25/04/2023
PATHAMMASAMADHISUTTA (AN 4.92)
Mendicants, these four people are found in the world.
[Cattārome, bhikkhave, puggalā santo saṁvijjamānā lokasmiṁ]
What four?
[Katame cattāro?]
One person has internal serenity of heart, but not the Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment.
[Idha, bhikkhave, ekacco puggalo lābhī hoti ajjhattaṁ cetosamathassa, na lābhī adhipaññādhammavipassanāya]
One person has the Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment, but not internal serenity of heart.
[Idha pana, bhikkhave, ekacco puggalo lābhī hoti adhipaññādhammavipassanāya, na lābhī ajjhattaṁ cetosamathassa]
One person has neither internal serenity of heart, nor Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment.
[Idha pana, bhikkhave, ekacco puggalo na ceva lābhī hoti ajjhattaṁ cetosamathassa na ca lābhī adhipaññādhammavipassanāya.]
One person has both internal serenity of heart, and the Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment.
[Idha pana, bhikkhave, ekacco puggalo lābhī ceva hoti ajjhattaṁ cetosamathassa lābhī ca adhipaññādhammavipassanāya]
These are the four people found in the world.
[Ime kho, bhikkhave, cattāro puggalā santo saṁvijjamānā lokasmin ti.]
This writing is a response to various opinion in the West, mostly by untrained lay people but also some monastics as well, that Vipassana is not a method as such in the Buddhist meditation practice and that in the sutta no reference is made to vipassana as dedicated meditation practice. Some maintain that whenever the vipassana is mentioned it refers to a result but not a discipline or a method. Others maintain that it is a myth in present day Buddhism that only has a position as practical mindfulness.
It is actually not easy to say that vipassana is a myth without disrespecting the practice of millions of Theravadins in the past and present. One just has to participate in local Buddhist practice in Myanmar, Thailand and Sri Lanka to understand what precisely the methodological difference is between Calm Abiding (Samatha) and Discerning Insight (Vipassana). Even more it might show a sense of hybris towards the Tipitaka because the differentiation between Calm and Discerning Insight is mentioned many times in the Pali sutta actually as being separate methods with distinctive training function and characteristics. For example, in the Yuganaddhasutta; Sammapattivaga; Balavaga; Abhinnasutta; Tatiyasamadhisutta; Akhankhasutta and many more.
To understand that there is a difference in the practice of meditation, one just has to realize first that meditation is a mental act of keeping attention to a chosen subject. In Pali the term is samadhi consisting of ‘sam’ (correct) and ‘adhi’ (above), that denotes attention ‘priority’. It implies that attention has to be focused on a subject of study, therefore it is translated with ‘concentration’.
However, a meditator will find that once our attention is continuously directed towards the chosen subject, one can easily see two kinds of processes taking place, sometimes simultaneously but sometimes following up each other: The first is, after overcoming lethargy, boredom, confusion, daydreaming and worries the attention is able to stabilize on the object of attention and no other thought and feelings can occupy the mind except for the chosen subject. Along with this mental state calm and serene state of awareness is produced. How closer the attention gets to the chosen subject, the more serene it becomes and eventually fully merges into a synthesis between subject-object without separation. The different levels of serenity are referred as Jhana levels. Which denotes the level of absorption of the meditator’s awareness into the object of attention (this is the reason why Jhana is referred to as ‘absorption’).
The second process is that after overcoming lethargy, boredom, confusion, daydreaming and worries, the attention gets hold on the subject of choice but starts seeing deeper layers of subtle realities of the chosen subject and is able discern, deconstruct, separate the elements from the whole, continuously dividing into smaller and smaller realities that ends with experiencing that there is actually nothing at all left. In the Maha Satipathana sutta (DN 22) this process of deconstructing is embodied in the simile of the ‘beef piece and the cow’ and also the method to seeing the ‘body in the body’ where the whole body is perceived as only consisting of conglomeration of the four natural elements. Also, the observation of our physical body as conglomeration of internal organs and body parts belongs to this approach.
A same approach of seeing deeper layers of realities than the appearance at first sight of the object observed is also applied in the four satipathana’s to ‘seeing feelings in feelings’ (which has a profound explanation by the arahant sister Dhammadina in the Culavedallasutta MN 44); ‘seeing thought in thoughts’ and ‘seeing realities in reality’s’.
This practice of seeing deeper than the appearance at first glance leads to more insight into the true nature of our being as a person. It corrects the wrong perception (as explained in the Vipallasasutta AN 4.49) that: 1. That which is actually ugly is perceived by us as beautiful; 2. that which is actually painful is perceived by us as pleasure; 3. That what is transient is perceived as fixed; and 4. That which has no substance is perceived as substantial (perceiving no-self as possessing a self). The different levels of insight are called Ñana in the Pattisambhidamagga and culminates in entering nibbana (the unconditioned) during the phases called Maggañana and Phalañana.
The first mentioned process is called the method of Samatha (calming of the hart) and the second is called Vipassana (seeing reality as it is). In the traditional Theravada doctrine in the East, it is acknowledged that the boddhisatta Sidharta gained mastery of the Samatha practice as pupil of Alara Kalama and Udaka Ramaputta but could not reach enlightenment with the nondual approach. As such he went to find out by himself that the reoccurring cycle of dependent co-arising was the actualization of suffering even in the highest/foremost state of undividedness. This realization is the “Wisdom” [Pañña] part that is attributed to be Siddhartha’s own contribution for completion of spiritual development.
What is today known as Vipassana is actually the dedicated training of ‘Wisdom’ consisting of the methodological formation of knowledge/gnosis as elements for accomplishment of Right View and Right Resolve. So Vipassana is the disciplined training of the first two parts of the Noble Eightfold Path being the Wisdom Basket of the Eightfold Path. Vipassana should not be mistaken as mere ‘Mindfulness’, as often thought.
The development of Right View and Right Resolve can only be attained if one clearly experiences transiency; dissatisfaction; and insubstantiality [Anicca-Dukkha-Anatta] that leads to full disenchantment from all perceivable phenomenon by our human senses. As concepts being only mind constructs cannot reveal these general phenomenological characteristics of change-suffering-chaos, in vipassana only Ultimate Realities [Paramathadhamma] can be chosen as subject for meditation. The reason is that only ultimate realities are able to provide deep sense of transiency; pain and powerlessness as direct experience to the meditator. This in turn, after this being personally experienced leads to distancing, disenchantment and renunciation from the five constituents (body, feeling, thought, perception, conditioned mind objects also known as the Panca Khanda).
So, to maintain that vipassana is not a method is unjustified, as Right View and Right Resolve comes first in the training of the Noble Eightfold Path. Without some sense of dissatisfaction with the present state of affairs, one will not be motivated to seek for spiritual improvement by accepting and following the Noble Eightfold path. It is the rudimentary vipassana sense that leads one to accept the correct morality norms [Sila] and practice concentration [Samadhi]. On the other hand, practicing morality and concentration leads to a higher level of Right View and Right Resolve. That is why it is mentioned so many times in the Tipitaka of the both approaches, which could be practiced separately or jointly, and in combination as the Pathammasamadhisutta states.
One person has internal serenity of heart, but not the Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment.
This sentence refers to the meditation practice of only developing calm to one’s upmost ability. It is easy to conceive the calming of the heart is due to its soothing of the hardness of human existence, this leads to a state of consciousness that is stable; pleasurable; and controllable. These characteristics are exactly of the opposite character for the necessary ingredients for wisdom being instability, suffering and chaos. One can insight in pleasure and joy. Furthermore, the mental act of the meditator is to attach oneself to the chosen subject. Probably because of this reason Vipassana teachers always warn their students to avoid Samatha as much as possible. So why train in Calm Abiding when it produces circumstances that is more liable for attachment than detachment? The answer is because calm produces clarity of mind that eliminates unnecessary/side reasoning and most important gives the mind sharpness and penetrating strength. These features are in fact very important to be able to see through the first glance impression and see the deeper reality. Furthermore, not everybody is suitable for vipassana, especially those who are restless, unorganized and impatient by disposition. These persons are better off by training in calm abiding. At peak of calm and serenity the meditator thus eventually sees the transiency, dissatisfaction; and insubstantiality nature of reality. The liberation associated with this practice is referred to as ‘Liberation of the Heart’ [Cetovimutti], of which generally is of temporary nature but when achieved in the formless absorption has a permanent quality.
One person has the Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment, but not internal serenity of heart
This is the opposite position of the above mentioned whereby a person solely trains in insight only, this training is also called dry vipassana. Because the meditator only confines oneself in observing the five constituents, which in the training is grossly divided in two realms the physicality [Rupa] and psyche [Nama]. Due to the overwhelming experiencing of the present reality and the continuous the labeling in the mind, the separation and differentiation of concept and ultimate reality is progressively understood. This enables distancing and disenchantment from own feelings; personal thoughts/views and eventually renouncing the self-identification with the person you thought yourself to be. This training requires personality traits that can endure hardship and prolonged periods of confronting and observing misery and the ability to stay unengaged in seeing how the own mind responds to the hardships. Therefore, the liberation associated with this training is called ‘Liberation by Wisdom’ [Paññavimutti]. Furthermore, many teachers maintain that coming into contact with vipassana is a not normal case but has to be supported by good merits and sufficiently developed perfections [Parami], otherwise the practice might only lead to a state of heedfulness but not to a change of view in the nature of the ‘self’. However, as a windfall a lesser enlightenment moment is possible in a not too far away time, as it is said: in this very life.
One person has neither internal serenity of heart, nor Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment
This refers to the untrained worldling [Puthujjana] that has no knowledge of ability to emotionally calm down nor to intellectually understand the true nature of things. In the worst case such a person is completely unaware of the existence of the teachings that has been proclaimed by the Buddha and in the most favorable case such a person is born in traditional setting of Buddhist culture but does not have the faith to commit oneself to the required mental training and development as taught by the Buddha, to end suffering and re-existence. The one who is morally inclined to higher ethical standards may confine to supporting the sangha of monks and participate in Buddhist ceremonies and rituals in accordance to collective usance. Getting more acquainted and involved in Buddha’s teachings is the most viable path for this person, by reading and listening to dhamma talks. This phase of learning to know the teaching is called the reading phase [Pariyatti] where one gains literary wisdom [Sutta Maya Pañña]. Although Pariyatti phase usually does not involve meditation and austerity it is a very important phase where one prepares the mental grounds (psychological motivation) that leads to the wish to meditate and contemplate. The more mature the literary wisdom becomes the more chance of following and doing meditation sessions.
One person has both internal serenity of heart, and the Vipassana higher wisdom of reality discernment
This person follows the ideal training as stated in the Yuganadhasutta (AN 4.170 & Yuganaddhakatha PTS), because the person has the ability to abide in calm without attachment and has higher knowledge without any appropriation by the ego. Sutta refers to them as liberated in both ways, being hart liberated and wisdom liberated. The sutta mentions that there are four ways to practice either samatha (calm training) or vipassana (wisdom training): 1. To start with samatha and then latter changing to vipassana; 2. Start with vipassana and later change to samatha; 3. Practicing both in tandem and 4. By solely observing reality till overpowered by dissatisfaction that brings disenchantment. This last point is the strategy that is held by the ‘dry vipassana’ trainee, as reality itself by nature easily reveals the suffering aspects of existence internally or externally.
As conclusion we maintain that the sutta pitaka acknowledges the two domains of mental development that even suggests two types of liberation by hart [cetovimutti] and by wisdom [paññavimutti]. When one starts to mediate mostly one does not differentiate between concept and reality, but only trains in forming discipline, effort, steadfastness in mental training. But as contemplation develops one realizes that when the mind is directed to concepts it has a different sequel than when it is directed towards the bare experience itself. The difference is exactly the difference between serenity and insight.
So, when one trains in samatha the subjects are almost predominantly ‘concepts’ while vipassana that wants to develop Right View and Right Resolve keeps itself checked with bare experience solely. This sharpens the capacity of the mind to discern ‘which is and which is not’ the trajectory to proceed and thus stay on the way to the intended result. Certainly, a meditation form that is not so explicitly dedicated to either concept or reality is also possible, as we see in the description of undirected [Appanihita] and signless [Animitta] meditations in other suttas.
In the end both Samatha and Vipassana adepts will experience undirected and sign-less states. But for an average beginner, it requires a lot of effort to correctly understand and interpret the mind states that occur without falling into grasping or appropriation (and false conclusion) by the constructed self. Following a systematic dedicated methodological approach that is user ready, wins in time and ease because it has been prepared in advance by the Buddha and preserved for us by Burmese Theravada meditation masters. Therefore, the recognition is important that these two approaches and two different domain of training exists, and should be chosen according to one own’s character or disposition. Just as nowadays we can take a light bulb from the shelf to lightened up the room and neglect the research on how electricity can produce light, such is the path to enlightenment made user ready for us without having to do the groundwork of researching first. We just have to take it into practice.
Nibbanasa pacayo hotu.
