The Sankhara thread

I once studied pali for 6 months in India but I only remember some chanting. So my understanding of some of the technical terms like sankhara might not be perfect. I hope Jackson eventually comes in here and clears up all the misunderstanding on sankharas as he has talked about doing it in the past. I would also like to ask this one question and see what sort of response I get.

Does one who practices Vipassana "eradicate" sankharas/formations?

This is the view adhered to in the Goenka tradition and it seems to be a common idea on the net when you google in "sankharas" and "eradicate". It seems to be one of the key causes for yogis in that tradition not believing stream entry is possible in this lifetime.

If they are talking about mental volitional formations then I can't really agree. I have volitional intentions arise all the time. What seems to have been "eradicated" is the clinging element, not the mental volitional formations.

Kenneth, or anyone else, what is it exactly that one "eradicates" at 4th path?

JMHO --

I don't think anything is "eradicated." I think existence is better understood. One's place in the universe and how one fits in it is illuminated. One sees the equality of all objects and mental processes. This idea that something is or must be eradicated is a myth bound up in legend enervated by superstition. Awakening is the better word because we awaken to our nature, what we are. And what we are was there all along but obscured by what Buddhists call "ignorance." What we awaken to is our humanity. Nothing removed. Nothing added.

In other words, look for yourself and see what's true or not true. Stop thinking in modes that others present to you. Bust out of the paradigms that bind you to incorrect models. This is the place to do THAT

I'm in total agreement with you, Chris. I'm thinking of writing something for my dhamma friends in the Goenka tradition. At first I thought it was primarily the technique that wasn't getting them to SE. But now I realize clear as day that it is the "view" they hold on to and which motivates them that is the great hindrance and obstacle. I want to get more of an idea how I could explain it to them better. Thanks Chris.

So if we were still to use the word "eradicate", we could say one "eradicates" ignorance as that is what was covering our eyes to all the mental and physical processes that make up the human being. Would you agree, Chris?

Why use a code word that doesn't inform? I've taken to saying the truth as I see it, in my own words, and just letting that speak. If it resonates then that's great. If it doesn't, well, then it doesn't.

"
Why use a code word that doesn't inform? I've taken to saying the truth as I see it, in my own words, and just letting that speak. If it resonates then that's great. If it doesn't, well, then it doesn't.

"

Sorry, I have misunderstood. So you don't think ignorance has been dispersed (eradicated)? What is wrong with saying ignorance has been eradicated?

Hmm, I mean I seem to be discovering new things about mysefl everyday. So i guess not all ignorance has been "eradicated". I like the word "synched up". I'm looking for soemting that resonates with others. Not just myself. I'm on a mission

Not trying to argue with you Chris. I am trying to get a better grip on how to explain it. Thanks for your advice.

Nick

Nick, I'm being careful to tell you this is all just my personal opinion. You should do what you think is best. The point I was making is that if people are bound up in a model that includes the notion of "eradicating" things, parts of themselves, then maybe to present them with something that's very different is a good way to bust them out of that mindset. You can present this is two ways:

1. Ignorance can be eradicated
2. The fullness of your humanity can be uncovered

My experience in business and life tells me that sometimes a radically new view of an old thing is more powerful than an incremental change in the existing view.

Again, JMHO

"

1. Ignorance can be eradicated
2. Your full humanity can be uncovered
"

And I have a lot of respect for your opinions Chris. I love it. In fact it is what I was thinking about yesterday as I looked at the dependent chain of origination. Ignorance is what they are not dealing with completely in the Goenka tradition. There is volition involved in choosing only to be aware of sensations and not to be aware of other phenomena. No matter how much one practices in this way, one will always be identified with that volition. They do not dis-embed and dispel that ignorance of "being embedded" in all the other phenomena.

I have to work with some of the lingo they are attached too. Thus "eradicating" something. But what exactly do you think was the thing that happened? When I think about the blip, it was just a synching up of perception with reality as it is. The previously somewhat warped, out of synch perception was for all my life what i was ignorant of.
Dispelling of ignorance=synching up the perception with how reality within the mind/body really is?...What do you think?

I am reviewing.

See my post #1 ;-D

I don't know the Goenka tradition *at all* so your judgment about that is light years ahead of mine.

"What do you think?"

As time passes what happened to me seems to be less about the phenomenological or "technical" stuff regarding perception (although very clearly that's a part of it and how it starts) and more about what I would call "meaning," as in the meaning of life and my part in it. This includes the material I've posted on my own thread. There is a universe I'm a part of and there is only one, yet I appear both as one and as a holistic "part" with some separation. I am a part of everything but have the appearance of separateness. So what does all that mean existentially, phenomenologically, philosophically, ethically, and so on?

So, uh, I don't know.

I am curious to see what Jackson will say. I honestly don't know. On my last goenka retreat the concept of Sankhara is definatly what really disturbed me. Its very dis-empowering... I imagined Nikolai writing a piercing critique of the tradition during my last retreat... something to shake all that up... Now I dunno. I applaud your efforts Nick you are doing a great service and if just one person tastes liberation because of your diligent efforts it will all be worth it. I think facebook should get rid of the poke function... instead you should have a "You just got whacked by a Zen staff" application with a text box that pops up and says simply, "WAKE UP!"
But fantasies aside I think Nick is onto something... I really think the method itself is adequate for SE, But if you think you can't make that layup... guess what you're not going to... very sad...

Hello Nick, et al.

I have been known to dive in to this topic head first, only because of the way Daniel Ingram defines "formations" (sankharas) in MCTB, which is pretty much his own creation and has very little to do with traditional Buddhist teachings.

In my initial studies, I found that sankhara is most generally defined as "fabrication" or "compounded thing." And so describing calling a particular phenomenal appearance a "formation" as opposed to anything else seemed ridiculous. Sankhara does not mean 3D, luminous, awareness-trying-to-sync-with-objects, etc.

My recent studies revealed something more useful than my initial findings. It turns out the Buddha used sankhara in different ways in different contexts. In terms of defining sankhara as a khanda (or aggregate), it actually refers to mental concoctions - or rather, the minds ability to fabricate and the fabrications themselves. Here's where it starts to relate to what Goenka is talking about. Disturbing emotions would be considered mental fabrications, or perhaps what the Buddha Nature schools would call "adventitious stains," or what the Vajrayana people call, "conceptual complexities." Basically, it's all the stuff that comes up in the the dark night that one eventually gains Equanimity in regards to. I suppose some Vajrayana and Zen people might also agree that these sankharas could be explained as "dualities" than need to be transcended.

(continued below)

(continued from above)

So is the sankhara khanda and its fabrications completely eradicated at arahantship? I doubt it. This idea fits nicely within many different forms of Buddhist philosophy, but not the most realistic forms in my opinion. I think the Zen and Vajrayana views are the most sane in this regard. If I understand them correctly, these schools generally teach that the relationship between the emotional energies that causes us trouble can be transformed/transmuted and be included in our realization. From what I know about myself, other, certain case studies, and even modern or contemporary Western psychology, this seems to be the most accurate.

I personally do not think that all forms of sankhara (as mental concoctions) are eradicated in full realization, but perhaps some arise less or harldy at all. For instance, if Kenneth's "you know you're done," criteria for arahantship is true, than the sankhara "I'm not done, I have more to do," would be a sankhara that has been more or less eradicated. As you can see, it starts to get tricky.

Rather than talking about "eradication", I think it's much more useful to talk about transforming one's relationship with the energies that distort into distorted appearances of negative emotions. Talk of eradication usually just causes people to stuff things down and pretend they aren't there, which is terribly unhealthy for both the individual and anyone they are in relationship with. Better to learn how to relate to and express the emotional energies in a new way.

I don't know if I'm right about anything of this, but that's my take on it for now.

~Jackson

Excellent! Thanks for that explanation and elaboration, Jackson. Wonderful!!!! I hope Kenneth can comment eventually. This is an important topic!

home.primusonline.com.au/peony/fifty_verses.htm

I dont know if im going the wrong direction here..
This is the 50 verses on the nature of consciousness
Thich Nhat Hanh also discusses in his book "understanding the mind"


Ten
Unobstructed and indeterminate,
Store consciousness is continuously flowing and changing.
At the same time, it is endowed
With all five universal mental formations.

Eleven
Although impermanent and without a separate self,
Store consciousness contains all phenomena in the cosmos,
Both conditioned and unconditioned,
In the form of seeds.

Twelve
Seeds can produce seeds.
Seeds can produce formations.
Formations can produce seeds.
Formations can produce formations.

Thirteen
Seeds and formations
Both have the nature of interbeing and interpenetration.
The one is produced by the all.
The all is dependent on the one.

Fourteen
Store consciousness is neither the same nor different,
Individual nor collective.
Same and different inter-are.
Collective and individual give rise to each other.

Fifteen
When delusion is overcome, understanding is there,
And store consciousness is no longer subject to afflictions.
Store consciousness becomes Great Mirror Wisdom,
Reflecting the cosmos in all directions. Its name is now Pure Consciousness.

---

This description of store consciousness describes that where our consciousness comes from is collective, therefore it is never totally in our control. We are interdependent on others actions and thoughts. Also, new experiences will always occur. If Sankharas are knots from the past due to not being mindful and thus not seeing the true nature of our reactions therefore making our brain judge and interpret them as a deluded self serving view,

...then the article also states "Formations" are connected to the collective consciousness. Are these the same formations as Sankharas? Anyway if they were, then Sankharas would be even more impossible to eradicate!

But whether thats the same or not.. and sankharas are just from our own volition, our own karma, i think its impossible to eradicate completely. When I watch HHTDL or Thich Nhat Hanh or supposedly very moral or enlightened masters, they still show anger or anxiety in some situations, but i think what they do is they embrace the energy with compassion, like awouldbehipster mentioned. But the sankhara or the reaction i think still seems to arise. They conditioned themselves to react with compassion but not eliminate the arising of the habit energy.

What I think is if we're human, then our reaction or the capability of our brains to re-work the way its wired or the way it reacts is also bound by our health, nutrition, genetics, quality of life, and other natural imperfect factors. like, the older we get also, the harder it is for the brain to learn something new or change past behaviors.

Is this what the whole Theravada Vs. Mahayana/Engaged Buddhism is ? The idea of aiming to eradicate sankharas is what the Engaged Buddhists say is wrong with Theravada, and learning to healthily embrace and work with them is more realistic.

"When I watch HHTDL or Thich Nhat Hanh or supposedly very moral or enlightened masters, they still show anger or anxiety in some situations, but i think what they do is they embrace the energy with compassion, like awouldbehipster mentioned. But the sankhara or the reaction i think still seems to arise. They conditioned themselves to react with compassion but not eliminate the arising of the habit energy." ~mindful1983

I saw a video once where an interviewer asked the Dalai Lama if he gets angry. He said something like, "Yes, of course. I am a human being. If you don't, something is very wrong" (not a direct quote). I think this speaks volumes.

Continued from above...

By remaining equanimous towards gross, unpleasant sensations, you will proceed to experience subtler, pleasant sensations. If you continue to maintain equanimity, sooner or later you will reach the stage described by the Buddha, in which throughout the physical structure, the meditator experiences nothing but arising and passing away. All the gross, solidified sensations have dissolved; throughout the body there is nothing but subtle vibrations. Naturally this stage is very blissful, but still it is not the final goal, and one must not become attached to it. Some of the gross impurities have been eradicated, but others still remain in the depths of the mind. If one continues to observe equanimously, one after another all the deeper sankhara will arise and pass away. When they are all eradicated, then one experiences the '˜deathless''”something beyond mind and matter, where nothing arises, and therefore nothing passes away'”the indescribable stage of nibbana.

Everyone who works properly to develop awareness and equanimity will certainly reach this stage (...)

Taken from here: www.vridhamma.org/The-Discourse-Summaries.aspx#Seven

What are people's opinions of what Goenka says about Sankharas?

The Buddha said, "When a meditator practises ardently, without neglecting for a moment awareness and equanimity towards sensations, such a person develops real wisdom, understanding sensations completely." The meditator understands how one who lacks wisdom reacts to sensations, and multiplies his misery. The meditator also understands how one who bears in mind the impermanent nature of all sensations will not react to them, and will come out of misery. The Buddha continued, "With this thorough understanding, the meditator is able to experience the stage beyond mind and matter'”nibbana." One cannot experience nibbana until the heaviest sankhara have been eliminated'”those that would lead to a future life in a lower form of existence where misery would predominate. Fortunately, when one starts to practise Vipassana, it is these very sankhara that arise first. One remains equanimous and they pass away. When all such sankhara have been eradicated, then naturally one experiences nibbana for the first time.

(...)

It sounds like Goenka is using 'sankharas' nearly synonymously with 'fetters', which are supposedly eradicated at path moments. That's the only way I can make sense of what he's talking about, here. What do you think?

I'm not sure, Jackson. But the belief that one must eradicate most if not all sankharas to experience the 'deathless" has caused many in my opinion to put off going for stream entry as how could one get stream entry with all the sankharas i have within me. This annoys me for some reason. It always did. It is a self defeating mindset to think it isn't doable in this lifetime. And if it is it is only doable because of my paramis. AAaaaargh!!

He means, I think, that sankharas are the mental reactions. As he often goes on about sankharas being the reactionary part of the mind. But a lot of yogis coe away with the belief that one must "eradicate" the negaivte sensations that one considers sankharas. It is so mixed up there.

Interesting...

Well, sankharas do cease momentarily at stream entry. Whether or not there are sankharas that are able to arise prior to stream entry, and then are no longer able to arise after, is what needs to be worked out. To say that "all" sankharas need to be actually eradicated, rather than momentarily ceased, is pretty off base. That's why I think there must be some connection between sankhara and fetter. I'm under the impression that not all sankhara are bad. I guess I should pick up a Goenka book and see what he has to say about it, so I'm not just judging his teaching based on out of context assumptions.

This quote from Stephen Batchelor's new book is probably not entirely germane to this discussion, but I liked it--and it does seem to speak to the notion of "eradication." So many people seem to think freedom is found in getting rid of something or other--whether sankharas or difficult emotions.

"...the many passages in the Pali Canon that depict the Buddha's relations with Mara paint a different picture. On attaining awakening in Uruvela, Siddharta Gotama did not 'conquer' Mara in the sense of literally destroying him. For Mara is a figure that continues to present himself to Gotama even after the awakening. He keeps reappearing under different guises until shortly before the Buddha's death in Kusinara. This implies that craving and the other 'armies of Mara' have not been literally deleted from Gotama's being. Rather, he has found a way of living with Mara that deprives the devil of his power. To be no longer manipulated by Mara is equivalent to being free from him. The Buddha's freedom is found, not in destroying greed and hatred, but in comprehending them as transient, impersonal emotions that will pass away of their own accord as long as you do not cling to and identify with them."

Mara I see you! I love this perspective I first heard about it through the writings of Jack Kornfield I believe...

That is a great quote jgroove!!!!

And I would have to agree with it. Mara keeps poking his head up, but I see you , you ugly bastard you! Hehe!

Fantastic quote, jgroove. An excellent point, indeed.