Early Buddhist Meditation
Page 26
[T]he four satipaṭṭhānas are, then, four anupassanās, four activities the purpose of which is to bring sati into ‘service’. That is, in the process of watching the body, feelings, mind and dhammas, sati stand near, manifests and is established.64
At this point I would like to emphasize again two points that have been discussed in previous chapters and should be recalled here again. First, the practice of satipaṭṭhāna is a gradual practice. Second, the Nikāyas clearly correlate the gradual maturity of this practice with the attainment of the jhānas and the development of samādhi.65 We have seen that the jhānas appear as the outcome of a recurrent and gradual path-structure that consists essentially of the abandoning of the five hindrances by the practice of sīla, the training in restraining sense impressions and the preparatory development of sati.66 We have also seen that the Dantabhūmi Sutta clearly points out that prior to the attainment of the jhānas, the practice of satipaṭṭhāna is preliminary.67 In light of the analysis of the Dantabhūmi Sutta, I have suggested that it is only by abiding in the jhānas that one can observe phenomena clearly and lucidly. This, I have argued, occurs in a gradual manner since each jhāna signifies a more clarified perception of experience; when the mind is not conditioned by habitual reaction-patterns of likes and dislike (conscious and latent), not conditioned by unwholesome mental states, and when the awakening factors arrive at full maturation, only then can one finally see clearly the nature of experience. The implication of all this is that the practice of satipaṭṭhāna and the attainment of the jhānas are woven together in a complex structure of successive interdependent development, development through which the mind is in inclined into the attainment of nibbāna. In other words, the progression from one jhāna to the next should be seen as the actualization of insight meditation and not as a separate meditation technique.
For now, we can conclude that sati is a multidimensional and versatile concept. Sati – as all other kusala dhammas – has a wide spectrum: one is not with or without sati68 but rather one can have various degrees of sati. Secondly, sati (just as the practice of satipaṭṭhāna) is cultivated gradually and in various levels of stability, depth and continuity.69 Lastly, different cognitive contexts modify sati’s mode of function. The latter was observed by Anālayo, who wrote that
[T]his mental quality of sati has a broad variety of possible applications. Within the context of the satipaṭṭhāna, sati can range from the coarsest activities, such as defecation and urination, all the way up to the most sublime and exalted state, when sati is present as a mental factor during the breakthrough to nibbāna.70
All this entails that the interpretation of sati is a sensitive endeavour. One is obligated to take into consideration the specific cognitive-affective contexts of sati and the level of stability, strength, depth and continuity this quality has developed.
Despite these words of precaution, I do believe that previous scholars have been successful in offering a good working definition of sati as a fundamental mental quality in the path of transforming the cognitive process from ordinary to awakened by means of practicing satipaṭṭhāna and by fulfilling the seven factors of awakening. I believe that these definitions are applicable (with minor refinements) to the nature and function of sati in the fourth jhāna, which I believe is a key mental (and physical) context for attaining awakening. I will refer here specifically to suggestions made by Bodhi which I find discerning and helpful.
In a recent article on sati, Bodhi maintains that
[T]o establish mindfulness is not to set about remembering something that occurred in the past, but to adopt a particular stance towards one’s present experience. I characterize this as a stance of observation or watchfulness towards one’s own experience. One might even call this as a stance of sati a ‘bending back’ of the light of consciousness upon the experiencing subject in its physical, sensory and psychological dimensions.71
He further explains that sati makes the objective field ‘present’ to awareness as an expanse of phenomena exhibiting their own distinctive phenomenal characteristics, as well as patterns and structures common to all conditioned phenomena. This, he suggests, means that sati might be characterized simply as ‘lucid awareness’. He explains:
Sati makes the apprehended object stand forth vividly and distinctly before the mind. When the object being cognized pertains to the past – when it is apprehended as something that was formerly done, perceived, or spoken – its vivid representation takes the form of memory. When the object is a bodily process like in-and-out breathing or the act of walking back and forth, or when it is a mental event like a feeling or thought, its vivid presentation takes the form of lucid awareness of the present.72
Bodhi’s main arguments are helpful for the present enquiry and can be summed up as follows: sati is a mental quality that enables the mind to bring into focus the experiential field. It can be characterized as a particular stance towards experience,73 constituting lucid awareness of the present whether it is a sensation, emotion or memory. Furthermore, sati has varying layers of conceptual content ranging from ‘heavy’ to ‘light’ to ‘zero’, depending on the particular type of satipaṭṭhāna being practiced.74
With these definitions in mind, let us proceed to analyzing the nature and function of sati in the fourth and final jhāna, taking into consideration that it is a unique mental and physical position – the culmination of a spiritual ascent – where the process of purifying the mind’s perception of experience arrives at a potentially transformative moment.
IV The nature and func tion of sati in the fourth jhāna
I mentioned earlier the observation made by Bodhi that many contemporary vipassanā teachers define sati as ‘bare attention’, identifying it with a brief moment of pre-conceptual awareness. For Bodhi, this definition is acceptable only if we take it as a pragmatic definition rather than definitive or theoretical.75 According to Bodhi, the reason why it cannot be regarded as definitive is because this definition conflates two mental factors: the first one is the immediate pre-conceptual apprehension of an object that comes into the range of cognition (manasikāra),76 and the second is sati. Bodhi correctly observes that the first is an automatic and ethically indeterminate cognitive process while the second is a quality of mind that the practitioner has to cultivate (bhāvetabba).77 In other words, manasikāra is a spontaneous and automatic function exercised whenever an object contacts one of the sense-doors while sati supervenes, according to Bodhi, at a later stage, ‘sustaining attention on the object and making it appear vividly to lucid cognition’.78
Bodhi’s observation is perceptive and important but it seems to overlook a situation where the two might not be as distinct as they are in ordinary consciousness. For example, I would hypothesize that these two mental functions might not be so distinguishable in a state of mind where the conceptual content is very light (meaning perception (saññā) is at work but discursive and conceptual thinking is not)79 and where the mind is free temporarily (or permanently) from emotional reactive patterns. What I am suggesting (and will elaborate later) is that in this cognitive-emotive context, manasikāra and sati might not be so distinct in contrast to how they are during ordinary cognitive process. It is interesting that Bodhi himself points out that the initial task of sati is to observe experience as free as possible from distorted conceptual overlays.80 Several questions arise from this statement: what happens when this initial task of sati arrives at full completion? What are the theoretical and practical differences between manasikāra and sati when distorted conceptual and affective overlays fade away? How should we understand the function of sati when it is fully matured in a wholesome, non-discursive and non-reactive field of awareness? Can we define it then as ‘bare awareness’, namely, as non-discursive lucid awareness of the phenomenal field?
It seems obvious that the mode of function of sati in a wholesome, nondiscursive and non-reactive stream of consciousness is quite different from its mode of function in an ordinary mi
nd where unwholesome states arise alternately with wholesome ones, and where the mind discursively interprets experience based on deep physical, mental and emotional habits. When the mind is not yet wholesome and calm (i.e., not free from the various hindrances and other unwholesome states that obstruct clear seeing), sati must operate as a guard against unskilful tendencies, thereby assisting the meditative practice of recognizing the wholesome (kusala) and the unwholesome (akusala) with the intention of abandoning the latter. As mentioned earlier, in an ordinary cognitive process sati works in unison with right view (that which aids the process of evaluating between the wholesome and unwholesome), right effort (that which cultivates the wholesome and abandons the unwholesome) and right intention.
Another important point that should be remembered is the versatility and multidimensionality of sati. This versatility is illustrated by Bodhi’s observations that sati has varying layers of conceptual content ranging from ‘heavy’ to ‘light’ to ‘zero’, depending on the particular type of satipaṭṭhāna being practiced.81 This observation is self-evident when one reads the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. Certain practices in this discourse use conceptualization extensively. In these types of techniques, sati is associated and works closely with discursive and conceptual thinking.82 In these practices the practitioner uses thoughts and concepts frequently as an aid for bringing and keeping the mind on the body, feelings, mind and mental phenomena. This indicates that sati, as pointed out by Bodhi, cannot be regarded as non-discursive and non-conceptual by its nature.83
To put it differently, I would say that in an ordinary cognitive process, sati requires continuous cultivation by various techniques; many of these techniques concern concepts and discursive thoughts, and some even use verbal formulations. In such contexts, right effort, right view and right intention must accompany sati.
Yet, we should bear in mind that in other stages of the path, when the conceptual content is very light and the mind contains only wholesome factors, sati does not need the ‘assistance’ of any type of thinking and intention in order to maintain awareness on the phenomenal field. In these unique occasions, sati is finally fully developed in a stream of consciousness that is free from mental obstructions and cognitive overlays. It seems plausible to characterize sati during such a higher level occasion as ‘bare awareness’ of the phenomenal field. It is bare in the sense that it is free from affective or cognitive overlays; it is free from the medium of discursive thoughts and conceptual constructions; it is free from mental and physical reactivity rooted in desire, aversion and ignorance. Therefore, it is free from clinging and identification. On such an occasion, I would argue, the aim of Buddhist meditation has been achieved to a very high extent (this is because the final aim is, of course, nibbāna – the permanent cessation of unwholesomeness).
It is clear, I think, by now that sati’s mode of function in a wholesome, nondiscursive and non-reactive field of awareness is different from its mode of function during an ordinary cognitive process. What I am suggesting is that the attainment of the fourth jhāna marks an important moment in the Buddhist path to awakening. At this point in the spiritual path a specialized form of awareness has been fully established – a form of awareness that resembles an awakened awareness. I would further suggest that the purification of sati in the fourth jhāna actually means there is no deliberate or intentional effort to bring sati into service. This is because it has already been fully developed as a sustained and lucid awareness; that is, it is fulfilled as an awakening factor. In other words, in the fourth jhāna, sati as a sustained and lucid awareness of the phenomenal field becomes an ‘automatic’ function; it is automatic in the sense that it does not require deliberate and intentional effort.
In addition, following the latter proposition, I contend that in the fourth jhāna the automatic apprehension of an object and the sustained awareness (sati) of that activity are almost indistinguishable. My point is that these two mental processes are not ‘spaced’, as in an ordinary mind, by discursive and conceptual thinking and emotional reactions. Thus, it is the case that manasikāra and sati are differentiated by the fact that the former is always an automatic process (i.e., the initial adverting of attention to an object) and, by contrast, sati (i.e., the lucid awareness of this process of attention) is originally a cultivated quality.84 Nevertheless, I would argue, that in the fourth jhāna, both mental factors arise automatically and in such proximity and continuity that they can almost be looked at as one single event. In short, the lucid and vivid awareness (sati) of what contacts the senses arises immediately after an object comes into the range of cognition, unintentionally and free from any hindrances. In other words, there is no pause between the moment an object contacts the sense-doors and when sati comes into play. This seems to mean that there is no mental gap in which the experiential act (i.e., seeing, hearing etc.) can be ascribed to a subjective ‘I’ by conceptual and affective overlays. At this attainment there is no fabrication of a sense of self. The experiential act is seen as conditioned and empty of self. This, however, does not mean that this state itself is a completely unfabricated state, as all moments of experience are fabricated. However, I would suggest that it fabricates much less. Hence, it can be the spring board to awakening: it sees its own fabrication and therefore can see clearly the origin of dukkha.
To sum up, this unique mental setting allows the practitioner to be deeply familiarized with a clear, lucid and non-reactive awareness of experience for a prolonged period of time,85 free from emotional and cognitive overlays that create a sense of a subjective ‘I’ separated from the objective field, and hence, free from the duality of subject and object. In the fourth jhāna, the initial task of sati has arrived at full completion. Bodhi has beautifully described this mode of function even though he does not ascribe it to the nature of sati in the fourth jhāna. He explains that
[B]y bringing into focus the experiential field, sati illuminates objects without the usual overlay of distorted conceptual elaborations that obscure their real nature.86
I would suggest that this description relates unintentionally to the function of sati in the fourth jhāna (and it would seem to me, to awakened awareness as well). I am suggesting that sati of the fourth jhāna not only helps keep cognitive distortions in check as specified by Bodhi;87 rather, it should also be accredited as that which facilitates insight or wisdom by functioning as lucid and bare awareness of the phenomenal field. In the fourth jhāna, sati serves (upaṭṭhāna) the mind not as a guard against the unwholesome but as that which allows insight to manifest through a sustained attention of what presents itself to awareness. At this moment, this attention is free from ignorance and reactive tendencies of desire and aversion; this is because upekkhā has also been fulfilled as an awakening factor.88
I will provisionally reflect, following these observations, that the preceding analysis seems to imply that consciousness (viññāṇa) in the fourth jhāna might not be shaped by conditioned psychological settings or conceptual structures (an issue I will offer some further reflections later on). This, I would hypothesize, can be described as the best possible ‘position’ for attaining awakening.
V Vedanā of the fourth jhāna
The last factor I wish to discuss is the ‘feeling tone’ (vedanā) of the fourth-jhāna experience. While the first three jhānas are characterized as pleasurable (sukha), the fourth jhāna is characterized as adukkhaṃ-asukhaṃ – ’neither-painful-norpleasant’. According to Buddhist analysis of experience, vedanā is the term for the ‘feeling tone’ of every moment of experience; it is born out of contact between an object and a sense door.89 Buddhist analysis discerns three types of vedanā: painful, pleasant and neither-painful-nor-pleasant90 while assuming that it has both mental and physical facets.91 Vedanā, according to Buddhist psychology, is central in determining the reactions to our experiences. Our reactions to the different types of feelings can sustain and recondition three kinds of underlying tendencies: the underlying tendency to desi
re (rāgānusayo), the underlying tendency to aversion (paṭighānusayo) and the underlying tendency to ignorance (avijjānusayo).92 When these reactive tendencies are not abandoned, they condition the arising of craving (taṇhā) and clinging (upādānā). Yet, a wise relation to the different types of feelings and sensations (vedanā) can uproot these same underlying tendencies; therefore, it can stop the origination of dukkha.93
According to the Cūḷavedalla Sutta, the underlying tendency to desire underlies most pleasant feelings, while the underlying tendency to aversion underlies most painful feelings.94 This process is described in detail in the Salla Sutta, which explains that, when an ordinary person (puthujjana) experiences painful feelings, the mind harbours aversion towards that feeling. When one harbours aversion towards painful feelings, the underlying tendency to aversion (paṭighānusayo) lies behind this. When an ordinary person feels a pleasant feeling (or when one seeks delight in sensual pleasures as an escape from painful feelings), the mind seeks delight in that pleasant feeling; here the underlying tendency to desire (rāgānusayo) lies behind these feelings.95 The Salla Sutta further explains that the underlying tendency to ignorance underlies most ‘neither-painful-nor-pleasant’ feelings when one does not understand: