‘Right mindfulness’: translating it backwards - Discussion
In the Pali suttas, there is the following stock phrase for ‘Right Mindfulness’:
A problem with this translation is it places the emphasis upon ‘mindfulness’ (‘sati’) as ‘contemplating ‘ (‘anupassi’) or ‘watching’, which results in meditators striving to observe meditation objects.
This is contrary to the basic principles of the Buddha-Dhamma, which place the emphasis upon ‘letting go’, as shown in the following verses:
The word ‘mindfulness’ (‘sati’) actually means ‘to remember’, ‘recollect’ or ‘keep in mind’, as shown in the following verse:
The above fundamental principles accord with the final words in the definition of Right Mindfulness, namely:
When the meditator uses mindfulness to keep the mind in a state of letting go or free from craving, the mind will still become aware or observant (anupassi) of the meditation object automatically because the in & out breathing becomes the grossest or predominant sense object of the quiet silent mind that has let go of craving & striving.
The mental action or willfulness of striving to observe the object is itself a ‘thought’ & thus an obstacle to optimal mental clarity fluidity & sensitivity.
This is why the suttas state:
Therefore, the definition or instruction in the phrase ‘Right Mindfulness’ can (ideally) be practised in a ‘backwards’ manner, where mindfulness keeps the mind free from craving (covetousness & distresss) or in a state of letting go or ‘right view’. With such ’empty mind’, consciousness, by its very nature, will cognise or ‘contemplate’ (anupassi) the intended meditation object of in & out breathing. There is no need for an act of will for consciousness to know objects.
And what, monks, is right mindfulness? (i) There is the case where a monk dwells constantly contemplating body in bodies — ardent, clear comprehending & mindful — putting away covetous & distress towards the world. (ii) He dwells constantly contemplating feelings in feelings — ardent, clear comprehending & mindful — putting away covetous & distress towards the world. (iii) He dwells constantly contemplating mind in the mind — ardent, clear comprehending & mindful — putting away covetous & distress towards the world, (iv) He dwells constantly contemplating Dhamma in dhammas — ardent, clear comprehending & mindful — putting away covetous & distress towards the world.
A problem with this translation is it places the emphasis upon ‘mindfulness’ (‘sati’) as ‘contemplating ‘ (‘anupassi’) or ‘watching’, which results in meditators striving to observe meditation objects.
This is contrary to the basic principles of the Buddha-Dhamma, which place the emphasis upon ‘letting go’, as shown in the following verses:
And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of suffering: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release & letting go of that very craving This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned. Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a noble disciple, making it his object to let go, attains concentration, attains singleness of mind. Indriya-vibhanga Sutta
The word ‘mindfulness’ (‘sati’) actually means ‘to remember’, ‘recollect’ or ‘keep in mind’, as shown in the following verse:
One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong view & for entering into right view: This is one’s right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one’s right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view. Maha-cattarisaka Sutta
The above fundamental principles accord with the final words in the definition of Right Mindfulness, namely:
…ardent, clear comprehending & mindful – abandoning covetous & distress in relation to the world.
When the meditator uses mindfulness to keep the mind in a state of letting go or free from craving, the mind will still become aware or observant (anupassi) of the meditation object automatically because the in & out breathing becomes the grossest or predominant sense object of the quiet silent mind that has let go of craving & striving.
The mental action or willfulness of striving to observe the object is itself a ‘thought’ & thus an obstacle to optimal mental clarity fluidity & sensitivity.
This is why the suttas state:
...there is no need for an act of will, ‘May my mind grow concentrated.’… Cetana Sutta
Therefore, the definition or instruction in the phrase ‘Right Mindfulness’ can (ideally) be practised in a ‘backwards’ manner, where mindfulness keeps the mind free from craving (covetousness & distresss) or in a state of letting go or ‘right view’. With such ’empty mind’, consciousness, by its very nature, will cognise or ‘contemplate’ (anupassi) the intended meditation object of in & out breathing. There is no need for an act of will for consciousness to know objects.
Hi Chris. As a student of the Pali scriptures yourself, if you are caught in conflict over the words in the suttas, it is your duty to sort it out. If the mind is not beyond the five hindrances (and must fall back on Mahasi Sayadaw's instructions for novices), it won't be able to practise what is posted.
If you *think* an act of will is required to hear (be conscious of) a loud noise, to be consciousness of a sight or a taste or to be conscious of breathing, I can't help there, either. (Please don't replay with wrong views on Dependent Origination). My impression is this is a meditation forum.
Below is an answer to a mind not encumbered by words & theory.
If you *think* an act of will is required to hear (be conscious of) a loud noise, to be consciousness of a sight or a taste or to be conscious of breathing, I can't help there, either. (Please don't replay with wrong views on Dependent Origination). My impression is this is a meditation forum.
Below is an answer to a mind not encumbered by words & theory.
In reality, ‘letting go’ also requires an act of will. For example, if you carry an object in your hand, to drop or let go of the object requires an act of will. This act of will for letting go of the object is a different, more subtle/gentle, act of will than if you want to crush the object with your hand or throw the object a long distance.
As for the word ‘ardent’ (ātāpī), it means to be ‘active’, ‘zealous’ & ‘continuous’ in the practise. It can also relate to ‘endurance’. Similar to ‘ātāpī – the word ‘tapo’ is found at Dhammapada 184, in the verse: ‘khantī (patience) paramaṃ (supreme) tapo (austerity) titikkhā (endurance)’.
So, in relation to ‘letting go’, being ‘ardent’ means the ‘continuous’ practise of letting go & can also refer to a broad ‘visceral’ quality of endurance (rather than to a narrow rigid suppressive concentration).
I hope that helps clarify the language.
As for the word ‘ardent’ (ātāpī), it means to be ‘active’, ‘zealous’ & ‘continuous’ in the practise. It can also relate to ‘endurance’. Similar to ‘ātāpī – the word ‘tapo’ is found at Dhammapada 184, in the verse: ‘khantī (patience) paramaṃ (supreme) tapo (austerity) titikkhā (endurance)’.
So, in relation to ‘letting go’, being ‘ardent’ means the ‘continuous’ practise of letting go & can also refer to a broad ‘visceral’ quality of endurance (rather than to a narrow rigid suppressive concentration).
I hope that helps clarify the language.