Posted by: Michael | 04/15/2010

Like a Broken Gong

If like a broken gong
never you reverberate,
quarrelling’s not part of you,
that Nibbana’s reached.

Explanation: When an individual is tranquil and silent like a flattened out metal pot, it is as if he has already attained Nibbana. Such a person does not engage in vain talk. Even when it is struck, the flattened out metal pot cannot make a sound in return.

I listened to a Dhamma talk by Ajahn Munindo yesterday from which I took the title of this post and I was really moved by the verse (Dhammapada verses 133-134). I’ve always felt that samma vaca was extremely important-it would have to be if it’s listed a an element of the 8FP-but the way in which it’s encapsulated in the preceding verse really brings it home. I don’t really have much to add but I wanted to share the verses with anyone who might stumble across this blog. In addition, here’s a link to the Dhamma talk as well: http://aruno.org/podcast/index.php?id=18

Sukhi hotu!

Source:

http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/d_punish.htm

Posted by: Michael | 04/14/2010

Meekness

Meekness seems to be to be yet another concept which I’ve inherited from my Judeo-Christian background but which has an important meaning all its own in relation to the Dhamma. In fact, one is much more likely to encounter Christian websites when googling the term “meekness” than any other and it would take some serious searching to find it at all on a Buddhist-oriented site.  It is instructive that the Pali equivalent of meekness has less to do with an attitude of subservience and submission than it does with one’s capacity to be trained.

Sovacassataa: the meaning given in the commentaries is “one who can easily be addressed, spoken to or advised” and it further means “a person who can be corrected.” Also implied are the qualities of tolerance of criticism directed at oneself and courtesy and gratitude in accepting advice.

The commentary says that a person who is meek when corrected has the chance to learn Dhamma, which is the opposite of the person who is “difficult to speak to.” The latter “indulge in prevarication, silence or think up virtues and vices.” Prevarication is only a fancy word for lying, the method used by some people when they are admonished. Another way is sullen silence, while the third is blaming the adviser by charging him with faults or else praising one’s own virtue. People like this are difficult to train: others find them hard to get on with. One should examine oneself to find out whether or not one has the blessing of being meek when corrected.

Source:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soni/wheel254.html

Posted by: Michael | 04/13/2010

Viriya

The Pali word viriya is often translated as “energy” and it forms an important part of Right Effort or samma vayama. Today being an uposatha day, I find myself face to face with my recent lack thereof. I have been especially lax in regard to my formal sitting meditation practice, believing the voices that tell me “Oh, you’re too tired to sit for a full session, why not just rest?”. Interestingly enough, I have found that although I reap some benefit from loosening up I have not felt anymore rested. In fact, it seems that the more I give in to fatigue (despite whether it be real or imagined) the stronger it becomes. Therefore, I’m making a public adhitthana today that come what may I will do formal sitting/walking/standing meditation for 35 minutes each morning and evening. Regardless of how tired I am or how useless I might believe it to be I commit to meditating for at least an hour and ten minutes every day which is not much when you think about it. As Ven. Thanissaro says, I need to focus on the causes and the results will come. So, to help me out with this I found this collection of Dhamma talks from Ajahn Pasanno which are available here: http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Passano_mp3/Viriya.htm

Posted by: Michael | 04/13/2010

Humility

For whatever reason, whenever I think about the concept of humility I cannot help but think of it primarily in terms of the Judeo-Christian milieu in which I first encountered it as a child. Humility brings to mind the image of a man bent and trembling in awe and terror before his lord God despite the fact that I long ago consigned such a belief to the dustbin. What makes it even more complicated is the fact that I truly feel humility, the act of being humble, is a valuable and necessary quality for anyone engaged in spiritual discipline. For me, it’s almost impossible to separate humility and honesty for without the willingness to let go of conceit and pride how would it even be possible to admit the truth of one’s shortcomings? Notwithstanding my own inclinations, however, I have found preciosu little in the suttas (other than the mangala Sutta) where humility is even mentioned let alone discussed in detail. As far as I can tell the closest Pali word to the English “humility” is sagāravatā which translates as “respect”. This is a different sense altogether from the Latin root of the word humility which means “lowness” and is perhaps the reason why yours truly has been inclined to view humility in such a thoroughly adhammic way.  After much searching I was able to find the following passages which help to shed light on a more Dhammic understanding of humility:

A feeling of superiority is a very pleasant mental state, but it is essentially akusala — unhealthy and unskilled, highly dangerous in its results.

Any conceit that arises in connection with the practice of Dhamma is much to be deplored. This sometimes occurs when students are making good progress in their studies. Some queer experience or flash of “insight” is assumed to be a sign of virtue or an advance towards Higher Consciousness, and the student, instead of checking up on his experience with a wise teacher, jumps to the conclusion that he is half-way to being an Arahant. We do well to remember that no two people have exactly the same experience in regard to meditation practice. The was recognized in the Buddha’s own day: Sariputta was revered for his wisdom, and Moggallana for his psychic powers, but both were venerated as “Great Beings.”

Conceit is very prone to arise when one is praised for some particular work or mental quality. Within limits praise from a knowledgeable person is stimulating and encouraging; some people who are modest or diffident by nature can only work well when they are appreciated. The trouble is that too much praise, particularly if it borders on flattery, stimulates the sense of “I”-ness. The ego sticks out its chest and feels two inches taller; it has a delicious feeling of security and believes itself to be invulnerable!

This is the nasty sort of pride that the ancient Greeks called hubris; it was looked upon as an insult to the gods, and when the Olympians found a man suffering from it they unloosed Nemesis, the goddess of revenge, who brought him to death or destruction.

The cultivation of humility is not easy; there’s a temptation to indulge in mock-modesty, and untruthfully disclaim any real achievement, and still worse to be conceited about not being conceited. It is wiser, I think, to tackle Conceit at its first uprising; if one can do that, then Humility will develop in the natural course of events.

Source:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/bl014.html

Posted by: Michael | 04/11/2010

Kalyāṇa-mitta

For many of us who have come to the Dhamma-vinaya on our own (i.e., not having been raised as Buddhists from birth), the idea that a good part of our development requires the cultivation of relationships with virtuous and knowledgeable companions seems to run completely against our individualistic inclinations.  Upon further reflection, however, the benefits of surrounding oneself with like-minded individuals in pursuit of a common goal doesn’t seem all that strange. In fact, the Lord Buddha viewed admirable friendship as being so important that he stated that it was to be thought of as constituting not just half but the whole of the holy life.

Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, “This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie.”

“Don’t say that, Ananda. Don’t say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path.

What exactly is meant by the term kalyāṇa-mitta? In the Dighajanu Sutta we find the following definition:

“And what is meant by admirable friendship? There is the case where a lay person, in whatever town or village he may dwell, spends time with householders or householders’ sons, young or old, who are advanced in virtue. He talks with them, engages them in discussions. He emulates consummate conviction in those who are consummate in conviction, consummate virtue in those who are consummate in virtue, consummate generosity in those who are consummate in generosity, and consummate discernment in those who are consummate in discernment. This is called admirable friendship.

If anyone here remembers their adolescence you may have had the experience of being told by your parents that this or that person of group of people were bad influences and that you were not to hang out with them lest you begin to emulate their behaviors. This was certainly the case for yours truly and I must admit that my parents were correct in their assessment of human behavior despite the fact that it took me a long time to actually heed their advice. But now that we’re “all grown up” and (if we) are serious about pursuing the path to liberation we have to be even more scrupulous when it comes to deciding whose company to keep.

If you gain a mature companion, a fellow traveler, right-living & wise, overcoming all dangers go with him, gratified, mindful.

If you don’t gain a mature companion, a fellow traveler, right-living & wise, wander alone like a king renouncing his kingdom,like the elephant in the Matanga wilds, his herd.

Sources:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.002.than.html

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.054.than.html

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.03.than.html

Posted by: Michael | 04/10/2010

Puñña – Merit

Be quick in doing what’s admirable.
Restrain your mind from what’s evil.
When you’re slow in making merit,
evil delights the mind.
Dhp 116

The pursuit of merit gets short shrift in the Anglo-American Dhamma centers which I frequent but has seemed to me to be the single most important undertaking one can engage upon to lay a foundation for the higher stages of the path. I have been fascinated with the ideas of puñña and the paramis for quite some time now (apparently much more so than many of my convert co-religionists) perhaps because I have a pretty abysmal (but realistic) view of my own spiritual development. Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu has these wise words to contribute on the topic at hand:

Of all the concepts central to Buddhism, merit (puñña) is one of the least known and least appreciated in the West. This is perhaps because the pursuit of merit seems to be a lowly practice, focused on getting and “selfing,” whereas higher Buddhist practice focuses on letting go, particularly of any sense of self. Because we in the West often feel pressed for time, we don’t want to waste our time on lowly practices, and instead want to go straight to the higher levels. Yet the Buddha repeatedly warns that the higher levels cannot be practiced in a stable manner unless they develop on a strong foundation. The pursuit of merit provides that foundation. To paraphrase a modern Buddhist psychologist, one cannot wisely let go of one’s sense of self until one has developed a wise sense of self. The pursuit of merit is the Buddhist way to develop a wise sense of self.

But how, precisely, does merit work to further us along the path? What has merit got to do with seeing into the truth of suffering? Obviously, merit alone cannot deliver one safely to the other shore but according to the Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi

[t]he equipment of merit facilitates progress in the course of samsaric wandering: it brings a favorable rebirth, the encounter with good friends to guide one’s footsteps along the path, the meeting with opportunities for spiritual growth, the flowering of the lofty qualities of character, and the maturation of the spiritual faculties required for the higher attainments.

So, just what constitutes merit? Since I don’t have the time or inclination to find an exhaustive description of the ways of making merit perhaps the best way to answer the question and end the post is with the following verses from the Dhammapada:

A blessing: friends when the need arises. A blessing: contentment with whatever there is. Merit at the ending of life is a blessing. A blessing: the abandoning of all suffering & stress. A blessing in the world: reverence to your mother. A blessing: reverence to your father as well. A blessing in the world: reverence to a contemplative. A blessing: reverence for a brahmin, too. A blessing into old age is virtue. A blessing: conviction established. A blessing: discernment attained. The non-doing of evil things is a blessing.

— Dhp 331-333

Sources:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/merit.html#punna

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel259.html#merit

Posted by: Michael | 04/09/2010

Anicca vata sankhara

Anicca vata sankhara — “Impermanent, alas, are all formations!” — is the phrase used in Theravada Buddhist lands to announce the death of a loved one, but I have not quoted this line here in order to begin an obituary. I do so simply to introduce the subject of this essay, which is the word sankhara itself. Sometimes a single Pali word has such rich implications that merely to sit down and draw them out can shed as much light on the Buddha’s teaching as a long expository article. This is indeed the case with the word sankhara. The word stands squarely at the heart of the Dhamma, and to trace its various strands of meaning is to get a glimpse into the Buddha’s own vision of reality.

The word sankhara is derived from the prefix sam, meaning “together,” joined to the nounkara, “doing, making.” Sankharas are thus “co-doings,” things that act in concert with other things, or things that are made by a combination of other things. Translators have rendered the word in many different ways: formations, confections, activities, processes, forces, compounds, compositions, fabrications, determinations, synergies, constructions. All are clumsy attempts to capture the meaning of a philosophical concept for which we have no exact parallel, and thus all English renderings are bound to be imprecise. I myself use “formations” and “volitional formations,” aware this choice is as defective as any other.

However, though it is impossible to discover an exact English equivalent for sankhara, by exploring its actual usage we can still gain insight into how the word functions in the “thought world” of the Dhamma. In the suttas the word occurs in three major doctrinal contexts. One is in the twelvefold formula of dependent origination (paticca-samuppada),where the sankharas are the second link in the series. They are said to be conditioned by ignorance and to function as a condition for consciousness. Putting together statements from various suttas, we can see that the sankharas are the kammically active volitions responsible for generating rebirth and thus for sustaining the onward movement of samsara,the round of birth and death. In this context sankhara is virtually synonymous with kamma,a word to which it is etymologically akin.

The suttas distinguish the sankharas active in dependent origination into three types: bodily, verbal, and mental. Again, the sankharas are divided into the meritorious, demeritorious, and “imperturbable,” i.e., the volitions present in the four formless meditations. When ignorance and craving underlie our stream of consciousness, our volitional actions of body, speech, and mind become forces with the capacity to produce results, and of the results they produce the most significant is the renewal of the stream of consciousness following death. It is thesankharas, propped up by ignorance and fueled by craving, that drive the stream of consciousness onward to a new mode of rebirth, and exactly where consciousness becomes established is determined by the kammic character of the sankharas. If one engages in meritorious deeds, the sankharas or volitional formations will propel consciousness toward a happy sphere of rebirth. If one engages in demeritorious deeds, the sankharas will propel consciousness toward a miserable rebirth. And if one masters the formless meditations, these “imperturbable” sankharas will propel consciousness toward rebirth in the formless realms.

A second major domain where the word sankharas applies is among the five aggregates. The fourth aggregate is the sankhara-khandha, the aggregate of volitional formations. The texts define the sankhara-khandha as the six classes of volition (cha cetanakaya): volition regarding forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile objects, and ideas. Though these sankharascorrespond closely to those in the formula of dependent origination, the two are not in all respects the same, for the sankhara-khandha has a wider range. The aggregate of volitional formations comprises all kinds of volition. It includes not merely those that are kammically potent, but also those that are kammic results and those that are kammically inoperative. In the later Pali literature the sankhara-khandha becomes an umbrella category for all the factors of mind except feeling and perception, which are assigned to aggregates of their own. Thus the sankhara-khandha comes to include such ethically variable factors as contact, attention, thought, and energy; such wholesome factors as generosity, kindness, and wisdom; and such unwholesome factors as greed, hatred, and delusion. Since all these factors arise in conjunction with volition and participate in volitional activity, the early Buddhist teachers decided that the most fitting place to assign them is the aggregate of volitional formations.

The third major domain in which the word sankhara occurs is as a designation for all conditioned things. In this context the word has a passive derivation, denoting whatever is formed by a combination of conditions; whatever is conditioned, constructed, or compounded. In this sense it might be rendered simply “formations,” without the qualifying adjective. As bare formations, sankharas include all five aggregates, not just the fourth. The term also includes external objects and situations such as mountains, fields, and forests; towns and cities; food and drink; jewelry, cars, and computers.

The fact that sankharas can include both active forces and the things produced by them is highly significant and secures for the term its role as the cornerstone of the Buddha’s philosophical vision. For what the Buddha emphasizes is that the sankharas in the two active senses — the volitional formations operative in dependent origination, and the kammic volitions in the fourth aggregate — construct the sankharas in the passive sense: “They construct the conditioned; therefore they are called volitional formations. And what are the conditioned things they construct? They construct the body, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness; therefore they are called volitional formations” (SN XXII.79).

Though external inanimate things may arise from purely physical causes, the sankharas that make up our personal being — the five aggregates — are all products of the kammically active sankharas that we engaged in our previous lives. In the present life as well the five aggregates are constantly being maintained, refurbished, and extended by the volitional activity we engage in now, which again becomes a condition for future existence. Thus, the Buddha teaches, it was our own kammically formative sankharas that built up our present edifice of personal being, and it is our present formative sankharas that are now building up the edifices of personal being we will inhabit in our future lives. These edifices consist of nothing other than sankharas as conditioned things, the conditioned formations comprised in the five aggregates.

The most important fact to understand about sankharas, as conditioned formations, is that they are all impermanent: “Impermanent, alas, are formations.” They are impermanent not only in the sense that in their gross manifestations they will eventually come to an end, but even more pointedly because at the subtle, subliminal level they are constantly undergoing rise and fall, forever coming into being and then, in a split second, breaking up and perishing: “Their very nature is to arise and vanish.” For this reason the Buddha declares that all sankharas are suffering (sabbe sankhara dukkha) — suffering, however, not because they are all actually painful and stressful, but because they are stamped with the mark of transience. “Having arisen they then cease,” and because they all cease they cannot provide stable happiness and security.

To win complete release from suffering — not only from experiencing suffering, but from the unsatisfactoriness intrinsic to all conditioned existence — we must gain release fromsankharas. And what lies beyond the sankharas is that which is not constructed, not put together, not compounded. This is Nibbana, accordingly called the Unconditioned —asankhata — the opposite of what is sankhata, a word which is the passive participle corresponding to sankhara. Nibbana is called the Unconditioned precisely because it’s a state that is neither itself a sankhara nor constructed by sankharas; a state described asvisankhara, “devoid of formations,” and as sabbasankhara-samatha, “the stilling of all formations.”

Thus, when we put the word sankhara under our microscope, we see compressed within it the entire worldview of the Dhamma. The active sankharas consisting in kammically active volitions perpetually create the sankhara of the five aggregates that constitute our being. As long as we continue to identify with the five aggregates (the work of ignorance) and to seek enjoyment in them (the work of craving), we go on spewing out the volitional formations that build up future combinations of aggregates. Just that is the nature of samsara: an unbroken procession of empty but efficient sankharas producing still other sankharas, riding up in fresh waves with each new birth, swelling to a crest, and then crashing down into old age, illness, and death. Yet on it goes, shrouded in the delusion that we’re really in control, sustained by an ever-tantalizing, ever receding hope of final satisfaction.

When, however, we take up the practice of the Dhamma, we apply a brake to this relentless generation of sankharas. We learn to see the true nature of the sankharas, of our own five aggregates: as unstable, conditioned processes rolling on with no one in charge. Thereby we switch off the engine driven by ignorance and craving, and the process of kammic construction, the production of active sankharas, is effectively deconstructed. By putting an end to the constructing of conditioned reality, we open the door to what is ever-present but not constructed, not conditioned: the asankhata-dhatu, the unconditioned element. This is Nibbana, the Deathless, the stilling of volitional activities, the final liberation from all conditioned formations and thus from impermanence and death. Therefore our verse concludes: “The subsiding of formations is blissful!”

Source:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_43.html

Posted by: Michael | 04/07/2010

Fears

We’re afraid of so many things. There’s so much fear in our lives. And yet the texts don’t treat fear all that much, largely because there are many different kinds of fear — fear associated with greed, fear associated with anger, fear associated with delusion — and the texts focus more on the emotions behind the fears than on the fears themselves. The implication here is that if you want to understand your fears, you have to understand the emotions behind them. You have to analyze fear not as a single, solid thing, but as a compound of many different factors, to see which part of the fear is dependent on the greed or passion, which part is dependent on the aversion, and which part is dependent on the delusion. Then, when you’ve taken care of the underlying emotions, you’ve taken care of the fear.

If there’s greed for something, or passion for something, there’s the fear that you’re not going to get it, or the fear that once you have got it you’re going to be deprived of it.

Then there’s fear based on anger. You know that if a certain thing happens it’s going to hurt, you’re going to suffer. You’re averse to it, so you’re afraid of it.

And then there’s the whole area of delusion, of what you don’t know, of the great unknown out there. Fear based on delusion can range anywhere from fear of a ghost in the next room, or a strange person in this room, to general existential angst: a sense that something is required of you and you don’t know what it is. Human experience seems like such a huge void, something very alien. There’s the big sense of fear that there may not be any meaning or purpose to life, that it’s just pointless suffering.

So you have to divide out the different kinds of fear, because you need to work not so much on the fear as on its root. Unless you dig down to the different factors, you won’t know what kind of fear it is. You won’t be able to get to its root causes.

Now, fear is complicated by the fact that it’s such a physical emotion. When fear arises there are all kinds of reactions in the body. The heartbeat speeds up, the stomach juices get churning, and we often confuse the physical reactions for the mental state. In other words, a single flash of fear floods the mind and then recedes, but it sets into motion a huge series of physical reactions that sometimes will take a long time to settle down. And because they don’t settle down right away, there’s a sense that “I must still be afraid because here are all the physical symptoms of fear.” So the first thing in dealing with fear, especially strong fear like this, is to separate the mental state from the physical state.

Some people say they have no trouble reasoning themselves out of the fear, but find that they’re still afraid. That may be based on a misunderstanding, on mistaking the physical symptoms of fear for the actual mental state. We have to separate the physical side of the fear from the mental state, because if you’re reasoning through the issue, the actual fear itself may be at bay. What seems to live on, or seems to be unwilling to go away, is the physical side, and of course it takes a while to go away because of the hormones churned up in your blood stream. It’s going to take a while for them to wash out. So your first line of defense is to learn to know when there actually is fear in the mind and when there’s no fear in the mind, even though there may be the signs of fear in the body. When you can make this distinction, you don’t feel so overwhelmed by the emotion. You breathe as best you can through the physical manifestations of fear, the tension, the feelings that come with that shortened breath or the constricted breath that result from the fear. Then consciously expand that sensation of physical relief and open it up to counteract the fear’s physical symptoms.

At the same time, ask yourself, “Exactly what is this fear?” “What’s being threatened?” “Where do you feel weak?” “What is the danger?” Learn to take the reasons for the fear apart, because a lot of the fear lies in the confusion. You don’t know exactly what you’re afraid of, or you don’t know exactly what to do. All the avenues seem closed and you can’t analyze what’s going on. And that multiplies the fear.

So you have to sit down, if you have the chance to sit down, or at least mentally make a note: “What is this fear? Exactly what sparked it?” Learn to look at the fear not as something that you’re feeling but something that’s simply there. And try to look at why it keeps shouting at you over and over and over in the brain.

Some fears are neurotic. They’re based on gross delusion and they’re relatively easy to deal with. Those are the ones that psychotherapists can handle. You had a really bad experience as a child and you’ve instinctively been avoiding that particular issue, that particular feeling, ever since, but it’s gotten to the point where it’s totally unrealistic. And because the fear is unrealistic, the treatment is to simply look at the situation for what it really is. You confront it, you try not to avoid it, but actually put yourself into circumstances that will bring up that fear again and watch the disjunction between the fear and the reality. You learn that the reality was not as bad as you thought it would be. As this disjunction grows clearer, the fear gets calmer, weaker, more and more manageable. That’s how you handle neurotic fear.

Realistic fears require deeper practice. One of the members of our community lost her mother in a war, came to the States, and became a psychotherapist. As part of her training she had to undergo psychotherapy. After a couple of years of psychotherapy, the therapist said, “It looks like your fears are very realistic. There’s nothing I can do for you.” This is where Dhamma practice comes in: facing our realistic fears, our fears of aging, illness, separation, and death. These things are real and they do cause suffering — if you don’t work your way down into exactly where your attachments are. This is precisely the Buddhist take on fear: It comes from clinging and attachment. And the clinging is threatened by impermanence, by stress and suffering, by the fact that these things are beyond your control. The purpose of our training here is to learn how not to let our happiness be based on things beyond our control, because as long as we entrust our happiness to them, we’re setting ourselves up for suffering, setting ourselves up for fear.

This is how the meditation in and of itself is a way of dealing with the fears — the deeper fears, the realistic fears. Ask yourself, “What exactly does my happiness depend on?” Normally, people will allow their happiness to depend on a whole lot of conditions. And the more you think about those conditions, the more you realize that they’re totally beyond your control: the economy, the climate, the political situation, the continued beating of certain hearts, the stability of the ground beneath your feet, all of which are very uncertain. So what do you do? You learn to look inside. Try to create a sense of wellbeing that can come simply with being with the breath. Even though this isn’t the total cure, it’s the path toward the cure. You learn to develop a happiness less and less dependent on things outside, and more and more inward, something more under your control, something you can manage better. And as you work on this happiness you find that it’s not a second best. It actually is better than the kind of happiness that was dependent on things outside. It’s much more gratifying, more stable. It permeates much more deeply into the mind.

In fact, it allows the mind to open up, because for most of us the mind jumps around like a cat. Wherever it lands, it’s always going to stay tense, for it knows it has to be ready to jump again at any moment. But when you find something you can stay with for long periods of time, the mind can allow itself to relax. When it knows that it won’t have to jump anytime soon, it can soften up a bit. When it softens up you find it easier to know the mind in and of itself: what it’s like, where its attachments are, where it’s still clinging. That allows you to go deeper still.

And we find that our ultimate fear is fear of death, which is an extremely realistic fear. It’s going to happen for sure, and for most of us it’s a huge mystery. This is where the solution has to lie in the meditation, for only meditation can take you to something beyond death, beyond space and time. Death is something that happens within space and time, but there is something that can be experienced outside of those dimensions. That’s what we’re looking for.

As the texts say, there are four reasons why people fear death. One, they’re attached to their bodies — they know they’re going to lose their bodies at death. Two, they’re attached to sensory pleasures — they know they’re going to lose them at death. These two types of fear are based on passion: passion for the body, passion for our sensual appetites. The third type of fear is based on aversion, when people know that they have done cruel things in the past and that they may have to face punishment for those cruel things after death. The fourth type of fear is based on delusion, when people are uncertain about the true Dhamma: “Was the Buddha right? Is there really a Deathless?” As long as you don’t know these things directly for yourself, there’s always going to be an uncertainty, a large amount of ignorance and delusion surrounding death, creating fear.

The whole purpose of the practice is to counteract these causes for fear, so that you aren’t dependent on the body, you don’t have to cling to the body for your happiness, you don’t have to cling to sensory pleasures for your happiness, you train yourself to do good things, and you reach the point where you taste the Deathless and know for sure that you’re on the right path to the right goal.

To do this you have to take apart the basic building blocks of experience, as you encounter them in concentration: form, feeling, perceptions, thought-fabrications, and consciousness. You look to see where these things are inconstant. Where they’re inconstant, you realize they’re stressful. There’s stress right there in the inconstancy. Then when you look at stress, look at suffering — although at this level it’s more stress than suffering — you ask yourself, “What am I doing to cause that stress, to aggravate that stress? What activities are accompanying the stress?” You look for the cause, and it’s right there in your intentional actions.

When you can take those intentions apart, things open up. Once they open up, you realize that you’ve come to something totally different, a totally different dimension, outside of space and time. And you realize that death can’t touch that. Only with that direct experience can you say that you’ve overcome your fear of death. The only fear you’re left with is the fear you might have lapses of mindfulness where you might do something unskillful. So there is still work to be done. At the very least, though, in the gross sense of the five precepts, you wouldn’t intentionally do anything unskillful.

So this is how the meditation deals with fear. It breaks the fear down into other emotions, looking for the underlying causes in terms of the greed, passion, anger, and delusion that give rise to the fear and keep it going. At the same time, the meditation points directly at the way we pin our hopes for happiness on undependable things, and opens the way for us to pin our hopes, not on something changeable or out of our control, but on a dimension beyond the reach of things that could harm it. So the cure for fear is not just a matter of talking yourself out of it, but of putting yourself in a position of strength, where there really is no danger, nothing to fear.

So these are a few thoughts on dealing with the emotion of fear as it comes.

— Learn to separate the physical from the mental side, so you don’t misunderstand what’s happening in the body, so it doesn’t stir up more confusion in the mind.

— Learn how to focus directly on the mind, to see exactly what the problem is, where the sense of weakness is, where the clinging is, because wherever there’s clinging there’s weakness. And that’s what constitutes fear.

— Then look to see if that danger is realistic. If it’s not, there’s one way of dealing with it; if it’s realistic, there’s another deeper way of dealing with it.

This way you find you can not only get a handle on your fear or learn to cope with fear but ultimately put yourself in a position where there truly is nothing to fear. And that’s what makes this practice so special. Freud once said that the purpose of psychotherapy is to take people out of their neurotic suffering and leave them with the ordinary miseries of daily life. The Dhamma, however, takes you from the ordinary miseries of human life and leads you beyond, to a dimension where there is no misery, no suffering, at all. It deals not only with unrealistic fears or fears that are way out of proportion, but also with the fears that are genuinely realistic and well founded. It can take you beyond even those to a point where, in all reality, there is nothing to fear.

We’re afraid of so many things. There’s so much fear in our lives. And yet the texts don’t treat fear all that much, largely because there are many different kinds of fear — fear associated with greed, fear associated with anger, fear associated with delusion — and the texts focus more on the emotions behind the fears than on the fears themselves. The implication here is that if you want to understand your fears, you have to understand the emotions behind them. You have to analyze fear not as a single, solid thing, but as a compound of many different factors, to see which part of the fear is dependent on the greed or passion, which part is dependent on the aversion, and which part is dependent on the delusion. Then, when you’ve taken care of the underlying emotions, you’ve taken care of the fear.

If there’s greed for something, or passion for something, there’s the fear that you’re not going to get it, or the fear that once you have got it you’re going to be deprived of it.

Then there’s fear based on anger. You know that if a certain thing happens it’s going to hurt, you’re going to suffer. You’re averse to it, so you’re afraid of it.

And then there’s the whole area of delusion, of what you don’t know, of the great unknown out there. Fear based on delusion can range anywhere from fear of a ghost in the next room, or a strange person in this room, to general existential angst: a sense that something is required of you and you don’t know what it is. Human experience seems like such a huge void, something very alien. There’s the big sense of fear that there may not be any meaning or purpose to life, that it’s just pointless suffering.

So you have to divide out the different kinds of fear, because you need to work not so much on the fear as on its root. Unless you dig down to the different factors, you won’t know what kind of fear it is. You won’t be able to get to its root causes.

Now, fear is complicated by the fact that it’s such a physical emotion. When fear arises there are all kinds of reactions in the body. The heartbeat speeds up, the stomach juices get churning, and we often confuse the physical reactions for the mental state. In other words, a single flash of fear floods the mind and then recedes, but it sets into motion a huge series of physical reactions that sometimes will take a long time to settle down. And because they don’t settle down right away, there’s a sense that “I must still be afraid because here are all the physical symptoms of fear.” So the first thing in dealing with fear, especially strong fear like this, is to separate the mental state from the physical state.

Some people say they have no trouble reasoning themselves out of the fear, but find that they’re still afraid. That may be based on a misunderstanding, on mistaking the physical symptoms of fear for the actual mental state. We have to separate the physical side of the fear from the mental state, because if you’re reasoning through the issue, the actual fear itself may be at bay. What seems to live on, or seems to be unwilling to go away, is the physical side, and of course it takes a while to go away because of the hormones churned up in your blood stream. It’s going to take a while for them to wash out. So your first line of defense is to learn to know when there actually is fear in the mind and when there’s no fear in the mind, even though there may be the signs of fear in the body. When you can make this distinction, you don’t feel so overwhelmed by the emotion. You breathe as best you can through the physical manifestations of fear, the tension, the feelings that come with that shortened breath or the constricted breath that result from the fear. Then consciously expand that sensation of physical relief and open it up to counteract the fear’s physical symptoms.

At the same time, ask yourself, “Exactly what is this fear?” “What’s being threatened?” “Where do you feel weak?” “What is the danger?” Learn to take the reasons for the fear apart, because a lot of the fear lies in the confusion. You don’t know exactly what you’re afraid of, or you don’t know exactly what to do. All the avenues seem closed and you can’t analyze what’s going on. And that multiplies the fear.

So you have to sit down, if you have the chance to sit down, or at least mentally make a note: “What is this fear? Exactly what sparked it?” Learn to look at the fear not as something that you’re feeling but something that’s simply there. And try to look at why it keeps shouting at you over and over and over in the brain.

Some fears are neurotic. They’re based on gross delusion and they’re relatively easy to deal with. Those are the ones that psychotherapists can handle. You had a really bad experience as a child and you’ve instinctively been avoiding that particular issue, that particular feeling, ever since, but it’s gotten to the point where it’s totally unrealistic. And because the fear is unrealistic, the treatment is to simply look at the situation for what it really is. You confront it, you try not to avoid it, but actually put yourself into circumstances that will bring up that fear again and watch the disjunction between the fear and the reality. You learn that the reality was not as bad as you thought it would be. As this disjunction grows clearer, the fear gets calmer, weaker, more and more manageable. That’s how you handle neurotic fear.

Realistic fears require deeper practice. One of the members of our community lost her mother in a war, came to the States, and became a psychotherapist. As part of her training she had to undergo psychotherapy. After a couple of years of psychotherapy, the therapist said, “It looks like your fears are very realistic. There’s nothing I can do for you.” This is where Dhamma practice comes in: facing our realistic fears, our fears of aging, illness, separation, and death. These things are real and they do cause suffering — if you don’t work your way down into exactly where your attachments are. This is precisely the Buddhist take on fear: It comes from clinging and attachment. And the clinging is threatened by impermanence, by stress and suffering, by the fact that these things are beyond your control. The purpose of our training here is to learn how not to let our happiness be based on things beyond our control, because as long as we entrust our happiness to them, we’re setting ourselves up for suffering, setting ourselves up for fear.

This is how the meditation in and of itself is a way of dealing with the fears — the deeper fears, the realistic fears. Ask yourself, “What exactly does my happiness depend on?” Normally, people will allow their happiness to depend on a whole lot of conditions. And the more you think about those conditions, the more you realize that they’re totally beyond your control: the economy, the climate, the political situation, the continued beating of certain hearts, the stability of the ground beneath your feet, all of which are very uncertain. So what do you do? You learn to look inside. Try to create a sense of wellbeing that can come simply with being with the breath. Even though this isn’t the total cure, it’s the path toward the cure. You learn to develop a happiness less and less dependent on things outside, and more and more inward, something more under your control, something you can manage better. And as you work on this happiness you find that it’s not a second best. It actually is better than the kind of happiness that was dependent on things outside. It’s much more gratifying, more stable. It permeates much more deeply into the mind.

In fact, it allows the mind to open up, because for most of us the mind jumps around like a cat. Wherever it lands, it’s always going to stay tense, for it knows it has to be ready to jump again at any moment. But when you find something you can stay with for long periods of time, the mind can allow itself to relax. When it knows that it won’t have to jump anytime soon, it can soften up a bit. When it softens up you find it easier to know the mind in and of itself: what it’s like, where its attachments are, where it’s still clinging. That allows you to go deeper still.

And we find that our ultimate fear is fear of death, which is an extremely realistic fear. It’s going to happen for sure, and for most of us it’s a huge mystery. This is where the solution has to lie in the meditation, for only meditation can take you to something beyond death, beyond space and time. Death is something that happens within space and time, but there is something that can be experienced outside of those dimensions. That’s what we’re looking for.

As the texts say, there are four reasons why people fear death. One, they’re attached to their bodies — they know they’re going to lose their bodies at death. Two, they’re attached to sensory pleasures — they know they’re going to lose them at death. These two types of fear are based on passion: passion for the body, passion for our sensual appetites. The third type of fear is based on aversion, when people know that they have done cruel things in the past and that they may have to face punishment for those cruel things after death. The fourth type of fear is based on delusion, when people are uncertain about the true Dhamma: “Was the Buddha right? Is there really a Deathless?” As long as you don’t know these things directly for yourself, there’s always going to be an uncertainty, a large amount of ignorance and delusion surrounding death, creating fear.

The whole purpose of the practice is to counteract these causes for fear, so that you aren’t dependent on the body, you don’t have to cling to the body for your happiness, you don’t have to cling to sensory pleasures for your happiness, you train yourself to do good things, and you reach the point where you taste the Deathless and know for sure that you’re on the right path to the right goal.

To do this you have to take apart the basic building blocks of experience, as you encounter them in concentration: form, feeling, perceptions, thought-fabrications, and consciousness. You look to see where these things are inconstant. Where they’re inconstant, you realize they’re stressful. There’s stress right there in the inconstancy. Then when you look at stress, look at suffering — although at this level it’s more stress than suffering — you ask yourself, “What am I doing to cause that stress, to aggravate that stress? What activities are accompanying the stress?” You look for the cause, and it’s right there in your intentional actions.

When you can take those intentions apart, things open up. Once they open up, you realize that you’ve come to something totally different, a totally different dimension, outside of space and time. And you realize that death can’t touch that. Only with that direct experience can you say that you’ve overcome your fear of death. The only fear you’re left with is the fear you might have lapses of mindfulness where you might do something unskillful. So there is still work to be done. At the very least, though, in the gross sense of the five precepts, you wouldn’t intentionally do anything unskillful.

So this is how the meditation deals with fear. It breaks the fear down into other emotions, looking for the underlying causes in terms of the greed, passion, anger, and delusion that give rise to the fear and keep it going. At the same time, the meditation points directly at the way we pin our hopes for happiness on undependable things, and opens the way for us to pin our hopes, not on something changeable or out of our control, but on a dimension beyond the reach of things that could harm it. So the cure for fear is not just a matter of talking yourself out of it, but of putting yourself in a position of strength, where there really is no danger, nothing to fear.

So these are a few thoughts on dealing with the emotion of fear as it comes.

— Learn to separate the physical from the mental side, so you don’t misunderstand what’s happening in the body, so it doesn’t stir up more confusion in the mind.

— Learn how to focus directly on the mind, to see exactly what the problem is, where the sense of weakness is, where the clinging is, because wherever there’s clinging there’s weakness. And that’s what constitutes fear.

— Then look to see if that danger is realistic. If it’s not, there’s one way of dealing with it; if it’s realistic, there’s another deeper way of dealing with it.

This way you find you can not only get a handle on your fear or learn to cope with fear but ultimately put yourself in a position where there truly is nothing to fear. And that’s what makes this practice so special. Freud once said that the purpose of psychotherapy is to take people out of their neurotic suffering and leave them with the ordinary miseries of daily life. The Dhamma, however, takes you from the ordinary miseries of human life and leads you beyond, to a dimension where there is no misery, no suffering, at all. It deals not only with unrealistic fears or fears that are way out of proportion, but also with the fears that are genuinely realistic and well founded. It can take you beyond even those to a point where, in all reality, there is nothing to fear.

Source:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/meditations.html#fears

Posted by: Michael | 04/06/2010

Loving is Not Liking

Todays post takes up the theme of difficulties in the cultivation of metta once more. After some searching I found an excellent article by Ajahn Amaro which discusses one way to overcome the difficulties of techniques which can seem to involve mindless repetitions of phrases or laundry lists of classes of beings to whom we should spread metta. I know that for me these aspects of traditional metta bhavana have troubled me for years so it’s good to get a different perspective once in a while. So, without further ado, I’ll present the article in toto below:

The one theme that seems guaranteed to bring up irritation in people is metta – loving-kindness. It’s an almost sure-fire trigger for aversion to arise to start telling everyone to love everything. I find frequently when teaching a ten-day retreat, people say, ‘It was fine until day eight when you did that guided metta meditation. That really set me off.’ It’s strange how common an experience that is.

Sometimes metta practice is taught as a Walt Disney, ‘wouldn’t it be nice if everything was nice’ approach. It seems to be trying to sugar everything over; to turn the world into a place where the butterflies flitter around, the lion lies down with the lamb, and children pick blackberries from the same bush as grizzly bears. Something in us gets nauseated by that Walt Disneyesque image and revolts against it. Immediately we can’t wait for the grizzly to swipe the head off the little three year-old, we want to torch the butterflies, and so on and so forth. We are annoyed because everything is just too sweet, too false in that kind of approach.

I have experienced that same kind of irritation I confess, and I’ve found it’s because of starting from an idea of loving-kindness. We approach it in a verbal or conceptual way with a system of words or phrases that we repeat. This can be done with all sincerity, and some people do find this helpful and get a lot out of it, but for the majority of people it can be irritating or seem superficial. We can spread loving-kindness in a geographical way, like starting from this place and then spreading out from here, around the world and then to the whole universe, or start out with the people that we know and love, then the people that we are indifferent to, the people that we dislike or dislike us, and outward to all the different levels of beings. This can get to feel like a laundry list of beings, or a kind of geography lesson. We find we’re repeating phrases or trying to conjure up images but our heart’s not really with it.

What I’ve found in contemplating this is that it’s more important to get a feeling for establishing a genuine sense of metta, of that true fundamental benevolence and acceptance, to make the priority establishing that emotional quality. I see metta is about bringing our attention within ourselves, within one’s own body and mind, within one’s own being; to cultivate first a sense of friendliness and benevolence towards one’s own body. Oftentimes we do this by focusing attention on the breath, especially at the heart area. We work with that until we can cultivate a genuine, heart-felt sense of friendliness and well-wishing towards our own body. Most of us can do that without any sense of falsity or superficiality. It can be very solid and genuine. We wait and work with that until we can cultivate the genuine presence of an attitude of kindness and acceptance.

One of the things, which if not understood also contributes to the Walt Disney effect of the other approach, a point that Ajahn Sumedho would stress regularly, is that loving things is not the same as liking them. Having metta for ourselves or for other beings is not the same as liking everything. We often come a cropper by trying to make ourselves like everything. This is a completely wrong approach. When we taste something that’s bitter and try to force ourselves to believe it’s sweet this is just falsity, it’s just sugaring things over. It doesn’t work. It just makes the bitter even worse. It makes it nauseating as well as horrible to taste.

I have a very painful memory of trying to help out a fellow novice friend of mine in Thailand many years ago. He was French and didn’t have a very good grasp of English and he had an even weaker grasp of the nature of herbs. When we’d received a care-package from America with all sorts of different herb teas, he had selected some wormwood and made this into the afternoon tea for the Sangha. I dropped by the kitchen where he was brewing this up. He had an extremely agitated and anxious look on his face. So I said, ‘What’s the problem? You look really upset.’ And he said, ‘Oh, it is terrible. The tea I make for everyone, it is wormwood. I don’t know what it is, but it is horrible! It is like disgusting medicine.’ Then I replied, ‘Yes, that’s right. It is disgusting medicine. It’s not a tea that you’re supposed to make for everyone as a refreshment.’ Being convinced of my own genius, confident that I was the ultimate tea maker I said, ‘Leave it to me. Don’t worry. You go back to your kuti and recover. I’ll take over.’ So I took over the tea making. I tried putting sugar in. I tried putting some salt in. I tried putting some chilli powder in. I tried everything I could think of to fix it. There was no electricity in those days so I couldn’t just chuck it away and start again – just getting the water hot took ages on those little charcoal fires. Finally I thought, ‘Okay, publish and be damned.’ I just took the kettle and decided to serve it up as it was to the whole Sangha. I had this feeling that it wasn’t me who really made it. My poor friend, Jinavaro, who was literally shaking, had gone off to his kuti to recover. So I thought, ‘Alright, I’ll take the rap. I haven’t really fixed it but at least he won’t get the blame.’ I thought I was being very noble.

It was the hot season so we were all sitting outside under the trees. I offered the kettle to the monks and they started pouring it out. There was a cascade of exploding and cursing as the Ajahn and the other senior monks each took a mouthful. They spluttered the concoction over the forest floor. I heard my name called out with great vigor by Ajahn Pabhakaro, who was the abbot at the time. ‘What is this?!’ ‘It’s called wormwood, Ajahn.’ There was a great grumbling. I thought that monastics were supposed to be grateful for whatever they received. Anyway, this was also the occasion when I began to believe in divine intervention. Just as there was general disgust and dismay at this revolting drink a little pick-up truck pulled up and people got out whom we had never seen before. They opened the back of their truck and got out two crates of Fanta and Pepsi and a big bucket of ice, which they offered to us. They then got back into their truck and drove off. I thought, ‘Whoever is in charge of this, great, you just saved my neck.’

The taste of that extremely bitter, foul drink, laden with so much sugar that you could stand a spoon up in it, has stuck with me ever since. It was the epitome of a nauseating mixture. This is what it’s like when we try to practice metta by liking everything. But what is really meant by metta is the heart that can accept everything, that does not dwell in aversion towards things. So what I find is far more important, rather than going through lists of beings or going through a geographical pattern, is to discover the heart which can genuinely and completely accept the way things are. We’re not trying to like everything, rather we’re recognising that everything belongs. Everything is part of nature: the bitter as well as the sweet, the beautiful as well as the ugly, the cruel as well as the kindly. The heart that recognises that fundamentally everything belongs is what I would describe as being the heart of metta, the essence of metta. If we get that really clear within us, and begin to train ourselves to recognise it, we realise that we can cultivate this quality of radical acceptance. Even though metta is described as a brightness or radiance in the brahmaviharas, there’s also this quality of receptivity that it has. There’s receptivity and acceptance; a readiness to open the heart to the way things are.

So I don’t like to teach metta as a practice on its own but more as an attitude which needs to underlie every single aspect of the practice; whether it’s samadhi or samatha (concentration or tranquillity), or whether it’s vipassana (insight practice). Unless there is this radical acceptance, a basic attitude that everything belongs, any attempt we make to establish concentration or insight will go awry because there’ll be an element of disharmony in it. If I’m trying to concentrate and I consider the mind focusing on the breath as good, and noises around me in the room or random thoughts arising as bad, then there’ll be dualism in the mind. It will set up a conflict between what belongs and what doesn’t belong – the breath belongs and the noises don’t belong. We may be able to force ourselves to concentrate through an act of will for a certain length of time but it creates the mind as a battle zone. It becomes this purified place that I have to protect. I have to keep the intruders at bay. I’ve got to wipe out evil. I’ve got to destroy or keep at bay the intrusions of noise, thoughts, emotions, physical discomforts and so forth. They become the enemy. What happens is that you live in a war zone. You may find that you can protect your space – your homeland can be secure (to use a painfully familiar phrase from where I am living these days) – but you end up in a realm of paranoia where the enemy is everywhere. You live in a state of fear and tension.

So this attitude of everything belonging is really seeing that everything is Dhamma, everything is part of nature. Everything has its place. It all belongs. Then, from that basis of recognising fundamental belonging, seeing that confusion belongs and clarity belongs, that pain belongs and comfort belongs, then we can make choices. We can discriminate, but it’s not a discrimination that’s deluded or divisive. It’s recognising that if I follow this particular track then concentration or clarity is likely to follow. If I follow this track then confusion and difficulty is likely to follow. So it’s rather like at Chithurst if you want to go to Petersfield, when you get to the junction of the A272, you turn right, you don’t turn left. It’s not that left is bad or wrong in some fundamental way. It’s just it’s not the way to go if you want to go to Petersfield. Similarly, we don’t reject thoughts or random emotions or physical discomfort as being evil or somehow fundamentally wrong. It’s just that’s not the direction we want to go. So there’s discrimination but it’s based upon a fundamental quality of attunement where the heart accepts everything as part of the whole pattern of nature.

Now it can be difficult for us to do this. We can get very fixated on ideas of what equals progress and what equals degeneration, of what is good and what is bad. We can get mixed up between a conventional judgment of what is good and something that is absolute. We might think progress is good, development is good, and growth is good. And that degeneration, things falling apart or breaking up is bad. We don’t want that. But it’s really crucial for us to examine these assumptions. Growth is not always a good thing. We can use the power of reflection to consider how much we assume that things improving and succeeding is good. ‘That’s a good thing. That’s great!’ If we see through the eyes of Dhamma we recognise that it is all relative, it’s all dependent. We shouldn’t assume just because something is developing that that is an absolute good. It all depends on how we handle it or what we make of it.

I was recalling today about when Ajahn Sumedho first went back to visit Luang Por Chah after having been over here for a couple of years. Luang Por Chah asked how things were going and he said, ‘It’s amazing! There is a really good group of monks. We have novices. Four nuns have been ordained. Everyone is really harmonious and committed to the practice. They keep the Vinaya strictly. They get on so well together and everyone is so helpful….’ He was waxing lyrically in this kind of way. Finally he paused for breath to give Luang Por a chance to respond. Luang Por waited for a moment and went, ‘Uuurgh! Well you won’t develop very much wisdom living with that bunch.’ He was totally unimpressed. He was always of the mind that it is the friction that teaches you. Don’t be glad when there is no abrasion. If everything is running smoothly we just fall asleep. He was genuinely unimpressed, he wasn’t just putting on a show for Ajahn Sumedho. ‘Well, perhaps I’ll send you over a few to liven things up a bit.’

We can have an assumption that everything running well and everyone getting on is how it should be. If it’s not like that we feel, ‘Oh dear, there’s this difficult person. Oh dear, we’ve run out of money….’ It is so important that we contemplate these things, that we don’t make assumptions. If you are dependent on success and development, what happens when it all falls apart? What happens when suddenly loss is there, when death is there? Does that mean that everything has gone wrong? How do we work with it? What does it teach us? Luang Por was always stressing that wisdom will mean we learn from everything. Right attitude to the practice is to cultivate a readiness to learn from everything. If we establish that heart of acceptance, of true loving-kindness, then our heart is open to everything. Then whether we call it success – we do a retreat and find our mind easily settles down and we are brimming with insights – or failure: we’re just writhing in agony, chewing over ancient resentments, with back pain and anxieties about the future all mixed together with a brimming irritation at the teacher – everything will teach us if we let it. If we are wise everything will teach us: success will teach us, failure will teach us; gain will teach us, loss will teach us; pleasure will teach us, pain will teach us.

In one sutta the Buddha says, ‘suffering can ripen in two ways; in further suffering or in search.’ When we meet a bitter experience, we can either compound it – getting lost in fearing that experience, running away from it or fighting against it – or it can ripen in search. Which means that there is a quality of wisdom present that recognises, ‘Oh, I know what this is. There must be a cause for this. How do I handle this? What can I learn from this?’ This is one way of understanding the Buddha’s encouragement towards search. We are reflecting upon our experience. So, much of spiritual training is based on the capacity we have for this quality of acceptance, and the readiness to learn from dukkha, from the unwanted, from suffering.

Source:

http://www.forestsangha.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167:radical-acceptance&catid=9:talks-by-ajahn-amaro

Posted by: Michael | 04/05/2010

Enemies of Metta

I know from my own experience that my practice of metta bhavana can seem at times to produce emotional states and feelings which are completely antithetical to the idea of loving-kindness. Fortunately for me, this is not uncommon and a good many teachers have much to say about the so-called Enemies of Metta. Although I am unsure of the author, I did find this rather interesting classification of the obstacles to metta on the Dublin Buddhist Centre’s website:

The Far Enemy of metta is ill-will or aversion. It is the polar opposite of wanting the best for
someone. It comes in various shades, and particularly in the difficult person stage, we have
to acknowledge any feelings of irritation or animosity that arise, and then try and let them
go.
The Near Enemy of metta is sentimental attachment, and this arises particularly in the friend
stage. It is where we like the feeling that we have ourselves when someone is around, rather
than wanting the best for them. It isn’t the end of the world to feel this, but in the practice
we try and move towards a more self-less love for people; metta.
Sometimes people mistake metta for being ‘nice’, and think that it is about letting others ‘off
the hook’, or letting people walk over them. Nothing could be further from the truth! Metta
is the most robust state you could be in. It is not sentimental at all! Often the kindest thing
one can do for someone may not necessarily be pleasant for them. We are developing
robust kindness, not ‘nice-ness’!
The Hidden Enemy of metta is boredom and indifference. This can particularly arise in the
neutral person stage! Sometimes it can be a real trial to just get interested in the person, just
to take them in as a human being at all. Engaging our imagination to see them as much as
possible, and simply watching out for our mind wandering helps in this stage.

May this be of benefit. Sukhi hotu.

Source:

http://www.dublinbuddhistcentre.org/pdf%20Files/Week%203%20-%20Metta%20Bhavana.pdf

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories

Brightening Futures of Zanzibar

Improving Lives through Generosity

Shillelagh Studies

A hub for the music, culture, knowledge, and practice of Irish stick-fighting, past and present.