Insight meditation and the Satipatthana sutta

[blossomingtree]

I agree with sky123, it is to encourage an "active" reflection that will lead to reducing attachment to the physical body (but by no means not valuing/appreciating the physical body, just to recognize that as precious and beautiful a vehicle it is, it will decay and die, and to thus see clearer this way).

"In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipi....010.than.html

Originally Posted by catsquotl

Yes but to what purpose...
Sorry to keep asking questions, but let's get down to the nitty gritty of it instead of just vague notions..

Why I zoom in on the cemetery meditations is because to me they stand out.
From the frames of reference, we cannot know the experience of having a decaying body, we cannot feel like a skeleton that consists of sun bleached bones. We can only become aware of our inclination towards such a sight and smell.

Every other frame of reverence so to speak in the satipatthana is directly experience-able in some way. those cemetery meditations are not. I find that interesting..

It is precisely to encourage awareness of the reality of our temporal lives/body.

He applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.'

Not sensation based, as I see it.

BT

[sky]

Marassati Sutta.

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Joe Mc

Yes. I mean the methodology around various meditation techniques seems to drift into a bogus debate of which is best, so it becomes a spiritual materialism perhaps. I'm going to change my horse

It's always nice to chat, Joe so feel free to contribute anytime. I don't agree that methodology discussion is (necessarily) spiritual materialism, firstly because this is a discussion forum so the gist of what we do is talk but secondly because many ways have their ways about it. It's like learning to ride a horse, some trainers teach this technique, others another. As long as the trainer is a genuine professional, I personally don't think it matters (and why I hesitate to comment unless I know the technique in more detail) which method is utilized, but commenting on differences does not necessarily constitute a "peeing match" - unless it is one of course.

Originally Posted by Joe Mc

Perhaps the main thing is to chip away and at least stay in touch with some kind of deepening and spiritual acknowledgement of our predicament here as human beings.

It is unavoidable for those of us interested in the spiritual path, I suspect, especially where there have been openings. The fix is in motion.

Originally Posted by Joe Mc

Looking back at my enthusiasm when I cleaned the windows of a dharma centre and saw the teacher as a living buddha perhaps said more about my (naivety) nativity as a simple Irish working class kid who was destined to see something in dharma terms, despite not being able to hold a debate with you Blame it on the Catholicism perhaps. Thanks for opportunity to ramble some more. Best regards Joe.

Not at all, we all start with innocence and hopefully end in innocence, it's a beauty, not a bane.

As to debate, I certainly am sorry if I have made you feel this way. My intention is not to debate with you, only to share my (admittedly banal ) perspectives and walk alongside you as a friend and Dharma buddy. I hold you in high regard and esteem, your beauty is evident.

Debate is secondary and minor, it's not even required for Dharma. The only reason I will often comment is, although the theory is admittedly unimportant, in some ways, it is also important. The reason is thus: a manual on martial arts. At the end of the day, when we are chopping the old block in half and doing aerial somersaults the manual of course doesn't matter, it is secondary to the practice nor was it the "purpose".

However, when practicing, it is my firm belief that there is a precision to Dharma practice. i.e. the manual has a purpose and it has its own quirks and tips, depth and corners.

Therefore, it is eminently valuable to have in this world as many realized (genuinely masterful) teachers with pure purpose as possible - Buddhism is both an art and a science and guides are essential if students are to reach maximum fruition, imo.

Love.

BT

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Gem

Those are for intellectual understanding that death and decomposition is characteristic of the body: "this body, too, is of that same nature".

I think it is intended for a monk in particular to reduce attachment to the body, and see this - I would classify it as reflection, not an intellectual understanding. I see little in Buddhist scripture that is intended to stay at the intellectual level.

BT

[Gem]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

Yes but to what purpose...
Sorry to keep asking questions, but let's get down to the nitty gritty of it instead of just vague notions..

Why I zoom in on the cemetery meditations is because to me they stand out.
From the frames of reference, we cannot know the experience of having a decaying body, we cannot feel like a skeleton that consists of sun bleached bones. We can only become aware of our inclination towards such a sight and smell.

Every other frame of reverence so to speak in the satipatthana is directly experience-able in some way. those cemetery meditations are not. I find that interesting..

Yes. That's what makes it 'intellectual'. I mean we all know someone who died and we all know ourselves and everyone else is going to die, but that does very little in terms of our attachments. In this way the death contemplation reveals something true and inevitable about the body, but one would have to explore the experience of their own living body to gain any significant insight.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Gem

Yes. That's what makes it 'intellectual'. I mean we all know someone who died and we all know ourselves and everyone else is going to die, but that does very little in terms of our attachments. In this way the death contemplation reveals something true and inevitable about the body, but one would have to explore the experience of their own living body to gain any significant insight.

' but that does very little in terms of our attachments '


As we get older you can see/feel the body starting to deteriorate therefore I personally find the teaching very helpful but you you need to put it into practise not just read it.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

' but that does very little in terms of our attachments '


As we get older you can see/feel the body starting to deteriorate therefore I personally find the teaching very helpful but you you need to put it into practise not just read it.

All it means is you can only practice a graveyard contemplation in imagination, which seems quite ill-fitting in this meditation, as does imagining all the organs in an earlier passage. As in intellectual contemplation it's fair to consider, but it is not a 'direct experience'. When we look at that, and we know that distinction between what is 'imagined about' and what is 'really experienced', that observation which reveals such things to us is 'insight meditation'.

I mean the fact that the graveyard contemplation is 'thinking about' or 'considering' and the breath meditation is 'just watching' isn't true because I say it is, or because I'm right about it, but because you can recognise it yourself. It is 'true of you' - and that's what we refer to as 'insight'.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Gem

Yes. That's what makes it 'intellectual'. I mean we all know someone who died and we all know ourselves and everyone else is going to die, but that does very little in terms of our attachments. In this way the death contemplation reveals something true and inevitable about the body, but one would have to explore the experience of their own living body to gain any significant insight.

Your right.

The attachments weave in so many ways of our own living body.

Until you walk through the experience more directly with yourself, you cant know the full extent of your own attachments.

Its a bit like my passing through the "fear of death" space in myself, where I entered into an actual experience of letting go to death to overcome the fear of it. I actually believed I would die in that moment I reached in myself and my process that was unfolding slowly to get me there. (Letting all attachments go) If I didn't enter into it fully, I would not have been able to see the my emotional binds and resistance and what I was holding onto.. To actually feel this fully as a full feeling and surrender, allowed me to enter into the fullness of myself in that moment, even to show me the understanding of the body shutting down.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

Your right.

The attachments weave in so many ways of our own living body.

Until you walk through the experience more directly with yourself, you cant know the full extent of your own attachments.

Yes. Attachment runs deeper than one would expect and unraveling them is an involved process.

Its a bit like my passing through the "fear of death" space in myself, where I entered into an actual experience of letting go to death to overcome the fear of it. I actually believed I would die in that moment I reached in myself and my process that was unfolding slowly to get me there.

Yes there is a 'brink' which if you cross it you are going without knowing if you will come back - and you'll see what kind of thing attachments can be.

(Letting all attachments go) If I didn't enter into it fully, I would not have been able to see the my emotional binds and resistance and what I was holding onto.. To actually feel this fully as a full feeling and surrender, allowed me to enter into the fullness of myself in that moment, even to show me the understanding of the body shutting down.

That sounds very true to life.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Gem

Yes. Attachment runs deeper than one would expect and unraveling them is an involved process.

Yes for sure.

Yes there is a 'brink' which if you cross it you are going without knowing if you will come back - and you'll see what kind of thing attachments can be.

yes I had to surrender without knowing either way, it was the only way as I see it to let go fully.

That sounds very true to life.

That moment of surrender to death opened me to learn how to live my life without attachments and live more fully. Liberation of the spirit in body, to become the body of spirit liberated.