Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I think it was Shunryu Suzuki who said that the whole of the Buddha's teaching can be summed up in three words, "Not always so". I can't comment on the whole of the Buddha's teaching, not having read it, but "not always so" is I think true of the meaning of words. There's no solid link between a word and it's meaning, and so words can "slide" about over different meanings, meaning different things at different times e.g. the word "gay". I'm old enough to remember when it meant something close to "happy" (One of my favourite poems is a medieval English tale, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, but I always smile at the references to "King Arthur and his gay knights"!)
And words can mean different things to different people at the same time too, something I often see in my work as a Mediator e.g to one person "pedantic" may mean something close to "meticulous" and be intended as a form of praise, to another it means something close to "anally retentive" and is therefore a fearful insult, and before you know if the parties are in dispute over what was intended as praise from one to the other. It keeps Mediators in business I suppose. And yes, one can try to define words, but only with other words, which again don't have absolutely fixed meanings, so I wonder if definitions can really tie down the meaning of a word.
Which is partly why I find Elohim's references to the original Pali so interesting. When I read terms in English I come to them with our own cultural and personal assumptions about what the words mean that aren't necessarily shared by the person who used them, and which certainly may not reflect the assumptions that a Pali speaker may have had 2,500 years ago. Learning about the original words and their meanings is a way of opening up my mind to possible meanings and nuances that I would not have perceived "behind" the English word. Thank you Elohim.
And yet, in the final analysis, presumably the Pali words are also "just" words, whose meanings can only ever be approximated but never quite be grasped or tied down, not even by definitions (which consist of other words). Ultimately, I wonder if words as well as teachings are not just a finger pointing at the moon, and we shouldn't mistake the finger for the moon, or the word (Pali, English, Norfolk (we have our own here!) or whatever) for the meaning. Which may - I don't know - be part of what Simon is saying. And which means that it's very useful, even skillful, to learn about the Pali, but doesn't make the Pali is some kind of sanctified version, which of course Elohim wasn't implying either.
Martin.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
Not supercilious but, unwittingly perhaps, elitist. What you suggest is also what I term "faith-specific fascism". I know that the term is strong but I feel strongly about it.
The logical outcome of your position is to create a hierarchy of practitioners where the old arguments between Pali Canon and the rest of the scriptures become battlegrounds of academic argument. At the bottom of this pyramid will. once again, be the unlettered, the anawim. It will recreate aristocracy.Pali, although some historians dispute whether he actually spoke it. Why sanctify it?
I'm not really sure what this objection is about, Simon. I understand that what you added to this discussion was that the concept behind 'mindfulness'--as an idea--is not necessarily unique to Buddhism. Jason's position is not different from the position he has consistently adopted on this forum: the focus of his study is the Pali Canon. He posts with humility and self-deprication. What may be perceived as potentially 'elitist' is perhaps the authority with which he is able to articulate and ground his claims about questions, such as 'mindfulness', in specific suttas of the Pali Canon.
I think the logical outcome is nonsense. Perhaps if Jason picked fights and put others down as a result of his learning, that would be one thing. That is not the case for me.
I am not one to bash academic study. I understand the fear of hierarchy and elitism. If it were another member, Simon, I might tend towards your position. In this case, Jason does not claim to be the tender of the fire, he simply sits by its warmth. I appreciate his posts, as I do yours, Simon.
I think critical dialogue is important--we should challenge one another. But let's do it in a way that is respectful rather than hurtful.
It is an accident of history that the Buddha Shakyamuni's words were remembered in Pali, although some historians dispute whether he actually spoke it. Why sanctify it?
One argument may be that as perhaps one of the earliest textual, sacred languages of Buddhism (another is Prakrit), the grammar and syntax has been shaped for and by Buddhism to convey timeless truths and concepts. Isn't that reason enough?
You have made some very good points, and have said some very nice things. From time to time it is good to know where it is that you are doing well, and where it is that you need some improving. Quite often it takes the wisdom of someone else to point both of those things out to you. A different perspective can be a very valuable thing. Simon, I would like to apologize for my initial reaction, and for anything else that I might have unskillfully said before hand.
I shall be reflecting on the last few days as I go to the hospital for some tests today. Maybe Fede and Brigid are right and I am waspish because of my meds.
Bear with me, please.
Love
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
This made me think of another post that I put ... somewhere...
Like I said in that post, sometimes being mindful is taking the time to think about what someone has said to us and why they have said it. Instead of, like I do, immediately letting my "ego" become hurt and responding in kind.
I don't think that any of us out here honestly believe that someone is going to rip into us just for satisfaction, vendetta or just to hurt feelings. I think we all know each other better than that.
All of us will find that we will go through difficult situations and sometimes - our sangha is the only "safe" place we can go to for a sounding board.
Even Buddha dealt with people having anger or dealing with difficulties with deep amounts of compassion. Even those that would rant against him - he simply left them with their rantings.
I firmly believe that our sangha only wishes peace upon it's members. But, sometimes day to day stuff gets in the way.
I shall be reflecting on the last few days as I go to the hospital for some tests today. Maybe Fede and Brigid are right and I am waspish because of my meds.
Bear with me, please.
Love
A million blessings to you, Simon. Bearing with you will be an honour and a privilege. Funny things happen in the brain after heart incidents and people can do things that are completely out of character. Like my dad. But he was pretty difficult to begin with. lol!
You, on the other hand, are not difficult and it's a testament to your true character that we would notice any change so acutely.
I'm wishing you fabulous results on your tests and a doctor with the same compassion you have shown in your life.
While practicing mindfulness, don’t be dominated by the distinction between good and evil, thus creating a battle within oneself.
Whenever a wholesome thought arises, acknowledge it: “A wholesome thought has just arisen.” If an unwholesome thought arises, acknowledge it as well: “An unwholesome thought has just arisen.” Don’t dwell on it or try to get rid of it. To acknowledge it is enough. If they are still there, acknowledge they are still there. If they have gone, acknowledge they have gone. That way the practitioner is able to hold of his mind and to obtain the mindfulness of the mind.
— The Miracle of Mindfulness by Thich Nhat Hanh. p.39
I don't understand this, so when practicing mindfulness, you're not supposed to have good thoughts, such as compassion thoughts for someone?
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited May 2006
Just let the thoughts come and go... Observe them, but be Mindful of your thoughts words and deeds...they need to be skilful and supported by the Eightfold path...
Why are you creating so much anxiety for yourself? Just relax... you are so intent on doing the 'Right' thing, that you are not seeming to enjoy Life....its liberty and freedom of Being is passing you by!
Life is a wonderful privilege..It should be spent in tranquil Joy, not constant appraisal!
I don't understand this, so when practicing mindfulness, you're not supposed to have good thoughts, such as compassion thoughts for someone?
I actually believe that generating good thoughts is a form of mindfulness/recollection, a very basic one serving as a beginning to "right thought," aiming to counteract unwholesome thoughts. But we also must keep in mind that "samma" here seems to make "right thoughts" more than just positive thoughts but really the highest of all thoughts, namely, "The logically applied reasoning thoughts, which focus attention to fix verbal determinations in the noble path mind, without desires, are noble right thoughts transcending this world and they are a feature of the path."
What are right thoughts with desires to share merit, which mature as substratum? They are non sensual thoughts, non angry thoughts and non hurting thoughts These are right thoughts with desires, to share merit, which mature as substratum. Bhikkhus, what are right thoughts, that are noble, without desires, transcending this world is a feature of the path? The logically applied reasoning thoughts, which focus attention to fix verbal determinations in the noble path mind, without desires, are noble right thoughts transcending this world and they are a feature of the path. [2] He endeavours to dispel wrong thoughts and get established in right thoughts, that becomes his right endeavour. He mindfully dispels wrong thoughts and abides established in right thoughts, that becomes right mindfulness, to him Thus these three things follow each other, turning in a circle. Such as right view, right endeavour and right mindfulness.
This sutta is a very interesting one, and has been very useful to me for trying to understand the relationship between path factors. For this question, the important point the sutta brings out is that right view, right endeavor, and right mindfulness "follow each other, turning in a circle" are the key factors (with right view as foremost) in developing any of the other path factors. So, when you are talking about right mindfulness you are talking about recollection, or the actual re-application of the mind to something other than sensual phenomena (our habitual application of mind), and what exactly you do with this depends on what you are re-applying the mind to. I believe TNH here is probably talking about, when he says "mindfulness of the mind" a meditative practice intended for developing "right concentration". So when you are talking about "right thought" try not to be confused by someone who is talking about "right concentration", since, though the path is all connected, and this sutta does call the eightfold path "right concentration with its means and accessories," they really seem to be two different developments (we might even say levels of development).
While practicing mindfulness, don’t be dominated by the distinction between good and evil, thus creating a battle within oneself.
Whenever a wholesome thought arises, acknowledge it: “A wholesome thought has just arisen.” If an unwholesome thought arises, acknowledge it as well: “An unwholesome thought has just arisen.” Don’t dwell on it or try to get rid of it. To acknowledge it is enough. If they are still there, acknowledge they are still there. If they have gone, acknowledge they have gone. That way the practitioner is able to hold of his mind and to obtain the mindfulness of the mind.
— The Miracle of Mindfulness by Thich Nhat Hanh. p.39
I don't understand this, so when practicing mindfulness, you're not supposed to have good thoughts, such as compassion thoughts for someone?
'Supposed to' & 'Not supposed to' does not really apply here. Mindfulness practice does not really cultivate 'supposed to'. 'Supposed-to-mind' clings to one extreme while rejecting & pushing away the other. This creates a hostile environment and unnecessary struggle. What mindfulness practice is about is simply seeing what is without becoming involved in the judging what is. As TNH said, we acknowledge the thought, whether it is wholesome or unwholesome. If a judgement of that thought arises, we notice the judgement as well. It is important not to identify with the judging or the thought in this practice. Just simply notice. The more involved you are in the thoughts or the judgment (which is just more thought), the heavier the karma you are creating. Developing this is essential to Unbinding. It is the active development of dispassion and is a key to developing equanimity (upekkha). It allows us to become keenly aware of our thoughts and the whole mental process. By actively trying to force good thoughts, we make it impossible to see when and how these thoughts arise. Allowing all thoughts to arise as the will, we are creating the basis for insight. By not allowing them, we are not creating a basis for insight.
Now, with all that said, we don't suddenly become morally ambiguous. We still recognize that skillful/wholesome thoughts are preferable to unskillful/unwholesome thoughts, but when we are doing this specific form of meditation we just watch, rather than actively judging and controlling. By simply being aware of unwholesome thoughts, we are able to let go of them as they arise rather than creating a mental drama around them. We also do the same with skillful thoughts and let them go without creating a mental drama around them. Our raised level of awareness created by this sort of meditation then makes it easier to act skillfully/wholesomely without the clinging which is the source of distress.
Anyway, here is an excerpt from an Access To Insight article:
The definition (the four frames of reference)
"And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness...
"This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference."
— DN 22
The words "in & of themselves" are the key here. Nothing to add or subtract.
Hope this helps
_/\_
metta
Hope this helps
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited May 2006
* Vaccha and N1N2... I greatly value your contributions and know that what you say is charged with both wisdom and knowledge...However, could I just say that this is Buddhism 101 and not 102....
There is a thread titled 'Mindfulness of Breathing' on Forum Buddhism 202 upon which one could expand.... Similarly, perhaps you might like to just open a thread there on Mindfulness alone.
I would be grateful therefore if you would, on this forum, keep your posts short, simple and easily digested. This is not the place for great and verbose expansion.
OK, I've decided, I'm going to quit trying to practice mindfulness. My happiness has been based upon this, I thought mindfulness is gonna help me performed better in my daily life, I believed I will be happy when I get the hang of it. I guess I was wrong. I'm gonna aim lower, to things that I can be happy with. I've been thinking too much. I gonna free myself. Thank you all for helping me and answering my questions.
* Vaccha and N1N2... I greatly value your contributions and know that what you say is charged with both wisdom and knowledge...However, could I just say that this is Buddhism 101 and not 102....
There is a thread titled 'Mindfulness of Breathing' on Forum Buddhism 202 upon which one could expand.... Similarly, perhaps you might like to just open a thread there on Mindfulness alone.
I would be grateful therefore if you would, on this forum, keep your posts short, simple and easily digested. This is not the place for great and verbose expansion.
Thank you both so much. *
Alright, Fine!:grumble: But Vaccha started it.
Anyway, let's try again, shall we?
ro10,
Basically, What Ven. TNH is saying is specific to mindfulness practice. In mindfulness practice we do not actively value judge our thoughts. If we have a bad thought (lust, anger, etc), we don't start mentally berating ourselves. If we have a good thought (compassion, joy) then we don't start celebrating. We just notice the thought and whatever the mind says about it (good, bad, nuetral), and we move on.
TNH said this:
don’t be dominated by the distinction between good and evil
It's not that you get rid of the distinction. You just don't let your mind be dominated by this distinction.
Sure, good thoughts are preferable, but we don't get lost in our preferences, clinging to the good and repressing the bad. The key here is not to get too personally involved (dominated) by this sort of value judgement. We are cultivating awareness here, not value judgement. We are also working on letting go of clinging to our thoughts & feelings.
FYI, there are other methods of contemplation and meditation which intentionally cultivate compassion and Wisdom. I would be happy to provide you with some links, if you would like.
Hope this was a little more basic.
_/\_
metta
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
OK, I've decided, I'm going to quit trying to practice mindfulness. My happiness has been based upon this, I thought mindfulness is gonna help me performed better in my daily life, I believed I will be happy when I get the hang of it. I guess I was wrong. I'm gonna aim lower, to things that I can be happy with. I've been thinking too much. I gonna free myself. Thank you all for helping me and answering my questions.
Andy
Good post, Andy. Going back to the beginning is always a good thing to do, no matter how far along the path you are.
Remember, we don't practice mindfulness so that we can perform better in our daily lives. We practice mindfulness because we usually go through life on auto-pilot, distracted, not paying attention to this moment right now. We practice mindfulness because we want to wake up and pay attention.
But it is causing you distress because you have given the practice of mindfulness a task to complete. That task is to help you perform better in life. Don't assign a task for mindfulness to complete. Don't give it a job to do. It's only a tool to help you do a job. Your job is to follow The Noble Eightfold Path. But right now you're not sure how to use the tool of mindfulness. That's O.K. Just spending time in the workshop itself is helpful. You don't have to pick up any of the tools yet. Just look around and get acquainted. Take in the smells, the sounds, the sights. You don't have to do anything at all right now. Just being in the workshop is good enough because it's the right place to be and one day you'll be able to pick up the tools and start using them. But not today. Today all you have to do is hang out.
My point was actually very simple, and I can sum it up quite briefly: consistent establishment of good thoughts and the expulsion of unwholesome thoughts is indeed an application of "right mindfulness".
V.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited May 2006
Well why dincha say sow!?!?
Thanks Vaccha....More succinct and to the point, you couldn't hope to get - !
Nice one!! :thumbsup:
1) Mindfulness let you live in the present and experience life in the moment, there is no past or future. A mindful person wouldn’t recall any memory in the past, even if it’s a pleasant one. He also doesn’t dwell ahead into the future.
++To live in the moment there is past and future. We are now in the present moment as a result of those things that happened in the past. We can heal those things from the past that we are still carrying around in the present moment. Example- I discover that I am carrying guilt and saddness toward the way I treated my Grandmother. I feel it now, in this moment. I can look deeply to my Grandmother in me, of course she is there, becuse I am a continuation of her through my parents. I can say, " Grandmother I am so sorry for the way I behaved and spoke to you", and I can see her smiling at me with compassion. I can thereby, transform the past to go forth with right action. To address the future I would say that those actions that we do today mindfully in full awareness impact future events. That is why daily practice is necessary, to ensure that I stay on the path today so I may again be fully present in all my affairs.
Mindfullness does not suggest repression of thoughts of the past or future, but to accept and see all thoughts for their place in the ultimate reality.
2) Mindfulness in daily life should come naturally with little effort and need a firm formal meditation background to back it up, trying too much to be mindful causes self-conscious which is the opposite of being mindful.
++If mindfullness came naturally, there would be no need to practice.
The reason I wanted to practice mindfulness is to gain insight, to improve myself. Though as much as I want to be mindful and gain insight, I am being self-conscious when trying to be mindful.
++ In his work "Cutting Through spiritual Materialism", Chogyam Trungpa highlights a common pitfall that he calls "spiritual materialism".
"The universal human tendency, he shows, is to see spirituality as a process of self improvement- the impulse to develop and refine the ego when the ego is essentially empty. "The problem is that the ego can convert any thing to it's own use even spirituality. His teaching points to a way which serve to wake us up from this trick we can play on ourselves and involves letting go of the self rather than working to improve it."
THN said further that there is no self, as in an entity that is seperate from the whole of the cosmos.
My point was actually very simple, and I can sum it up quite briefly: consistent establishment of good thoughts and the expulsion of unwholesome thoughts is indeed an application of "right mindfulness".
V.
The definition (the four frames of reference)
"And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness...
"This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference."
— DN 22
Abandoning the wrong factors of the path
"One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right resolve: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right speech: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right action: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness..."
— MN 117
I think TNH's discourse is definitely specific to certain types of mindfulness cultivation. I also think that the point he was making about not turning this into a battle is absolutely essential to actually being able to establish good thoughts and to properly expel bad thoughts without repressing them.
In actuality, expelling these negative thoughts requires a level of detachment which allows the practitioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in. It is like weeding your garden. If you just pull top of the weed off, it will grow right back. If you make sure you pull it out by the roots, then it will not.
And establishing good thoughts requires a level of detachment which allows the practitioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in. In this way, one can nurture them from the roots up.
If the practitioner is persistent in this sort of practice, their own garden of mind will be full of skillful and wholesome qualities, and they will not be afflicted by negative thoughts.
In actuality, expelling these negative thoughts requires a level of detachment which allows the practitioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in. It is like weeding your garden. If you just pull top of the weed off, it will grow right back. If you make sure you pull it out by the roots, then it will not.
When you speak here of "a level of detachment which allows the practicioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in" You are speaking of part of what I was trying to say earlier, before we were told we were getting too advanced. That is, Right View (see what these thoughts are rooted in) and Right Mindfulness (level of detachment) work together.
If the practitioner is persistent in this sort of practice, their own garden of mind will be full of skillful and wholesome qualities, and they will not be afflicted by negative thoughts.
Happy gardening!!
_/\_
metta
And you didn't forget "Right Effort" ("if the practicioner is persistent"), which is the third of factors Right View and Right Mindfulness which are said at MN 117 to turn round each other in establishing the path factors. Maybe it is good to think of them as like the engine at the core of the path, driving it, with, of course, Right View being the forerunner (knowing what is connected with the goal from what is unconnected with the goal).
Ok, I'm being stupid again. I've think about daily mindfulness again today. I just don't get how other could be so happy doing house chore, I seemed to want to do that but if I try to watch my body movement while doing it, I'll would get self-conscious, and insecure. I've been staying off the forum in hope I'll would forget this mindfulness things, but I did it again. I hate myself so much. When I'm alone with nothing to do, I'll think about this, and worry, and insecure. I wish I didn't read about mindfulness in the first place. Well, I'm just doing 5 minutes counting breath a day, would this consider as right meditation or mindfulness? Would this sitting practice will eventually get me how to do thing mindfully, such as bliss doing house chore? My mind right now is pretty disturbed.
we CAN be insecure, fretful or worry if we are doing dishes and thinking about what is goin to happen in the future.. ( the next hour, the next day etc. )
we can be regretful, down on ourselves, negative or stressed if we are doing the dishes
and thinking about what we have done in the past.. ( 5 min. ago, last week month etc. )
that is ONE GOOD REASON.. to be mindful and do the dishes with our thoughts in the present.
i tryed to keep this short and simple.. i will PM you later.
iv read some good material about mindfulness and will keep it simple in explaination.
Thich Naht Han .. has some easy read / easy learning... on the subject..
Hi Andy....
I too have been struggling with this mindfulness thing...
I happened to be browsing a discount book store and came across this book, "Mindfulness with Breathing". It starts off with just what you said, breath.
It is written by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, translated from Thai by Santikaro Bhikku.
So far I am really enjoying it and it;s very helpful.
It's about "developing life". According to the author, we lack the 'secret' and understanding of the extent to which life can truly be developed. The main cause being dukkha, or stress, conflict, agitation (samsara). The author goes on explain the 4 aspects of developing life.
If you or anyone, would like more information, PM me...as I do not wish to ramble and bore anyone...
I don't mean this in a bad way - but it's the quickest way to cut to the chase...
There is a difference between being Mindful and being borderline OCD.
Not that you are! I'm just saying that there is a way to be mindful of what you are doing without taking it to an extreme.
Being mindful of what we are doing at the moment - means being aware of the moment. When being mindful doing dishes - we should be aware of what we're doing - not putting so much mental thought into it that someone would think we're trying to clean the dishes with telepathy.
When interacting with loved ones - do we concentrate so hard on what we're moving, what we're touching, what they're saying that we lose the moment of the actual interaction?
One side of the path - over studying everything you're doing too much that you can't see the beauty or happiness of the moment.
Middle Path - being aware and mindful of what is happening with you and around you.
Other side of the path - being oblivious as to what is going on around you.
Now... there are exercises that we can practice - which is exactly that... "practice". It's something we do at a specific time to hone "mindfulness" in us. But at those times, it's just practice.
Ok, I'm being stupid again. I've think about daily mindfulness again today. I just don't get how other could be so happy doing house chore, I seemed to want to do that but if I try to watch my body movement while doing it, I'll would get self-conscious, and insecure. I've been staying off the forum in hope I'll would forget this mindfulness things, but I did it again. I hate myself so much. When I'm alone with nothing to do, I'll think about this, and worry, and insecure. I wish I didn't read about mindfulness in the first place. Well, I'm just doing 5 minutes counting breath a day, would this consider as right meditation or mindfulness? Would this sitting practice will eventually get me how to do thing mindfully, such as bliss doing house chore? My mind right now is pretty disturbed.
~Andy
Mindfulness isn't so much about forcing where your awareness goes. It is simply being with your awareness wherever it goes. If your mind thinks it needs to be aware of the movement, then just notice that the mind wants to be aware of the movement. If the mind rebels and starts getting self conscious & insecure, just notice that the mind is getting self conscious & insecure. If your mind is thinking that it hates itself, well then, just notice that. Be with it. Just notice, no forcing. Once you are just noticing, then let go.
You are mixing up concentration and mindfulness. Mindfulnees is being with whatever is there. Concentration is being able to put aside all distractions. That comes with time. The more important part is to just be with whatever is there with judging and without creating a new mental dialogue. If judging or mental dialogue happens, just notice, don't feel you've failed. If you feel you've failed just notice that. Once your mind is just noticing, then let go. Perhaps you should view concentration more as letting go of extraneous objects rather than trying to grasp at a single object. The former approach builds tranquility, the latter builds tension. Try easing up the tension a bit.
Here's an article that might help you on the issue of mindfulness of the breath, since you seem to be very concerned about being able to concentrate on a fixed object:
This morning I was talking to Venerable Subbato and he was saying he never has developed anapanasati, mindfulness of the breath. So I said, 'Can you be mindful of one inhalation?' And he said, 'Oh yes.' 'And of one exhalation?' And he said, 'Yes.' And I said, 'Got it!'
There's nothing more to it than that. However, one tends to expect to develop some special kind of ability to go into some special state. And because we don't do that, then we think we can't do it.
But the way of the spiritual life is through renunciation, relinquishment, letting go not through attaining or acquiring. Even the jhanas [1] are relinquishments rather than attainments. If we relinquish more and more, letting go more and more, then the jhanic states are natural.
The attitude is most important. To practise anapanasati, one brings the attention onto one inhalation, being mindful from the beginning to the end. One inhalation, that's it; and then the same goes for the exhalation. That's the perfect attainment of anapanasati. The awareness of just that much, is the result of concentration of the mind through sustained attention on the breath. From the beginning to the end of the inhalation, from the beginning to the end of the exhalation. The attitude is always one of letting go, not attaching to any ideas or feelings that arise from that, so that you're always fresh with the next inhalation, the next exhalation, completely as it is. You're not carrying over anything. So it's a way of relinquishment, of letting go, rather than of attaining and achieving.
I hope you will forgive me for disagreeing with you here, but I feel that what you have said in the beginning does not agree with the quote you provided, nor with my understanding. To my thinking the quote is more correct and your comment less correct with regard to one or two points. This could be a semantic problem, but I feel there is a conflict of meaning. You said that Mindfulness isn't about forcing (this is a loaded word, when what we are really talking about is application or choosing) where your awareness goes, but this is not accurate in my view. For example, the very quote you provided says (emphasis mine), "But the way of the spiritual life is through renunciation, relinquishment, letting go not through attaining or acquiring. Even the jhanas [1] are relinquishments rather than attainments. If we relinquish more and more, letting go more and more, then the jhanic states are natural.
The attitude is most important. To practise anapanasati, one brings the attention onto one inhalation, being mindful from the beginning to the end."
So, the venerable teacher there is saying that indeed mindfulness is about bringing the attention to a fixation (forcing where your awareness goes), as a matter of practice. He is not here talking about just letting the mind wander and being mindful of that wandering (one translation of samsara is wandering), sort of like, forgive the analogy, letting the dog walk you around the park instead of the other way around. Mindfulness is more like the leash, and you are the master, not the dog. In other words, mindfulness means the dog goes where you choose for it to go, not you go where the dog chooses for you to go. Samadhi then would be, at risk of extending the analogy too far, where there is totally no conflict of interest between the dog and you, the dog and you are as if sharing one mind.
This brings up the second point that I wanted to try to clarify, and this is intimately related, is that you seem to want to divide mindfulness from concentration as if they are two easily distinct things or areas of practice. In the passage I quoted above, the venerable teacher sees that mindfulness is in fact all bound up with the aim of concentration (jhanas/relinquishments). In this regard, mindfulness (recollection/the application of the mind to a fixation) is the application of the mind towards development of concentration. Fully developed mindfulness is basically the same as concentration (unification, undilutedness, jhana process of relinquishment), one leads "naturally" (seamlessly, we could say) into the other. Sati as attention could even be called concentrating (in process of development) vs. Samadhi as concentration (fulfillment). And this is so much why Sati is so closely discussed with Samadhi and jhanas, and why Sati is grouped in the "concentration" group of the path factors and so intimate not only formally (it is directly prior) but in process.
To end in concord rather than disagreement, where I definitely agree with you is that it is a good thing to see concentration (and, consequently, I would say also mindfulness) as a relinquishment practice. To go back to the dog/leash analogy, the normal habit of mind is to be so totally interested in phenomena that it is always going here or there, leading the leash and pulling the master to and fro. Mindfulness is leash training, to train the dog to, as much as possible, relinquish the demands of phenomena and be heedful (mindful) of the leash and the master, and not go running to and fro like a wild animal as is its natural habit. As a matter of practical concern, I would note that here the "leash" I don't know if we want to call it mindfulness or Dhamma or what we want to call it, but I must say that as mindfulness develops it is an almost tangible presence inside like the pulling of the leash, when attended to you are more and more in accord with it (the meaning of samma is "in accordance with"), and it is felt initially as the pleasure of jhana. It can be thought of in many analogies, but one of the nicest is that of a stream (not to be confused with the analogy of the stream/flood of sensuality)...when you are near it (developing Sati) you can hear it calling with its pleasant sound and when you are in it (with more fully developed Sati) you can feel with your entire body its cooling (Nibbana is often likened to a cooling) water as it prompts you with its current to the goal.
To Andy I wanted to offer, as a fellow student, encouragement and friendliness. I can see that you have some aspiration to tread the path, but like many of us you are still wrestling with the many obstacles which get in the way, such as worry, doubt, restlessness, and diluted persistence. If I had any advice to you, I would say that five minutes a day is a beginning, but it is really not enough. You should gradually (but not to slowly) build upon the time you spend meditating in earnest to a minimum, as a lay disciple, of 30 minutes to an hour daily. And, as an experiment, you might try rethinking your approach to sitting meditation mindfulness in the following way. Instead of just focusing on the breath or counting the breath, try to meditate relinquishing everything that comes your way, but use the breath as a reminder to do so. Because the breath is a constant in our lives (not that it doesn't change, it is just that when you are alive, you are breathing), it is the one of the more readily available reminders or foundations of our practice of recollection. The point is to calm the mind to unification, to train yourself not to "go out to phenomena" like that dog on the leash who wants to lead the master here and there in pursuit of all the great smells. Because the breath is more or less a constant, it provides a steady foundation for that recollection, like a post you can lean on to relax when you are exhausted from running, or, as I have said elsewhere, like a sturdy wall you can bounce a ball off of (to return it to yourself and practice "catching the ball"). As I said before, as you develop this ability to keep the mind centered you can feel it almost tangibly in yourself like a stream you can hear from a distance or feel its current when you are "in it" or a place you can go to just by thinking about it, and that is the point where you can more successfully begin to take the learning from the formal sitting meditation into more everyday things like chores, because you can remain recollected of this steadiness of mind once you are familiar with it. Instead of being self-conscious, you are happy because you have this secret source of joy inside you that you can access any time (and it is actually good for your practice to develop this access). It is good to develop it in more and more situations, because the more you are able to maintain it in any kind of encounter, the less likely you are that unhealthy mental activities will arise in difficult situations.
Well, I hope any of my thoughts have been useful to you.
in friendliness,
V.
Mindfulness isn't so much about forcing where your awareness goes. It is simply being with your awareness wherever it goes. If your mind thinks it needs to be aware of the movement, then just notice that the mind wants to be aware of the movement. If the mind rebels and starts getting self conscious & insecure, just notice that the mind is getting self conscious & insecure. If your mind is thinking that it hates itself, well then, just notice that. Be with it. Just notice, no forcing. Once you are just noticing, then let go.
You are mixing up concentration and mindfulness. Mindfulnees is being with whatever is there. Concentration is being able to put aside all distractions. That comes with time. The more important part is to just be with whatever is there with judging and without creating a new mental dialogue. If judging or mental dialogue happens, just notice, don't feel you've failed. If you feel you've failed just notice that. Once your mind is just noticing, then let go. Perhaps you should view concentration more as letting go of extraneous objects rather than trying to grasp at a single object. The former approach builds tranquility, the latter builds tension. Try easing up the tension a bit.
Here's an article that might help you on the issue of mindfulness of the breath, since you seem to be very concerned about being able to concentrate on a fixed object:
You might be right about me mixing things up, but concentration to me means mindfulness of a fixed object, where as mindfulness itself is just being attentive to what is present. Sure, concentration isn't possible without mindfulness, but I feel there is a distinction between mindfulness in every day activities and mindfulness of certain activities.
I'm not sure whether I am completely correct on the technicalites, but I am more speaking from my own instruction & experience in Vippasana and general meditation.
Basically, I feel that ro10 is resisting or trying to ignore the thoughts that he is having in his practice. This makes the practice full of anxiety, and is really not very conducive to concentration. Being mindful of where the mind is going is absolutely essential (imo) in being able to let go. The point here is to become intimately acquanted with the mind and its movements through mindfulness practices. Doing so gives one the ability to be firmly rooted in mindfulness in order to practice the relinquishement necessary for the jhana states.
I hope you will forgive me for disagreeing with you here, but I feel that what you have said in the beginning does not agree with the quote you provided, nor with my understanding. To my thinking the quote is more correct and your comment less correct with regard to one or two points.
I think this is still too advanced for some of us beginners. I know this is probably frustrating for you but for some of us things have to be explained in simpler ways.
When we're at the very beginning of practicing Buddhism some of us are not even aware that the dog is leading us. So in order to begin being mindful we first have to understand and be aware that the dog, our mind, is leading us all over the place and is very unruly. This takes time and some of us are still at this stage.
Only when we are aware that we are being pulled all over the place by our minds are we beginning to be mindful. If we're just beginning to see how this works we can't be expected to jump ahead and understand the finer points and distinctions between mindfulness and concentration and so forth. It's just confusing. Different minds learn in different ways and at different speeds, especially when there's an emotional block in place that prevents us from coming to an understanding of something that seems simple to others but baffling to ourselves.
You're very advanced and if I may use another analogy you're like the computer expert trying to explain things to someone who has never used a computer before and has fear and discomfort about doing so. I can see how it must be frustrating for you, although you haven't expressed any frustration whatsoever. I appreciate what your saying and it has helped me a great deal but this may not be the case for others. We need it to be simpler and more basic. But, again, thank you.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited May 2006
* Gentlemen:
I would draw your attention yet again, to my request in post #65....
I think more of what you have said here I can agree with, though the basic idea of this distinction between concentration and mindfulness is still something I differ on. It occurs to me we could be having some of this distinction because of the ways in which we translate the words (and of course, the ways in which it is taught), which, in English as concentration and mindfulness, appear at first to suggest two differing cognitive modes almost like doing two different kinds of work, or like the difference between frying and boiling for example, when in the larger context of the eightfold path it feels to me that the Buddha didn't intend this distinction. To me Sati is bringing the mind back (literally recollecting it) and Samadhi is the fulfillment of that, or the full recollectedness, unification, or having brought into full self-accordance, concentration (in the sense of undiluted, centered) so there is a seamlessness and it is less a distinction between kinds or objects (mindfulness of this or that kind) than it is a distinction of degree or completeness. Like I said Samadhi is complete Sati or Sati in its fullness of development.
"One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness." (and so on with other path factors) As in MN 117 quoted above, for example, this is mindfulness brought into context of its basic meaning of bringing the aspirant into accord with the path, or recollecting oneself to the path (and of course the goal), which I am not so certain can be described so easily as "just" being attentive to what is present. In that sense we are almost opposite in interpretation, because I see it as more colored by the sense of the word's other meaning that of memory or recollection, meaning the bringing to mind of something that is not present (since what is present is the mind's unwholesome habit of samsara), which to me gives sati the flavor of keeping the mind in check (in accordance with the path) despite what is present, rather than merely bringing the mind into accord with what is present (arisen).
Finally, a note about technicalness. I understand we are trying to be precise and clear in our meanings, but I don't want to give the impression that meditation is anything other than something that can only be achieved through intuitive effort. It's not, as I have said elsewhere, a paint-by-numbers picture, a time-life do-it-yourself book, or a betty crocker recipe, it's something that can only be communicated by approximations, analogies, suggestions. It's something that has to be grasped on an intuitive level rather than as a matter of a technique or a technology that is easily explained and grasped on an outward level like so many other practical matters (like, to get this certain result, all you have to do is dial the adjustment on this tool to .575, for example).
To Elohim,
thanks for the links to the talks by Ven. Thanissaro. Thanissaro seems to me to have a pretty balanced view and I look forward to seeing what he has to say on these things.
You might be right about me mixing things up, but concentration to me means mindfulness of a fixed object, where as mindfulness itself is just being attentive to what is present. Sure, concentration isn't possible without mindfulness, but I feel there is a distinction between mindfulness in every day activities and mindfulness of certain activities.
I'm not sure whether I am completely correct on the technicalites, but I am more speaking from my own instruction & experience in Vippasana and general meditation.
Basically, I feel that ro10 is resisting or trying to ignore the thoughts that he is having in his practice. This makes the practice full of anxiety, and is really not very conducive to concentration. Being mindful of where the mind is going is absolutely essential (imo) in being able to let go. The point here is to become intimately acquanted with the mind and its movements through mindfulness practices. Doing so gives one the ability to be firmly rooted in mindfulness in order to practice the relinquishement necessary for the jhana states.
Thanks for your words. I really am not trying to get too advanced here, I am trying to cut down to the most basic ideas of what mindfulness really is (in my view ). That what I am saying is confusing for anybody I can only apologize for, and probably it's just the manner in which I'm accustomed to expressing things. It could also be that I sometimes disagree with the more conventional ideas or other poster's interpretations that it might seem like I'm trying to bring the level of discussion up a notch to the highly technical. But really my intention is that if someone is having difficulty understanding mindfulness, maybe the introduction of a way of looking at it that nobody has yet mentioned will be helpful. What I am trying to communicate is really basic building blocks of practice, not just advanced notions (to my way of thinking, all of the Buddha's teaching on the four noble truths is Buddhism 101, and the only thing left is putting into sincere and ardent practice). I've tried to come up with analogies and examples of teachings all as ways of approximating the basic orientation to beginning mindfulness that I feel will be helpful.
It occurs to me that some of your comments about not being aware that the dog is leading us speaks moreso to Right View than to Right Mindfulness. Let me try to summarize all my comments in a very simple way. The basic idea I am trying to communicate is that Right Mindfulness is essentially reversal of habit. The mind's habit is to go out and become stirred up by things and happenings, like an excited dog on a leash. Right View is to see this is happening and that it needs correcting and Right Mindfulness is to reverse this habit, to "heed the leash" so to speak. In other words, "Right Heel" (or left heel, as it may be).
The mind's habit is to go out and become stirred up by things and happenings, like an excited dog on a leash. Right View is to see this is happening and that it needs correcting and Right Mindfulness is to reverse this habit, to "heed the leash" so to speak.
Exactly. But people understand things in different ways and sometimes it's really difficult to understand what one is being taught when there are too many details included in the instructions. It's too complicated and involved, Vacch. It becomes confusing.
That's why I used your analogy to explain that mindfulness requires elements of Right View before an attempt can be made to apply it correctly. But I wasn't about to start going on about the application of Right View being a prerequisite for mindfulness blah, blah, blah. Advanced students already understand how The Noble Eightfold Path is applied. But some of us are just getting to know how our minds work for the first time in our lives. It's too difficult to get into the technicalities at this point. It's intimidating, confusing and off putting. Do you know what I mean? It needs to be streamlined and simplified and not over explained or analyzed. At least for Buddhism 101. We can get into the finer points in Buddhism 202 but I think we need to keep it as uncomplicated as possible here. This can't be a scholarly discussion because it does a disservice to beginners. It's not a safe, friendly, welcoming place when things start going over the heads of beginners. I know you're really not trying to confuse anybody. I understand that. But what your saying is confusing to beginners nonetheless. Do you see how that could be? You can stretch the muscles of your understanding in 202, O.K? Let's keep this area for the beginners. Really, please?
Comments
And words can mean different things to different people at the same time too, something I often see in my work as a Mediator e.g to one person "pedantic" may mean something close to "meticulous" and be intended as a form of praise, to another it means something close to "anally retentive" and is therefore a fearful insult, and before you know if the parties are in dispute over what was intended as praise from one to the other. It keeps Mediators in business I suppose. And yes, one can try to define words, but only with other words, which again don't have absolutely fixed meanings, so I wonder if definitions can really tie down the meaning of a word.
Which is partly why I find Elohim's references to the original Pali so interesting. When I read terms in English I come to them with our own cultural and personal assumptions about what the words mean that aren't necessarily shared by the person who used them, and which certainly may not reflect the assumptions that a Pali speaker may have had 2,500 years ago. Learning about the original words and their meanings is a way of opening up my mind to possible meanings and nuances that I would not have perceived "behind" the English word. Thank you Elohim.
And yet, in the final analysis, presumably the Pali words are also "just" words, whose meanings can only ever be approximated but never quite be grasped or tied down, not even by definitions (which consist of other words). Ultimately, I wonder if words as well as teachings are not just a finger pointing at the moon, and we shouldn't mistake the finger for the moon, or the word (Pali, English, Norfolk (we have our own here!) or whatever) for the meaning. Which may - I don't know - be part of what Simon is saying. And which means that it's very useful, even skillful, to learn about the Pali, but doesn't make the Pali is some kind of sanctified version, which of course Elohim wasn't implying either.
Martin.
I'm not really sure what this objection is about, Simon. I understand that what you added to this discussion was that the concept behind 'mindfulness'--as an idea--is not necessarily unique to Buddhism. Jason's position is not different from the position he has consistently adopted on this forum: the focus of his study is the Pali Canon. He posts with humility and self-deprication. What may be perceived as potentially 'elitist' is perhaps the authority with which he is able to articulate and ground his claims about questions, such as 'mindfulness', in specific suttas of the Pali Canon.
I think the logical outcome is nonsense. Perhaps if Jason picked fights and put others down as a result of his learning, that would be one thing. That is not the case for me.
I am not one to bash academic study. I understand the fear of hierarchy and elitism. If it were another member, Simon, I might tend towards your position. In this case, Jason does not claim to be the tender of the fire, he simply sits by its warmth. I appreciate his posts, as I do yours, Simon.
I think critical dialogue is important--we should challenge one another. But let's do it in a way that is respectful rather than hurtful.
One argument may be that as perhaps one of the earliest textual, sacred languages of Buddhism (another is Prakrit), the grammar and syntax has been shaped for and by Buddhism to convey timeless truths and concepts. Isn't that reason enough?
You have made some very good points, and have said some very nice things. From time to time it is good to know where it is that you are doing well, and where it is that you need some improving. Quite often it takes the wisdom of someone else to point both of those things out to you. A different perspective can be a very valuable thing. Simon, I would like to apologize for my initial reaction, and for anything else that I might have unskillfully said before hand.
Sincerely,
Jason
EVERYONE GET YER ARSES OVER HERE FOR A GROUP HUG!
-bf
I shall be reflecting on the last few days as I go to the hospital for some tests today. Maybe Fede and Brigid are right and I am waspish because of my meds.
Bear with me, please.
Love
Thinking of you.
Group hug indeed....
Like I said in that post, sometimes being mindful is taking the time to think about what someone has said to us and why they have said it. Instead of, like I do, immediately letting my "ego" become hurt and responding in kind.
I don't think that any of us out here honestly believe that someone is going to rip into us just for satisfaction, vendetta or just to hurt feelings. I think we all know each other better than that.
All of us will find that we will go through difficult situations and sometimes - our sangha is the only "safe" place we can go to for a sounding board.
Even Buddha dealt with people having anger or dealing with difficulties with deep amounts of compassion. Even those that would rant against him - he simply left them with their rantings.
I firmly believe that our sangha only wishes peace upon it's members. But, sometimes day to day stuff gets in the way.
-bf
A million blessings to you, Simon. Bearing with you will be an honour and a privilege. Funny things happen in the brain after heart incidents and people can do things that are completely out of character. Like my dad. But he was pretty difficult to begin with. lol!
You, on the other hand, are not difficult and it's a testament to your true character that we would notice any change so acutely.
I'm wishing you fabulous results on your tests and a doctor with the same compassion you have shown in your life.
Much, much love, Simon,
Brigid
I don't understand this, so when practicing mindfulness, you're not supposed to have good thoughts, such as compassion thoughts for someone?
Why are you creating so much anxiety for yourself? Just relax... you are so intent on doing the 'Right' thing, that you are not seeming to enjoy Life....its liberty and freedom of Being is passing you by!
Life is a wonderful privilege..It should be spent in tranquil Joy, not constant appraisal!
Chill! Breathe! LET GO!!
I actually believe that generating good thoughts is a form of mindfulness/recollection, a very basic one serving as a beginning to "right thought," aiming to counteract unwholesome thoughts. But we also must keep in mind that "samma" here seems to make "right thoughts" more than just positive thoughts but really the highest of all thoughts, namely, "The logically applied reasoning thoughts, which focus attention to fix verbal determinations in the noble path mind, without desires, are noble right thoughts transcending this world and they are a feature of the path."
See MN 117 ( http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima3/117-mahacattarisaka-e.htm ) :
This sutta is a very interesting one, and has been very useful to me for trying to understand the relationship between path factors. For this question, the important point the sutta brings out is that right view, right endeavor, and right mindfulness "follow each other, turning in a circle" are the key factors (with right view as foremost) in developing any of the other path factors. So, when you are talking about right mindfulness you are talking about recollection, or the actual re-application of the mind to something other than sensual phenomena (our habitual application of mind), and what exactly you do with this depends on what you are re-applying the mind to. I believe TNH here is probably talking about, when he says "mindfulness of the mind" a meditative practice intended for developing "right concentration". So when you are talking about "right thought" try not to be confused by someone who is talking about "right concentration", since, though the path is all connected, and this sutta does call the eightfold path "right concentration with its means and accessories," they really seem to be two different developments (we might even say levels of development).
Does that clarify the idea at all?
in friendliness,
V.
'Supposed to' & 'Not supposed to' does not really apply here. Mindfulness practice does not really cultivate 'supposed to'. 'Supposed-to-mind' clings to one extreme while rejecting & pushing away the other. This creates a hostile environment and unnecessary struggle. What mindfulness practice is about is simply seeing what is without becoming involved in the judging what is. As TNH said, we acknowledge the thought, whether it is wholesome or unwholesome. If a judgement of that thought arises, we notice the judgement as well. It is important not to identify with the judging or the thought in this practice. Just simply notice. The more involved you are in the thoughts or the judgment (which is just more thought), the heavier the karma you are creating. Developing this is essential to Unbinding. It is the active development of dispassion and is a key to developing equanimity (upekkha). It allows us to become keenly aware of our thoughts and the whole mental process. By actively trying to force good thoughts, we make it impossible to see when and how these thoughts arise. Allowing all thoughts to arise as the will, we are creating the basis for insight. By not allowing them, we are not creating a basis for insight.
Now, with all that said, we don't suddenly become morally ambiguous. We still recognize that skillful/wholesome thoughts are preferable to unskillful/unwholesome thoughts, but when we are doing this specific form of meditation we just watch, rather than actively judging and controlling. By simply being aware of unwholesome thoughts, we are able to let go of them as they arise rather than creating a mental drama around them. We also do the same with skillful thoughts and let them go without creating a mental drama around them. Our raised level of awareness created by this sort of meditation then makes it easier to act skillfully/wholesomely without the clinging which is the source of distress.
Anyway, here is an excerpt from an Access To Insight article:
The words "in & of themselves" are the key here. Nothing to add or subtract.
Hope this helps
_/\_
metta
Hope this helps
There is a thread titled 'Mindfulness of Breathing' on Forum Buddhism 202 upon which one could expand.... Similarly, perhaps you might like to just open a thread there on Mindfulness alone.
I would be grateful therefore if you would, on this forum, keep your posts short, simple and easily digested. This is not the place for great and verbose expansion.
Thank you both so much. *
Andy
Alright, Fine!:grumble: But Vaccha started it.
Anyway, let's try again, shall we?
ro10,
Basically, What Ven. TNH is saying is specific to mindfulness practice. In mindfulness practice we do not actively value judge our thoughts. If we have a bad thought (lust, anger, etc), we don't start mentally berating ourselves. If we have a good thought (compassion, joy) then we don't start celebrating. We just notice the thought and whatever the mind says about it (good, bad, nuetral), and we move on.
TNH said this:
It's not that you get rid of the distinction. You just don't let your mind be dominated by this distinction.
Sure, good thoughts are preferable, but we don't get lost in our preferences, clinging to the good and repressing the bad. The key here is not to get too personally involved (dominated) by this sort of value judgement. We are cultivating awareness here, not value judgement. We are also working on letting go of clinging to our thoughts & feelings.
FYI, there are other methods of contemplation and meditation which intentionally cultivate compassion and Wisdom. I would be happy to provide you with some links, if you would like.
Hope this was a little more basic.
_/\_
metta
Good post, Andy. Going back to the beginning is always a good thing to do, no matter how far along the path you are.
Remember, we don't practice mindfulness so that we can perform better in our daily lives. We practice mindfulness because we usually go through life on auto-pilot, distracted, not paying attention to this moment right now. We practice mindfulness because we want to wake up and pay attention.
But it is causing you distress because you have given the practice of mindfulness a task to complete. That task is to help you perform better in life. Don't assign a task for mindfulness to complete. Don't give it a job to do. It's only a tool to help you do a job. Your job is to follow The Noble Eightfold Path. But right now you're not sure how to use the tool of mindfulness. That's O.K. Just spending time in the workshop itself is helpful. You don't have to pick up any of the tools yet. Just look around and get acquainted. Take in the smells, the sounds, the sights. You don't have to do anything at all right now. Just being in the workshop is good enough because it's the right place to be and one day you'll be able to pick up the tools and start using them. But not today. Today all you have to do is hang out.
Your friend,
Brigid
My point was actually very simple, and I can sum it up quite briefly: consistent establishment of good thoughts and the expulsion of unwholesome thoughts is indeed an application of "right mindfulness".
V.
Thanks Vaccha....More succinct and to the point, you couldn't hope to get - !
Nice one!! :thumbsup:
++To live in the moment there is past and future. We are now in the present moment as a result of those things that happened in the past. We can heal those things from the past that we are still carrying around in the present moment. Example- I discover that I am carrying guilt and saddness toward the way I treated my Grandmother. I feel it now, in this moment. I can look deeply to my Grandmother in me, of course she is there, becuse I am a continuation of her through my parents. I can say, " Grandmother I am so sorry for the way I behaved and spoke to you", and I can see her smiling at me with compassion. I can thereby, transform the past to go forth with right action. To address the future I would say that those actions that we do today mindfully in full awareness impact future events. That is why daily practice is necessary, to ensure that I stay on the path today so I may again be fully present in all my affairs.
Mindfullness does not suggest repression of thoughts of the past or future, but to accept and see all thoughts for their place in the ultimate reality.
++If mindfullness came naturally, there would be no need to practice.
++ In his work "Cutting Through spiritual Materialism", Chogyam Trungpa highlights a common pitfall that he calls "spiritual materialism".
"The universal human tendency, he shows, is to see spirituality as a process of self improvement- the impulse to develop and refine the ego when the ego is essentially empty. "The problem is that the ego can convert any thing to it's own use even spirituality. His teaching points to a way which serve to wake us up from this trick we can play on ourselves and involves letting go of the self rather than working to improve it."
THN said further that there is no self, as in an entity that is seperate from the whole of the cosmos.
Just sharing a few thoughts. Please add your own.
"And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness...
"This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference."
— DN 22
Abandoning the wrong factors of the path
"One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right resolve: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right speech: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right action: This is one's right mindfulness...
"One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness..."
— MN 117
I think TNH's discourse is definitely specific to certain types of mindfulness cultivation. I also think that the point he was making about not turning this into a battle is absolutely essential to actually being able to establish good thoughts and to properly expel bad thoughts without repressing them.
In actuality, expelling these negative thoughts requires a level of detachment which allows the practitioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in. It is like weeding your garden. If you just pull top of the weed off, it will grow right back. If you make sure you pull it out by the roots, then it will not.
And establishing good thoughts requires a level of detachment which allows the practitioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in. In this way, one can nurture them from the roots up.
If the practitioner is persistent in this sort of practice, their own garden of mind will be full of skillful and wholesome qualities, and they will not be afflicted by negative thoughts.
Happy gardening!!
_/\_
metta
When you speak here of "a level of detachment which allows the practicioner to see what these thoughts are rooted in" You are speaking of part of what I was trying to say earlier, before we were told we were getting too advanced. That is, Right View (see what these thoughts are rooted in) and Right Mindfulness (level of detachment) work together.
And you didn't forget "Right Effort" ("if the practicioner is persistent"), which is the third of factors Right View and Right Mindfulness which are said at MN 117 to turn round each other in establishing the path factors. Maybe it is good to think of them as like the engine at the core of the path, driving it, with, of course, Right View being the forerunner (knowing what is connected with the goal from what is unconnected with the goal).
in friendliness,
V.
~Andy
let me say this ... ( and i will pm you later. )
we CAN be insecure, fretful or worry if we are doing dishes and thinking about what is goin to happen in the future.. ( the next hour, the next day etc. )
we can be regretful, down on ourselves, negative or stressed if we are doing the dishes
and thinking about what we have done in the past.. ( 5 min. ago, last week month etc. )
that is ONE GOOD REASON.. to be mindful and do the dishes with our thoughts in the present.
i tryed to keep this short and simple.. i will PM you later.
iv read some good material about mindfulness and will keep it simple in explaination.
Thich Naht Han .. has some easy read / easy learning... on the subject..
I too have been struggling with this mindfulness thing...
I happened to be browsing a discount book store and came across this book, "Mindfulness with Breathing". It starts off with just what you said, breath.
It is written by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, translated from Thai by Santikaro Bhikku.
So far I am really enjoying it and it;s very helpful.
It's about "developing life". According to the author, we lack the 'secret' and understanding of the extent to which life can truly be developed. The main cause being dukkha, or stress, conflict, agitation (samsara). The author goes on explain the 4 aspects of developing life.
If you or anyone, would like more information, PM me...as I do not wish to ramble and bore anyone...
Good Luck...:)
I don't mean this in a bad way - but it's the quickest way to cut to the chase...
There is a difference between being Mindful and being borderline OCD.
Not that you are! I'm just saying that there is a way to be mindful of what you are doing without taking it to an extreme.
Being mindful of what we are doing at the moment - means being aware of the moment. When being mindful doing dishes - we should be aware of what we're doing - not putting so much mental thought into it that someone would think we're trying to clean the dishes with telepathy.
When interacting with loved ones - do we concentrate so hard on what we're moving, what we're touching, what they're saying that we lose the moment of the actual interaction?
One side of the path - over studying everything you're doing too much that you can't see the beauty or happiness of the moment.
Middle Path - being aware and mindful of what is happening with you and around you.
Other side of the path - being oblivious as to what is going on around you.
Now... there are exercises that we can practice - which is exactly that... "practice". It's something we do at a specific time to hone "mindfulness" in us. But at those times, it's just practice.
Any of that make sense?
-bf
Take it slow. It won't happen overnight.
Mindfulness isn't so much about forcing where your awareness goes. It is simply being with your awareness wherever it goes. If your mind thinks it needs to be aware of the movement, then just notice that the mind wants to be aware of the movement. If the mind rebels and starts getting self conscious & insecure, just notice that the mind is getting self conscious & insecure. If your mind is thinking that it hates itself, well then, just notice that. Be with it. Just notice, no forcing. Once you are just noticing, then let go.
You are mixing up concentration and mindfulness. Mindfulnees is being with whatever is there. Concentration is being able to put aside all distractions. That comes with time. The more important part is to just be with whatever is there with judging and without creating a new mental dialogue. If judging or mental dialogue happens, just notice, don't feel you've failed. If you feel you've failed just notice that. Once your mind is just noticing, then let go. Perhaps you should view concentration more as letting go of extraneous objects rather than trying to grasp at a single object. The former approach builds tranquility, the latter builds tension. Try easing up the tension a bit.
Here's an article that might help you on the issue of mindfulness of the breath, since you seem to be very concerned about being able to concentrate on a fixed object:
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed087.htm
There is more to the article that you might find helpful as well.
Hope this helps.
_/\_
metta
The attitude is most important. To practise anapanasati, one brings the attention onto one inhalation, being mindful from the beginning to the end."
So, the venerable teacher there is saying that indeed mindfulness is about bringing the attention to a fixation (forcing where your awareness goes), as a matter of practice. He is not here talking about just letting the mind wander and being mindful of that wandering (one translation of samsara is wandering), sort of like, forgive the analogy, letting the dog walk you around the park instead of the other way around. Mindfulness is more like the leash, and you are the master, not the dog. In other words, mindfulness means the dog goes where you choose for it to go, not you go where the dog chooses for you to go. Samadhi then would be, at risk of extending the analogy too far, where there is totally no conflict of interest between the dog and you, the dog and you are as if sharing one mind.
This brings up the second point that I wanted to try to clarify, and this is intimately related, is that you seem to want to divide mindfulness from concentration as if they are two easily distinct things or areas of practice. In the passage I quoted above, the venerable teacher sees that mindfulness is in fact all bound up with the aim of concentration (jhanas/relinquishments). In this regard, mindfulness (recollection/the application of the mind to a fixation) is the application of the mind towards development of concentration. Fully developed mindfulness is basically the same as concentration (unification, undilutedness, jhana process of relinquishment), one leads "naturally" (seamlessly, we could say) into the other. Sati as attention could even be called concentrating (in process of development) vs. Samadhi as concentration (fulfillment). And this is so much why Sati is so closely discussed with Samadhi and jhanas, and why Sati is grouped in the "concentration" group of the path factors and so intimate not only formally (it is directly prior) but in process.
To end in concord rather than disagreement, where I definitely agree with you is that it is a good thing to see concentration (and, consequently, I would say also mindfulness) as a relinquishment practice. To go back to the dog/leash analogy, the normal habit of mind is to be so totally interested in phenomena that it is always going here or there, leading the leash and pulling the master to and fro. Mindfulness is leash training, to train the dog to, as much as possible, relinquish the demands of phenomena and be heedful (mindful) of the leash and the master, and not go running to and fro like a wild animal as is its natural habit. As a matter of practical concern, I would note that here the "leash" I don't know if we want to call it mindfulness or Dhamma or what we want to call it, but I must say that as mindfulness develops it is an almost tangible presence inside like the pulling of the leash, when attended to you are more and more in accord with it (the meaning of samma is "in accordance with"), and it is felt initially as the pleasure of jhana. It can be thought of in many analogies, but one of the nicest is that of a stream (not to be confused with the analogy of the stream/flood of sensuality)...when you are near it (developing Sati) you can hear it calling with its pleasant sound and when you are in it (with more fully developed Sati) you can feel with your entire body its cooling (Nibbana is often likened to a cooling) water as it prompts you with its current to the goal.
To Andy I wanted to offer, as a fellow student, encouragement and friendliness. I can see that you have some aspiration to tread the path, but like many of us you are still wrestling with the many obstacles which get in the way, such as worry, doubt, restlessness, and diluted persistence. If I had any advice to you, I would say that five minutes a day is a beginning, but it is really not enough. You should gradually (but not to slowly) build upon the time you spend meditating in earnest to a minimum, as a lay disciple, of 30 minutes to an hour daily. And, as an experiment, you might try rethinking your approach to sitting meditation mindfulness in the following way. Instead of just focusing on the breath or counting the breath, try to meditate relinquishing everything that comes your way, but use the breath as a reminder to do so. Because the breath is a constant in our lives (not that it doesn't change, it is just that when you are alive, you are breathing), it is the one of the more readily available reminders or foundations of our practice of recollection. The point is to calm the mind to unification, to train yourself not to "go out to phenomena" like that dog on the leash who wants to lead the master here and there in pursuit of all the great smells. Because the breath is more or less a constant, it provides a steady foundation for that recollection, like a post you can lean on to relax when you are exhausted from running, or, as I have said elsewhere, like a sturdy wall you can bounce a ball off of (to return it to yourself and practice "catching the ball"). As I said before, as you develop this ability to keep the mind centered you can feel it almost tangibly in yourself like a stream you can hear from a distance or feel its current when you are "in it" or a place you can go to just by thinking about it, and that is the point where you can more successfully begin to take the learning from the formal sitting meditation into more everyday things like chores, because you can remain recollected of this steadiness of mind once you are familiar with it. Instead of being self-conscious, you are happy because you have this secret source of joy inside you that you can access any time (and it is actually good for your practice to develop this access). It is good to develop it in more and more situations, because the more you are able to maintain it in any kind of encounter, the less likely you are that unhealthy mental activities will arise in difficult situations.
Well, I hope any of my thoughts have been useful to you.
in friendliness,
V.
I'm not sure whether I am completely correct on the technicalites, but I am more speaking from my own instruction & experience in Vippasana and general meditation.
Basically, I feel that ro10 is resisting or trying to ignore the thoughts that he is having in his practice. This makes the practice full of anxiety, and is really not very conducive to concentration. Being mindful of where the mind is going is absolutely essential (imo) in being able to let go. The point here is to become intimately acquanted with the mind and its movements through mindfulness practices. Doing so gives one the ability to be firmly rooted in mindfulness in order to practice the relinquishement necessary for the jhana states.
Sorry for the technicalness everybody.
_/\_
metta
For those of you interested in the practice of mindfulness, these three talks by Thanissaro Bhikkhu might prove to be of some value:
Appropriate Attention
The Breath: A Vehicle for Liberation (Part 1)
The Breath: A Vehicle for Liberation (Part 2)
Sincerely,
Jason
I think this is still too advanced for some of us beginners. I know this is probably frustrating for you but for some of us things have to be explained in simpler ways.
When we're at the very beginning of practicing Buddhism some of us are not even aware that the dog is leading us. So in order to begin being mindful we first have to understand and be aware that the dog, our mind, is leading us all over the place and is very unruly. This takes time and some of us are still at this stage.
Only when we are aware that we are being pulled all over the place by our minds are we beginning to be mindful. If we're just beginning to see how this works we can't be expected to jump ahead and understand the finer points and distinctions between mindfulness and concentration and so forth. It's just confusing. Different minds learn in different ways and at different speeds, especially when there's an emotional block in place that prevents us from coming to an understanding of something that seems simple to others but baffling to ourselves.
You're very advanced and if I may use another analogy you're like the computer expert trying to explain things to someone who has never used a computer before and has fear and discomfort about doing so. I can see how it must be frustrating for you, although you haven't expressed any frustration whatsoever. I appreciate what your saying and it has helped me a great deal but this may not be the case for others. We need it to be simpler and more basic. But, again, thank you.
I would draw your attention yet again, to my request in post #65....
Thank you. *
I think more of what you have said here I can agree with, though the basic idea of this distinction between concentration and mindfulness is still something I differ on. It occurs to me we could be having some of this distinction because of the ways in which we translate the words (and of course, the ways in which it is taught), which, in English as concentration and mindfulness, appear at first to suggest two differing cognitive modes almost like doing two different kinds of work, or like the difference between frying and boiling for example, when in the larger context of the eightfold path it feels to me that the Buddha didn't intend this distinction. To me Sati is bringing the mind back (literally recollecting it) and Samadhi is the fulfillment of that, or the full recollectedness, unification, or having brought into full self-accordance, concentration (in the sense of undiluted, centered) so there is a seamlessness and it is less a distinction between kinds or objects (mindfulness of this or that kind) than it is a distinction of degree or completeness. Like I said Samadhi is complete Sati or Sati in its fullness of development.
"One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness." (and so on with other path factors) As in MN 117 quoted above, for example, this is mindfulness brought into context of its basic meaning of bringing the aspirant into accord with the path, or recollecting oneself to the path (and of course the goal), which I am not so certain can be described so easily as "just" being attentive to what is present. In that sense we are almost opposite in interpretation, because I see it as more colored by the sense of the word's other meaning that of memory or recollection, meaning the bringing to mind of something that is not present (since what is present is the mind's unwholesome habit of samsara), which to me gives sati the flavor of keeping the mind in check (in accordance with the path) despite what is present, rather than merely bringing the mind into accord with what is present (arisen).
Finally, a note about technicalness. I understand we are trying to be precise and clear in our meanings, but I don't want to give the impression that meditation is anything other than something that can only be achieved through intuitive effort. It's not, as I have said elsewhere, a paint-by-numbers picture, a time-life do-it-yourself book, or a betty crocker recipe, it's something that can only be communicated by approximations, analogies, suggestions. It's something that has to be grasped on an intuitive level rather than as a matter of a technique or a technology that is easily explained and grasped on an outward level like so many other practical matters (like, to get this certain result, all you have to do is dial the adjustment on this tool to .575, for example).
To Elohim,
thanks for the links to the talks by Ven. Thanissaro. Thanissaro seems to me to have a pretty balanced view and I look forward to seeing what he has to say on these things.
in friendliness,
V.
Thanks for your words. I really am not trying to get too advanced here, I am trying to cut down to the most basic ideas of what mindfulness really is (in my view
It occurs to me that some of your comments about not being aware that the dog is leading us speaks moreso to Right View than to Right Mindfulness. Let me try to summarize all my comments in a very simple way. The basic idea I am trying to communicate is that Right Mindfulness is essentially reversal of habit. The mind's habit is to go out and become stirred up by things and happenings, like an excited dog on a leash. Right View is to see this is happening and that it needs correcting and Right Mindfulness is to reverse this habit, to "heed the leash" so to speak. In other words, "Right Heel"
in friendliness,
V.
Exactly. But people understand things in different ways and sometimes it's really difficult to understand what one is being taught when there are too many details included in the instructions. It's too complicated and involved, Vacch. It becomes confusing.
That's why I used your analogy to explain that mindfulness requires elements of Right View before an attempt can be made to apply it correctly. But I wasn't about to start going on about the application of Right View being a prerequisite for mindfulness blah, blah, blah. Advanced students already understand how The Noble Eightfold Path is applied. But some of us are just getting to know how our minds work for the first time in our lives. It's too difficult to get into the technicalities at this point. It's intimidating, confusing and off putting. Do you know what I mean? It needs to be streamlined and simplified and not over explained or analyzed. At least for Buddhism 101. We can get into the finer points in Buddhism 202 but I think we need to keep it as uncomplicated as possible here. This can't be a scholarly discussion because it does a disservice to beginners. It's not a safe, friendly, welcoming place when things start going over the heads of beginners. I know you're really not trying to confuse anybody. I understand that. But what your saying is confusing to beginners nonetheless. Do you see how that could be? You can stretch the muscles of your understanding in 202, O.K? Let's keep this area for the beginners. Really, please?