My practice has flourished because of this monk..I've never, ever heard a monk explaining the Suttas and how to meditate with such level of details..even the well known teachers just parrot the Buddha"s teachings. Cant thank him the revered monk enough. ❤❤❤❤
Bhante -this is the most enlightening discourse. Absolutely clear. Absolutely makes complete sense. Gets right to the nitty gritty. I am so very very grateful. 🙏🏽
23:24 "True peace of meditation, that still the sankhara correctly is the removal of the ownership of sankhara, not removal of sankhara, Thats why for correct meditation, you need the Right View, you need to understand where the problem is, the ownership" - Ven. Nanamoli Thero
Interestingly, the words sankhāra, ahamkāra, mamakāra, and karma are all derived from the root kr which denotes doing & making--i.e activity. I think in one of your other talks on non-activity, you mention how activity is required for the maintenance of our being. The body discerned peripherally can be a cause of anxiety because there's nothing there that you can truly control and appropriate in order to prop up your being.
An 3.32: "...Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu thinks thus: ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, the stilling of all activities, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbāna.’ In this way, Ānanda, a bhikkhu could obtain such a state of composure that he would have no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding this conscious body; he would have no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding all external objects; and he would enter and dwell in that liberation of mind, liberation by understanding, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it..." An3.33: "..Therefore, Sāriputta, you should train yourselves thus: (1) ‘There will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding this conscious body; (2) there will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding all external objects; and (3) we will enter and dwell in that liberation of mind, liberation by understanding, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it.’ It is in this way, Sāriputta, that you should train yourselves. “When, Sāriputta, a bhikkhu has no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding this conscious body; when he has no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding all external objects; and when he enters and dwells in that liberation of mind, liberation by understanding, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it, he is called a bhikkhu who has cut off craving, stripped off the fetter, and, by completely breaking through conceit, has made an end of suffering..."
This!!!!! Been thinking of sankaras as ‘mental formations’ but never seemed to fully connect with it. Thinking of it as ‘activity’ is like switching the light on. All of a sudden it’s so clear. Thank you.
An arahant still does things by body, speech & mind, but has fully ceased being the false protagonist in the deluded mental narrative that is the hallmark of self-actualizing entities and is the prime mover of consequential action. An arahant is operating on empty tank fumes which are about to run out. The doer is fully gone in the arahant, not like a squirrel whose self-actualizing capacity is simply in an arrested temporary stasis but is still functional just dormant like that of a new born human.
So the sense of ( I )ownership comes From craving for or against things because if I was indifferent towards sight sound taste touch smell I wouldn't care because I wouldn't take them as for me. Also before the Buddha died he went through all the jhanas and immaterials and it seems like he successfully was shutting aspect of physical and mental phenomena off the turning them back on. Like an expert
You speak of MN44 and say that there is no "I am" in the first Jhana. I only find a passage about the "cessation of perception and feeling" that matches your description. How is that to be understood? You further call the First Jhana "non-activity", yet I cannot find anything in the Suttas that indicates that. Is the translation of Bhikkhu Bodhi unsuitable?
1. Yes, I often quote MN 44, but in this context it is more accurate to refer to SN 28.1 which uses the same wording but talks specifically about the First jhana: “Reverend, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, I entered and remained in the first jhana, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while thinking and pondering. But it didn’t occur to me: ‘I am entering the first jhana’ or ‘I have entered the first jhana’ or ‘I am emerging from the first jhana’.” Goes without saying that there is "no 'I am'" only in jhana that has been developed on the basis of the Right view. (how jhana leads to cessation of "I am" and personality see MN 64) 2. That's my practical description of jhana, I don't think you'll find the Sutta using those specific terms.
@@HillsideHermitage Thank you. Does Ananda not raise the point in SN 28.1 that there is no 'I am' in Sariputtas first Jhana because his taints have long been destroyed? Further, it seems that in MN 64, the practitioner first enters the first Jhana (maybe without Right View), and with that as a basis, he starts discerning the 5 aggregates Rightly? So would it be more correct to say that "Right Samadhi" is without 'I am' instead of "overall Samadhi" (as you sometimes say that a Puthijjana can attain Jhana without Right View)? And does that 'I am' refer to the conceit/appropriation of the view point or just to a subset of activities? As you explained in other videos, the ownership of thinking and breathing is only renounced in subsequent Jhanas. This seems to imply that the 'I am' is "gradually" renounced?
-Yes. And his taints of "I am" were destroyed by abiding in that which is the opposite of "I am" and "mine", namely - first jhana or higher: “I say that the complete destruction of the taints DEPENDS on the first jhana... or second jhana... or third... etc." - AN 9.36 That doesn't mean that the taints will be instantly destroyed upon entering the jhana, because although there is no sense of "I am" taking the center of the stage of one's experience (as it is in a day to day life), the UNDERLYING TENDENCIES for "I am" (I-making and mine-making) are still there (meaning, sense of "I am" CAN return). That's why the Buddha encourages monks to abide in jhana diligently while regarding everything there as misery, dart, debt etc. until their mind turns away from it and all underlying tendencies have been destroyed. - No, because the Sutta MN 64 says that a Noble disciple is the one who understands the path on how to escape the five lower fetters. Then goes on describing that path (i.e. jhanas). Thus, unless one first understands what the path is (i.e. has the Right view), it will not be possible for him to follow it. - Right samadhi is the samadhi of the Right view. Until that samadhi is developed to the level of at least the First jhana, there will be a sense of I-am involved in it, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means it's not complete.
Dear Ajhan I would appreciate if you make attention to following verses, common in all 4 Sathipattana. I am experiencing, the ajjhattaṃ and bahiddhā7 is 'PATIGA SAMPASSA' and samudayadhammānupassī is 'ADI VACHANA SAMPASSA' . I feel the English translation "he dwells observing body in body externally, or internally" etc. means that. Some translation says ajjhattaṃ, bahiddhā7as " my body and others body" which sounds not correct. Can you please elaborate this in another season? It will be useful because Buddha said the Sathipattana is the one and only way for finding liberation. # Iti6 ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, bahiddhā7 vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, samudayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, vayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, samudayavayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, ‘ # English translation Thus6 he dwells observing body in body internally, or he dwells observing body in body externally, or he dwells observing body in body both internally and externally.7 Thus he dwells observing the phenomenon of arising in the body, thus he dwells observing the phenomenon of passing away in the body, thus he dwells observing the phenomenon of arising and passing away in the body.
This is a good site to listen to deep Dhamma. We can use two phrases to define Sankhara : 1) volitional activities or 2) mental formation. Both are correct. May be combining these two may be the best. I.e., Sankhara are volitional activities in mind. In that way we can think of sankharas as cetana driven activities in the mind. Why this way is better? We all know any activity happening in mind is not real and they are empty and they have no intrinsic value. Hence, this definition with other relevant Dhamma can be used to realize that Sabbe Sankhara anicca.
Activity in the mind is equally real. Nothing is experienced outside of the body and that pleasure you assume to be in sense objects is not from the object it's felt and perceived on the level of the mind. I actualized that principal through restraining the out pours of I'll will. I realized I'll will was my resistance to my senses not the actual person I assumed it be from. On that level I could never be truly mad at something or someone external. I was mad at these aggregates. Because of that clarification whenever it manifest I don't ignore but it's not worth engaging period.
Venerable, "letting go" of ownership of the sankharas also seems like a sankhara, doesn't it? It seems like another form of intention, by "willing" or "understanding" thus "letting go" of ownership. Perhaps, it is an intention informed by wisdom? And so then it is a type of right effort? What are your thoughts on this? Thank you very much.
It's an intention informed by dispassion and disenchantment, that was sufficiently developed beforehand. It's the intention of the Noble Eightfold Path, not you.
@@HillsideHermitage That makes sense. In a way, is the Path the moving away from sankharas informed by ignorance toward those informed by the wisdom of dispassion and disenchantment? Thanks again.
Thinking and pondering are not required for speech. Truly, I say this, not as a conception, but as a witnessing of how it has been. It is possible to witness the body speak and not partake in conceptual thought.
Sir, elements of the body, such as Exhaustion, sleep deprivation, tiredness, lethargic, flu, one must recognize the possibility that if an individual was couldn’t get the rest, he will suffer. Thus when one is sleep deprived, exhausted, sick, let the body be exhausted, don’t give into them and continue on. Do I get it right?
question - if going into solitude gives you a lot of pain, is it still recommendable? should it just be endured until it goes away or will something more gradual be required? Thanks
You need to fulfil ALL prior requirements of the Gradual Training before you should go into heavy solitude. Those requirements are: unshakeable virtue, seeing the danger in the slightest fault, moderation in eating, wakefulness, being able to endure feelings without acting out of them.
Very good explanation and very deep thorough analysis of sankharas. Thanks allot. I would love to hear a more in detail practical method of letting go of that ownership to sankharas especially regarding the bodily variant, kaya sankhara i.e unpleasant sensations which mind has grasped so bounded too. Is there any way to explain more about how the process of burning off / purifying of these sankharas? which meditation is more ideal? Thanks
Theinngu 32, an organisation in Myanmar, under the authority of the arahat Sayadaw U Sandima teaches this through cittanupassana and sitting long hours without moving but also being relaxed. He uses many trained guides to help and they have great success.
Practically, could you say that sankharas are that which make/pressure you to act by body, speech or mind? Are they the things, that if not understood as not self, pressure you to do and thus be? And by things I mean a mental constellation of phenomena that aren’t as defined and separately dissectable, that seem to be there by themselves, such as the body being there, so senses are there, so feelings on account of the senses are there, so intentions are there, thoughts are there, pressure is there - all these background things behind both your current, and in fact, any possible action… And the calming is actually the understanding of the nature of these background phenomena, which isn’t dependent on your views about them, or your thoughts, or whether you are attending to them directly, that they manifest and cease and endure while changing, on their own, despite you? Sorry for the ramble, I think it’s getting clearer for me but it’s difficulty to be certain I’m recognising the right things from my own experience and your teaching of what you’ve discerned…
No, avijja is what pressures you to act. Avijja is the reason that action implies control/ownership. Avijja paccaya sankhara. But, practically speaking, your reasoning is not too far off it, so as long as you calm yourself through enduring of the pressure to act (but not acting), things will fall in place rightly.
@@HillsideHermitage Thank you very much. ‘Avijja is the reason action implies control/ownership” is a lightbulb moment. I’ve always found of all terms Dukkha the hardest to see and understand, but the more I’m understanding and recognising Anicca the more I’m recognising Dukkha as the non-controllability. Ignorant of this uncontrollability, one tries to control, hence the action and the being - that is then subject to danger/cessation/death.. like being thwarted, with this sense of wrongness because you’re acting blindly based on an assumption that is wrong…
My practice has flourished because of this monk..I've never, ever heard a monk explaining the Suttas and how to meditate with such level of details..even the well known teachers just parrot the Buddha"s teachings. Cant thank him the revered monk enough. ❤❤❤❤
Agree …it adds another very important level to the practice. Am very grateful.
Ditto. Amazing.
Totally agreed with you.
🙏🙏🙏
Bhante -this is the most enlightening discourse. Absolutely clear. Absolutely makes complete sense. Gets right to the nitty gritty. I am so very very grateful. 🙏🏽
23:24 "True peace of meditation, that still the sankhara correctly is the removal of the ownership of sankhara, not removal of sankhara, Thats why for correct meditation, you need the Right View, you need to understand where the problem is, the ownership" - Ven. Nanamoli Thero
Interestingly, the words sankhāra, ahamkāra, mamakāra, and karma are all derived from the root kr which denotes doing & making--i.e activity. I think in one of your other talks on non-activity, you mention how activity is required for the maintenance of our being. The body discerned peripherally can be a cause of anxiety because there's nothing there that you can truly control and appropriate in order to prop up your being.
This is so well explaining I feel like I'm using a Dhamma cheat code.
An 3.32:
"...Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu thinks thus: ‘This is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, the stilling of all activities, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbāna.’ In this way, Ānanda, a bhikkhu could obtain such a state of composure that he would have no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding this conscious body; he would have no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding all external objects; and he would enter and dwell in that liberation of mind, liberation by understanding, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it..."
An3.33:
"..Therefore, Sāriputta, you should train yourselves thus: (1) ‘There will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding this conscious body; (2) there will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding all external objects; and (3) we will enter and dwell in that liberation of mind, liberation by understanding, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it.’ It is in this way, Sāriputta, that you should train yourselves.
“When, Sāriputta, a bhikkhu has no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding this conscious body; when he has no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit regarding all external objects; and when he enters and dwells in that liberation of mind, liberation by understanding, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it, he is called a bhikkhu who has cut off craving, stripped off the fetter, and, by completely breaking through conceit, has made an end of suffering..."
This!!!!! Been thinking of sankaras as ‘mental formations’ but never seemed to fully connect with it. Thinking of it as ‘activity’ is like switching the light on. All of a sudden it’s so clear. Thank you.
Thank you ,so observing the impersonal activity leads you towards impersonal being
Very useful in the process of attaining Right Understanding.
An arahant still does things by body, speech & mind, but has fully ceased being the false protagonist in the deluded mental narrative that is the hallmark of self-actualizing entities and is the prime mover of consequential action. An arahant is operating on empty tank fumes which are about to run out. The doer is fully gone in the arahant, not like a squirrel whose self-actualizing capacity is simply in an arrested temporary stasis but is still functional just dormant like that of a new born human.
🙏
Fantastic explanation . Thank you 🙏🧘🏻♂️🔆
🌋Much appreciated !!!
Excellent speechless God bless namo Buddhaya 🙏🌸🌼🌺🌻🙏
For the summarised transcript:
t.me/HillsideHermitage/155
So the sense of ( I )ownership comes From craving for or against things because if I was indifferent towards sight sound taste touch smell I wouldn't care because I wouldn't take them as for me. Also before the Buddha died he went through all the jhanas and immaterials and it seems like he successfully was shutting aspect of physical and mental phenomena off the turning them back on. Like an expert
Void mind, as Ajahn Buddhdasa said, Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu
You speak of MN44 and say that there is no "I am" in the first Jhana. I only find a passage about the "cessation of perception and feeling" that matches your description. How is that to be understood? You further call the First Jhana "non-activity", yet I cannot find anything in the Suttas that indicates that. Is the translation of Bhikkhu Bodhi unsuitable?
1. Yes, I often quote MN 44, but in this context it is more accurate to refer to SN 28.1 which uses the same wording but talks specifically about the First jhana:
“Reverend, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, I entered and remained in the first jhana, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while thinking and pondering. But it didn’t occur to me:
‘I am entering the first jhana’ or ‘I have entered the first jhana’ or ‘I am emerging from the first jhana’.”
Goes without saying that there is "no 'I am'" only in jhana that has been developed on the basis of the Right view. (how jhana leads to cessation of "I am" and personality see MN 64)
2. That's my practical description of jhana, I don't think you'll find the Sutta using those specific terms.
@@HillsideHermitage
Thank you.
Does Ananda not raise the point in SN 28.1 that there is no 'I am' in Sariputtas first Jhana because his taints have long been destroyed?
Further, it seems that in MN 64, the practitioner first enters the first Jhana (maybe without Right View), and with that as a basis, he starts discerning the 5 aggregates Rightly?
So would it be more correct to say that "Right Samadhi" is without 'I am' instead of "overall Samadhi" (as you sometimes say that a Puthijjana can attain Jhana without Right View)? And does that 'I am' refer to the conceit/appropriation of the view point or just to a subset of activities? As you explained in other videos, the ownership of thinking and breathing is only renounced in subsequent Jhanas. This seems to imply that the 'I am' is "gradually" renounced?
-Yes. And his taints of "I am" were destroyed by abiding in that which is the opposite of "I am" and "mine", namely - first jhana or higher: “I say that the complete destruction of the taints DEPENDS on the first jhana... or second jhana... or third... etc." - AN 9.36
That doesn't mean that the taints will be instantly destroyed upon entering the jhana, because although there is no sense of "I am" taking the center of the stage of one's experience (as it is in a day to day life), the UNDERLYING TENDENCIES for "I am" (I-making and mine-making) are still there (meaning, sense of "I am" CAN return). That's why the Buddha encourages monks to abide in jhana diligently while regarding everything there as misery, dart, debt etc. until their mind turns away from it and all underlying tendencies have been destroyed.
- No, because the Sutta MN 64 says that a Noble disciple is the one who understands the path on how to escape the five lower fetters. Then goes on describing that path (i.e. jhanas). Thus, unless one first understands what the path is (i.e. has the Right view), it will not be possible for him to follow it.
- Right samadhi is the samadhi of the Right view. Until that samadhi is developed to the level of at least the First jhana, there will be a sense of I-am involved in it, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means it's not complete.
@@HillsideHermitage Thank you
Words words words😂
🙏🙏🙏
Dear Ajhan
I would appreciate if you make attention to following verses, common in all 4 Sathipattana. I am experiencing, the ajjhattaṃ and bahiddhā7 is 'PATIGA SAMPASSA' and samudayadhammānupassī is
'ADI VACHANA SAMPASSA' . I feel the English translation "he dwells observing body in body externally, or internally" etc. means that. Some translation says ajjhattaṃ, bahiddhā7as " my body and others body" which sounds not correct. Can you please elaborate this in another season?
It will be useful because Buddha said the Sathipattana is the one and only way for finding liberation.
#
Iti6 ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, bahiddhā7 vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, samudayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, vayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, samudayavayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, ‘
#
English translation
Thus6 he dwells observing body in body internally, or he dwells observing body in body externally, or he dwells observing body in body both internally and externally.7 Thus he dwells observing the phenomenon of arising in the body, thus he dwells observing the phenomenon of passing away in the body, thus he dwells observing the phenomenon of arising and passing away in the body.
This is a good site to listen to deep Dhamma.
We can use two phrases to define Sankhara : 1) volitional activities or 2) mental formation. Both are correct. May be combining these two may be the best. I.e., Sankhara are volitional activities in mind.
In that way we can think of sankharas as cetana driven activities in the mind. Why this way is better? We all know any activity happening in mind is not real and they are empty and they have no intrinsic value. Hence, this definition with other relevant Dhamma can be used to realize that Sabbe Sankhara anicca.
Activity in the mind is equally real. Nothing is experienced outside of the body and that pleasure you assume to be in sense objects is not from the object it's felt and perceived on the level of the mind. I actualized that principal through restraining the out pours of I'll will. I realized I'll will was my resistance to my senses not the actual person I assumed it be from. On that level I could never be truly mad at something or someone external. I was mad at these aggregates. Because of that clarification whenever it manifest I don't ignore but it's not worth engaging period.
Venerable, "letting go" of ownership of the sankharas also seems like a sankhara, doesn't it? It seems like another form of intention, by "willing" or "understanding" thus "letting go" of ownership. Perhaps, it is an intention informed by wisdom? And so then it is a type of right effort? What are your thoughts on this? Thank you very much.
It's an intention informed by dispassion and disenchantment, that was sufficiently developed beforehand. It's the intention of the Noble Eightfold Path, not you.
@@HillsideHermitage That makes sense. In a way, is the Path the moving away from sankharas informed by ignorance toward those informed by the wisdom of dispassion and disenchantment? Thanks again.
Great question, and a wonderfully encouraging answer from the Venerable sir.
Since thinking and pondering are required for speech, does this mean someone in the 2nd jhana cannot talk?
Thinking and pondering are not required for speech. Truly, I say this, not as a conception, but as a witnessing of how it has been.
It is possible to witness the body speak and not partake in conceptual thought.
Sir, elements of the body, such as Exhaustion, sleep deprivation, tiredness, lethargic, flu, one must recognize the possibility that if an individual was couldn’t get the rest, he will suffer. Thus when one is sleep deprived, exhausted, sick, let the body be exhausted, don’t give into them and continue on. Do I get it right?
At which jhana can one remove these sankaras or mental formations?
question - if going into solitude gives you a lot of pain, is it still recommendable? should it just be endured until it goes away or will something more gradual be required? Thanks
You need to fulfil ALL prior requirements of the Gradual Training before you should go into heavy solitude.
Those requirements are: unshakeable virtue, seeing the danger in the slightest fault, moderation in eating, wakefulness, being able to endure feelings without acting out of them.
@@HillsideHermitage thank you
Very good explanation and very deep thorough analysis of sankharas. Thanks allot. I would love to hear a more in detail practical method of letting go of that ownership to sankharas especially regarding the bodily variant, kaya sankhara i.e unpleasant sensations which mind has grasped so bounded too. Is there any way to explain more about how the process of burning off / purifying of these sankharas? which meditation is more ideal? Thanks
Theinngu 32, an organisation in Myanmar, under the authority of the arahat Sayadaw U Sandima teaches this through cittanupassana and sitting long hours without moving but also being relaxed. He uses many trained guides to help and they have great success.
Practically, could you say that sankharas are that which make/pressure you to act by body, speech or mind? Are they the things, that if not understood as not self, pressure you to do and thus be? And by things I mean a mental constellation of phenomena that aren’t as defined and separately dissectable, that seem to be there by themselves, such as the body being there, so senses are there, so feelings on account of the senses are there, so intentions are there, thoughts are there, pressure is there - all these background things behind both your current, and in fact, any possible action… And the calming is actually the understanding of the nature of these background phenomena, which isn’t dependent on your views about them, or your thoughts, or whether you are attending to them directly, that they manifest and cease and endure while changing, on their own, despite you? Sorry for the ramble, I think it’s getting clearer for me but it’s difficulty to be certain I’m recognising the right things from my own experience and your teaching of what you’ve discerned…
No, avijja is what pressures you to act. Avijja is the reason that action implies control/ownership.
Avijja paccaya sankhara.
But, practically speaking, your reasoning is not too far off it, so as long as you calm yourself through enduring of the pressure to act (but not acting), things will fall in place rightly.
@@HillsideHermitage Thank you very much. ‘Avijja is the reason action implies control/ownership” is a lightbulb moment. I’ve always found of all terms Dukkha the hardest to see and understand, but the more I’m understanding and recognising Anicca the more I’m recognising Dukkha as the non-controllability. Ignorant of this uncontrollability, one tries to control, hence the action and the being - that is then subject to danger/cessation/death.. like being thwarted, with this sense of wrongness because you’re acting blindly based on an assumption that is wrong…
Don't poke the bear.
Why nor
Fyi If you take sankhara after avijja as activity or formation , that is not the actual meaning .