Okay, KP/MindOE, point taken.
The point of my even pausing to comment on your dilemma was to see if there was any interest in any of the points being made in the commentary. Apparently, there may be. Now that I've got your attention, let's see what, if anything, can be done to begin adjusting some of your views about practice and your approach.
Actually, I liked what Richard Zen had to say. He noticed the very same things I noticed from your initial post. Also, his suggestions were very good. Although I'm not sure you understood them any more than you endeavored to understand what I was pointing out. That's not to suggest that you
should have understood any of this. But perhaps it has piqued your curiosity to learn more. If so, then we are on good footing.
You must know that attempting to do this over the Internet is not only awkward and difficult from the standpoint of accurately receiving, translating, and benefiting from communication, but also highly not recommended. You would be hundreds of times better off if you had an actual guide there by your side who you trusted and with whom you were able to communicate successfully. I'm having to make adjustments all the time attempting to assist people over the Internet because of the imperfect medium that it is when two people who haven't met or spoken face to face with one another attempt to communicate and understand one another solely using the written word without any idea of who the person is at the other end. So, let's take this slowly, and work to clear up quickly any misapprehensions that might creep into the conversation.
One of the first things I realized when I resumed a study of the Dhamma several years ago was that if I wanted to succeed at this endeavor, I needed to find out just what its originator, Gotama, had to say on any given subject (which means I needed to find and read his discourses, or at least the important ones). And I had to figure out what his intent was based upon my own experience as it related to the points he was endeavoring to communicate. That's not an easily accomplished venture, especially when the teacher has been dead for over 2500 years and he spoke using a different language. So, I realized that I needed to endeavor to understand the definitions of the key words and ideas he was attempting to get across if I were to have even the slightest chance of comprehending what he was teaching.
One of the points I'm endeavoring to make here is: it is important to go back to the original source and not rely on second hand accounts when studying something as vast, complex, and subtle as the Buddha's Dhamma. This can reduce the chances for error in understanding. In light of this, then, let's look at this word "mindfulness" or
sati and become clear about what it is and what it means depending upon the context of it use.
(I majored in English at university, so words and their intended meaning are
very important to me. Especially in activities like this where nuance can come into play. You cannot get anywhere in this world if you don't understand what you are doing and how to do it correctly.)
Mind over easy:
My take on mindfulness at this point is that things are always in flux, and stress can result from fixing the mind on things and becoming attached, making mindfulness a 100% always accessible way to return to the fact that things are fluxing, which makes the mind naturally release it's stressful grip.
There's nothing wrong with your take on mindfulness. That is, as far as it goes (implication: it may not go far enough). However, were you aware that the word
sati has several different yet related meanings depending upon the context in which it is used. Sometimes the context encompasses only one of these meanings, and sometimes it encompasses more than one or even all of them at once. When you have a more comprehensive idea of what is being discussed, chances are that your understanding of the subject matter will increase.
The word
sati doesn't just mean mindfulness when translated. Its root word smr.ti [see etymology under
sarati] means
memory,
recognition,
consciousness; intentness of mind, wakefulness of mind, mindfulness, alertness, lucidity of mind, self-possession, conscience, self-consciousness.
And under
sarati we find: [smr., cp. smr.ti = sati; Lat memor, memoria = memory; Gr. me/rimna care, ma/rtu
witness, martyr; Goth.
maúrnan=E. mourn to care, etc.]
to remember D ii.234; Vin i.28; ii.79; J ii.29. …. — Caus.
sāreti to remind Vin ii.3 sq., 276; iii.221;
sārayamāna, reminding J i.50; ppr. pass.
In this context, then, since writing and literacy was only known at the time of the Buddha to be used for correspondence between kings on official business and was not used by the ordinary people, how did the ordinary people, for instance, make a shopping list? If you wanted to make a shopping list at the time of the Buddha, if you wanted to catch and "note" and witness something, you needed to use your memory. You needed to
mentally take note of the things you needed to obtain in the market.
So 2500 years ago the Buddha did not say to his monks: “Whenever you see a form, hear a sound, etc. just ‘take a
note’.” He did not say “please
label the sense impressions.” But he used the proper Pali word for the same activity based on the prevalent oral culture, and so he asked people to use “
sati” or “remembering” to “take a (mental) note” of or to “mentally witness” what just occurred.
In this context, then, there comes the added idea of
sati sampajanna, which means "to remember or mentally take note" of an object with "clear comprehension or clear knowingness." To see the object as it is, in its bare constituency, without any added influx of ideas (biases) that may color its character and therefore cause a false perception of the object, which in turn may cause an affective reaction.
And here is where equanimity or evenness of mind comes in. One is to look upon the arising of
dhammas – phenomena – with an evenness of mind (without attaching to any reaction that may arise to overtake and to color one's perception), thus avoiding any positive or negative in the reaction. This ability does not develop overnight; one is bound to experience bumps along the pathway. It takes time to become ingrained within one's psyche. How one handles those bumps can make all the difference in how easily one makes one's way through this period of adjustment. This way of observation is then coupled with being able to view things with what is called
yoniso manasikara or wise (or appropriate) attention (reasoned reflection) toward the object in an effort merely to see it just as it is.
This kind of reflective mindfulness of the arising and passing of phenomena, coupled with the practice of equanimity toward mental formations, helps one to be able to maintain their composure, easing the mind. The wisdom (or clear comprehension of the object under observation) allows the mind to view things with an easy disposition. While the wise or appropriate attention toward the object allows one to see it in a different light than the conditioned (either positive or negative) light that it was formerly viewed in, which in turn is easeful on the mind.
If this is what you have been practicing, then, good, keep practicing in this way. If not, then, you might want to consider the benefits of this method.
In peace,
Ian