To Grief or Not to Grief

Updated: 11th June 2011, 8:07 am

"Herein,  what  are  the  six  kinds  of  grief  based  on  the household  life?  When one  regards  as a non-acquisition  the non-acquisition  of  forms  cognizable  by  the  eye  that  are wished  for, desired,  agreeable,  gratifying,  and  associated with  worldliness  - or  when  one  recalls what  was  formerly  not  acquired  that  has passed, ceased,  and  changed -  grief  arises. Such grief as this is called grief based on the household life.

"When  one regards  as a non-acquisition  the non-acquisition  of sounds cognizable by  the ear...the non-acquisition  of  odours cognizable by  the nose...the non-acquisition  of  flavours  cognizable by  the  tongue...the  non-acquisition  of  tangibles cognizable by  the body...the  non-acquisition  of mind-objects  cognizable by the mind  that  are wished  for,  desired,  agreeable, gratifying,  and associated with  worldliness  -  or when  one recalls what  was  formerly  not  acquired  that  has passed, ceased, and  changed  -  grief arises. Such grief as this is called grief based on the household life. These are the six kinds of grief based on the household life.

"Herein, what are the six kinds of grief based on renunciation? When, by knowing the impermanence, change, fading away, and cessation of forms, one sees as it actually is with right wisdom that forms both formerly and now are all impermanent, suffering, and subject to change, one generates a longing for the supreme liberations thus: 'When shall I enter upon and abide in that base that the noble ones now enter upon and abide in' In one who generates thus a longing for the supreme liberations, grief arises with that longing as condition. Such grief as this is called grief based on renunciation.

"When, by knowing the impermanence, change, fading away, and cessation of sounds...of odours...of  flavours...of  tangibles ...of mind-objects, one sees as it actually is with right wisdom that mind-objects  both formerly and now are all impermanent, suffering, and subject to change, one generates a longing for the supreme liberations thus: 'When shall I enter upon and abide in that base that the noble ones now enter upon and abide in?' In one who thus generates a longing for the supreme liberations, grief arises with that longing as condition. Such grief as this is called grief based on renunciation. These are the six kinds of grief based on renunciation.”

~ Saḷāyatanavibhaṅga Sutta, Majjhima-Nikāya, Sutta 137

The first set of six kinds of grief (domanassa) mentioned in the passage just quoted, the grief based on the household life, is what the Buddha called in Sakkapañha Sutta (Dīgha-Nikāya, Sutta 21) the grief that should not be pursued (asevitabba). In the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (Majjhima-Nikāya, Sutta 10) it is also called worldly painful feeling (sāmisaṃ dukkhaṃ vedanaṃ). This kind of worldly grief includes the dejection based on failure to acquire material things desired or, by extension, loss of material things which one is attached to and which one considers to belong to oneself. Material things here include not only material properties but also position, status, as well as beings (loved ones, relatives, friends, and even pets).

For example it includes grieving over the loss of a love one due to death. While such grieving is, understandably, the nature of an ordinary unenlightened human beings still afflicted with defilements, and would, in the mundane world, be considered “natural” for a human being, yet in the discipline of the Noble One such grieving would be considered as an inability to accept the nature of reality. It betrays a deficiency in insight or wisdom into the nature of things as they really are. And so we find that when the Buddha was about to pass away and the Ven. Ānanda was weeping and grieving over it, the Buddha admonished him saying:

“Enough, Ānanda, do not sorrow and cry. Have I not previously declared that there will be separation, parting, and departing from all that is dear and beloved. How could it be, Ānanda, that what is born, come to be, conditioned, subject to breaking up, even if it is the body of the Tathāgata, not break up? This is impossible.”

~ Mahāparinibbāna Sutta, Dīgha-Nikāya, Sutta 16

Vipassana and where to Find it in the Suttas

When asked what is vipassanā most Buddhists would think of vipassanā as a technique of Buddhist meditation. But actually vipassanā is not a kind of meditation at all. There is a difference between vipassanā and vipassanā-bhāvana. Vipassanā refers to insight wisdom whereas vipassanā-bhāvana refers to insight meditation or, more correctly, the development (bhāvana) of insight. These two are related but not exactly the same. One refers to the thing to be developed whereas the other to the process, method, and technique of developing it.

Let's take a closer look at vipassanā. We usually translate vipassanā as insight. This word insight tells us two things about vipassanā. Firstly, insight denotes a clear and deep understanding. This is very true of vipassanā. Vipassanā is indeed a kind of very clear and deep understanding, knowledge, or wisdom. Secondly, the word insight denotes that this understanding or wisdom of vipassanā is intuitive in nature. This means it is a wisdom that arises spontaneously in the mind without any prompting from the rational mind, without the help of the power of intellect. In other words it arises without any deliberate act of thinking, reasoning, or inferring, etc.

In our normal day to day life we usually try to understand things by thinking about them, by applying logic and reasoning, by making inference, by deducing, etc. All these involve the power of the intellect. In this way we derive knowledge, understanding, and even wisdom. But vipassanā wisdom does not arise in this way. How then does it arise?

Developing Mental Health - A Reflection in the Afternoon of Life

Time and tide wait for no man. Once upon a time we were young. We were healthy, strong, and brimming with youthful confidence. It seems at that time that we can take on the world and there is nothing that we are not capable of doing. But then the years marched by so silently fast, many things happened in the meantime, and before we know it middle-age has caught up with us. We are no longer that young.

The youthful and naïve confidence that we once had is there no longer, replaced, hopefully, by confidence born of experience. But if recklessness was our way of life in those younger days, or if fortune was not on our side, regrets over the lost years or despair over what the future holds may now surface. At early middle-age, unless we are really unfortunate, we can still very well perform most of the physical and mental activities that we did when we were younger. But our health and strength are beginning to show the early signs of clear decline.

Skin and hairs begin to age at an accelerated pace. Eyesight begins the slow process of diminishing. We would soon, if we haven't already, be needing a pair of spectacles. Muscles and bones start to weaken. And unless we are still recklessly holding on to the delusion of youth, things such as regular exercise, healthy diet, regular sleeping hours, abstinence from drinking and smoking, have become necessities. At forties, or, for our era, even earlier than that, we begin to hear of people coming down with various kinds of ailments: Hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, heart diseases, even cancer. These are but some of the tell-tale signs that the sure process of aging is asserting itself.

Aging is a process that had been going on since the day we were born. But when we were young aging is not called aging. It is called growing up, maturing, the flowering of youth, or some other sugar coated expression like these. But whatever we choose to call it there is an undeniable process of change going on continuously since our birth, nay, since our conception in our mothers' womb. However, once we hit forties aging starts to become simply what it is: the process of getting old. At
forties we may still be relatively young but the slow march towards the grave has begun in earnest. As one teacher once put it, we have arrived in the afternoon of our life. And we may also add that evening is not too far away.

About Sila

A human-being or manussa is defined by ancient Buddhist teachers as one who possesses an elevated mind (manassa ussannatāya manussā). As such a human is the one being among all the creatures on this planet capable of profound thoughts and reflections. This capability gives humans the ability to differentiate the wholesome from the unwholesome, to tell right from wrong, and to recognise virtue as opposed to vice. It also arouses among humans the desire to cultivate virtues and to walk the path of righteousness.

Out of this desire comes sīla, a code of conduct to regulate one's actions, to keep them righteous, and to cultivate virtues. This code of conduct is based on the universal principle of morality, of what is wholesome and unwholesome, what is right and wrong. Sīla is a common human aspiration and is found in every human society as the ideal that separates humans from animals and that makes a human-being humane. It is in fact what constitutes basic human qualities. It lends refinement to our mind and therefore serves as the basis for human culture. Sīla is also a fundamental practice found in all the credible religious teachings of the world, including the teaching of the Buddha. It is a common denominator in all these teachings that identifies them as a good religion capable of serving as a reliable guide to acceptable human conduct.

In the Buddha's teaching, sīla is the basic fundamental practice that serves as the foundation for the spiritual path that leads to liberation of the mind from suffering.

“Bhikkhus, just as whatever strenuous work there are to be done, all are done based on the earth, established upon the earth, even so, based on sīla, established upon sīla, a bhikkhu develops and cultivates the Noble Eightfold Path.”

~ Saṃyutta-Nikāya, Maggasaṃyutta, Sutta 149

Since sīla is fundamental to our practice of Dhamma, it would be helpful for us to have a proper understanding of what exactly is sīla and what constitute its practice.

Buddhists Vision of the World of Existence and Beyond

“Once Zhuangzi dreamt he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn't know he was Zhuangzi. Suddenly he woke up and there he was, solid and unmistakable Zhuangzi. But he didn't know if he was Zhuangzi who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuangzi. Between Zhuangzi and a butterfly there must be some distinction!”

~ The Butterfly Dream of Zhuangzi (Translation by Burton Watson taken from Wikipedia)

“All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts...”

 ~ William Shakespeare

Is our life as we are experiencing it real? Or is it just a dream? Are we all, as Shakespeare put it, actors and actresses playing different roles in a stage performance called life? Are our dreams a real world to which we return to once the show is over? Is life an illusion we must eventually wake up from?

Such questions concerning the nature of our existence have occupied the thoughts of man through the ages. They have both intrigued and confounded him at the same time. Mystics, meditators, philosophers, thinkers, even scientists, in their quest to make sense of the world, have attempted various answers. And we have all been fascinated or turned off by their answers.

The Buddha's teaching is one among many teachings in the world that have arisen out of a need to address man's problem of existential suffering. But to solve this problem necessitate first of all an understanding of the nature of our existence. Therefore, since the Buddha did claim to have found a solution to this problem, we would expect that the Buddha's teaching also provides some answers to these questions about the nature of our existence. But what are it's answers if any? What do the Buddha and his enlightened disciples see when they look at this world of our existence and how do they describe it?

Mindfulness, Clarity, Perception, and Memory

Among the twenty five sobhaṇa-cetasikas or beautiful-mental-factors listed in Abhidhamma, sati or mindfulness is probably the one most often mentioned and highlighted by Buddhists. This is because of the central role that mindfulness plays in Buddhists' practices.

“But mindfulness, bhikkhus, is needed at all times.”

~ Saṃyutta-Nikāya, Bojjhaṅgasaṃyutta, Sutta 53

In many suttas one who has mindfulness is described thus:

“...a bhikkhu is mindful, one who possess the highest mindfulness and discrimination, who remembers and recalls what was done and said long ago.”

~ e.g. Dīgha-Nikāya, Saṅgīti Sutta

This description of mindfulness in the Suttas brings out its aspect of memory. In the commentary also mindfulness is explained in relation to memory:

“It is mindfulness (sati) because by means of it they remember (saranti); or it itself remembers; or it is just mere-remembering.”

~ Dhammasaṅgaṇi-Aṭṭhakathā

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.

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.

The Dhamma Rebellion

Coming to a vipassanā retreat is like staging a rebellion against the government inside our mind. So our teacher told us. And indeed it does seem so.

The mind that has been left untrained for innumerable lifetimes has been strongly ingrained in the many defiled habits that has kept us bound to saṃsāra (the rounds of birth and death) and the suffering that accompany it. These habits such as covetousness, clinging, obsession, conceit, hatred, jealousy, avariciousness, restless searching, mistaken-views, etc., are habits that are so strongly influenced by Māra (the Buddhist personification of evil) who delights in keeping beings trapped in saṃsāra and unable to break free from his clutches.

Over the long period of our journey through saṃsāra, through having fallen repeatedly under the enticing and deluding spells and charms of Māra, we have all grown fond of him, drawn near him, opened ourselves up to him, delighted in and adopted his ways, even worshipped him. Unwittingly we have invited and welcomed Māra into our minds and he has surreptitiously annexed our mind and added it to his domain. And in doing so he has set up his government within our minds to dominate over us.