma", please see the section "Appendix" below. Here it must suffice to say that I use akusala vitakka (e.g. kāmavitakka), micchāsaṅkappa (e.g. kāmasaṅkappa) and akusala dhamma synonymously. Vitakka and saṅkappa are synonymous, and both are included in the broad umbrella term "akusala dhamma"..), but that you should destroy them, abandon them, wipe them out of existence (see especially MN 2, where this is stated very clearly, and the many suttas @Zom shared. Btw. thanks @Zom!).

...
AN 6.7 is a very intersting sutta.

First of all, notice how AN 6.7 doesn't talk about akusala dhamma (..such as lust that one should allow to be present and not try to destroy/"deny" (although one should not welcome/accept it), according to Ven. Nyanamoli)?
So, "dhamma" here it could indeed be your understanding of it, i.e. something "neutral" that one "endures".

If it was, however, an akusala dhamma/saṅkappa/vitakka, the suttas are very unanimous, consistent and clear that one should destroy them, abandon them and wipe them out of existance (so that they are not present anymore), and not tolerate them/their presence.

And I think I have made clear enough with the simile above that in such case, merely "enduring"/not welcoming such thoughts would not be enough (because that would still be tolerating their presence, even when one doesn't accept them/"pick them up").

AN 6.1 may shed some further light on how this passage in AN 6.7 could be understood: khamo here may mean that one remains equanimous, i.e. neither happy or sad regardless whatever dhamma arise (in six-fold-sense-experience).
That still doesn't absolve one from doing the appropriate duty of right effort, i.e. abandoning, wiping out of existence when that dhamma is akusala. One must abandon it while remaining equanimous.
In other words, you do the job with a "stoic" mindset. Akusala dhamma have arisen, you notice it, and don't get sad about it, but simply do what is necessary out of heedfulness; generating desire and putting in effort to abandon it, wipe it out of existence.

That is, if this "dhamma" in AN 6.7 where to refer to akusala dhamma, but it could just be some "neutral" dhamma.

Anyway, the endurance mentioned in AN 6.7 doesn't necessarily mean that one should let akusala things persist/be present (and not try to destroy them), but could simply mean that you are not emotionally moved/affected by what makes contact with you (physically and mentally).

Otherwise, it would be contradicting many other suttas, imo, and internal consistency is key when understanding suttas (cf. DN 16, the 4 great standards).

I hope my response made some sense..

.....
With mettā.

PS: I have some issues with the videos you alerted me to, but I think it is enough to adress the things I did in this reply...(?)

PPS: Wiping akusala thoughts out of existance is not merely "managing" the problem of dukkha, but following the noble eightfold path that will lead to its' eventual "uprootment".

Appendix:
I’m not sure what you mean by akusala dhamma [...]
(All sutta translations by Ven. Sujato, SC, if not otherwise stated.)

SN 45.8:
And what is right effort?
Katamo ca, bhikkhave, sammāvāyāmo?

It’s when a mendicant generates enthusiasm, tries, makes an effort, exerts the mind, and strives so that bad, unskillful qualities don’t arise.
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu anuppannānaṁ pāpakānaṁ akusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ anuppādāya chandaṁ janeti vāyamati vīriyaṁ ārabhati cittaṁ paggaṇhāti padahati,

They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that bad, unskillful qualities that have arisen are given up.
uppannānaṁ pāpakānaṁ akusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ pahānāya chandaṁ janeti …pe…

They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that skillful qualities that have not arisen do arise.
anuppannānaṁ kusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ uppādāya chandaṁ janeti …pe…

They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that skillful qualities that have arisen remain, are not lost, but increase, mature, and are fulfilled by development.
uppannānaṁ kusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ ṭhitiyā asammosāya bhiyyobhāvāya vepullāya bhāvanāya pāripūriyā chandaṁ janeti vāyamati vīriyaṁ ārabhati cittaṁ paggaṇhāti padahati—

This is called right effort.
ayaṁ vuccati, bhikkhave, sammāvāyāmo.

MN 33:
And how does a mendicant not pick out flies’ eggs?
Kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu na āsāṭikaṁ hāretā hoti?

It’s when a mendicant tolerates a sensual, malicious, or cruel thought that has arisen. They tolerate any bad, unskillful qualities that have arisen. They don’t give them up, get rid of them, eliminate them, and obliterate them.
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu uppannaṁ kāmavitakkaṁ adhivāseti, nappajahati na vinodeti na byantī karoti na anabhāvaṁ gameti. Uppannaṁ byāpādavitakkaṁ …pe… uppannaṁ vihiṁsāvitakkaṁ …pe… uppannuppanne pāpake akusale dhamme adhivāseti, nappajahati na vinodeti na byantī karoti na anabhāvaṁ gameti.

That’s how a mendicant doesn’t pick out flies’ eggs.
Evaṁ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu na āsāṭikaṁ hāretā hoti.
Notice how the Buddha talks about akusala vitakka and then immidiately about akusala dhamma, which implies that those vitakka are included in those akusala dhamma, i.e. that they are synonymous here.


SN 45.22:
And what are unskillful qualities?
Katame ca, bhikkhave, akusalā dhammā?

They are wrong view, wrong thought [micchāsaṅkappo], wrong speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, and wrong immersion.
Seyyathidaṁ—micchādiṭṭhi …pe… micchāsamādhi.

These are called unskillful qualities.
Ime vuccanti, bhikkhave, akusalā dhammā.

And what is wrong thought?
Katamo ca, bhikkhave, micchāsaṅkappo?
Thoughts of sensuality, of malice, and of cruelty.
Kāmasaṅkappo, byāpādasaṅkappo, vihiṁsāsaṅkappo—
This is wrong thought.
ayaṁ, bhikkhave, micchāsaṅkappo.

MN 117:
And what is right thought?
Katamo ca, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo?

Right thought is twofold, I say.
Sammāsaṅkappampahaṁ, bhikkhave, dvāyaṁ vadāmi—

There is right thought that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment.
atthi, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo sāsavo puññabhāgiyo upadhivepakko;

And there is right thought that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.
atthi, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo ariyo anāsavo lokuttaro maggaṅgo.

And what is right thought that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment?
Katamo ca, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo sāsavo puññabhāgiyo upadhivepakko?

Thoughts of renunciation, good will, and harmlessness.
Nekkhammasaṅkappo, abyāpādasaṅkappo, avihiṁsāsaṅkappo:

This is right thought that is accompanied by defilements.
‘ayaṁ, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo sāsavo puññabhāgiyo upadhivepakko’.

And what is right thought that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path?
Katamo ca, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo ariyo anāsavo lokuttaro maggaṅgo?

[Than. transl.:] The thinking, directed thinking, resolve, mental fixity, mental transfixion, focused awareness, & verbal fabrications in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path.
Yo kho, bhikkhave, ariyacittassa anāsavacittassa ariyamaggasamaṅgino ariyamaggaṁ bhāvayato takko vitakko saṅkappo appanā byappanā cetaso abhiniropanā vacīsaṅkhāro—

This is right thought that is noble.
ayaṁ, bhikkhave, sammāsaṅkappo ariyo anāsavo lokuttaro maggaṅgo.
Notice how the Buddha uses vitakka and saṅkappa synonymously here (don't let the fact that it is mentioned under noble right saṅkappa confuse you. The saṅkappa here is noble because it is the saṅkappa of an noble mind, free of āsava, which also makes it necessarily sammā. The point here is, that saṅkappa here is used synonymously with vitakka. This would also apply to miccāsaṅkappa; kāmasaṅkappa ≈ kāmavitakka.)

Since micchāsaṅkappa (such as kāmasaṅkappa) are akusala dhamma, according to SN 45.22, we can infer that akusala vitakka ≈ micchāsaṅkappa ≈ akusala dhamma.

When the suttas talk about abandoning akusala dhamma, they talk about abandoning everything that is akusala, which obviously includes akusala vitakka (e.g. kāmavitakka) and the synonymous micchāsaṅkappa (kāmasaṅkappa). So in this case, you can use these terms synonymously: vitakka ≈ saṅkappa, both of which are dhamma.
Last edited by Lucilius on Wed Jun 22, 2022 3:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by NotMe »

:smile:

Wow! Phil Spector created the wall of sound. You created a wall of Dhamma dude!

No metta from me Mercy please!

Edit to add: well worth the wait.
:popcorn:
Lucilius
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:41 am

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by Lucilius »

@keller
keller wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 9:06 pmVenerable Nyanamoli is not advocating that one unilaterally "do nothing" as they paradoxically advance in some schools of Zen. This would indeed be the abandoning of Right Effort.
I'm not saying that he is advocating "doing nothing at all"; "enduring" is indeed "doing something", just not "doing something" about the akusala thoughts that have arisen.
It is a subtle thing, but for the spiritual practitioner who is unwittingly and unwillingly consumed in lust, the desire to be free from that lustful state becomes their sensuality. [...]

Whether it is asubha or intentional dissociation through bringing up perceptions of the three characteristics or any other conventional "skillful" means, any attempt to perceptually modify the state of lust will necessarily be based in sensuality, because that is the very modality of a lustful mind.

As such, the only thing one can really skillfully do in that situation is not give in to the impetus to either act out of the thoughts at the gross level or to actively maintain the train of thought at the subtle level.
I strongly disagree.

It seems you have already adopted Ven. Nyanamolis re-definition of sensuality...
Your whole argument here relies upon adopting/accepting Ven. Nyanamolis re-definition of "sensuality", which (to my knowledge) has no basis in the suttas whatsoever; thus there is no compelling reason to adopt it for me. Especially when it in fact skewes the meaning and understanding of what is said in the suttas, imo.

May i again remind you of SN 45.8 and the definition of right effort:
“And what, monks, is right effort? (i) There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (ii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. (iii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (iv) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. This, monks, is called right effort.”
Notice how he generates desire and upholds his intent for the sake of abandoning unskillful dhammas that have arisen.
In other words, one has to want to and try to get rid of them; which is in direct contradiction to what Ven. Nyanamoli is advocating with his practice of "endurance".

It doesn't even matter what the results of whatever one is doing is, if there is not generating desire (etc.) for the abandoning of akusala dhamma, one is not doing right effort.

Sidenote: there must be a reason why this, specifically is right effort. I can only speculate, but it seems that only this (generating desire etc.) is actually effective, adequate and sufficient (for abandoning akusala dhamma).

Thus, one factor of the path is not followed by adopting the practice of "endurance".
Without following and developing all eight factors of the path, there is no liberation (on any level).
In a more general sense the desire to not have lustful states of mind is obviously wholesome and integral to the path. Venerable Nyanamoli indicates as much by stating that the time to engage in asubha is when one is not already in the midst of lust.
Sure, that can be a appropriate time to contemplate asubha. But you can contemplate asubha even when and especially when there is lust in the mind. Trying to get rid of sensuality is not sensuality itself, according to the definition of sensuality in the suttas.

...
And here's the kicker: focusing on this nimitta of endurance is, in a lustful situation, actually fulfilling the first four strategies for the removal of unwholesome thoughts in MN 20!
Few objections:
...Even if the practice of endurance would somehow fit MN 20 somehow, if it doesn't fit SN 45.8 (which it doesn't, see above), then it's still not right effort.
Also, one has to find a interpretation of MN 20 etc. that fits SN 45.8...

...So the following considerations are somewhat superfluous imo. Nevertheless:
It is directing the mind towards a skilfull theme that is not connected with greed, aversion, or delusion;
Doesn't the "theme of enduring" include what it is "enduring", in this case, akusala thoughts? So akusala thoughts are still present (and therefore not removed) while "enduring", even if one doesn't welcome them or delight in them.
it is recognizing the unwholesomeness of the thoughts in a manner even beyond basic conceptualization by not acting out of them or emotionally indulging in them further.
If you actually saw their unskillfulness, you would not tolerate even their presence (even when not "acted out of", i.e. delighted in and "given in to"), You would try to destroy, extinguish, wipe them out of existence asap. It's not just acting out of them that is problematic, but also their presence per se.
How else does one attempt to forget something other than by not giving the topic any further emotionally-charged attention, by remaining indifferent to it?
According to MN 20, you are not just not-giving "emotionally-charged" attention to akusala thoughts, you are not paying them attention at all..
Just as the man when he looks away, looks away (completely) or even closes his eyes. He isn't looking without emotionally-charged attention (but still looking); he is not looking.
Also, you cannot scrutinize the drawback of a akusala thought while paying it no attention. These are 2 seperate approaches.
And how else do sankharas become stilled other than by just being still, immovable, unshakable, enduring.
..Through appropriate attention, investigation and questioning. You see that what you are doing is unneccessary and causing stress, so you simply stop it.
The sutta illustrates this with asking oneself: "Why am I running?" -> exhausting/stressful and unneccessary -> so he walks. "Why am I walking?" -> exhausting/stressful and unneccessary -> so he stands, and so on..
In the same way, you ask youself: e.g. "why am I fabricating this thought?"-> you see that it is stressful and unneccessary -> relaxation of that thought-fabrication.

Also, as long as that akusala thought persists, as long as you have to endure it, its' ongoing/continous fabrication is obviously not stilled.
Of course, as Ajahn Geoff says, there are times when you need to be humble, get out the sledgehammer and use the fifth method.
Sure. But he isn't saying your options are either "practice of 'endurance'" or the "sledgehammer".
He us also not advocating enduring/tolerating/not destroying/not doing something about arisen akusala thoughts.

The five methods are five different methods.

It is not the case (im the suttas) that the "practice of endurance" covers methods 1~4; and if it doesn't work, you should use the "sledgehammer" (method 5).
You use 1, then 2, if 1 doesn't work, then 3, if 2 doesn't work and so on..
Recognizing the limits of one's endurance is important.
I don't think Ven. Nyanamoli would agree with you that there would be a limit to the practice "endurance" (i.e. cases/times when it is insufficient or inadequate; when it doesn't work), it seems to be basically the only thing he teaches (at least until you reach sotapatti).. which seems to replaces the noble eightfold path (or at least the samādhi-khandha (sammā-vayama, sammā-sati, sammā-samādhi) of it)...(?)
But in the ways I previously mentioned, endurance is a powerful tool for engaging in Right Effort in all but the most dire of sensual states.
As I said above, it's not right effort. Right effort is wanting to get rid of akusala thoughts and actively trying to get rid of them. Not allowing akusala thoughts to persist/exist/be present..
One can, through enduring, fulfill what is prescribed by the Buddha in MN 2 and the injunction in MN 20 to destroy arisen thoughts of sensuality.
Indeed, the sensuality of the thought is obliterated every moment that one holds it within the context of unwelcoming yet unreactive endurance.
As long as you endure the presence of sensuality, you have not obliterated it (i.e. brought it to absence), or else there would be no sensuality present which is to be endured.

.....
Just my 2 cents.
With mettā.

PS: This reply should be mostly consistent with my reply to @SDC, above. If it isn't; this reply was written before it, so I might have evolved my understanding a bit more there...
So I recommend reading that reply also..
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by SDC »

Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm
:thumbsup:

Looks like we are getting closer to understanding each other. Give me a day or so and I’ll get back to you.
“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: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Path of "Right Endurance" of Ven. Nyanamoli (from Hillside Hermitage) incompatible with the Noble Eightfold Path

Post by SDC »

Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm In other words, one endures both the dhamma and "vitakka" (in your sense of the word), but the akusala "nimitta" and "vitakka" is not "picked up"/avoided.
I hope I could express why a distinction between dhamma and vitakka is not really of importance.
You endure both, and what is important is that the akusala direction is not "picked up"..
So far, so good..?
Not exactly what I said, but close. (Great effort all around getting to know one another's views in order to give this discussion the best chance to be beneficial. I see we have both made adjustments in our language to make things more clear.)

Something Ajahn Nyanamoli said in the most recent talk about MN 20 was that those were the five ways to cut off the energy for the continuance of those types of vitakka. That, if one can successfully recognize the source of the unwholesome thinking it can immediately dissipate and calm down. Right there is plenty of room for the likelihood that he is not advocating for the endurance of vitakka whatsoever. To me it sounds just like denying the mind the direction it wants, which seems to be your position. Denying the right for that type of thought to continue, right? In my experience, when Ajahn N talks about denial it is in regards to denying presence - the common notion that thoughts aren't meaningful and that they can be disregarded simply by denying their significance. I think you and I agree that thoughts are significant and dangerous and need to be denied their right to continue, and I think we would also agree that picking up the appropriate signs means that there is a nature to be discerned in those thoughts and the more we become familiar with the signs of the unwholesome the less likely we are to pick them up when they become available again. And they will come back (unarisen evil unwholesome states are still possible) and we need to be ready to make effort to settle them again and again until - as MN 20 states at the end - "This bhikkhu is then called a master of the courses of thought. He will think whatever thought he wishes to think and he will not think any thought that he does not wish to think. He has severed craving, flung off the fetters, and with the complete penetration of conceit he has made an end of suffering.”

To endure a dhamma, which I do agree is a broader context than vitakka, does not always imply the endurance of vitakka, but only the endurance for the potential of it, i.e., successfully cutting off the unwholesome vitakka does not imply the threat is gone for good (as mentioned above). I think this ties in well with some of the suttas you posted below regarding kusalānaṁ/akusalānaṁ dhammā (wholesome/unwholesome qualities/states), which seems to be a broad reference to that manopubbaṅgamā dhammā "the mind precedes mental states", which is of course based upon what you choose to cultivate most often. In other words, there needs to be consistent effort in the direction of wholesome to improve to overall quality of where the mind (mano) is most likely to be. In other words, if "...with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox" (Dhp 1) - in the spirit of MN 20 - amounts to the presence of a very broad dhamma (state) riddled with signs of unwholesome and the potential for unwholesome vitakka. This is beautifully illustrated in SN 45.22 from your appendix; describing askusala dhamma as unwholesome on the broad level of the view, i.e. the entire eightfold path is going in the wrong direction. (Just want to briefly contrast this with dhamma in the context of the six sense base, where there will only be reference to the corresponding feeling. This is on the level of appearance specifically and not directly in reference to how that appearance could be understood as a representation of the entire state of one's development as it is in SN 45.22.)

Now taking MN 19 into consideration as well (which is about vitakka), it is safe to say that while the fields are still riddled with fresh crops the cowherd is going to have to be awfully vigilant to keep the cows in line. If he is vigilant they don’t go for the crops, i.e. the mind doesn’t go for the unwholesome thoughts even though they are readily available. In other words, there is going to be a period of sustained effort of not allowing the mind to go in the unwholesome direction, which is nothing other than residue from eons of resorting to wrong view thinking. There will be a period where wholesome and unwholesome are vying for prominence and that must be endured.
Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm ...
Our main disagreement seems to be that of what it means to abandon/destroy/remove.

If I understand you correctly, you understand it to be the "not-picking up"/avoiding of that akusala nimitta and/or "direction".

I understand it to mean that one brings that akusala thought (e.g. lust) to absence; i.e. one obliterates it's presence, wipes it out of existence.
In other words, there is no akusala "direction" and its' "invitation"/"pressure" which one could accept or resist/reject/avoid "picking up" anymore. The mind is comeplety free of lust (at temporarily until you reach non-return), when abandoning is successful.
It's not just "not-picking it up"/not accepting/not delighting in lust. The lust must not be present at all in the mind.

And as you said, even when one doesn't "pick up"/accept lust, i.e. you resist it, its' "invitation" or "pressure" may remain. In other words (in such a case) it (the lust) is still present in the mind.

Also, as long as you are "enduring" something, it is necessarily present. You cannot resist (or for that matter give in to) a thought of lust that isn't there.
I agree that it means to bring the unwholesome vitakka to "absence". Absolutely. Why? Because a different sign is attended to within that same situation to bring about wholesome. Success in whichever of the five ways in MN 20 implies the direction has been defeated. A good thing to note, however, is that each successive methods builds upon the nature of the previous, i.e., "If, while he is giving attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome, there still arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with hate, and with delusion, then he should...". That right there implies a persistence on behalf of that state of mind to keep pushing, and thus the need for a shift in approach. Again, taking into account the nature of the cows in MN 19, it is always going to be their nature to go for the crops when the crops are ripe and available, but once they have dried up (been repeatedly left alone long enough for them to be taken in by the farmer, which was not the cows choice), they no longer disturb the cows. In other words, the overall quality of the mind (mano) has improved to the degree of seclusion from unwholesome, which brings the mind (citta) to singleness.
Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm
...
So, in my understanding of abandoning, you have to "deny" these thoughts (the right to exist!), to use the words of Ven. Nyanamoli.
If he would say, that we should "deny" thoughts of lust (in this way; i.e. not "denying" as in lying to oneself that present lust is not present), I would have 0 problems with his teaching in this regard.

But that is something which he says is not to be done. One shouldn't try to destroy/abandon/wipe out of existence/bring to absence (in my sense of the word!) lust etc., and wanting to do so, is also a type of sensuality, according to Ven. Nyanamoli.

That is why I said in my original post, that it seems to me that he is teaches something contrary to the right effort of the suttas, which makes it incompatible with the noble eightfold path, imo.
I don’t disagree with you in general, and I really don’t think Ajahn Nyanamoli would disagree with your description of absence. Like I said, he sums MN 20 up by saying that they are the five ways to cut off the energy that would continue unwholesome vitakka. I really think this just may be a case of not being as familiar with his usage of certain terms, which I do admit can be difficult to follow. However, that is an issue with most translators as well. Especially in the case of "dhamma" where some try for a more universal usage while others attempt something more nuanced. More on that towards the end...
Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm A simile might illustrate this:

Suppose your land is at war with enemy invaders. There is a difference between not welcoming them but allowing them to be there ("enduring" their presence), i.e. your land is occupied against your will, and actually fighting back, pushing the invaders out of your land/kicking them out, so that they are not present anymore (i.e. no more occupation).

(The invading enemies = akusala thoughts,
your land = your mind.)

The latter is right effort, the former is not. The fact that you are allowing them to be there (although you are not welcoming/accepting/giving in to them) excludes the possibility of you (actively) kicking them out at the same time.
Even if—while you are enduring their occupation—the enemy eventually leaves/retreats 'on their own', it was not through your right effort because of the lack of intention and desire and active effort to kick them out.

The invading enemy (=akusala thoughts) may indeed leave 'on their own' (which still only a suface level observation though... it goes deeper than that. but that would be beyond the scope of this discussion..).
Thus, I am not saying that there can never be removal of akusala thoughts (in my sense! i.e. bringing to absence) while engaging in the practice of "endurance" (at which point the practice of "enduring" the akusala thought/its' "invitation/pressure"" breaks down though, because it is then not there to "endure" anymore..).
What I am saying, however, is that that strategy is very ineffective, inadequate and insufficient, and you probably don't gain much discernment on how to effectivly fight the enemy.

The effort to not welcome/mentally resist akusala thoughts is not enough.
You need to totally wipe them out of existence.


As many suttas consistently say, you shouldn't endure/tolerate akusala dhamma (for a deeper dive into my understanding of the term "akusala dhamma", please see the section "Appendix" below. Here it must suffice to say that I use akusala vitakka (e.g. kāmavitakka), micchāsaṅkappa (e.g. kāmasaṅkappa) and akusala dhamma synonymously. Vitakka and saṅkappa are synonymous, and both are included in the broad umbrella term "akusala dhamma"..), but that you should destroy them, abandon them, wipe them out of existence (see especially MN 2, where this is stated very clearly, and the many suttas @Zom shared. Btw. thanks @Zom!).
I'm not trying to upend your simile but it is the same one that I posted last time from SN 35.238 and it is about dhammas, and mano in that simile is an empty village about to be raided:
‘Village-attacking dacoits’: this is a designation for the six external sense bases. The eye, bhikkhus, is attacked by agreeable and disagreeable forms. The ear … The nose … The tongue … The body … The mind is attacked by agreeable and disagreeable mental phenomena.
The solution: don't stay in the village and try to defeat the raiders:
Then, bhikkhus, afraid of the four vipers of fierce heat and deadly venom, and of the five murderous enemies, and of the sixth murderer—the intimate companion with drawn sword—and of the village-attacking dacoits, that man would flee in one direction or another. He would see a great expanse of water whose near shore was dangerous and fearful, and whose further shore was safe and free from danger, but there would be no ferryboat or bridge for crossing over from the near shore to the far shore.

“Then the man would think: ‘There is this great expanse of water whose near shore is dangerous and fearful, and whose further shore is safe and free from danger, but there is no ferryboat or bridge for crossing over. Let me collect grass, twigs, branches, and foliage, and bind them together into a raft, so that by means of that raft, making an effort with my hands and feet, I can get safely across to the far shore.’

“Then the man would collect grass, twigs, branches, and foliage, and bind them together into a raft, so that by means of that raft, making an effort with his hands and feet, he would get safely across to the far shore. Crossed over, gone beyond, the brahmin stands on high ground.
I'm not saying your simile isn't applicable to our discussion, but what can be cut off is the energy for the continuance of thinking rooted in greed, ill will and delusion in regard to whatever mental phenomena are attacking. Endure the attack, cut off the unwholesome thinking. (Now if you meant to apply this simile to vitakka and citta, that could work also, but they do not seem to share the same type of relationship as mano and dhamma, so that would take some consideration.)

With all due respect to @Zom, those suttas were not about dhammas specifically, and as I showed earlier, the suttas about wholesome/unwholesome qualities/states in the appendix are broad designations representative of the entire experience. I will agree once again that dhamma is the broader term, but, as such, it means more than things that are included within it. It seems dhamma is the field within which the potential for vitakka is found, wholesome or unwholesome. If the actions are always that of a corrupt mind (mano) the field is going to be corrupt as well, and the availability of unwholesome vitakka is going to be very high. (I really don't want to get into a discussion of saṅkappa, but I see that as a broad intention (action) towards that entire field of experience - based on right view (or wrong), there will be the right (or wrong) intention from the broadest possible perspective. In that sense, it does take on the same meaning as vitakka in principle, but it is direction upon which all directions are inclined - the principle intention supported by right view (or wrong).)
Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm
...
AN 6.7 is a very intersting sutta.

First of all, notice how AN 6.7 doesn't talk about akusala dhamma (..such as lust that one should allow to be present and not try to destroy/"deny" (although one should not welcome/accept it), according to Ven. Nyanamoli)?
So, "dhamma" here it could indeed be your understanding of it, i.e. something "neutral" that one "endures".

If it was, however, an akusala dhamma/saṅkappa/vitakka, the suttas are very unanimous, consistent and clear that one should destroy them, abandon them and wipe them out of existance (so that they are not present anymore), and not tolerate them/their presence.

And I think I have made clear enough with the simile above that in such case, merely "enduring"/not welcoming such thoughts would not be enough (because that would still be tolerating their presence, even when one doesn't accept them/"pick them up").

AN 6.1 may shed some further light on how this passage in AN 6.7 could be understood: khamo here may mean that one remains equanimous, i.e. neither happy or sad regardless whatever dhamma arise (in six-fold-sense-experience).
That still doesn't absolve one from doing the appropriate duty of right effort, i.e. abandoning, wiping out of existence when that dhamma is akusala. One must abandon it while remaining equanimous.
In other words, you do the job with a "stoic" mindset. Akusala dhamma have arisen, you notice it, and don't get sad about it, but simply do what is necessary out of heedfulness; generating desire and putting in effort to abandon it, wipe it out of existence.

That is, if this "dhamma" in AN 6.7 where to refer to akusala dhamma, but it could just be some "neutral" dhamma.

Anyway, the endurance mentioned in AN 6.7 doesn't necessarily mean that one should let akusala things persist/be present (and not try to destroy them), but could simply mean that you are not emotionally moved/affected by what makes contact with you (physically and mentally).

Otherwise, it would be contradicting many other suttas, imo, and internal consistency is key when understanding suttas (cf. DN 16, the 4 great standards).

I hope my response made some sense..

.....
With mettā.

PS: I have some issues with the videos you alerted me to, but I think it is enough to adress the things I did in this reply...(?)

PPS: Wiping akusala thoughts out of existance is not merely "managing" the problem of dukkha, but following the noble eightfold path that will lead to its' eventual "uprootment".
I don't really have much to say about the above that I didn't already address. In regards to your PSS, I absolutely agree if we are talking about vitakka. That is the work.
Lucilius wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:12 pm
Notice how the Buddha uses vitakka and saṅkappa synonymously here (don't let the fact that it is mentioned under noble right saṅkappa confuse you. The saṅkappa here is noble because it is the saṅkappa of an noble mind, free of āsava, which also makes it necessarily sammā. The point here is, that saṅkappa here is used synonymously with vitakka. This would also apply to miccāsaṅkappa; kāmasaṅkappa ≈ kāmavitakka.)

Since micchāsaṅkappa (such as kāmasaṅkappa) are akusala dhamma, according to SN 45.22, we can infer that akusala vitakka ≈ micchāsaṅkappa ≈ akusala dhamma.

When the suttas talk about abandoning akusala dhamma, they talk about abandoning everything that is akusala, which obviously includes akusala vitakka (e.g. kāmavitakka) and the synonymous micchāsaṅkappa (kāmasaṅkappa). So in this case, you can use these terms synonymously: vitakka ≈ saṅkappa, both of which are dhamma.
Just to reiterate, when the suttas talk about akusala dhamma it seems to be in reference to a broad state of things. Not only that, but a broad state that requires much effort to change. In MN 33, that seems to be more about the prevalence of the corrupt mind described in Dhp 1. In SN 45.22, the wrong direction of all eight path factors are unwholesome dhammas - again, this is a broad reference to the direction of the entire experience. So, while these are extraordinarily broad designations that can be summed up as a general thought (dhamma), if one is capable of gathering it up, I don't see how we can apply the cutting off described in MN 20 at this level. If we could, the wrong eightfold path could be cut off in an instant by anyone capable of what is described in MN 20. As Dhp 1 says, there needs to be frequent action of body and speech to support a change in a different direction, which to me is much more long-term work than what is found in MN 20. MN 20 is about the direction of greed, hate and delusion - the tendencies of which will remain if they have been long-cultivated. The point is to no longer let those three directions continue no matter what the raiders do to the empty village.


---

At this point, I think I have shown that your concerns are emerging from a gray area resulting from Ajahn Nyanamoli taking for granted that the listener was already familiar with his views and usage of these terms (or that they would eventually get to the point of familiarity). Indeed, he did not start from scratch in the video from the OP, and therefore the listener is at a slight disadvantage - especially if they want to make a broad judgement of his views at that point. Though, even in your appendix we see three or four different words that can all be rendered "thought" when properly qualified. If someone relatively unfamiliar with such qualifications were to go to work on the suttas in question, they would also pick up on potential incompatibility between them. What I pointed out, in the very least, should induce some uncertainty in your position solely based in the fact that many different words are being used interchangeably. All in all, in one of the videos I posted it is clear that Ajahn Nyanamoli sees MN 20 as ways to cut off the energy for the continuing of thinking rooted in greed, ill will and delusion, and that if the effort was successful the mind would calm down. That alone should be a sign that what you gathered from the OP video may not be the whole story.

I'm more than happy to continue the discussion, however. :smile:
“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
Post Reply