Insight meditation and the Satipatthana sutta

[Gem]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

Well this thread has taken a slight detour it seems.
It has become rather philosophical despite the wish for it not to..

Yes, it's taking an aside to the theology aspect, whereas I'm more interested in lived aspects.

So I am still interested in how exactly the Sattipatanna Sutta is practiced by you guys.
If we take it a paragraph at the time and reach the end of the middle length discourse we can take the final paragraphs from the Long discourse..

Good idea.

A translation and commentary I am rather fon of is the following.
Analayo-Satipatthana-The-Direct-Path-to-Realization-pdf

Cool, I'll have a read of that.

As for abiding in dhammas.
In Jospeph Goldstien's rather large treaty (found here)

He talks about the 4 foundations of mindfullness as abiding in them. Like laying/ being in a pasture. You abide within one of them mindfully, Diligent, Clearly knowing and free from desire and discontent.

Sounds 'right'.

So you abide in the pasture of the body, mindfully, Diligent, Clearly knowing and free from desire and discontent.
Or abide in the feelings/vedanna, mindfully, Diligent, Clearly knowing and free from desire and discontent.
Or abide in Citta/mind, mindfully, Diligent, Clearly knowing and free from desire and discontent.
Or abide in dhammas/mindstates, mindfully, Diligent, Clearly knowing and free from desire and discontent.

In my experience what the Satipatthana points to is to penetrate the samatha states and see reality as it really is.

It it to see it 'as it is'. That's the principle of mindfulness.

I don't know what 'samatha states' means.

So wherever you find yourself. You can only be inside/abide in one of 4 pastures.
In those pastures you can realize all there is to realize in order to be free from suffering

In terms of practice.
Usually my practice consists of 30 minutes walking meditation followed by 30 minutes of sitting.
I try to make a mental note of my direct experience at least every second or so.
While walking I tend to stay in the realm of body. noting the movements as they happen. If my mind drifts I note the drifting if I can catch it or the dhamma where it ended up in.
When I leave the pasture of the body I usually make a note of the vedana I experience there.

When sitting I am inclined to not at a slower pace. The rise and fall of my belly is usually slower than once per second. Other than that I try to note all 4 abidings as they happen.

Sometimes I try to take the satipatthana as a layout. Where I take a more active stance in pointing my attention through the body, to feelings, to mind, to dhamma's.
Although helpful at times that feels rather forced so I do this only on occasion. I think it's triggered by doubt. But am not sure yet.

With Love
Eelco

I observe breath and/or body, both these being feeling (vedana). Being conscious at feel level I know the movements of the mind, as any mental action, reaction, craving, aversion is in reaction to the sensation (vedana).

The practice itself is remaining still with that quiet balance of equanimity. Only a quiet, balanced mind can go deeper. A reactive, agitated mind can not. As the mind becomes more concentrated in this way, I can feel subtler and subtler sensations. Because there is no reactivity to these, I cease to produce new 'impure states of mind'. Since the observation stays still, the old impurities, my contents, arise to conscious awareness and there they dissolve away.

[Gem]

I had a glance over the link you provided (first one) and it has a great translation of the sutta and what at first glance looks like a reall good, easy to read, commentary. It is quite long so I will get back to it another time - read it a bit at a time when I come to this thread.

PS: thanks for putting the tread back on topic.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

Quote Gem.... I see. I had never heard of Digha Nakaya series or Majjhima Nikaya, and have no idea what they are.

Nikiyas are collections/volumes in the Sutta Pitaka which is one of the three baskets that compose the Pali Tipitaka in Theravada Buddhism..

Oh right. The baskets I heard of, but until now knew nothing of their names or their details.

[Gem]

It's very beautifully written, catsquotl. I read a few pages and it is true to my own practice, so I could only say the same things as this author says (but not nearly as well). I look forward to reading more and am bound to gain a deeper understanding from it.

Samatha states refer to Jhana's.
They are states of mind that can be attained through so called samatha or concentration practices.

They are known as meditative absorption.
The first 4 are known as material states, the latter 4 as immaterial.
They have specific properties by which they are to be known.

I believe that they aren't needed for insight practices although some belief they make the ride a lot more pleasurable.

Gem when you notice the vedana, do you stick to the 3 forms it manifests as?
pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant nor unpleasant?

With Love
Eelco

Originally Posted by Gem

It's hard to know what to say because if I talk about the specifics of practice technique, I'd be contradicting a lot of teachers,

I could also go into the satipatthana sutta itself, but that would be a philosophical based knowledge, and as we've seen in the past, that way of speaking leads to acrimony which indicates that minds have become too agitated to progress to subtler reaches - hence that too would be futile.

It begins with calm mindedness because a calm mind will attend in a focused, penetrating way. Resting on the gross and solid level of the immediate experience, and feeling the finer details that make up the that overall solidity - dividing the initial feeling into its constituents by feeling out the finer details of the sensation. It follows that such an endeavor is training the mind to be able to perceive on a subtler level that was previously possible.

If the mind becomes agitated, frustrated, impatient, craven, or otherwise disrupted from quiet calm, it is incapable of the sensitivity required for such subtle perception.

This is why mindful speech is instrumental here, as speech which intended to, or likely to, elicit psychological reactivity that agitates mind, is wholly counterproductive. If the genuine wish is for our mutual greater happiness, our way of speaking will create rather than disrupt the 'conditions' most conducive to that end.

I'm re-reading the beginning of this thread and can't help but to be confused.
The title indicates the start of a thread that will explore the relationship of insight meditation and the satipatthana sutta.

But then it never explores it on the bases that it would be a futile endevour because of fear of contradiction?
Then out of the blue appears the comment that it starts with a calm mind and mindful speech. Both of which can be part of mindfullness practices, but aren't (to my understanding) mentioned in the sutta..

I've dived in with how I keep the satipatthana in mind when practicing, but start to doubt that this is what the OP was after..

Would you elaborate?
With Love
Eelco

[sky]

Quote catsquoti......Gem when you notice the vedana, do you stick to the 3 forms it manifests as?
pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant nor unpleasant?

Are there any more sensations/feelings beside these....

Not as far as clear knowing of feelings would be understood. Every derivative holds a larger concept which would make it a mindstate with a feeling undertone which could be categorized as pleasant, unpleasant or neither. Often called neutral.

I'm on my phone so can't look it up but the refrain of the satipatthana often states understanding something as far as needed for clear comprehension.

In my understanding when it comes to feelings the 3 stated characteristivs are enough.
personally i take this to mean don't overcomplicate the experience.

With love
Eelco

[sky]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

Not as far as clear knowing of feelings would be understood. Every derivative holds a larger concept which would make it a mindstate with a feeling undertone which could be categorized as pleasant, unpleasant or neither. Often called neutral.

I'm on my phone so can't look it up but the refrain of the satipatthana often states understanding something as far as needed for clear comprehension.

In my understanding when it comes to feelings the 3 stated characteristivs are enough.
personally i take this to mean don't overcomplicate the experience.

With love
Eelco

As you can't have one without the other I understand this teaching to mean that feeling exists, and there is no need for labels.

Do they?

Like every phenomenon they arise and pass away as well.
I often find myself using emotions to convey what in effect is a pleasant (I love you) or unpleasant(I hate/ am angry at you) feeling.

I think it is beneficial to get to know exactly where the feeling begins and end and where the mind state that I perceive as the emotion arises.

With Love
Eelco