The 'papañca' which taints the worldling's
concept of his individuality is none other than the notion of an ego […] ('asmīti
bhikkhave papañcitaṁ'). This wrong notion is said to be the root of all
sickness within the individual and out in the society. The diseases in the
case of the individual are lust (rāga), hatred (dosa) and
delusion (moha), while some of their symptomatic manifestations in the
society are quarrels (kalaha), strife (viggaha), dispute (vivāda),
conceit (mānātimāna), slander (pesuñña), jealousy and avarice (issāmacchariya).
The relevance of 'papañca' to an analysis of the individual and social
sickness referred to above is amply illustrated in suttas like Madhupiṇḍika,
Sakkapañha and Kalahavivāda.
Bhikkhu Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda: Concept and
Reality in Early Buddhist Thought. An Essay on Papañca and Papañca-Saññā-Saṅkhā.
Publ. by Pothgulgala Dharmagrantha Dharmasravana Mādhya Bhāraya. Rev. ed.
2012, pp. 33f. (Originally published by the Buddhist Publication Society:
Kandy, 11971).
Prologue: Rangoon, Burma, July 2004 –
My
first meditation retreat – a very intensive, Mahāsī-style one at that! –
at Chanmyay Yeiktha, Rangoon, Burma. Three weeks. Formal meditation consisting
of (1) walking practice (caṅkama) and (2) sitting practice, alternatingly.
In between: awareness of all daily activities (DA), following the
Buddha’s guidance from the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, trying to establish
moment-to-moment mindfulness, sati, round the clock!
The
maximum I could spend on formal practice (see above) totalled 11 and a half
hours on a single day.
The
whole retreat seemed to be an endless struggle. There were days with sati,
and there were days with no trace of sati at all. Nobody told me
that sati, too, has the nature to arise, to be there, and then to
disappear. Aniccaṁ. Nobody called my attention to it. Then and there.
And
then, one day, I suddenly realised that I am my worst enemy, and that it
was me, towards whom I had the least patience! That means, the enemy was
– and still is – in me, in here, within. It manifested itself as powerful
and stubborn resistance.
This
resistance is one of the main obstacles we encounter – not only during formal
meditation practice, but in our daily lives as well.
▲
(Vesakh
Day 2023, 5 May, afternoon talk given at Sri Bodhimalu Vihāraya, Pilessa,
Sri Lanka.)
Without
any hesitation, I asked those of the large audience present who had admittedly
practised meditation what the reason was that they were not (yet) enlightened.
It
became clear that there was something, such as disturbances, or thinking,
which blocked their practice.
This
”something” is the same as the enemy within I had perceived myself during my
first retreat. There was something in the mind, there was a consensus, which
was an obstacle to practice. This something is there as soon as one sits down
and closes their eyes, something which is against any letting go – which opposes
letting go –, relinquishing, renunciation. All in all, something which is
in the way.
Ajahn
Brahm puts it this way:
Meditation is a natural process of coming to rest, and
it requires you to get out of the way completely.
Ajahn Brahm: Mindfulness,
Bliss, and Beyond: A Meditator’s Handbook. Boston: Wisdom Publications,
2006, p. 23.
Let’s
see what the Burmese meditation teacher Sayadaw U Jotika has to say in this
regard:
Many people ask what to do when meditating. Just pay attention!
But most
people are surprised by the answer. They think they have to do something, they
have to create something. Doing is something we do in our daily life. But
when we meditate we don’t do anything at all. We just pay attention. It is so
simple that it is so hard for people to do, just because it is so simple. We have
the habit of making things so complicated. When we try to do something the
ego is in the way. You cannot do that in meditation. Get yourself out of the
way and let meditation happen; no ego, not doing anything, just paying
complete attention; this is very important.
Sayadaw U Jotika: A Map of the Journey, 2005, pp. 372f.
Here
we are! One: ”When we try to do something the ego is in the way.” – Two: ”Get
yourself out of the way and let meditation happen […]”
Yes,
it is the ego which is in the way. මමත්වය. And I prefer to call
it BIG ME, in English, regardless of the language I happen to use to
speak about it. Well, for the sake of Sinhala speakers, I am happy to use the
Sinhala term as well!
’Ego’
actually means ”I”, and is a loanword from Latin / Greek: ”by 1707, in metaphysics,
the self; that which feels, acts, or thinks, from Latin ego ”I” […].” –
And: ”Psychoanalytic (Freudian) sense is from 1894; sense of ’conceit’ is
1891.” (Source: Online Etymology Dictionary, ego.)
ego noun
your idea or opinion of yourself, especially your feeling of your own
importance and ability (Cambridge Dictionary online)
self noun
2: the union of elements (such as body, emotions, thoughts, and sensations)
that constitute the individuality and identity of a person (Merriam-Webster online)
I came across a blog, Pathway to Happiness. I
have selected a few trains of thought in order to present some ideas, such as
the one accepted by Western psychology, namely that the ego is but a construction.
The very last sentence I have copied reminds one of the Buddhist approach: letting
go of what is causing you unhappiness! – Source: https://pathwaytohappiness.com/blog/what-is-the-ego/
What is Ego?
The ego is
the mind’s identity of our own construction, an identity that is false. […]
The Ego Unmasked
Why is it so hard to explain or describe?
The ego is difficult to define because the ego isn’t one specific thing. It is
actually made up of many different beliefs that a person acquires over their
life. Those beliefs can be diverse and even contradictory. To further complicate
it, each person’s ego is different. […]
How to Spot the Ego
It can be difficult to see, because it hides behind opinions that appear true –
our attachment to the descriptions of our identity – and because we haven’t
practiced looking.
[…] The easier way to spot
the ego is by the trail of emotional reactions it leaves behind […].
“Having an ego” is usually
associated with arrogance and is a term used to describe someone who thinks
they are better than others. […]
Letting Go of the Ego
Because of its multiple aspects, it’s not practical or effective to dissolve
all of it at once, nor is it likely that you could do so.
Much like a tree or large
bush that is overgrown in the yard, you don’t just lift it out and throw it
away – you cut off manageable pieces instead. The same approach is effective
with letting go of the false beliefs that make up the ego. You begin by detaching
from individual thoughts that reinforce it, then let go of beliefs, separating
yourself from the false identity of your ego.
We have spent years building
our ego self-images, living inside of them, and reinforcing them. Extracting
our genuine self out of this matrix of false beliefs will take more than a few
days. Yes, it will take a while… so what. It also took a while to learn to
read, do math, walk, and develop proficiency at any valuable skill. Things
worth doing take time and practice. What better thing do you have to do than
let go of what is causing you unhappiness?
In this last paragraph quoted above, there is mention
of ”our genuine self”. It sounds pretty innocent and harmless, whereas it is not.
Based on above premises, there is a ”genuine self” somewhere in us, within, a
captive ”of this matrix of false beliefs” out of which it is to be ”extracted”.
Ego as opposed to a ”genuine self,” but what should this ”genuine self” be
like? Further, does all this imply that there is an ”evil” (and, consequently,
undesirable) self called (or labelled) the ego, and there is a ”good”
(and, consequently, desirable) self, which is supposed to be ”our
genuine self”? Is it, perhaps, ”our better self,” helplessly drifting towards
the other extreme – Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde revisited?
Whatever the case, there still lurks a ”self,” genuine
or not, the very notion of a self, attā, and as soon as there is
a ”self,” there will be craving, conceit and (wrong) views.
Further, the question is how to ”secure” happiness
once ”our genuine self” is ”extracted,” as this genuine self is no guarantee of
happiness at all. Views about a self, belief in a self – and
attachment to them –, namely, are rather the source of unhappiness than
happiness.
▲
Sakkāya — sakkāyadiṭṭhi
In the Cūḷavedallasutta, the lay follower
Visākha questions Lady Dhammadinnā, an enlightened bhikkhunī about
diverse topics. The first one concerns sakkāya – ’the body in being;
embodiment’ –, that is, identity.
Ime kho, āvuso visākha, pañcupādānakkhandhā
sakkāyo vutto bhagavatā’’ti.
These five
aggregates affected by clinging are called identity by the Blessed One.
MN 44 | Cūḷavedallasutta;
The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. A Translation of the Majjhima
Nikāya. Translated from the Pāli. Original translation by Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli.
Translation edited and revised by Bhikkhu Bodhi. Third Edition. Boston: Wisdom
Publications, 2005 (11995). – MN 44: The Shorter Series of Questions
and Answers, p. 396.
Next, the lay follower would like to know what is
called the origin of identity by the Buddha:
‘‘sakkāyasamudayo sakkāyasamudayo’ti,
ayye, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, ayye, sakkāyasamudayo vutto bhagavatā’’ti?
‘‘Yāyaṁ, āvuso visākha, taṇhā ponobbhavikā nandīrāgasahagatā tatratatrābhinandinī,
seyyathidaṁ – kāmataṇhā bhavataṇhā vibhavataṇhā; ayaṁ kho, āvuso visākha,
sakkāyasamudayo vutto bhagavatā’’ti.
It is taṇhā, craving. Bhikkhunī
Dhammadinnā offers the explanation we know so well from the first
discourse of the Buddha, Dhammacakkappavattanasutta (SN 56:11).
A little bit later, Visākha inquires how identity /
personality view – sakkāyadiṭṭhi – comes to be: Kathaṁ panāyye,
sakkāyadiṭṭhi hotī’’ti? – Bhikkhunī Dhammadinnā tells him the
following:
‘‘Idhāvuso visākha, assutavā
puthujjano, ariyānaṁ adassāvī ariyadhammassa akovido ariyadhamme avinīto,
sappurisānaṁ adassāvī sappurisadhammassa akovido sappurisadhamme
avinīto, rūpaṁ attato samanupassati, rūpavantaṁ vā attānaṁ, attani vā rūpaṁ,
rūpasmiṁ vā attānaṁ. Vedanaṁ…pe… saññaṁ… saṅkhāre… viññāṇaṁ attato samanupassati,
viññāṇavantaṁ vā attānaṁ, attani vā viññāṇaṁ, viññāṇasmiṁ vā attānaṁ.
Evaṁ kho, āvuso visākha, sakkāyadiṭṭhi hotī’’ti.
(1) rūpaṁ attato samanupassati ’… regards
material form as self’,
(2) rūpavantaṁ vā attānaṁ ’or self as possessed
of material form’,
(3) attani vā rūpaṁ ’or material form as in
self’,
(4) rūpasmiṁ vā attānaṁ ’or self in material
form’,
… and regards vedanā (feeling), saññā
(perception), saṅkhārā (formations) and viññāṇa (consciousness)
alike [(1) to (4)], coming to a total of 20 types of personality (identity)
view (belief), namely four basic modes of identity view in regard of each of
the five aggregates (khandha).
▲
Strong attachment to a sense of ‘me’ and ‘mine’
”This attachment to a sense of self provides a core
focus for Dhamma practice: it must be attended to correctly and many teachings
address this issue. Many unique terms and expressions are used to designate
this form of attachment. Following is a summary of such terms and expressions,
organized into groups:
Group 1: etaṁ mama
(= taṇhā), esohamasmi (= asmimāna), eso me attā’ti (= diṭṭhi): ‘this is
mine, I am this, this is my self.’
Group 2: ahanti (=
eso me attā) vā mamanti (= etaṁ mama) vā asmīti (= esohamasmi) vā: ‘(the
belief in) “I”, (the belief in) “mine”, and (the belief), “I exist”.’ (See MN
28: Mahāhatthipadopamasutta.)
Group 3: ahaṅkāra
(= eso me attā) mamaṅkāra (= etaṁ mama) manānusaya (= esohamasmi): ‘(the
belief in) “I”, (the belief in) “mine”, and an underlying tendency of
conceit.’ – ”I-making by views, mine-making by craving, and the underlying tendency
to conceit”, in: The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. A Translation
of the Aṅguttara Nikāya. Translated from the Pāli by Bhikkhu Bodhi. Boston:
Wisdom Publications, 2012. – AN 3:32 | Ānanda, pp. 228f, 1639,
n. 366.
Group 4: mamāyita
– or: mamatta, lit. ”mine-ness,” ’egotism, possessiveness’ – an
attachment as ’mine’ (= etaṁ mama) and asmimāna: the
belief in “mine”, (‘the belief in “I”), and the conceit “I am”.’
Group 5: attā,
attaniya, (and asmīti): the self, things associated with the self,
(and the belief ‘I exist’). – cp. ”empty of self and of what belongs to self”, suññaṁ
attena vā attaniyena vā:
SN 35:85 | 9. Channavagga
85. Suññatalokasutta
Atha kho āyasmā ānando … pe
… bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “‘Suñño loko, suñño loko’ti, bhante, vuccati. Kittāvatā
nu kho, bhante, suñño lokoti vuccatī”ti?
“Yasmā ca kho, ānanda, suññaṁ
attena vā attaniyena vā tasmā suñño lokoti vuccati. Kiñca, ānanda, suññaṁ
attena vā attaniyena vā? Cakkhu kho, ānanda, suññaṁ attena vā attaniyena vā.
Rūpā suññā attena vā attaniyena vā, cakkhuviññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attaniyena
vā, cakkhusamphasso suñño attena vā attaniyena vā … pe … yampidaṁ manosamphassapaccayā
uppajjati vedayitaṁ sukhaṁ vā dukkhaṁ vā adukkhamasukhaṁ vā tampi suññaṁ
attena vā attaniyena vā. Yasmā ca kho, ānanda, suññaṁ attena vā attaniyena
vā, tasmā suñño lokoti vuccatī”ti.
85 (2) Empty Is the World
Then the Venerable Ānanda approached the Blessed One … and said to him:
“Venerable sir, it is said, ‘Empty is the world, empty is the world.’ In what
way, venerable sir, is it said, ‘Empty is the world’?”
“It is, Ānanda, because it
is empty of self and of what belongs to self that it is said, ‘Empty is the
world.’ And what is empty of self and of what belongs to self? The eye, Ānanda,
is empty of self and of what belongs to self. Forms are empty of self and of
what belongs to self. Eye-consciousness is empty of self and of what belongs
to self. Eye-contact is empty of self and of what belongs to self…. Whatever
feeling arises with mind-contact as condition—whether pleasant or painful or
neither-painful-nor-pleasant—that too is empty of self and of what belongs to
self. “It is, Ānanda, because it is empty of self and of what belongs to self
that it is said, ‘Empty is the world.’”
Bhikkhu Bodhi. The Connected
Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Saṁyutta Nikaya (Kindle
Locations 21382-21390). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.
Group 6: taṇhā, māna,
and diṭṭhi: craving, conceit, and fixed views.
Based on: Bhikkhu P. A.
Payutto (Somdet Phra Buddhaghosacariya): Buddhadhamma. The Laws of
Nature and Their Benefits to Life. Translated by Robin Philip Moore. Bangkok:
Buddhadhamma Foundation, not dated – e-book: 2019.; pp. 323ff.;
Buddhadhamma - Buddhadhamma
Thus etaṁ mama is kāmataṇhā, esohamasmi
is bhavataṇhā (= māna), and eso me attā is diṭṭhi.
(NB. vs. n’etaṁ mama – nesohamasmi – na meso attā.)
”When there is the delusion of self, there will
always be craving. Craving is how the delusion expresses itself.” – Ajahn
Brahm: Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond:
A Meditator’s Handbook. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2006, p. 200.
▲
’I am’ occurs
”It is by clinging, Ānanda,
that [the notion] of ’I am’ occurs, not without clinging. And by clinging to
what does ’I am’ occur, not without clinging? It is by clinging to form (rūpa)
that ’I am’ occurs, not without clinging. It is by clinging to feeling (vedanā)
… perception (saññā) … volitional formations (saṅkhārā) …
consciousness (viññāṇa) that ’I am’ occurs, not without clinging.”
The Connected Discourses
of the Buddha. A New Translation of the Saṁyutta Nikāya. Translated from the Pāli by
Bhikkhu Bodhi. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2000. – SN 22:83 | Ānanda
= Ānandasutta, pp. 928f.
… upādāya, āvuso Ānanda, asmīti hoti, no anupādāya:
that is, clinging in dependence of the five khandha. The five khandha
give rise to the notion ’I am.’ – ’I am’ is a manifestation of craving and
conceit, cf.: … asmīti taṇhāmānadiṭṭhisaṅkhātaṁ papañcattayaṁ avigatameva
hoti.
”Thus behind the data of
sense-experience conditionally arisen, there looms large the illusion of an
ego as the agent. It is the root of papañca-saññā-saṅkhā, and its eradication,
the aim of the spiritual training in Buddhism.”
Bhikkhu Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda:
Concept and Reality in Early Buddhist Thought, p. 32.
As long as the idea / view / notion / illusion / delusion
of a self – the belief in a self – prevails, there will be craving and conceit.
Then the late Ven. K. Ñāṇananda continues:
The eradication of the
illusion of an ego has to be accomplished through penetrative wisdom focussed
on one's own personality. He has to analyse the mental and corporeal constituents
of his individuality and see them in their correct penetrative, as being
impermanent (anicca), fraught with suffering (dukkha) and not
his own (anattā). He has to bring about a total transformation of his
concept of individuality which is characterised by 'papañca'. […]
The 'papañca' which
taints the worldling's concept of his individuality is none other than the
notion of an ego […] ('asmīti bhikkhave papañcitaṁ'). This wrong
notion is said to be the root of all sickness within the individual and out
in the society. The diseases in the case of the individual are lust (rāga),
hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha), while some of their symptomatic
manifestations in the society are quarrels (kalaha), strife (viggaha),
dispute (vivāda), conceit (mānātimāna), slander (pesuñña),
jealousy and avarice (issāmacchariya). The relevance of 'papañca'
to an analysis of the individual and social sickness referred to above is amply
illustrated in suttas like Madhupiṇḍika, Sakkapañha and Kalahavivāda.
– Op. cit., pp. 33f.
Feeling
In the Mahānidānasutta of the Dīgha Nikāya
– ’The Great Discourse on Origination’ (DN 15) – the Buddha asks Ānanda:
‘‘Kittāvatā ca, ānanda, attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati? Vedanaṁ
vā hi, ānanda, attānaṁ samanupassamāno samanupassati – ‘vedanā me attā’ti.
’In what ways, Ānanda, do
people regard the self? They equate the self with feeling: ”Feeling is my self”
[…].
”Tatrānanda, yo so evamāha
– ‘vedanā me attā’ti, so evamassa vacanīyo – ‘tisso kho imā, āvuso, vedanā –
sukhā vedanā dukkhā vedanā adukkhamasukhā vedanā. Imāsaṁ kho tvaṁ tissannaṁ
vedanānaṁ katamaṁ attato samanupassasī’ti?
’Now, Ānanda, one who says:
”Feeling is my self” should be told: ”There are three kinds of feeling, friend:
pleasant, painful, and neutral. Which of the three do you consider to be your
self?” […]
‘‘Tatrānanda, yo so evamāha – ‘na heva kho me vedanā attā, appaṭisaṁvedano
me attā’ti, so evamassa vacanīyo – ‘yattha panāvuso, sabbaso vedayitaṁ
natthi api nu kho, tattha ‘‘aya0mahamasmī’’ti siyā’’’ti?
‘‘No hetaṁ, bhante’’.
”If, friend, no feelings at
all were to be experienced, would there be the thought: ’I am’?” ”No, Lord.”
[…]
The Long Discourses of the
Buddha. A
Translation of the Dīgha Nikāya. Translated from the Pāli by Maurice Walshe.
Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications, 1987, pp. 226f.
Ven. K. Ñāṇananda:
It is through feeling that
the notion of self awakens.
Bhikkhu Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda:
The Law of Dependent Arising (Paṭicca Samuppāda). The Secret of
Bondage and Release. Library Edition. Dammulla, Karandana: Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda
Sadaham Senasun Bhāraya, 2016, pp. 18f.
In the Samanupassanāsutta of the Saṁyutta
Nikāya – ’Ways of Regarding Things’ (SN 22:47) – the Buddha speaks,
among others, ignorance-contact and the birth of a feeling:
Atthi, bhikkhave, mano, atthi dhammā, atthi avijjādhātu. Avijjāsamphassajena,
bhikkhave, vedayitena phuṭṭhassa assutavato puthujjanassa ‘asmī’tipissa
hoti; ‘ayamahamasmī’tipissa hoti […]
Tassa avijjāvirāgā vijjuppādā ‘asmī’tipissa na hoti; ‘ayamahamasmī’tipissa
na hoti […].
There is, bhikkhus, the
mind, there are mental phenomena, there is the element of ignorance. When
the uninstructed worldling is contacted by a feeling born of ignorance-contact,
’I am’ occurs to him; ’I am this’ occurs to him […].
With the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge, ’I am’
does not occur to him; ’I am this’ does not occur to him […]. – The Connected
Discourses of the Buddha, p. 886.
This is how the late Ven. Buddhadāsa Bhikkhu of Thailand
reflects on the arising of the ”ego”:
In Dhamma language [scil.
as opposed to everyday language], the word ”birth”* refers to the birth of
the idea ”I” or ”ego” that arises in the mind throughout each day. Each
arising in the mind of the idea of ”I” in one form or another is called a
”birth.” Thus, birth can take place many times over in a single day. […]
In his description of conditioned
arising, he [scil. the Buddha] wasn’t talking about physical birth*. He was talking about
the birth* of
attachment to the ideas of ”me” and ”mine,” ”myself” and ”my own.”
*In all instances: jāti.
Buddhadāsa Bhikkhu: Key
to Natural Truth. Various translators. Bankok: The Dhamma Study &
Practice Group, 1989, pp. 29f.
Needless to say, the word ”death” (maraṇa) in
Dhamma language refers, then, to the cessation of the idea of ”I” or
”me.” (Op. cit., p. 30.)
The Most Venerable P. A. Payutto of Thailand offers,
as a preliminary, this concise definition for the eleventh factor of Dependent
Arising (Paṭiccasamuppāda) in his monumental handbook Buddhadhamma
cited above:
11. Jāti: the birth
of a ‘self’ that embodies the state of existence and interacts with the world.
This ‘self’ claims ownership and control of proceedings. (p. 333.)
▲
Identification
හඳුනා ගැනීම
Ajahn Jayasaro, a well-known English teacher of the
Thai forest tradition, writes, among others, the following in connection with
the sense of self:
What is the meaning of
not-self?
The unenlightened person
assumes that there is a permanent independent entity behind our experience,
and that this entity is our self, who we really are. We take for granted that
this ”me” is the one who sees, who thinks, who feels, who hears, who talks, who
acts. The Buddha taught that this understanding of who we are is mistaken,
based upon certain fundamental misperceptions, and is the root cause of
human suffering.
Buddhism teaches that far
from being the solid centre of experience, the sense of self is created moment
by moment, by means of an instinctive identification with aspects of experience
— our body, feelings, perceptions, thoughts, emotions,
sense-consciousness. The Buddha encouraged us to look more closely at our
experience in order to see if we can discover this self that seems so obviously
to exist. Recognizing that life is a flow of phenomena, dependent on causes
and conditions, but without an owner or controller, is the insight into ’not-self’
or anattā.
Ajahn Jayasaro: Without
and Within. Questions and Answers on the Teachings of Theravāda Buddhism.
PDF; p. 92.
There is ”identification [with aspects of experience]”,
tammayatā, the opposite of which is atammayatā, ’non-identification.’
In other words, ”imaginings*
or methinkings by way of craving, conceit and views lead to an identification.”
– See: K. Ñāṇananda: Nibbāna – The Mind Stilled. Library Edition. Pothgulgala
Dharmagrantha Dharmasravana Mādhya Bhāraya, 2015, p. 319. – *’imaginings’ = maññanā.
Once the mind is liberated ”from imaginings,” one
attains ”the state of non-identification, atammayatā, or arahant-hood.”
(Op. cit., p. 323.) That is, ”atammayatā or non-identification
is the path to Nibbāna” (p. 641.).
In our last sermon we
brought up the term tammayatā. When one starts imagining in such
terms about something, one tends to become one with it, tammayo, even
as things made out of gold and silver are called golden, suvaṇṇamaya,
and silvery, rajatamaya. It is as if one who grasps a gem becomes its
owner and if anything happens to the gem he is affected by it. To possess a
gem is to be possessed by it.
When one gets attached and
becomes involved and entangled in the seen through craving, conceit and views,
by imagining egoistically, the result is identification, tammayatā,
literally "of-that-ness". (p. 326.)
And, later:
Because the aim of this holy
life or this path of practice is nongrasping instead of grasping;
non-identification, atammayatā, instead of identification, tammayatā;
assetlessness, nirupadhi, instead of assets, upadhi. (p. 655.)
හඳුනා නොගැනීම – atammayatā, ’non-identification’.
In a short sutta – Atammayasutta – of the Aṅguttara
Nikāya the Buddha speaks to his monks about ”the benefits of establishing
unlimited perception of non-self in all phenomena”:
“Cha, bhikkhave, ānisaṁse
sampassamānena alameva bhikkhunā sabbadhammesu anodhiṁ karitvā anattasaññaṁ
upaṭṭhāpetuṁ. Katame cha? Sabbaloke ca atammayo bhavissāmi, ahaṅkārā ca
me uparujjhissanti, mamaṅkārā ca me uparujjhissanti, asādhāraṇena ca ñāṇena
samannāgato bhavissāmi, hetu ca me sudiṭṭho bhavissati, hetusamuppannā ca
dhammā. Ime kho, bhikkhave, cha ānisaṁse sampassamānena alameva bhikkhunā
sabbadhammesu anodhiṁ karitvā anattasaññaṁ upaṭṭhāpetun”ti.
104 (9) Without Identification
”Bhikkhus,
when a bhikkhu considers six benefits, it is enough for him to establish the
unlimited perception of non-self in all phenomena. What six? (1) ’I will be
without identification in the entire world. (2) I-makings will cease for me.
(3) Mine-makings will cease for me. (4) I will come to possess knowledge not
shared [with worldlings]. (5) I will have clearly seen causation. And (6) I
will have clearly seen causally arisen phenomena.’
”Bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu
considers these six benefits, it is enough for him to establish the unlimited
perception of non-self in all phenomena.”
The Numerical Discourses of
the Buddha,
p. 984. – AN 6:104 | Without Identification.
And, according to the explanation of the commentary
(Manorathapūraṇī):
Ahaṁkārā’ti ahaṁkāradiṭṭhi. Mamaṁkārā’ti
mamaṁkārataṇhā. – 9. Atammayasuttavaṇṇanā.
Which means, ’I-makings’ is views, and ’mine-makings’
is craving.
▲
BIG ME
What makes up BIG ME? – Is there a way
to define BIG ME?
It is BIG, because it is bloated, inflated, and
appears, therefore, over-sized, filling the whole cosmos! And, indeed, they
tend to occupy much more space than others in general, for example in meditation
centres: they erect a whole fortress of cushions and all kinds of support
around themselves. They are inconsiderate in other regards as well, as if
loudly claiming all the time, ”ME, ME, ME!” – hence the designation. BIG
ME is ego-centric / selfish, only interested in what brings benefit and
advantages to themselves.
One could write books recounting personal experiences
in all kinds of communities. Monastic communities – meditation centres included
– are not immune either. Humans are made of humans. Monks are no exception;
they, too, are mostly made of humans.
Defilements of the mind: kilesa
And humans are composed of their mental defilements (kilesa)
of which there are various listings and accounts in the Dhamma, beginning
with the three akusalamūlāni, that is lobha, dosa, and moha,
the most basic and most powerful of the defilements. Then we have the
so-called dasa-kilesa-vatthu: the aforementioned three, followed by
(4) māna, (5) diṭṭhi, (6) vicikicchā, (7) thīna,
(8) uddhacca, (9) ahirika, and, lastly, (10) anottappa.
A catalogue of fourteen items comes next in the system
of the Abhidhamma, they are listed under the heading akusala
cetasika, presented in four groups (A. to D.):
A.
1. moha, 2. ahirika, 3. anottappa, 4. uddhacca — these
are called moha-catukka ’the quartet of moha’; here moha takes
the lead;
B.
5. lobha, 6. diṭṭhi, 7. māna — these are referred to as
lobha-trī ’the triad of lobha’; here lobha is the leader;
C.
8. dosa, 9. issā, 10. macchariya, 11.
kukkucca — these are called dosa-catukka, where dosa takes
the lead;
D.
12. thīna, 13. middha, 14. vicikicchā — these are
called thīna-trī, where thīna is the leader.
Ten are already known; numbers 9., 10., 11. and 13.
are introduced here.
According to the Vatthūpamasutta of the Majjhima
Nikāya (MN 7), there are sixteen moral imperfections which defile the
mind, the so-called impurities of the mind, cittassa upakkilesā. In
connection with meditation practice, anyhow, the upakkilesas refer to
imperfections of the mind. The sixteen cittassa upakkilesā are as
follows:
(1) abhijjhā-visamalobha,
(2) vyāpāda, (3) kodha, (4) upanāha, (5) makkha, (6)
paḷāsa, (7) issā, (8) macchariya, (9) māyā, (10)
sāṭheyya, (11) thamba, (12) sārambha, (13) māna, (14)
atimāna, (15) mada, and (16) pamāda.
(NB. Please refer to respective English renderings in the sutta.)
Not referred to as defilements proper, the Sallekhasutta
of the Majjhima Nikāya (MN 8) includes a list of forty-four items (!). Here
is the conclusion of the Buddha at the end of the sutta:
‘‘Iti kho, cunda, desito
mayā sallekhapariyāyo, desito cittuppādapariyāyo, desito parikkamanapariyāyo,
desito uparibhāgapariyāyo, desito parinibbānapariyāyo.
“So, Cunda, the way of
effacement has been taught by me, the way of inclining the mind has been
taught by me, the way of avoidance has been taught by me, the way leading upwards
has been taught by me, and the way of extinguishing has been taught by me.
Bhikkhu Bodhi; Bhikkhu Nanamoli.
The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima
Nikaya (Kindle Locations 2256-2257). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.
Each and every single individual is responsible for
their mental defilements as well as their elimination, that is, purification,
see Dhammapada, V. 165:
Attanā’va kataṁ pāpaṁ —
attanā saṅkilissati.
Attanā akataṁ pāpaṁ —
attanā’va visujjhati.
Suddhi asuddhi paccattaṁ —
n’āñño aññaṁ visodhaye.
Distortions of the mind: vipallāsa
In the Vipallāsasutta of the Aṅguttara
Nikāya (AN 4:49; pp. 437ff.) the Buddha expounds the distortions – also
rendered as ’perversions’ / ’inversions’ – of the mind. Ajahn Brahm speaks of
’cognitive distortion.’ These are saññavipallāsa (of perception),
cittavipallāsa (of thought), and diṭṭhivipallāsa (of
view):
our views (diṭṭhi) fashion
à
perceptions (saññā) à
perceptions fashion thoughts (citta) …
… thoughts fashions views … and so forth. These are
the three levels of cognition, see Ajahn Brahm, Mindfulness, cited
above, p. 236.
According to the Peṭakopadesapāḷi, (1) the
distortions of perception increase the akusalamūla of dosa,
(2) those of thought increase the akusalamūla of lobha, and (3)
those of views increase the akusalamūla of moha:
Tattha saññāvipallāso dosaṁ
akusalamūlaṁ pavaḍḍheti. Cittavipallāso lobhaṁ akusalamūlaṁ pavaḍḍheti.
Diṭṭhivipallāso mohaṁ akusalamūlaṁ pavaḍḍheti.
Peṭakopadesapāḷi: 1.
Ariyasaccappakāsanapaṭhamabhūmi.
There are four ways in which these inversions or
distortions manifest themselves:
Anicce niccasaññino (1),
Perceiving permanence in the impermanent,
dukkhe ca sukhasaññino (2);
perceiving pleasure in what is suffering,
Anattani ca attāti (3),
perceiving a self in what is non-self,
asubhe subhasaññino (4);
and perceiving attractiveness in what is unattractive,
Micchādiṭṭhigatā sattā,
beings resort to wrong views,
khittacittā visaññino.
their minds deranged, their perception twisted.
The Numerical Discourses of
the Buddha,
p. 438.
Beings resort to wrong views, their minds deranged,
their perception twisted. – Sounds very promising indeed!
Two kinds of illness: bodily and mental
However, this is not all. The Buddha speaks about
illness in the Rogasutta – ’Illness’ – of the Aṅguttara Nikāya (AN
4:157; pp. 522f.):
“Dveme, bhikkhave, rogā.
Katame dve? Kāyiko ca rogo cetasiko ca rogo. Dissanti, bhikkhave, sattā kāyikena
rogena ekampi vassaṁ ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā, dvepi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā,
tīṇipi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā, cattāripi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā,
pañcapi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā, dasapi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā,
vīsatipi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā, tiṁsampi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā,
cattārīsampi vassāni ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā, paññāsampi vassāni ārogyaṁ
paṭijānamānā, vassasatampi, bhiyyopi ārogyaṁ paṭijānamānā. Te, bhikkhave, sattā sudullabhā lokasmiṁ ye cetasikena
rogena muhuttampi ārogyaṁ paṭijānanti, aññatra khīṇāsavehi.
"Bhikkhus, there are
these two kinds of illness. Which two? Bodily illness and mental illness.
People are found who can claim to enjoy bodily health for one, two, three,
four, and five years; for ten, twenty, thirty, forty, and fifty years; and even
for a hundred years and more. But apart from those whose taints have been
destroyed, it is hard to find people in the world who can claim to enjoy mental
health even for a moment.
(At https://fakebuddhaquotes.com/all-worldlings-are-mad/
, there is another rendering: But it’s very hard to find any sentient beings in
the world who can claim to be free of mental illness even for a moment,
apart from those who have ended the defilements. [Emphasis added by me. As far
as I can judge, this rendering conveys the idea of the Pāli original better.])
Let me repeat the last sentence in above paragraph: But
apart from those whose taints have been destroyed, it is hard to find people in
the world who can claim to enjoy mental health even for a moment. – ”… apart
from those whose taints have been destroyed” is a necessarily paraphrase-like
translation of aññatra khīṇāsavehi, and refers to enlighted beings,
that is, arahants.
This is a devastating insight in its own right, but
if one just recalls the findings of the Buddha under the heading (1) ’defilements
of the mind’ along with his findings in connection with (2) ’cognitive
distortion’, and then adds (3) the universal lack of mental health in humans,
the outcome is alarming: here you are, these are the very components – ingredients
– of a human being as regards nāma, mentality – in the sense of nāmakkhandhā,
’the aggregates of mentality.’
BIG ME is blind. Being blinded, he is unable to see how misguided,
deluded and stupid (mogha, from the same root as moha) he is.
This is his blind spot. His own being misguided, deluded and stupid obstructs
his realisation of how misguided, deluded and stupid he is. Actually, the
same applies, among a great many other things, to his inability to understand
that he is in the way of his own happiness.
This is a near-hopeless vicious cycle, as even
if someone is able to understand the nature and workings of BIG ME
at a theoretical level, any attempt at the dismantling of BIG ME is
doomed to fail on account of the very resistance of said BIG ME. BIG
ME hates being lectured on BIG ME – as well as on his being misguided,
deluded and stupid –, and, as stated here above, thwarts all attempts at his
dismantling / elimination.
In addition to all those characteristics and traits
of BIG ME presented and discussed until now, preferences – and,
evidently, their opposite, namely aversion –, in other words, likes
and dislikes, or favouring and opposing, etc., are a determining feature of
BIG ME. These preferences go hand in hand with his reactions: ’”Favouring
and opposing” (anurodhapaṭivirodha) means reacting with attraction
through lust and with aversion through hate.” – See note 168, p. 1195, to Cūḷasīhanādasutta
of the Majjhima Nikāya (MN 11; pp. 159–163).
The Pāli term paṭigha ’aversion’ has ’resistance’
as another connotation, and it is this resistance which results from the
perception of aversion or dislike. BIG ME resists everything which
goes against his preferences (favourings, likes, likings, etc.). One of the
aids of dismantling BIG ME is exactly to scrutinize and decisively
work against them.
BIG ME prefers to do as he pleases, recklessly, without any consideration
for others – and without any fear of the consequences: the beautiful traits
of hiri and ottappa are unknown to him. Neither is BIG ME
happy to show respect (gārava), and he has no clue of what humbleness
or modesty (nivāta) means. He simply does not care. This is his basic
stance.
BIG ME doesn’t care about fundamentals of the Teaching either.
For them, there is no dāna, no sīla, and no bhāvanā. He
indulges in his individuality, blind towards the needs of others. Accordingly,
he cannot understand what a community is about, be it his own environment or
society at large, and often displays patterns of anti-social behaviour. Capricious,
and, yes, untrustworthy and unreliable: he doesn’t know saccapāramī. Unrestricted
and uncontrolled – unmanageable and incorrigible. In the case of monks, it
is also appropriate to use the label ’unenlightened behaviour.’ Such people
don’t listen to anybody except for themselves. It is not surprising then,
that – unable to find happiness in it – they utterly shun the Dhamma.
I have once encountered a 63 years old local Chinese
monk with a huge ego in Malaysia who had been ordained three years before. He shrieked
”I follow my ways!” at me when I gently tried to make him understand something
one morning. With all the local dāyakas present. ”No,” I replied, ”if
you are a Buddhist monk, you follow the Buddha’s way!” –
BIG ME even claims to know better than the Buddha did: this is how moghapurisa,
’misguided, deluded and stupid man,’ distorts and misrepresents the words
of the Buddha which inadvertently leads to the decline of the true Dhamma, as
expounded in quite a few discourses. – See, for instance: Saddhammappatirūpakasutta
of the Kassapavagga, Saṁyutta Nikāya (SN 16:13).
▲
In 1979, Ajahn Chah visited North America where he
had a chance to meet members of the lay Buddhist community. Ajahn Jayasaro,
who was cited earlier, writes the following in his indispensable, monumental
biography of Ajahn Chah:
DON’T LET THE THIEF IN
Luang Por had always
presented the path of practice as one demanding an integrated approach in which
the trainings of conduct, of the heart and of wisdom, as laid down by the
Buddha, were to be seen as inseparable parts of one whole. In America, he
found something rather different. A new eclectic Buddhism was emerging, one
characterized by the quest for a distinctly American Dhamma suited to the
prevailing society and culture, and without any necessary adherence to
traditional Asian forms (often referred to as ’baggage’). The talk was of
extracting the essence of all the different Buddhist traditions that had
found their way to America. Luang Por’s concern was, firstly, whether the
leaders of the Buddhist community were up to such a profound task, and
secondly, that in a pick and mix approach, the organic relationship between
practices fundamental to the Eightfold Path could easily be overlooked.
Furthermore, adopting only those elements of the tradition that conformed
to a non-Buddhist society’s current views and values risked narrowing the
tradition, or even distorting it.
[A Broader Canvas · 767]
Luang Por was particularly
concerned to point out the vital connection between the practice of sīla and
the more profound levels of inner cultivation. He arrived in America with a
reputation as a great meditation master, and it was not only Paul who was surprised
by how much time he devoted to talking about sīla. He asserted that when people
committed themselves to meditation practices without a commensurable
effort to purify their actions and speech, no lasting benefit would ensue. This
was not the Thai Theravada view of things, he said, it was the law of nature.
Sīla was the indispensable foundation of practice. It was the fundamental
tool needed to build a noble life. It was the quality that made a human being a
fitting vessel for the Dhamma.
Ajahn Jayasaro: Stillness
Flowing. The Life and Teachings of Ajahn Chah. Panyaprateep Foundation,
2017, PDF: pp. 767–768. – Free download as a PDF: Stillness
Flowing
As a predominantly Protestant
country since its inception, America, unlike Europe, has few historical
associations with monasticism, and little sympathy with it. One of the
topics on Buddhist lips at the time of Luang Por’s visit was the likelihood
of American Buddhism developing as a predominantly lay-based tradition,
and of that being a strength rather than a weakness.
(Ibid., p. 770.)
And, finally, I would like to include a very important
passage from a very important book, to the attention of all BIG ME’s
active around Wikipedia-articles or anything published either in
print or online, on Buddhism, the Dhamma, etc.
[…] But if the possibility
of learning the languages of Buddhism has diminished, and if the teachers of
Buddhism have not been able to gain an adequate philological training in Buddhism,
then I suspect that the situation that pertains at the moment, where much of
the work in the field of Buddhist studies is done by those who have not had an
adequate philological training in the languages
required, will continue and will in fact get worse.
I suspect that what I have
said in these lectures will have little effect upon some scholars, who would
probably say that I am overstating the need for philological training. They
would perhaps not describe themselves as philologists, but would nevertheless
regard themselves as sufficiently competent in philology to be able to
handle all the textual material they need, because in their books and articles
about Buddhism they do include Pāli and Sanskrit terms. This, however, is not
what I regard as philology. Any work on Buddhism, which makes a claim to be
based on original language sources, will be worthless unless it is based
upon a full understanding of those sources. This may appear to be stating the
obvious, but it seems to me that much of what is alleged to be based on such
sources is, in fact, not so based. Some of it seems to be based on translations,
with Pāli and Sanskrit equivalents inserted in brackets, to give a veneer of
scholarship.
Anyone who writes about Buddhism
can sprinkle his article with Pāli and Sanskrit equivalents, but this is not
the same as knowing what the words mean, or why they mean it. I say “anyone can
do it”, but this is not entirely true. I have read books, published recently,
by teachers in recognised academic institutions, where the Pāli and Sanskrit
words in brackets do not actually coincide with the English words which are supposed
to be their translation. Even if the authors have succeeded in tracking down
the correct place on the page in the text, the way in which they quote the
reference, with compounds wrongly divided, or case forms misunderstood,
makes it clear that some of them do not fully understand Pāli and Sanskrit.
Norman, K. R.: A philological
approach to Buddhism. London: School of Oriental and African Studies,
University of London, 1997. [= Buddhist Forum, Volume V: Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai
Lectures 1994.] – Edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library,
2005, 148. old.
▲
The Buddha was
enlighted.
I am not.
If you just think about it: everything aims at the
elimination – dismantling – of BIG ME in the Dhammavinaya,
simply because there is no liberation, no vimutti, with BIG ME.
To put it another way,
nothing is easier than to become enlighted. One thing, one thing alone is
needed for our liberation, namely: BIG ME, this misguided, deluded
and stupid moghapurisa in here must go.
5–22 May, 2023 • Yatiwala Sri Gunawardhanārāmaya •
Hungarian Bhante Vilāsa Th.
Updated, with some additions and minor corrections, 16 September, 2023.
☸
.jpg)
▲
.jpg)