mindfulness
Overview of the nature, meaning, function, and practice of mindfulness in Therava¯da Buddhism
While mindfulness (sati) itself is frequently emphasised in Therava¯da Buddhist philosophy and practice, the four primary Nika¯yas of the Pali Canon’s Sutta-pi_ taka offer little in the way of its definition, preferring to describe the practice of the ‘presencings of mindfulness’ (satipa_ t _ tha¯nas) that allows sati its fullest expression (Gethin 2001, 36). A more useful means to appreciating sati’s richness of meaning is with reference to its various categorisations within the 37 dhammas that contribute to awakening (bodhi-pakkhiya¯-dhamma¯), particularly the satipa_ t _ tha¯nas, and its relationship to other dhammas; for example, clear comprehension (sampajan˜n˜a), concentration (sama¯dhi), and wisdom ( pan˜n˜a¯). However, what should be clarified from the outset is Therava¯da Buddhism’s understanding of sati as occurring only in sobhana-citta, an Abhidhamma term that includes kammically wholesome (kusala) consciousness and its wholesome result (kusala-vipa¯ka). Kusala actions are ‘blameless’ actions that are ‘“wise” or “skilful” in producing an uplifting mental state and spiritual progress in the doer” (Harvey 2000, 42). Sati is understood by the Abhidhamma to only be fully effective when working dynamically with other kusala mental qualities. Nonetheless, it plays an important role in the development of kusala actions, in that it engenders a quality of clear observation that further allows one to see what is kusala and what is not (Milindapan˜ha, 37–38). Developed to its optimum measure, it leads to tranquillity ( passaddhi), a calm and contented state that is particularly useful in counteracting ‘restlessness and worry’, an unwholesome (akusala) state known as the fourth of the five main ‘hindrances’ (nı¯vara _ nas)1 to meditative development. Therefore, without sati’s dual impact of clearly observing but simultaneously calming the meditative process, unskilful attention and rashness may hinder the meditator. It is such an understanding of sati’s impact that sets the tone for the Therava¯da’s treatment of mindfulness as an intrinsically positive mental quality
The meaning of sati
In its most basic sense, sati, a noun related to the verb sarati (‘remember’), can be understood in two related ways: (i) as an aspect of memory2 —that is, of ‘calling to mind’ (anussati) and ‘remembrance’ ( pa_ tissati)—where such recollective activity facilitates greater awareness and sense of purpose for one treading the Ennobling Eightfold Path; and (ii) as awareness of the present moment, such that sati being present (upa_ t _ thitasati) implies a ‘presence of mind’ that allows one to be awake to the present moment (Ana¯layo 2003, 48). Such ‘wakefulness’ is in turn understood to support the recollective function of (i). In this way, sati is an alert yet receptive awareness, which brings a quality of breadth to experience, and is thus ‘an awareness of things in relation to things, and hence an awareness of their relative value’ (Gethin 2001, 39). Therefore, not only does sati have the ability to notice what is occurring, it also brings a wider vision of objects in their relationship to other objects and their accompanying mental factors.
The ethical dimension of sati
Sati’s protective characteristic, noted above, alludes to a crucial role envisaged for mindfulness in Buddhism: its cultivation for both moral selfprotection and the protection of others. The Buddha makes this point explicitly to his monks:
‘I will protect myself,’ bhikkhus: thus should the establishments of mindfulness [satipa_ t _ tha¯nas] be practised. ‘I will protect others,’ bhikkhus: thus should the establishments of mindfulness be practised. Protecting oneself, bhikkhus, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself. (S.V.169; translated by Bodhi 2000, 1648)
Thus, the Buddhist path consists of both moral and mental development consisting, firstly, of ‘guarding’ oneself in order to be of service to others and, secondly, of ‘guarding’ others by the practices of patience, harmlessness, lovingkindness and sympathy (Samyutta Nika¯ya V. 169). In this way, by being aware of one’s motives, thoughts, words and deeds, and their impact of oneself and others, one becomes clearer about what needs to be done, and what should be left undone; that is, one begins to make clear ethical choices. Sati, therefore, is understood to play an active role in strengthening one’s ‘moral brakes’, checking unwholesome habits and tendencies, and allowing greater spontaneity and scope for the wholesome. Conducting one’s life in a resolutely mindful fashion is called appama¯da, or heedfulness, regularly defined as non-neglect or non-absence of sati. It implies constant care and circumspection, continual attention to one’s duties, and denotes ‘responsibility” in Buddhist terms (Payutto 1990, 4). From this, it is clear that sati, established as appama¯da, has a social as well as an individual value; that is, others necessarily benefit from one’s own practice of mindfulness
The satipa ttha¯nas
The ‘presencings of mindfulness’, as outlined in both the Satipattha¯na Sutta (Majjhima Nika¯ya, 10) and the Maha¯satipa_ t _ tha¯na Sutta (Dı¯gha Nika¯ya, 22), provide one of the clearest means to understanding the practice of mindfulness in Therava¯da Buddhism, which holds both suttas in high esteem. The successful practice of satipa_ t _ tha¯na distinguishes sati as a mental factor from its perfected establishment as the path-factor Right Mindfulness (samma¯ sati). For this to occur, sati must be combined with diligence (a¯tappa) and clear comprehension (sampajan˜n˜a), and supported by a state of mind free from desires and discontent and directed towards the four fields of reference; that is, the body, and so forth. (Ana¯layo 2003, 52). Similarly to sati’s dependence on other dhammas, Right Mindfulness must work with Right Effort to bring about Right Concentration in order to bring the other path-factors to fruition (the role of concentration in satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice is discussed below). Despite this, the Therava¯din treatment of meditative training regularly elevates sati to the most important strand of the three sama¯dhi factors of the Eightfold Path. This is due to mindfulness, ‘perfected’ or otherwise, having assumed a somewhat special role in the Nika¯yas, partly because it plays an important role in the acquisition of both calm (samatha) and insight (vipassana¯) (discussed below), and partly because the satipa_ t _ tha¯nas are noted for their practical application, versatility, and ‘distillation’ of the Buddhist path of meditative training from its basics to bodhi (Gethin 2001, 66). Satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice is a process based around focusing, concentration, observation and contemplation of its four fields of reference, where sati is that which ‘holds’ the chosen object sufficiently for its examination and sampajan˜n˜a that which realises its nature and purpose (Payutto 1990, 29). As a sequence of contemplations, they are presented as a gradual and progressive movement from the relatively gross (e.g. bodily postures; anatomy) to the relatively subtle (e.g. sense-spheres; bojjhanga _ s), although it should be stressed that there is no ‘correct’ sequence; what is important is that ‘a flexible and comprehensive development of satipa_ t _ tha¯na should encompass all aspects of experience, in whatever sequence they occur’ (Ana¯layo 2003, 21). Broadly speaking, satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice can be broken down into the following stages (as repeated in the ‘refrain’ of both Majjhima Nika¯ya, 10 and Dı¯gha Nika¯ya, 22)
: (i) Focusing on phenomena in and of themselves, in the present moment, as they appear in oneself (ajjhatta), in others (bahiddha¯), and in both (ajjhattabahiddha¯).3
(ii) Focusing on phenomena viewed as arising (samudaya-dhamma¯), as passing away (vaya-dhamma¯), or as both (samudaya-vaya-dhamma¯).
(iii) A merging of stages (i) and (ii) into ‘one perfect and undivided “vision of things as they really are”’ (Nyanaponika 1998, 25).
The necessity of sama¯dhi, samatha, and vipassana
Sati is always utilised in conjunction with a variety of other mental factors for successful satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice. Of critical importance in this regard is the role of concentration (sama¯dhi), a minimal degree of which (as ekeggata¯, or ‘onepointedness’) is considered by the Abhidhamma to be indispensable in every state of consciousness. In its perfected form, Right Concentration (samma¯ sama¯dhi)— equivalent to attaining one of the four absorptions ( jha¯nas)—sama¯dhi becomes a prerequisite for bodhi and works cooperatively with the satipa_ t _ tha¯nas to bring this about. This is suggested by part of the Satipa_ t _ tha¯na Sutta’s ‘definition’ of effective and complete practice as ‘having put away covetousness and grief for the world’ (Majjhima Nika¯ya, I.56, translated by N˜ a¯ _ namoli & Bodhi 1995, 145), which is synonymous with having sufficiently stilled the mind by abandoning (at least temporarily) the five ‘hindrances’ (Papan˜casu¯danı¯, I.244). Such a state is a characteristic of calm meditation (samatha), and indeed one of its primary objectives.4 The implication of the sutta, therefore, is that successful satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice requires a certain degree of sama¯dhi and samatha, which may themselves have been developed in the initial stages of meditation, especially the body contemplations (Gethin 2001, 53). This accords with a basic Buddhist premise of the necessity of both samatha (closely allied to sama¯dhi) and vipassana¯ (closely allied to pan˜n˜a¯) for bodhi to take place. Additionally, the need for their balanced mutual development is often emphasised.
Trends in contemporary Therava¯din mindfulness practice
Historically, the Therava¯da shows a great fluidity in the way it sees samatha and vipassana¯ as working together to achieve realisation. This is evidenced in, for example, the dynamic and ongoing scholastic debate over the exact role, auxiliary or otherwise, which jha¯nas play in the development of vipassana¯, and of the related possibilities for ‘pre-jha¯nic liberation’. Modern methods of practice, however, have tended to be decidedly vipassana¯ orientated and often ‘bypass’ jha¯nic practice (for example, King 1992, 123). It has been chiefly on these terms that the tradition has been adopted in the West, as characterised by the rapid growth of the lay-centred Burmese vipassana¯-ya¯na5 approaches of Mahasi Sayadaw and U Ba Khin. Such approaches are distinct from the much less vipassana¯-orientated Thai and Sri Lankan forest traditions and, in the case of the Mahasi method, even emphasises the ‘dry insight’ (sukkha-vipassana¯) approach, which completely dispenses with the formal development of samatha. 6 Within this climate of vipassana¯-orientated practice, there has been an equally notable stress on practice emphasising the first satipa_ t _ tha¯na (ka¯ya¯nupassana¯), sometimes in conjunction with the second (vedana¯nupassana¯), and particularly on the practice of ‘mindfulness of breathing in and out’ (a¯na¯pa¯nasati). This is not surprising given the high praise the discourses and commentaries accord a¯na¯pa¯nasati, and the fact that any one satipa_ t _ tha¯na is understood to have the capacity to lead to bodhi. 7 Indeed, of the four, it is ka¯ya¯nupassana¯ that has been attributed with certain additional ‘benefits’; namely, the ability it can foster in the meditator to overcome sensual infatuation and develop sama¯dhi (Ana¯layo 2003, 124). In summary then, mindfulness practice, as adopted in the West from Theravadin sources, is often—although by no means always—characterised by an emphasis on aspects of mindfulness of body, with a similar tendency towards more vipassana¯-orientated practice
While mindfulness (sati) itself is frequently emphasised in Therava¯da Buddhist philosophy and practice, the four primary Nika¯yas of the Pali Canon’s Sutta-pi_ taka offer little in the way of its definition, preferring to describe the practice of the ‘presencings of mindfulness’ (satipa_ t _ tha¯nas) that allows sati its fullest expression (Gethin 2001, 36). A more useful means to appreciating sati’s richness of meaning is with reference to its various categorisations within the 37 dhammas that contribute to awakening (bodhi-pakkhiya¯-dhamma¯), particularly the satipa_ t _ tha¯nas, and its relationship to other dhammas; for example, clear comprehension (sampajan˜n˜a), concentration (sama¯dhi), and wisdom ( pan˜n˜a¯). However, what should be clarified from the outset is Therava¯da Buddhism’s understanding of sati as occurring only in sobhana-citta, an Abhidhamma term that includes kammically wholesome (kusala) consciousness and its wholesome result (kusala-vipa¯ka). Kusala actions are ‘blameless’ actions that are ‘“wise” or “skilful” in producing an uplifting mental state and spiritual progress in the doer” (Harvey 2000, 42). Sati is understood by the Abhidhamma to only be fully effective when working dynamically with other kusala mental qualities. Nonetheless, it plays an important role in the development of kusala actions, in that it engenders a quality of clear observation that further allows one to see what is kusala and what is not (Milindapan˜ha, 37–38). Developed to its optimum measure, it leads to tranquillity ( passaddhi), a calm and contented state that is particularly useful in counteracting ‘restlessness and worry’, an unwholesome (akusala) state known as the fourth of the five main ‘hindrances’ (nı¯vara _ nas)1 to meditative development. Therefore, without sati’s dual impact of clearly observing but simultaneously calming the meditative process, unskilful attention and rashness may hinder the meditator. It is such an understanding of sati’s impact that sets the tone for the Therava¯da’s treatment of mindfulness as an intrinsically positive mental quality
The meaning of sati
In its most basic sense, sati, a noun related to the verb sarati (‘remember’), can be understood in two related ways: (i) as an aspect of memory2 —that is, of ‘calling to mind’ (anussati) and ‘remembrance’ ( pa_ tissati)—where such recollective activity facilitates greater awareness and sense of purpose for one treading the Ennobling Eightfold Path; and (ii) as awareness of the present moment, such that sati being present (upa_ t _ thitasati) implies a ‘presence of mind’ that allows one to be awake to the present moment (Ana¯layo 2003, 48). Such ‘wakefulness’ is in turn understood to support the recollective function of (i). In this way, sati is an alert yet receptive awareness, which brings a quality of breadth to experience, and is thus ‘an awareness of things in relation to things, and hence an awareness of their relative value’ (Gethin 2001, 39). Therefore, not only does sati have the ability to notice what is occurring, it also brings a wider vision of objects in their relationship to other objects and their accompanying mental factors.
The ethical dimension of sati
Sati’s protective characteristic, noted above, alludes to a crucial role envisaged for mindfulness in Buddhism: its cultivation for both moral selfprotection and the protection of others. The Buddha makes this point explicitly to his monks:
‘I will protect myself,’ bhikkhus: thus should the establishments of mindfulness [satipa_ t _ tha¯nas] be practised. ‘I will protect others,’ bhikkhus: thus should the establishments of mindfulness be practised. Protecting oneself, bhikkhus, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself. (S.V.169; translated by Bodhi 2000, 1648)
Thus, the Buddhist path consists of both moral and mental development consisting, firstly, of ‘guarding’ oneself in order to be of service to others and, secondly, of ‘guarding’ others by the practices of patience, harmlessness, lovingkindness and sympathy (Samyutta Nika¯ya V. 169). In this way, by being aware of one’s motives, thoughts, words and deeds, and their impact of oneself and others, one becomes clearer about what needs to be done, and what should be left undone; that is, one begins to make clear ethical choices. Sati, therefore, is understood to play an active role in strengthening one’s ‘moral brakes’, checking unwholesome habits and tendencies, and allowing greater spontaneity and scope for the wholesome. Conducting one’s life in a resolutely mindful fashion is called appama¯da, or heedfulness, regularly defined as non-neglect or non-absence of sati. It implies constant care and circumspection, continual attention to one’s duties, and denotes ‘responsibility” in Buddhist terms (Payutto 1990, 4). From this, it is clear that sati, established as appama¯da, has a social as well as an individual value; that is, others necessarily benefit from one’s own practice of mindfulness
The satipa ttha¯nas
The ‘presencings of mindfulness’, as outlined in both the Satipattha¯na Sutta (Majjhima Nika¯ya, 10) and the Maha¯satipa_ t _ tha¯na Sutta (Dı¯gha Nika¯ya, 22), provide one of the clearest means to understanding the practice of mindfulness in Therava¯da Buddhism, which holds both suttas in high esteem. The successful practice of satipa_ t _ tha¯na distinguishes sati as a mental factor from its perfected establishment as the path-factor Right Mindfulness (samma¯ sati). For this to occur, sati must be combined with diligence (a¯tappa) and clear comprehension (sampajan˜n˜a), and supported by a state of mind free from desires and discontent and directed towards the four fields of reference; that is, the body, and so forth. (Ana¯layo 2003, 52). Similarly to sati’s dependence on other dhammas, Right Mindfulness must work with Right Effort to bring about Right Concentration in order to bring the other path-factors to fruition (the role of concentration in satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice is discussed below). Despite this, the Therava¯din treatment of meditative training regularly elevates sati to the most important strand of the three sama¯dhi factors of the Eightfold Path. This is due to mindfulness, ‘perfected’ or otherwise, having assumed a somewhat special role in the Nika¯yas, partly because it plays an important role in the acquisition of both calm (samatha) and insight (vipassana¯) (discussed below), and partly because the satipa_ t _ tha¯nas are noted for their practical application, versatility, and ‘distillation’ of the Buddhist path of meditative training from its basics to bodhi (Gethin 2001, 66). Satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice is a process based around focusing, concentration, observation and contemplation of its four fields of reference, where sati is that which ‘holds’ the chosen object sufficiently for its examination and sampajan˜n˜a that which realises its nature and purpose (Payutto 1990, 29). As a sequence of contemplations, they are presented as a gradual and progressive movement from the relatively gross (e.g. bodily postures; anatomy) to the relatively subtle (e.g. sense-spheres; bojjhanga _ s), although it should be stressed that there is no ‘correct’ sequence; what is important is that ‘a flexible and comprehensive development of satipa_ t _ tha¯na should encompass all aspects of experience, in whatever sequence they occur’ (Ana¯layo 2003, 21). Broadly speaking, satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice can be broken down into the following stages (as repeated in the ‘refrain’ of both Majjhima Nika¯ya, 10 and Dı¯gha Nika¯ya, 22)
: (i) Focusing on phenomena in and of themselves, in the present moment, as they appear in oneself (ajjhatta), in others (bahiddha¯), and in both (ajjhattabahiddha¯).3
(ii) Focusing on phenomena viewed as arising (samudaya-dhamma¯), as passing away (vaya-dhamma¯), or as both (samudaya-vaya-dhamma¯).
(iii) A merging of stages (i) and (ii) into ‘one perfect and undivided “vision of things as they really are”’ (Nyanaponika 1998, 25).
The necessity of sama¯dhi, samatha, and vipassana
Sati is always utilised in conjunction with a variety of other mental factors for successful satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice. Of critical importance in this regard is the role of concentration (sama¯dhi), a minimal degree of which (as ekeggata¯, or ‘onepointedness’) is considered by the Abhidhamma to be indispensable in every state of consciousness. In its perfected form, Right Concentration (samma¯ sama¯dhi)— equivalent to attaining one of the four absorptions ( jha¯nas)—sama¯dhi becomes a prerequisite for bodhi and works cooperatively with the satipa_ t _ tha¯nas to bring this about. This is suggested by part of the Satipa_ t _ tha¯na Sutta’s ‘definition’ of effective and complete practice as ‘having put away covetousness and grief for the world’ (Majjhima Nika¯ya, I.56, translated by N˜ a¯ _ namoli & Bodhi 1995, 145), which is synonymous with having sufficiently stilled the mind by abandoning (at least temporarily) the five ‘hindrances’ (Papan˜casu¯danı¯, I.244). Such a state is a characteristic of calm meditation (samatha), and indeed one of its primary objectives.4 The implication of the sutta, therefore, is that successful satipa_ t _ tha¯na practice requires a certain degree of sama¯dhi and samatha, which may themselves have been developed in the initial stages of meditation, especially the body contemplations (Gethin 2001, 53). This accords with a basic Buddhist premise of the necessity of both samatha (closely allied to sama¯dhi) and vipassana¯ (closely allied to pan˜n˜a¯) for bodhi to take place. Additionally, the need for their balanced mutual development is often emphasised.
Trends in contemporary Therava¯din mindfulness practice
Historically, the Therava¯da shows a great fluidity in the way it sees samatha and vipassana¯ as working together to achieve realisation. This is evidenced in, for example, the dynamic and ongoing scholastic debate over the exact role, auxiliary or otherwise, which jha¯nas play in the development of vipassana¯, and of the related possibilities for ‘pre-jha¯nic liberation’. Modern methods of practice, however, have tended to be decidedly vipassana¯ orientated and often ‘bypass’ jha¯nic practice (for example, King 1992, 123). It has been chiefly on these terms that the tradition has been adopted in the West, as characterised by the rapid growth of the lay-centred Burmese vipassana¯-ya¯na5 approaches of Mahasi Sayadaw and U Ba Khin. Such approaches are distinct from the much less vipassana¯-orientated Thai and Sri Lankan forest traditions and, in the case of the Mahasi method, even emphasises the ‘dry insight’ (sukkha-vipassana¯) approach, which completely dispenses with the formal development of samatha. 6 Within this climate of vipassana¯-orientated practice, there has been an equally notable stress on practice emphasising the first satipa_ t _ tha¯na (ka¯ya¯nupassana¯), sometimes in conjunction with the second (vedana¯nupassana¯), and particularly on the practice of ‘mindfulness of breathing in and out’ (a¯na¯pa¯nasati). This is not surprising given the high praise the discourses and commentaries accord a¯na¯pa¯nasati, and the fact that any one satipa_ t _ tha¯na is understood to have the capacity to lead to bodhi. 7 Indeed, of the four, it is ka¯ya¯nupassana¯ that has been attributed with certain additional ‘benefits’; namely, the ability it can foster in the meditator to overcome sensual infatuation and develop sama¯dhi (Ana¯layo 2003, 124). In summary then, mindfulness practice, as adopted in the West from Theravadin sources, is often—although by no means always—characterised by an emphasis on aspects of mindfulness of body, with a similar tendency towards more vipassana¯-orientated practice
Comments
Post a Comment