group-emotion / freedom within

[Guest guest]

Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote:

> Dear Karta,

>

> I've noticed that any time I focus my attention on something --

> on anything -- my mental state changes. The act of deliberately

> holding the attention puts the mind into a state where it cannot

> do many of the things it normally does, like have temper

tantrums.

> So yes, observing anger will tend to induce peacefulness,

> and one of the best ways of deal with unpleasant mental phenomena

> (anger, pain, etc.) is to pay attention to them.

>

> But I think the act of deliberately focusing the attention is more

> important than whatever we are focusing it on. Continuous

> deliberate attention is useful in itself apart from its utility in

dealing

> with unpleasant things.

>

> One of the common threads in all systems of practice, it seems to

> me, is the goal of continuous deliberate attention. Buddists call

> this mindfulness. In some systems it's not explicitly named, but

the

> idea is present. In Ramana Maharshi's system, for example, there

> is no specific term for " continuously focusing attention, " but the

> whole idea of his method is to cultivate a state in which attention

> is continuously and permanently held on the sense of " me. "

>

> It's difficult to maintain continuous attention. It keeps getting

lost.

> It's interesting, when it comes back, to try to notice how it was

lost,

> and to try to watch the process of it getting lost next time it

happens.

>

> Regards,

>

> Rob

 

 

thank you again Rob,

 

I found this on anger at an ecstatic Buddhism club

 

I've been referring to as " freedom within " (where feelings such as

anger arise, but there is no fixation) -- which I have juxtaposed

with " freedom from " (where feelings such as anger simply do not

arise, because the self-clinging and delusion that underlies such

feelings has been overcome).

 

& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &

 

I've found the " freedom within " approach to be more widely discussed

in Mahayana and Vajrayana circles; and I've found the " freedom from "

ideal most consistently expressed in Theravada. Everything that I've

encountered within Theravada to date has suggested that an Arahant

has " freedom from " -- i.e. afflictive emotions (such as anger) simply

do not arise. The suttas seem clear about this. Example:

 

" Suppose some bandits catch one of you and sever his body limb from

limb with a two-handed saw, and if he should feel angry thereby even

at that moment, he is no follower of my teaching. "

-- Kakacupama Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 21

 

The Abhidhamma seems very clear about this. In Abhidhamma, no

unpleasant mental feelings arise in an Arahant (as opposed to

unpleasant feelings within the 5 sense gates, which may arise).

 

I have seen this one and there is a little bit of a problem to solve

here.

 

They don't have emotional pains this is true. but there is still the

potential for unpleasant feeling to arise.

For instance, The Buddha had back pain until he died.... So it is

clear he had physical pain and the pain was so intense while he

walked to Kusinara to die, that he had to sit down and rest. ( He

still had a body to deal with! )

But you have to note here, that the pain did not disturb, or cause

movement within his mind.

 

Also, remember Mogalana! When he was close to death, when all of his

bones were crushed to sand, there was unpleasant feeling but it did

not shake his mind with dissatisfaction.

 

Now one might say, " So what? That could be just a bunch of

scholastic nonsense. " However, my experience has shown me that there

is a level of dwelling in wisdom wherein afflictive emotions are

simply no longer possible. Anger is simply a manifestation of

craving. You write:

 

> Craving is manifested in the mind as an opinion of the arisen

> feeling, 'I like it' or 'I don't like it'

 

Anger is ALREADY a form of 'I don't like it.' It is already a (very

strong) form of craving. If one has overcome craving, one has

overcome anger.

 

& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &

 

Yes the emotion arises. Dependent origination proves this. Go back

and look at the line of causation again.

 

The craving is the initial tensions tightness, the clinging in the

involvement and the real glue that makes you stuck!

 

Yes , when you nip the craving in the bud, the involvement never

arises,[because craving arises, clinging arises....]

 

In Vajrayana, it is said that wisdom can arise at THREE TIMES:

 

1) Wisdom can arise AFTER one has become afflicted and has gotten

miserably entangled in the afflictive emotion. You might 'wake up'

in the middle of your misery and say, " Oh, look what I'm doing to

myself. Let me unfixate ASAP!

 

the person is in the clinging and being here and identifying it

personally very heavily...

 

2) Wisdom can arise DURING the first hints of afflictive response.

Then it will get 'nipped in the bud' and not bloom into the full

blown mess. The initial clenching of fixation begins to twitch, but

it is immediately noticed and released.

 

Here I would say the we are at the point of the craving, a

manifestation of tightness and tension beginning to arise but not

into the full blown story as in clinging.....

 

& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &

 

3) Wisdom can arise PRIOR to an afflictive response. Here the

unpleasant emotion does not arise to begin with. This level of

practice is seen as a great attainment. This is the (apparently

effortless) practice of the arahant.

 

Here the feeling has arisen but the craving hasn't arisen.... but

there is no identification with it.... just allowing it and letting

it be.... and that is the cessation of suffering.... :-)

 

These third one is seen at very subtle levels.... and causes joy to

arise...

 

> 2. Because Formations arise, Consciousness arises [ Formations

being, all vibrations and waves and every thing...]

 

" Formations " is a translation of " sankhara " , which refers to

karmically embedded intentional actions of body, speech and mind.

 

Yes this is Sankhara. But not the gross definition of it as stated

above.

 

This is the more subtler and finer view of the definition.

 

> Formations of course are still here is this lifetime, right?

 

No. Sankharas are no longer present for the Arahant.

 

This is not true. They still have bodies. They still have actions.

They eat food ,still go to the bathroom and all of the things that a

human being does. Think about it.

 

> Therefore, Feeling (any feeling) can still arise, right?

 

No. According to the Suttas and the Abhidhamma, unpleasant mental

feelings are dependent upon ignorance. So without ignorance,

unpleasant mental feelings can no longer arise.

 

And unpleasant " physical feelings " can arise!

 

> However, The deep down part of the birth of the arising of the

> feeling ( of anger for instance) I think can still begin. It just

> never reaches the surface again and there is no longer ANY internal

> feeling going on like emotional responses etc.

 

I'm not clear on what you are saying here. If an arahant with highly

refined ability to observe feeling states can't feel a feeling at

all, then in what sense does the feeling exist? Why posit it?

 

i was thinking out loud here and I was wrong... because when you

follow it

through, they can't have any further 'unwholesome " mental feelings

arise..... yet they can have Joy arise and Tranquility arise BUT

without ANY attachment to them!

 

Here's my take:

 

If you can see and embrace things in their 'suchness' from the very

beginning, afflictive emotions based in delusion will not arise.

(This is freedom from).

 

True . This is the cessation of suffering.

 

If you fail to see and embrace things in

their suchness at first, and if afflictive emotions arise, then your

best bet is to see and embrace the afflictive emotions in THEIR

suchness. (This is freedom within).

 

No. You don't embrace Anger. You let it be. You let it go. You SEE

it is the cause of suffering.

 

If you fail to see and embrace things in their suchness, and if

afflictive emotions arise, and if you fail to see and embrace the

afflictive emotions in their suchness, then you are a captive to a

misery inducing delusion. (This is bondage; enslavement; unfreedom).

 

True. But 'embracing' is the wrong word , in my opinion, because you

let it go, you RELAX, and return to your object of meditation.

 

But, on the positive side of

impermanence, that situation will also come to pass in one way or

another.

 

Yeah.... By letting it go.... and NOT taking it personally anymore!

 

This is currently what my own experience tells me; what many teachers

confirm; and what my current reading of the Buddha's teachings seems

to say.

 

Yours may differ.

 

We are EXTREMELY close but for a few words it would seem... :-)

I am enjoying this one a great deal... try replacing the

word " suchness " with " things as they actually are " and see if it's

not clearer..

 

I keep going back to Dependent Origination to see if something is

true and this is how we develop our Wisdom , by seeing how things

actually are... By going back to the Dependent Origination. I am

also going back to the 4 Noble Truths which is the basis of the

teachings of the Buddha. They are the same.