Want to hear a sick joke? the body is unambiguously physical, in 16aps breath meditation step 3

 

Re: Why is it the same term in the nikaya can means very different things?

• Edit
• Delete
• Report
• Quote

Post by frank k » Wed Dec 21, 2022 4:35 am

Sam Vara wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 5:06 am

form wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 3:40 am
Usually the same word used in a specific field should have the same meaning, unless the field is quite unprofessional.

This is going to muddy the waters even more, but I'm reminded of a joke that my children used to enjoy:

"Why did the farmer win the Nobel Prize?"

" - Because he was out standing in his field!"

Good one.

And here's a sick joke a large percentage of the Theravada population doesn't seem to have caught on to yet:

"Step 3 of the 16 steps of breath meditation, when it says 'breathe in experiencing the entire body', it actually means the 'body of breath that excludes the physical body."

Just as in English, where the 'body' can sometimes mean something other than a physical body, but you know from context it must mean the physical body, the same thing applied during the Buddha's time.

Here's the context for breath meditation:

... He sits down with his legs crossed, straightens up his BODY." (we're in a physical body context).
...
1. Breathing in Long...(breathing is a physical process, we're in a physical body context)
2. breathing in short...(breathing is a physical process, we're in a physical body context)
3. breathe in experiencing the entire BODY. (have we suddenly left the context of meditation that intimately involves the physical body?)
4. he breathes in pacifying bodily activities. (we're still in a physical body context)

So, step 3, the 'body' in question, is sandwiched in between a bunch of instructions that clearly and unambiguously refer to the physical body. Not a metaphorical body, and not a 'collection of things.'

Now, if reading that English, being a fluent and competent English reader, someone were to tell you, actually step three doesn't mean the physical body, would you not think the person making this assertion is gullible, or dull, or think they are trying to swindle you or sell you something, or have some kind of religious agenda where they've been blinded by dogma and can't see the truth?

It works that way in Pāḷi too.
Use some common sense people.

Sometimes 'body' isn't the physical body, but the context would make that clear.
And if the context is genuinely ambiguous, a founder of a great religion would have the intelligence and courtesy to point out the ambiguity somewhere in the tens of thousands of suttas in existence.

Related topics

Re: How can i establish sati on parimukham?

• Edit
• Delete
• Report
• Quote

Post by frank k » Thu Dec 22, 2022 5:00 am

kyj2002 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 11:54 pmI tried to fix the awareness on the upperlip as instructed by VSM
At first i thought sati was well established in the upper lip
But what I was really doing was tighten my upperlip
I don't know how to fix sati in a particular place at the body
Sorry for my bad english

Your root problem is you have to decide whether you trust VSM or the Buddha's meditation instructions.
They aren't the same.
If you trust VSM, then you're in for a world of problems, well documented and researched, exactly like you've described above and it's going to get worse.
Not just your upper lip tightening but your entire body, entire mind also tensing and going the opposite direction of the Buddha's jhāna.