Watching Intention - Profound Insight through a Simple Act

One of the basic instructions in the practise of vipassanā meditation is to note the intention that arise prior to any bodily movements. But in carrying out this instruction many meditators "try" very hard to catch the intention before they move their limbs. And often we find that in their eagerness to observe the intention, let's say the intention before lifting the foot in walking meditation, they unwittingly produce the intention and then happily note the intention produced.

Actually this instruction to observe intention means to observe the natural intentions that arise prior to all our bodily movements. In our daily life as we go about our business many bodily movements occur seemingly by itself. We do not seem to consciously and deliberately produce these movements. They occur more out of the force of habits. For example when we approach a door our hand immediately reach for the knob, turn it, and push the door open. All these movements occur automatically out of the force of habit. We do not even think about it. Usually we are not even aware of these insignificant movements. Our mind is probably engrossed in thoughts about something else when these movements occur.

Contemplation is Total Engagement of Mindfulness

When we contemplate an object in vipassanā meditation we really need to give one hundred percent of all our mental resources to the work of contemplating the object in the present moment. The mind needs to be completely immersed with curiosity and interest into the object in the present moment and be totally engaged in investigating its nature.

The normal habit of the mind is to give a little attention here and a little there. Often we think that we are completely with the object in the present moment because it seems that we are able to follow the flow of the objects from moment to moment. But if we really look honestly we will realise that we are not really giving one hundred percent to the object occurring in the present moment.

Samatha and Vipassana Concentration: Some Similes

One way to understand the difference between samatha and vipassanā concentration is to think of samatha concentration as similar to a woodcutter who, when he wishes to take a break from his work, would put aside his axe by driving its sharp wedge into a tree stump, and then sit beside it to rest. Because the wedge of the axe is sharp it is able to cut into the stump effectively. But once it is driven in, the axe just remain there on the stump while the woodcutter takes a tranquil break.

Samatha concentration is like this. Because its jhāna factors (initial-mental-application, sustained-mental-application, joy, bliss, and mental-one-pointedness) are well developed, powerful, and sharp, they are able to penetrate effectively into their object. But once they go in, the mind just remain there, still and unmoving, allowing the meditator to have a peaceful and tranquil rest from the world of sensual objects. This is like the woodcutter taking a break from his work while his axe, normally busy chopping away, is in a state of rest, having been driven into the stump.

Kalama Sutta: Practise Freely or Practise in Accordance with the Dhamma

The Kesamutti Sutta (Aṅguttara-Nikāya, Book of the Threes, Sutta 66), better known as the Kālāma Sutta, is perhaps the most often quoted among the discourses taught by the Buddha. It is often cited to show that the Buddha promoted a spirit of free inquiry among his disciples and did not insist on blind and dogmatic belief. The Sutta has even been dubbed "The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry." The ten ways listed in the Sutta by which one should not accept a teaching (see below) as well as the Buddha's call in it to use one's own personal reflection and consideration to decide for oneself what teaching can be accepted and what teaching can be rejected, appear to hold out a promise of religious and thought freedom that is so enticing that it has endeared the Buddha's teaching to many modern, educated, intellectual, and rational minds.

These days, however, there is an increasing number of those who have taken a liking to Buddhism because of this promising spirit of free inquiry embodied in the message of the Sutta, but who at the same time believe, in part due to the far-reaching influence of the ideals of Secular Humanism on our modern society, and in part based on their personal understanding of the message of the Sutta, that one should be totally free and unrestricted in one's approach to the practise of the Dhamma. This belief includes the idea that in practising the Dhamma one should not be restricted by any structure or system at all, not even that of the Dhamma (which the Buddha himself established), and one should be totally free to mould and reshape the Dhamma in ways that one sees fit in order to make its practise more appealing, congenial and relevant for oneself as well as to modern conditions and needs. Some even believe that one should be free to adopt and incorporate without any restriction, ideas and methods outside the Buddha's teaching into the practise of the Dhamma if one finds it desirable.

There are even those who go so far as to believe that one can totally do away with faith in the Dhamma, that one should begin the practise on the basis of scepticism, doubt and question everything until one arrives at the truth; Or one should base one's practise solely on one's personal experience, or even, one's rational reflection, and understanding (read ideas and opinions). Some even propose to do away with fundamental teaching of the Dhamma such as rebirth which cannot be perceive directly in one's daily experience.

But did the Buddha really mean his message to the Kālāmas to be taken in this light? Or how did he mean it to be taken? Let us examine this Sutta to see if we can shed some light on this question.

All Men are Born Equal?: A Discussion on Kamma

Post updated: 30th Aug 2011 (See note under comments)

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

~ United States Declaration of Independence

All men are created equal. This is a very powerful statement and it embodies perhaps the single most potent idea that has captured the imagination of modern civilisations. The idea of equality of all men (and women) has wide ranging influence on and is very entrenched in our modern civilised world, particularly in western societies. It serves as one of the fundamental principles of any democratic institutions and is enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The appealing idea expressed by this statement seems pretty obvious and self-explanatory. But let us explore its meaning a bit further in order to try to understand it better. Here of course we are looking from the perspective of one who is a Buddhist. Therefore we have to leave aside the idea of creationism which is implicit in the statement because Buddhists do not subscribe to the idea that the universe and all lives that exist in it was created by a supreme almighty being. Be that as it may be we can still approach a discussion of its meaning generally by replacing the expression created equal with born equal. So instead of saying all men are created equal we can say all men are born equal.

But, when we look at this statement that all human beings are born equal the first question that immediately comes to mind is this: But are all human beings really born equal?

Mindfulness for Enlightenment Vis-à-vis Mindfulness for Modern Needs: The True Goals and Strength of Satipatthana

Mindfulness as taught by the Buddha is more correctly called satipaṭṭhāna or mindfulness (sati) that is firmly established (paṭṭhāna). Nowadays it is often understood simply as awareness. But satipaṭṭhāna as a kind of awareness is not, as many Buddhists think, the general awareness normally associated with our day to day life.

The general awareness of our workaday life is usually only superficial and cursory. And even when it is deliberately developed to render it some depth and focus, it rarely approaches the depth and focus of satipaṭṭhāna mindfulness. It is usually engaged with a lot of worldly conceptual thoughts and ideas unlike satipaṭṭhāna mindfulness that, even though it usually begins with some conceptual objects like in-out breath or parts of the body, is finally aimed at the ultimate realities underlying those objects. The general awareness of daily life is also always directed towards solving the problems of our worldly mundane life unlike satipaṭṭhāna mindfulness that is aimed towards the arousing of transcendental spiritual insights that leads to the complete liberation from our one problem of existential suffering, the problem that the Buddha's teaching aims to solve.

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