Why 'Focusing' Meditations are Wrong _ by Ajahn Nyanamoli Thero

7:29PM Jul 4, 2021

Speakers:

Keywords:

focusing

perception

sensations

understanding

means

people

feeling

inaccessible

attend

attending

context

buddha

meditation

subjectivity

experience

conceiving

chair

nature

point

basis

Good to better. So what did you say? So we're going to talk about aspects of meditation. That I think probably most people think about what they think when they think meditation they'll be thinking about. So let's say focusing on something.

Yeah, it's probably something every, we all done. Yeah. In the beginning, yeah. When you start practicing, I know.

Because that's the first thing you come across the idea of meditation is the idea of focusing concentration in terms of focusing, focusing, focusing, and then expecting the results come automatically out of you just doing this method of focusing. So what kind of folks in need?

So I guess, first of all, the idea was focusing, focusing your attention on this sort of triangle here, around your nose, that you're where breathing is happening. So you're basically just sort of focusing on the process of breathing. And doing it as a kind of observing air passing over this area. And then it was like, and then the idea was smaller and smaller, you get the area becomes smaller and smaller and smaller until until you've focusing on focusing on just to pinpoint the

area. And what were you thinking? Like, while you were doing the focusing practice? That I should be doing? What am I doing? Well, no, no, when when you were doing the folks in practice? Yeah. Your thoughts in terms of what were you thinking that you were focusing on?

Okay, well, that was the thing I was spending most of the time wondering what that what it was that was supposed to be focusing on? And what I was doing and whether I was doing it, right. And that was all kind of superfluous to the meditation. Sure, further meditation was okay, what are you focusing on here? So the idea, I guess, was what was being encouraged? was a kind of, I would say, like an objective, sideways view, I'm sure that there that happens to be passing this area here. I will be breathing. But as if

you can perceive things, yes, that is out there outside of your experience, as a person that doesn't pertain to you to experience Yes, yeah, that's the main, that's the fundamental problem with any focusing practice, whatever the technique might be, if it's a technique of observation, and focusing and sort of preying upon moments, as a pseudo sort of describe it. The problem with that is you assume this external world independent of your perception, yet, the only way you can relate to it is to perceive it, as in the experience it but you assume through experiencing it, there, it's outside of your experience, and you can be objective about it. But how can you even conceive the idea of outside of my experience, unless you're thinking it experientially, so to speak? So you're contradicting on both fronts? Yeah. And that's the sole problem. Focusing on this one account of that, that's whatever, that's just when mind does. Mind picks the damage to look at that that's just how it works. But you're assuming that those things stand for that which they cannot stand for, such as an external world independent of me, that is subjected to this scientific laws of impermanence. Thus, the Buddha and the science are saying the same thing. Well, these views that you hear today are completely misguided because they are rooted in this article assumption of external to me yet the only way I can know it is experiencing it by myself. But is it your, your folk

focusing on something objective? Like there's this objective side flow of air that's going through the students objective nose on the front of my face, but also this this kind of, you have to sort of stand back and look at it from a position of objectivity. So you're,

which is very subjective. Exactly. How could it not be Even our hand doesn't become purely objective because it's inconceivable that means like stepping outside of the aggregates or being there with objective matter. That's inconceivable, he just stops appropriately he subjectivity still has like the individuality in terms of character habits and all these things that are not lose any greed, aversion, delusion, of course. And yet people find subjectivity to be the problem, and it is a problem. But then instead of understanding truly what, what is the problematic aspect of subjectivity and then abandoning that they think you can simply replace subjectivity by emulating this assumption of objectivity

on the isn't the kind of idea of trying to get rid of the, basically, there's always a point of view. Yeah, of course, there's always a question I cannot have, I can't have an experience without a point of view. Whereas, whereas many attitudes, meditation, kind of trying to negate negate that trying to get that if they're trying to take a third person perspective, or like a God's eye view on? Sure.

So we can do the same we've always done before. Let's take focusing now. So focus on your body touching the chair, like right now? What are the characteristics of that? How would you describe it?

Well, you asked me to focus on my body, get on the chair, and I just sort of locked into something that was already there, it's already kind of given this sense of, yeah, I can feel something I could face isn't it. It's totally inseparable from the body. It's not like, yeah, like the chair touching my body and my body touching the chair, it's just this kind of pressure or something, I don't know. If that's a touch

base, it's your only relationship that you have with it. So if you're focusing now, on Boxing as well, you realize you can only focus on something that's already there, given. But now you have a choice. So yeah, you focus on it as in, you bring your attention to it. But now you have a choice, I have a choice you have, everybody has a choice. And that choice is I can now continue to just keep repeating this focusing mechanically, or I can try understand the nature of that thing that's necessary for my focus. And you could see those, those two are mutually exclusive directions. If I keep Oprah touching the chair, I'm touching the chair, I'm touching the chair means you actively avoid in the direction of Okay, you touching the chair, now, let it be there. So you get to understand the necessary basis for your attending that in the first place, which is that, which is all the other candidates we discussed in other videos, okay, so you can only really focus on something attend to something if it was given as a possibility. And by that, I mean, if it's given beforehand, it's already there, thus, you are able to turn to it in a domain, it's that peripheral aspect of Oh, it's already there, without me being without directly attending it. So it's already there as a possibility means it's already there on its own, which means even my ownership is secondary to that basis of possibilities that present themselves as possibly mine. And you can get to understand that and then you realize, okay, so that's all you need to do stop regarding in his mind. And you can forget all the focusing you want you fulfill the purpose of your focusing, but if your purpose is just to focus for the sake of focusing means you're actively then avoiding understanding thing.

So focusing. So, people are like, going in a particular direct, you said mutually exclusive direction. So focusing in on this particular thing, well, this one particular thing, and then and then then later that are the next particular thing.

Yes, sort of the same focusing as a rule of thumb follows the the idea of attending to the particular at the expense of everything else, and that's

why it's a problem because you're always rooted in the totality of your experience

exactly in understanding the context of your particular and that's why the whole point is like, yeah, any form of focusing is already singling out particular. But obviously within that particular you can go even further so you choose it To attend your body position seated on the chair, it's a particular thing you focused on. And that's more than sufficient. Now you want to understand the nature of that thing that you focused on, there is still there because you brought your attention to it, and you don't need to keep holding on to it. Because if I ask you, are you still touching the chair? Yes, of course, you wouldn't hold on, I need to figure that out. Recall the memory No, in the knowledge is still there. Because you attended it, you clarified it by simply by focusing on it. But instead of that, then people who follow the rule of focusing for the sake of focusing will then focus on the chair, then focus on the more specific notions of your body in the chair and focus on the module. So focus when the focus is in focus. That's generally the idea. That's the idea. That's how you arrive at some sort of knowledge, you realize, but that's why I asked you, what do you think then you're focusing on what can you focus on, you can only focus on a possibility that was presented itself as being able to focus, which means when you start practicing this focusing upon focusing, and you actually develop a belief that you are focusing on the actual Rupa, on the actual matter on the actual objectivity, while in reality only can focuses on your thoughts. In other words, your thoughts give you the focus that you can focus on. So when you are thinking about the objective matter, you're thinking about a thought that is fully misconceived the nature of matter and presented itself as death, which is the matter. And that's like the essence of more or Yasuda. Obviously, they give you a very extreme sense. But the point is, even this meant how far you committed in your focus in practice, how specifically how particularly you're staring at things, all you can do is focus and as a result, Dharma as such Dharma as a counterpart of your mind. But it's not I must stop doing that. No, all I have to stop doing is stop Miss conceiving that my thoughts can stand for that objective world, which I keep sort of fueling the assumption of it, through this practice of focusing, because I am thinking of getting closer to the pure materiality or something, they will then free me from any subjectivity.

And basically, the Buddhist teaching is not about just, it's about understanding the thing. It's all about understanding.

So we're just saying is that focusing is about going deeper into the objects into a smaller object more, smaller, more. But that's the

thing. So that's what already so some people, I think I can vary, they'll they will, they'll respond and say what happened? No, but I get lots of benefit from my meditation practice, which is focusing on small things, small things. Yeah. particular things more and more particular, I noticed the more I do it, the more refined and the more subtle, the more particular things, things I've never noticed before I start to notice and that that means awareness.

Right. So what is the nature of things found? In the particular exemplification of that? I don't see them either. I just didn't exactly know. That's insane. Yeah. Which means they're not interested in them? No, because the definition of the Dharma means things. Yeah. So the definition of the direction of the of the general direction of opposite of the direction of your particular focusing.

So what is it that keeps people doing this? Why do people why does so many people keep going in that direct, it's

deeply rooted view that you get rid of your Avada? By canceling you get you overcome subjectivity by denying it? Isn't it also that it's actually quite pleasant? Oh, yeah, no, that's an emotive media level, I'm talking about the view. But the point here, when you mentioned like, when you're getting deeper into things, that's usually the belief, but you will not get it, you can't get it, you always remain on the surface. That's what perception will always remain the ceiling, the perception, perception cannot really bring it into the matter. Because they will mean that you can access Rupa, which the Buddha says is inaccessible. You can only find the footing, in your experience through providing a basis of Miss conceiving. So he feels like if you always remain Yeah, that's what I mean, this matter how far you got focused, if you realize only focusing is on the damas another thing. Yeah. So it doesn't matter if it's this particular level, or this particular level, the nature remains completely the same. And if you're ignorant to that means Yeah, your pursuit of focusing is endless. And you're saying, You're delighting the novelty novel, this feels like I'm noticing things I've never noticed before, which means I must be learning things. Well, that's if you were to like I remember for myself, you stay in it's kind of feels like feels it feels like a novelty feels like oh, I'm not like you're so focused on particular movements, basically kind of exercising this, this sort of contrived sense of control. But you can only sustain that so far. But initially, it creates a sense of novelty whereby about experiencing things differently. But again, a new way new things are happening new things already. It doesn't matter. Where can difference happen, can happen on the level of particular,

it also you can convince yourself that you'd be more aware, because you'd be cocky. Let's

not jump into every possible angle people can take. Let's just clarify the pleasure we started on. Okay. So the point is, if it comes down to again, think about yourself now, focusing, why would you? Why would you carry on focusing, as you said yourself, because if it feels good, it feels peaceful. It feels like less cluttered, and so on. So bringing attention to things feels less quiet, it feels more directional, that's fine. But why would they then justified you constantly bring attention, bring attention, bring attention bring attention, means you still don't understand where that piece comes from. And that's in the other talk that I explained is like, the similar the anchor, throwing down the anchor, you throw the anchor, and then you let the boat sort of float round, because it's anchored. So you know, you can't go too far you allow it to move around. The idea of focusing, it's like, throw the anchor, pull the anchor, throw the anchor, throw the anchor, throw the anchor, throw the anchor, that's it, I'm focusing on focusing on folks, because the idea of floating about is too overwhelming. So the whole point of doing the folksy practice would be, you just want pleasure. Well, you just want to avoid any liability to suffering to the drunk cop to discomfortable feelings to uncomfortable feelings. That's it. So it becomes a management to your liability to suffering. Or if I focus hard enough, basically, I won't think about things important. Yeah, it's sort of basically putting your head in the sand. Yeah. And that's what I was saying the authority, the idea of concentration. For most people, it's like you focus so hard on one point where you forget everything

else. And that's why the ADA if everyone, everyone calls it, absorption. Yeah. Exactly. Absolutely. If you're absorbed in something, that means you're basically at

my office, you're not you're not aware of anything else. But one pointedness we described before, it's the point that includes everything else, regardless of the content. And that's exactly what we're describing. So you focus on your experiences at home, I, in my experience, I'm focusing on being seated on the chair. Okay, you brought your attention to it. Now, that's the container for your context. Let's see what comes up with it. So while I'm sitting in the chair, you're talking about these various ideas that are wrong, the routine wrong assumptions while I'm seated in the chair, while I'm sitting the chair, I have these feelings arising while I'm sitting in the chair, and I have these other thoughts arising, why don't you know the trick. But if you're doing the folksy practice, you'll be doing all these things that are happening. But I'm sitting in the chair, I'm seated, touching, touching, Leaning, leaning, touching, touching, lonely, thinking, often you're not even that, you know, you are, and I forgot that. Because you think the whole purpose is just to be fully absorbed in focusing right in front of it. And how can you then be fully absorbed in what's in front of you, without doing that at the expense of the nature of everything, at the expense of everything else, that it's not in front of you? And that's that's why it's inherently wrong. You can't do it right, because you're not have the right outcome cancelling out the context. Exactly. You're basically saying I'm not interested. And that's

about content. Yeah, yeah. I'm just interested delighting in the next thing.

And that's another so that the people you know, probably maybe will read, but they will not necessarily see a connection with this. What we're talking about is that they will resist all the some of the grounds and say, we are meditators, we meditate. And but what they do is like, like, like an owl, praying upon, like waiting for a fish, or a jackal waiting for a meal. Exactly. So imagine, just don't take my word for it. Imagine if you were a hunt. So there is there's a little hole and you were waiting for, I don't know, a rabbit, I had to come out. You want to catch it? What would you be doing? You'd be focusing, you'll be focused at the expense of everything, yes. Because that's how important this is to you. And when the Buddha described and when he said all these people call themselves meditators, and all they do they are like a jackal trying to catch a prey. They call themselves. Yeah. So basically trying to catch trying to focus in catch and attending grab the moment, whatever want to call it. And he said, Whoever does that does so rooted in sensuality, they meditate with sensuality, because you meditate with that, Oh, this is the basis of my senses a sense of touch, sense of usually center touch potentially can be visual, whatever else or the goal. The point is, you're catching the moment that you believe that he has significance for you. Profound significance you yourself kind of gave it in a way we do wrong views, that if you catch the moment, rightly sufficient amount of time it will purify find everything that needs to be purified without you needing to think about it or address it on an every single basis. So focus, focus, focus, focus, focus, got it, I got the moment I had this great experience, my body felt so light, it was a disappear in the day. So that must be mean that I've succeeded somehow. And that's usually like I've experienced or now I have to interpret it, which means I have no understanding of experience. Now I had to fabricate. Because even if you have the lofty, unusual experience of your energy in your body, but not, what's the nature of it actually means slightly less common experience of this body here, as opposed to more common daily experience. So this body here, either way, there is this body here.

So normal, normally, people would think you do the meditation, but then afterwards, you'll have this profound experience, and then you have to make it have to interpret. But that actual making sense out of it, that's the meditation. Yeah, that's where he's, well, that's closer, that's the direction that you need to be going in.

I mean, the best meditation will appraise is a meditation of jhana. How develop jhana by understanding the journey is, so by not dwelling on the theme of jhana, as in this is what genre is, I keep thinking about dwelling on it, monk enters it, by not dwelling on the theme of jhana, he doesn't develop it, as simple as that. But with the whole sort of, you know, commentarial, evolutionary take of watching nostrils leads to absorption leads to jhana leads to what not, yeah, anapanasati Sutra doesn't talk about jhanas at all. And it could then that talks about four foundations of mindfulness. So practice mindfulness of the breathing and fulfills your awareness of the peripheral fulfills your knowledge of the background in regard to that which you're focusing on. Rather than rather than have some sort of mystical absorption of focus disappears, you just like lose. And there was there was the meditation being what I saw, while I'm sitting here, I have such and such feeling arising and enduring. And I still feel like that while I'm sitting here, while we're talking about these themes, I need to try to catch up with anything actually, all you need to do is stay at the doorway, which is you determine through your initial active focus of, Oh, this is my situation, my situation is being seated in the chair in this room with two other people and six dogs. That's it. Within that now, everything that happens will happen within it. And you don't need to chase it. And count the symbol is the video game. But usually, it's the one demand sort of surveys that the outskirts of the city, there's no any in and out way entry or exit except one big gate, and he deserved, well, if I stay the gate, I'll know whoever's in and out who is out. I don't need to chase people individually, and we're trying to get them outside. I just need to stay here. And the idea of how do you stay here while things are changing. So be focusing focusing, focusing focusing means I'm going to gain or mitigate and mitigate or mitigate people coming in and out but you're looking at you know, you stay by the standing this. So this is the next this is the present container. This is the entry and exit point. How keep that in mind. that's it that's keeping things in mind keeping things together, isn't it somehow composing things, so you compose your situation, through luck revealing it through attend attending to it. So yeah, don't be completely mindless and non attentive. But doing attention for the sake of attention means actually, ignoring the situation, you cannot do you cannot attend to that which is better peripheral to mature attending. So I'm attending to this means and other things that are there simultaneously present, cannot be attended to. And it's not the point to attend all of them. The point is the virtue attend, recognize or attend to that which is a natural container to everything else.

Basically, the nature of your experience involves the presence of other things this periphery of this, like other things that you want attending to right now. Yeah, so if you're

on your body, for example, I could ask you to focus on something else. Yeah, it's equally that can serve as a footing for anchoring.

But like any, any meditation that avoids this kind of voice, acknowledging the periphery of whatever it is you're attending to, is Micha is what I've been missing the whole nature of your experience.

It's going to be like a jackal trying upon and ignoring everything else, like a cat catching the fish and ignoring everything else. And the Buddha mocked it he said, with the shoulders drooping head swing and basically sleeping, drooling. meditate, meditate because this powerful concentration where

Isn't it funny? That's generally that is the that is actually the nature of falling asleep when you fall asleep. Everything your lights excluded everything yeah, you're lying on your bed and you Thinking about whatever it is thinking about. But then at some point you forget the background. Wait a minute, my

bedroom here, sure, and you're done and you're absorbed in that particular thought. That's why even in your dreams, if you end up in a dream, something that requires slightly higher degree of reflection, you immediately wake up. Yeah, that's just how it works for you Just remember where you are, oh, we can't think you can't.

While I'm lying, hey, that's what waking. So So basically, the common idea about what meditation is, is very similar to what happens when you're falling asleep.

In a way, in a way, I think has similar to physical manifestations as well. But another another thing that they don't often get tied in this folks in plastics, prep practice, practice, is the idea of sensations. Yeah. As if some sort of a hybrid phenomena that's kind of in between perception and feeling.

So beginning I was saying talking about focusing on focusing on this, but another thing I used to do, I think a lot of people do is Yeah, so focusing on sensations in the body with the rationale that that's what the Buddha meant by VEDA, sure,

sure, feeling but then when Australia read, he said, What a pleasant, unpleasant neutral. So what difference does it make you feel a sensation is in your elbows, or your shoulders or your nose, when all you need to look for is is this pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. And if you start looking at that, you will see the pleasantness or unpleasantness in neutrality is not localized. In your perception of spatial body cannot be so calm. So when they say bodily feeling is basically a mental feeling in regard to the body. When they say mental mental feeling, it's a mental feeling in regard to the mind. Either way, feeling is Jessica, as the Buddha said in the suit, it's mental always mental. So you observing, observing, there you go. Observing sensation, your legs means you're perceiving sense of touch in your legs. Yeah, then somehow starts to stand for the feeling VEDA. So how can you perceive VEDA? How's it possible, I'm perceiving what I'm feeling. But the feeling is that which feels that it's felt. And perception is that which perceives this perceived? So how can you then perceive what you

feel? The sensations are usually described as, like,

well, sound of all of your perception, they're described as feelings, if you look at feelings, they're described as perceptions. Yeah. And you will maintain that ambiguity, that confusion, that contradiction, because you don't

clarify what it is. So that's when when people are observing sensations, exactly what would you like you're kind of standing back, like, as he was actually described as like a doctor, imagine you're a doctor, looking down, that's all fine. So that's the third point

is the existence of sensations or that which you refer to a sensation, but it's the confusion that you imply with it, as if that which you're perceiving is your feeling. That's all I need to do is stop ignoring how I start ignoring or maintained ignorance of how I'm actually feeling and keep hoping for the right perception that will reveal the nature of feeling and everything else to me because you assume that it can be perceived. So yeah, you can have various sensations in my back laughter You know, as a beestings you but that's not how I feel. Those are things that I perceive because the body's spatial, three dimensional, it has the insight has the outsides and the you know, that receptors go both ways. So you can feel internal sort of perceptions which are sensations but then you saying that that's what your feelings are. That's how you maintain the ground view. Because feelings are felt on the level of the mind. That's what we start with like, what's your mood right now? That's where the feelings are.

Yeah. No,

I'm feeling I'm feeling pleasure in my hand. No, you have agreeable perceptions in your hand that result in experience of pleasure. Yeah, that's it. So it's all you must stop paying attention to sensation they just don't stop must stop Miss conceiving feeling

the sensation that their feelings in my body. Exactly. Feelings being in a place. Yeah,

feelings are placed in this body here. So then you can measure the feeling by the means of perception. Yeah.

Was that good surgery? I had my hand. Oh, and it sort of put in the area. So you don't feel anything? The language. So you don't sense anything. You don't sense any pain. But they would normally not. And I could feel them putting on attendance. Yeah. Which is not something that is agreeable to me. Like, I feel that and I thought, it's not enough because I feel pain. Yeah, I feel pain. But I'm sensing only putting up a tendon which is disagreeable. And so they would numb around even more, and still, the pain was there. And I realized, Oh, wait, they can't numb that. They cannot no can't no feeling, they can numb they can change the sensations.

That's how people experience experience pain in the limbs after the loss of whole limb, racking unbearable delay feeling in regard to that thing, feeling is always Phantom from the point of view of perception, feeling can ever enter the domain of perception. So you have feeling perception and intention aren't impossible to destroy and as the Buddha said, So, whenever there is a perception, there is a simultaneously present enduring feeling this agreeable perception, but then some people will find that pleasurable. There are people who find pain being called discomfort, extreme, piercing discomfort being inflicted upon the body, they find pleasure in it. There are other people who have extreme amount of comfort afflicted to the body, and they still find it painful. So mine determines basically the threshold of what's going to be painful or not. Hence, the you know, the trained body, the body resistant to elements can endure much more than mine developed in jhanas can endure the roughness of the root of a tree. Horrible fermented urine for the medicine, rough hand probes will be like silk, and basmati rice and the king's palace. That's how it will be felt. And that's why Buddha said you should practice john and develop your mind in that sense corrections. But if you think that you can actually perceive your feelings. While you're completely it's uncalled for, but you end up giving significance to your perception that doesn't deserve. It shouldn't be there, it's Miss consuming it. So you don't need to deny sensations or say sensations are wrong, you just need to understand them. And you'll see if you're either taking them as perceptions and standing for feelings or feelings to send perceptions, or both. But once you clarify them, you won't do that anymore. So you can still use it as a designation and a form of speech. Yeah, but sensations in my like, I better change my posture. That's it. disagreeable perceptions, agreeable perceptions, but how you feel is in its own domain, and it can never mix with any other domain. And you aren't going to find VEDA by focusing, no, because what you can focus on is what you can observe. And you can't observe feelings, you can only feel them. But if your only means of any form of effort is at the level of focusing focusing is this whole domain of what's being felt right there simultaneously, abilities invisible. Knowledge, however, is a blanket access to all of the domains, nature of understanding the nature of things that you're not directly focusing on. But the setting is a necessary basis means its base for understanding, intention, feeling and perception here later. But yeah, you can't use a base of perception to establish anchoring coffee mindfulness, like for example, light. Now, right here. Now, if I asked you, is there light, or is it dark, which one is enough? It's light. So whatever you do, whatever we say, whatever you feel, whatever, whichever way your body moves, exam within the container of the light, it's still in use. And that's not a new, you didn't create this light. Is there a reason they provide a basis for the whole experience on a more particular level? What's happening to you? And it's not something I can focus on when I can't see it? Exactly. So you do anchoring properly, you do focusing properly, it's something you don't focus on anymore. Like focusing into bringing attention to it, but doesn't mean keep attending give me give me means you should understand it now that you attended in.

Even so even perceptions aren't really things that I'm attending, attending to any of the aliens for them. Exactly. Yeah. So like, that's why the Buddha says things but within that I can, I can discern various perceptions. They're always peripheral.

If you have a view that you must attend to focus, you have a view It prioritizes the content, yeah, of whatever you're focusing on attending, which means there has to be done at the expense of the nature, that sort of Buddha said, whatever aggregate of perception, so, whatever perception, old, new, past, future fire near, up, down, left, right, whatever particularly the perception might be, he knows, perception is there, he doesn't Oh, this is no perception is there because it has to be in some way. And so you stop being concerned about what way perception is there, you know, perception is there, whatever feeling past present, future father near personally personal, pleasant, unpleasant feeling is there. So every aggregates can be is present, particularly. But if that's all you see, you're ignorant of its nature means you're ignorant of the Dhamma. So that's why focusing outlines the picture for you. But understanding is on the level of the opposite of what you're attending. That's why you only saw MasterCard from the origin from the origin. So knowing the origin of this very thing that I'm attending, while this origin of that attention is present. Separate sort of, how can you attend the origin of your attention? You want to attend it is much Oh, I will see my eye with the same eye. That is inconceivable. But I will know that there is that because of which I'm able to see that I cannot see. But I can know that it's there as a necessary basis, namely, the eye that's properly exercised. You only saw MasterCard as only the suitors.

Yeah, I guess most people would think you only so means attending carefully attending

kind of

a basic level of nature of things, not on the level of what you can make observe the state? Because it is the origin of my attention. How can that same attention attend itself in its origin? possible? And the only reason you would keep assuming that is because you don't clarify sufficient enough that it is impossible. Because if you do your efforts, they will be trying to attend to it. Like you only so could be context.

Well, yeah, pretty much.

I mean, what can you attend something from nothingness? No, but he needs to be there beforehand.

And that context is the origin of this thing, in a sense that this thing couldn't be what it is, without this whole, larger context.

Attend to your elbows touching the chair, how can you do that? If you wouldn't have elbows, there is no chair, if you're not seated in a particular position of a few requiring, requiring you being leaning on the chair. How can you attend to you can't. So the only way you can attend it, if it's already there enduring?

And when you're here, you attend to any aspect? It's not new. No, no, you can, yeah, it's been going on. And I

understand that, that's how you also become unable to regard the most volitional choice decision as mine, because you see it fully encapsulated within that which cannot be yours, because you can only choose

the option to choose a choice, as they say, you choose it, their choice has always been there. And then we can even look, I'm still sitting. So I'm still the choice to such a stun going on.

And if you say no, but I have a choice to stand up and change their situation. Yes, and you can only do that because there is a possibility for you, as in for the body to be moved in an upright position. So you when you stand up, you just exercise another choice, on top of the choice that's been exercise of you sitting. So there's no matter of there is no such choice that can take you outside of the given container of your experience as a whole, from which you can really impartially or independently or like as a master choose without any basis for that choice. It's always secondary to it. So the choice, the effect of your choice. The results of your action are within your experience as a whole. They're secondary to it. So if I choose to stand up, I've changed my initially determined sort of base for my mindfulness that I focused on initially to just discern it. But now I can only change it because there is another potential basis there. This can be replaced with, hence the four body postures. Because there's no fifth By the way, you're either going to be standing, laying down, walking or sitting. That's it. So that's what that's when you start realizing that doesn't matter how much I exercise my choice within this, it's got to be within some limiting container. Fundamentally, the limiting container is the five aggregates are the life in itself. You can't do anything unless you're alive. So am I still alive? Yes. So that's your the most general container. Because you that's taken away, which can be at any moment. I'm not saying that. My whole life depends upon a muscle that beats inside of my chest, can I even conceive, telling it, how to beat how fast No, it's just inaccessible to you inaccessible to the wildest of your imagination, yet your entire life sits on it like this. And you can't even imagine this thing, how to change or what will happen to it. And that goes, none of this can remain. So if you keep that context, in your mind that's basically done correctly. Everything is then put against the backdrop of, it's unknowable, because it's rooted in something that I cannot even have in my imagination, let alone in practice. That's whatever I do on top of it is equally honorable by me. Because if you're the owner, you're the master. You're the controller, you're in charge of it. How can you be in charge of something you can't even imagine?

You don't even know the ending? You know, what you can know that he's gonna end up but he hasn't originated from you. Is it already 14 is beyond beyond Yeah. inaccessible. That's the suffering, that it's the murderer waiting to step in.

Well, that's the that's the nature of welcome. Anita means impossible to own, impossible to be mine. And what if it's an honorable and yet here I am, depending on it. And suffering. If it's an honorable it is Duke. Because then every sense of myself, I don't own even that. So if it's unknowable and duker, then my experience is enough. You don't need to do another, then, oh, this is impermanent, this is suffering. And this is the not self. No, this is impermanence. This is suffering, this experience is experienced as not self. So if you see your sense of self, as inseparably rooted in that, which cannot be your sense of self, which is unknowable, inaccessible to you, even in your imagination, then your sense of self right here, there will be felt as not my sense of self. So at dynata means to basically my self or not myself, and it doesn't mean there's no self because if there is no self, what are you designating by saying there is no self

is like allowing that understanding to endure long enough in the background? Yeah, to kind of color and influence the choices you're making the decisions you're making. Because you will see that everything that you're doing is bound up with a noun, like, even though you like be ignoring that

ignoring that then takes you in the direction of Oh, I am doing this in a sense of I am controller master of this. But at any given point, you can re establish the fundamental context, if a random muscle that pumps blood from your chest that stops no matter your project. feelings, hopes, dreams, memories, trauma, happiness or sadness. Can you make that for a second? Okay, so what do you do next? Nothing. clarify that same thing. That's what you do next. Just allow it to do it. Make it clearer and clearer and clearer and harder and harder to forget. That doesn't matter how much I'm involved or how involved I get with things. Simultaneously present is the basis for those things that inaccessible to me, and when I say based loosely the basis for your own life as well, because your life is another thing.

That's it.

And you can see how that this contemplation meditation Samadhi would automatically result in dispassion, how can you exercise passion to this when you cannot possibly, like lose the sight of the context that it's inherently in inaccessible to Audible, not worth the effort. And that's when he says like when demand prices rightly, he started developing these notions that, Oh, this is not worth engaging with. This is not worth delighting here. I can still do it. But now the unworthy aspect of this is way overwhelming. And then you can't do it anymore. The only way you would The only reason we're doing it is because you were finding it worthy of doing it or passionate about exactly passionate about it. And it became impossible passion is worthless effort of investing passion, his uncle, it becomes inconceivable. You really like the lighting? Or not? It is what it is. Yeah. Yeah. That's not mine. That's it. And you don't need to hire my stuff. Just don't lose the sight. That peripheral context doesn't matter what you are, particularly attending beautiful aspects, only aspects, beautiful aspects or ugly aspects neither. It's in the context of being all rooted in something that I cannot even conceive owning. Thus, pleasure pain stops bothering me. And that

the light is naturally falls off. So you just to kind of fight the delight, you just kind of stopped. Yeah,

just need to make it the context. in face of it. That's it. But if all you're doing is focusing what's in front of you, means your mind will be fully taking the pleasure fully taking the pain, resisting the pain, because they're

longing pleasure that will always be peripheral, which is you've chosen not to look at Yeah.

Exactly. The knowledge is on the level of peripheral. Because if have to keep keeping things that you know in your mind means you haven't really understood it, you keep reminding yourself because if you forget the knowledge goes with it, which means that's not knowledge, things that you really understood. You stop thinking about ! And if they're brought up the understanding is there. Like the Buddha and the simile that when a man asks him "oh do you...", when he asked the Buddha "do you prepare these answers beforehand?" and people asked him so what he ask in return : "you're a Master Chariot Maker (or whatever it was). If I were to ask you anything about the workings on the chariot's parts would you need to prepare the answer?" No. people wake me up in the middle of the night, and ask me a question I'll give them the answer. Because I have fully understood how chariot works, or engineering it's just fully understood. So I don't need to prepare anything: when it's asked the answer is there from that understood context. And he said dharma is always the same. That's how the fact that doesn't need to prepare ready answers. Why? Because you understood it. But if you again, similar, that same chariot maker, if you haven't understood how the chariot actually works, but you read about it : "Okay, so the wheels, the wheels, the wheels and chairs, okay, the ship the seat, (he will have to think about) exactly : you stop thinking about it : gone ! "Oh, okay. How does it work? How does it work again ?", it means you haven't understood. And it's not a big surprise, then when you read a sutta that's all the Buddha talks about. Dhamma is all about understanding. Yet attend certain things at the expense of others, as in things that are conducive to non lust at the expense of things that are conducive to lust, but only so that you can understand the nature of them, as they are. (Discerning the nature that is there exactly There are things there. Like Nibanna). Yeah, yeah, the element of Nibbana. That's what it means, doesn't mean you're already Nibbana, it means the possibility of you developing the Dharma of Nibanna is possible. If you do it rightly (It's not something that you) It's not outside of your five aggregates. It's basically the attitude in regard to five aggregates. It's a particular Dharma of complete absence of passion in regard to five aggregates, that's why even putthujhana does that in NM13, no, no. Later on, when he says, When talks about the conceiving, "I am, I'm doing this, I'm attaining this". And he says, at some point, so men can even say, Oh, this is Nibbana and "I'm a I'm attaining this Nibbana, this Nibana is mine". And people think, oh, it must be not not the real Nibana. And then the Buddha says "no, it is the real Nibana. What this man asserts is that which Nibana is . But he doesn't attain it as in he doesn't actually develop it properly, because he still "I am doing!" this so he's appropriating it. So the element of Nibbana is basically the experience of absence of greed, aversion, delusion, that's what Nibbana is.

One can discern it

One can discern it! Yeah, the more you discern it, the more the context will endure, the more the context will endure the less of you maintaining all these random passions will will occur. And when those passions completely go, then when they come with the context that you started discerning, you are then in Nibbana. That's what Sotapana understood basically, Nirvana understands the Arahant. Now, he needs to develop it, he needs to maintain that context simply through non restricted... through through non engagement, with sensuality, through restraint. And that's it, he will have to arrive at the complete eradication of greed, aversion, delusion from the context that has been fundamentally understood context of an unownable, unpleasurable, and thus, not myself. Not my own self.

It's that context has been uncovered.

Yeah. uncovered that's it, (because anything particular can only ever be determined by that context, but not understanding that) What do you mean? (So, you've uncovered the context when you say you've uncovered the context. Basically, you've just simply uncovered that which everything is Yoniso Manasikara (right attention), that everything is determined by whether you were... whether you were aware of that or not.

Yeah, that upon which your passion, your aversion, your distraction, delusion depend, is something inaccessible to your passion, to your aversion and to delusion. You fully understand that you will not be able to maintain passion, aversion, delusion in regard to that thing. That's it.