“But mindfulness, bhikkhus, is needed at all times.”In many suttas one who has mindfulness is described thus:
~ Saṃyutta-Nikāya, Bojjhaṅgasaṃyutta, Sutta 53
“...a bhikkhu is mindful, one who possess the highest mindfulness and discrimination, who remembers and recalls what was done and said long ago.”This description of mindfulness in the Suttas brings out its aspect of memory. In the commentary also mindfulness is explained in relation to memory:
~ e.g. Dīgha-Nikāya, Saṅgīti Sutta
“It is mindfulness (sati) because by means of it they remember (saranti); or it itself remembers; or it is just mere-remembering.”However, mindfulness is categorized in Abhidhamma as a beautiful-mental-factor, which means that while it is always found associated with wholesome consciousness (kusala-citta), it can never be found in association with unwholesome consciousness (akusala-citta). This means that mindfulness is absent when a person performs an unwholesome action like killing, stealing, etc.
~ Dhammasaṅgaṇi-Aṭṭhakathā
But if mindfulness is related to memory how could it be absent when a person performs an unwholesome action? Does this mean that a person who is killing or stealing has no recollection of things he had said or done? This would be absurd since memory is such a fundamental function of our mind that it should be common to all kinds of consciousness regardless of whether they are wholesome or unwholesome. A mental factor (cetasika) that is to perform the function of memory should by right fall into the category of those that are common to all consciousness, i.e. the universals (sabbacittasādhāraṇa). Assuming that the Suttas is correct then either mindfulness had been wrongly classified in the Abhidhamma, or there is something more to memory than just mindfulness.
In fact this problem had been noticed and pointed out in the Abhidhamma Commentary. There it is explained that even though one who performs unwholesome action does remember what he has done, that is not mindfulness at work but merely unwholesome consciousness occurring in the mode of memory (Dhammasaṅgaṇi-Aṭṭhakathā). This commentarial explanation shows that according to the understanding of the teachers of old, while mindfulness involves an aspect of memory, memory is not exclusively a function of mindfulness, and that there is something about unwholesome consciousnesses, some mental-factor (cetasika) associated with them perhaps, which is also involved in the function of memory and thus allows them to occur in the mode of memory. But what is this?
In the Sub-Commentary Dhammasaṅgaṇi-Mūlaṭīkā it is mentioned that unwholesome-aggregates (akusalakkhandha) which are devoid of mindfulness are associated with keen-perception (paṭusaññā) when noting what was done long ago. This point us to another mental-factor related to memory: perception (saññā). What is perception? It is a mental-factor that performs one of two functions. The first is to make a mark of the object that is being perceived by the mind which will serve as a condition for repeated perception later. The second is recognizing the object, which is done by recollecting the mark which have been made. So perception is the mental-factor which marks the distinctive features of an object as well as recognizes the object by means of this mark. It is very much like how a person who is trekking through an unfamiliar territory would leave markings on the path he takes so that he may later retrace his steps by recognizing the path he had taken through the marks he left earlier.
These functions of marking and recognizing carried out by perception lend themselves naturally to the process of memory. Memory, both the short and long-term ones, is possible through the process of an earlier perception making a mark of the distinctive features of an object, and later on, when experiencing the same object again, another perception recollecting the mark which draws out the same features of the object, allowing the perceiver to recognize that he had experienced the object before. Here we can also see that memory is not a mental-factor in itself but is a process that is made possible by the marking and recognizing functions of perception.
And perception or saññā, according to Abhidhamma classification, is a universal mental-factor which is common to all consciousness, wholesome as well as unwholesome. It fits perfectly the requirement for the universal nature of memory. But if perception is responsible for memory why then do both the Suttas and Commentary relate mindfulness to memory? How does mindfulness come into the picture? In what way does it contribute to the process of memory?
The Sutta passage quoted above that describes a bhikkhu who is mindful says that he possess the highest mindfulness and discrimination. Discrimination here means wisdom or clarity of vision. Not only is he mindful but he also possesses this clarity of vision. And as a result of being possessed of the highest kind of mindfulness and clarity he is said to be capable of recollecting what was done and said long ago. This passage taken as a whole suggests that he is not only able to remember but to remember clearly and correctly.
So what this passage is describing is not just an ordinary process of recollection of actions done or words uttered before but an accurate and clear recollection of them. For memory can be either accurate and clear or faulty and hazy, but here in this passage only the former kind is intended. And memory can only be clear and accurate in the presence of mindfulness and clarity of wisdom. Perception alone, in the absence of these two other beautiful-mental-factors is neither clear nor accurate.
And in the case of unwholesome consciousnesses, memory is to a larger or lesser extent distorted under the influence of delusion or moha and the other unwholesome mental-factors (greed, hatred, etc.) with which they are associated. For example a person under the influence of these unwholesome mental-factors would fail to see the fault in his own argument when arguing with another person over a certain problem where each holds a different opinion. Under the influence of delusion he perceived a personal self, its possession of an opinion, and that the self's opinion has been challenged. Under the influence of ego-conceit (māṇa) his pride is hurt and he feels the need to defend the self's position. Under the influence of anger he becomes angry with the other person, and blinded by his anger and hurt pride he seeks out only the fault of the other person's argument, even when there is none, and masking out any fault of his own argument from his subjective view.
Working under such a condition perception will selectively pick up only those features of his experience which are subjected to the influence of these unwholesome mental-factors and mark them. And so what he will remember of this experience is that he was right and the other person was wrong and had offended him when in truth the other person's opinion and argument made much more sense than his and it was he who had taken offense, due to hurt pride, of the other person's effort to calmly explain things to him.
But under the influence of mindfulness and clear wisdom things would work out rather differently. If the mind is working on the conceptual level of reality, as in the above example, mindfulness will first of all restrain the mind from unwholesomeness, preventing the mind from falling under the distorting influence of the unwholesome mental-factors. Mindfulness being a deep and thorough kind of awareness will also give rise to wisdom. And wisdom will lend clarity to the mind enabling it to see the situation clearly and objectively. Any difference in opinion can be ironed out objectively with wisdom and any faulty arguments given up.
But if the mind is working at the level of ultimate reality, like when one is practicing satipaṭṭhāna vipassanā meditation, then mindfulness together with concentration, or one-pointedness (ekaggatā), will hold the mind steady and undistracted on the ultimate realities, the object of contemplation, and not allow the mind to lose sight of them. This will give rise to profound wisdom which will then penetrate the nature of the ultimate realities being contemplated and see their impermanent, suffering, and non-self nature. In both cases, at the conceptual or ultimate level of reality, perception will perceive things clearly and correctly and there will be no distortion in memory.
Therefore when mindfulness is mentioned in relation to memory in both the Suttas and the Commentary, it refers to clear and accurate memory, not memory that is distorted, hazy, and inaccurate. Although it is the two functions of perception that make it possible for there to be memory, it is with the help of deep and thorough awareness of mindfulness and clarity of wisdom that memory is clear and accurate. Here, with regards to mindfulness, wisdom (clarity), perception, and memory, we can point out four possible scenarios for memory:
- Past perception was accompanied by mindfulness and wisdom, so it marked the object correctly. Present perception is not so accompanied, so it cannot recollect the correct mark correctly. The result is a faulty memory.
- Past perception was accompanied by mindfulness and wisdom, so it marked the object correctly. Present perception is also accompanied by them, so it can recollect the correct mark correctly. The result is a perfect memory.
- Past perception was not accompanied by mindfulness and wisdom, so it did not mark the object correctly. Present perception is also not accompanied by them, so it cannot even recollect the faulty mark correctly. The result is a very faulty memory.
- Past perception was not accompanied by mindfulness and wisdom, so it did not mark the object correctly. Present perception is accompanied by them, so it can recollect the faulty mark correctly. The result is a clear recollection of something wrong. e.g. the person in the example above who is later able to recollect the earlier argument he had and realize the error in his opinion. Also some meditators when reporting their experience to their teacher report that they remember that they were experiencing something during their practice but cannot describe clearly what they experienced because at the time of the experience they were not paying meticulous attention to the experience.
This point is important for vipassanā meditators to know. In vipassanā meditation we are trying to go closer and closer to the reality of things as they really are. And to do this the perception that accompanies the meditative mind needs the help of very strong mindfulness and clear-comprehension. To develop the strength of mindfulness and clear-comprehension we need to apply energetic effort to arouse mindfulness and aim it as accurately and clearly as we can onto the vipassanā object (the mental and physical phenomena) at each and every moment of their occurrence. We also need to apply energetic effort to make sure that mindfulness is continuous from moment to moment without missing a single moment of the occurrence of the object. In this way the continuous flow of accurate mindfulness will pick up momentum and strength with each moment of noting the object.
When mindfulness is continuous and strong, concentration will develop which will in turn give rise to clarity of wisdom. Only with the presence of this strong mindfulness and clear comprehension will there be a clear perception of the nature of the objects – a clear perception of the nature of impermanence (anicca-saññā), a clear perception of the nature of suffering (dukkha-saññā), and a clear perception of the nature of non-self (anatta-saññā). And only if there is a clear perception of such nature of the objects contemplated will insight (vipassanā) arise into their nature of impermanence, suffering, and non-self, and thus brings us closer to reality. The clearer the perception of reality is the deeper will be the insight and the closer we will get to the truths underlying our experience of the world. Besides, with a clear perception present during the time of meditation, the meditator will be able to later give an accurate account of his meditation experiences when reporting to his teacher. This will allow the teacher to guide him more effectively.
Let us come back to the Sutta passage describing a bhikkhu who is mindful. The association of mindfulness with wisdom in this passage also means that the mindfulness being described in this passage is not an ordinary beginner's kind of mindfulness but that which is well developed and powerful. Therefore it comes as no surprise that this same description of a bhikkhu who is mindful is used in the several suttas to describe not just mindfulness but also the controlling-faculty-of-mindfulness (satindriya; Saṃyutta-Nikāya, Indriyasaṃyutta, Sutta 9 & 10), and the power-of-mindfulness (satibala; Aṅguttara-Nikāya, Book of the Fives, Sutta 14). In the Abhidhamma it also describes the mindfulness-enlightenment-factor (satisambojjhaṅga; Vibhaṅga, Bojjhaṅgavibhaṅga). These are very highly developed state of powerful mindfulness and are mentioned in these suttas in relation to the noble-disciples (ariyasāvaka). In Sekha Sutta (Majjhima-Nikāya Sutta 53) also the mindfulness possessed by a sekha or a disciple in higher training (i.e. a noble-disciple who is at least a sotāpanna but not yet an arahant) is similarly described. This description of mindfulness also applies to established-mindfulness (upaṭṭhitassati), one of the thoughts of a great man that arose in the mind of Ven. Anuruddha just prior to his attainment of Arahantship (Aṅguttara-Nikāya, Book of the Eights, Sutta 30). And established-mindfulness is just another description of Satipaṭṭhāna or mindfulness that is well established, another highly developed state of powerful mindfulness.
“Or his mindfulness that 'there is the body' is established (sati paccupaṭṭhitā hoti) to the extent necessary for knowledge and mindfulness.”And it is with this kind of strong and powerful mindfulness that one abandons the unwholesome and cultivates the wholesome:
~ Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna Sutta, Dīgha-Nikāya, Sutta 22
“Bhikkhus, just as a king's frontier town has a gatekeeper who is wise, clever, and judicious, who keeps out strangers and admits only acquaintances, in order to guard those who are within and ward off those outside, so also, bhikkhus, a noble disciple is mindful, is one who possess the highest mindfulness and discrimination, who remembers and recalls what was done and said long ago. Bhikkhus, having mindfulness as his gatekeeper a noble disciple abandons the unwholesome and cultivates the wholesome; he abandons the blameworthy and cultivates the blameless; he upkeeps his own purity”According to Milindapañha the “wholesome” here refers to the thirty seven Bodhipakkhiyadhammas, the Dhammas on the side of enlightenment, tranquility (samatha), insight (vipassanā), knowledge (vijjā), and liberation (vimutti):
~ Aṅguttara-Nikāya, Book of the Sevens, Sutta 67
“When mindfulness is arising, great king, it calls to mind states (dhamma) and their opposites – [states] which are wholesome or unwholesome, blameworthy or blameless, inferior or superior, dark or bright – thus 'These are the four satipaṭṭhāna, these are the four right exertions, these are the four bases of success, these are the four controlling faculties, these are the five powers, these are the seven factors of enlightenment, this is the noble eightfold path, this tranquility, this is insight, this is knowledge, this is liberation.' Because of this the one who is devoted to meditation resorts to states (dhamma) that should be resorted to, don't resort to states that should not be resorted to, respect states that should be respected, don't respect states that should not be respected.”
~ Milindapañha, Satilakkhaṇapañha
Therefore when mindfulness is mentioned in relation to memory it is not an ordinary state of beginner's mindfulness but a developed state of powerful mindfulness, the mindfulness that keeps reminding us to keep onto and develop the wholesome and blameless path and to avoid the unwholesome and blameworthy path, the mindfulness of the kind usually associated with the bodhipakkhiyadhammā, the dhammas that leads to highest knowledge and liberation.
Reference: Abhidhamma Studies - Researches in Buddhist Psychology by Ven. Nyanaponika Thera
No comments:
Post a Comment