Application of cemetery contemplation

Discussion
1

Note : In this discussion I focus on the practical application of cemetery contemplation.

MN 10 : 1.6. The charnel ground contemplations

Furthermore, a monastic, just as if they were to see a corpse thrown in the charnel ground—dead for one, two, or three days, bloated, livid, and festering—they’d compare it with their own body: ‘This body is also of that same nature, that same kind, and cannot go beyond this.

EĀ 12.1 : A rotten corpse

“Further, bhikkhus, the practitioner meditates on the corpse of one who has died one day ago or one week ago. It is distended, fetid, and impure. Then he meditates on his own body and sees that his own body is no different. This very body of his will not be able to escape death.

MN 119 : And again, monks, it is as if a monk might see, thrown aside in a cemetery a body that had been dead for one day or for two days or for three days, swollen, discoloured, decomposing; so he focuses on this body itself, thinking: ‘This body too is of a similar nature, a similar constitution, it has not got past that (state of things).

It is apparent that the lines in bold letters are common to all suttas which describes cemetery contemplation, which suggests that it is an important aspect of the practice. since in modern era corpses are not left open for decaying the practitioner will not able to observe a real corpse in decay. The modern scholars recommends imaginative reflection, which seems to be applicable.

they’d compare it with their own body:‘This body is also of that same nature, that same kind, and cannot go beyond this.

thus, it seems that the practitioner is suppose to compare his own body with the rotting corpse. but when it comes to imaginative reflection is comparing necessary? why can’t the practitioner imagine his own corpse in decay rather than comparing his body to another? is this not recommended ?:confused:

5 Likes
2

Well, since we cannot observe our bodies in one or another corpse state, we are necessarily engaging in a comparison with other bodies when we reflect on this topic in these ways. Maybe we’d rather not look directly at anatomical decay, and instead just think about it? This doesn’t seem to bring the message home in the same way, at least for me…

It’s one of four strivings:

(1) “And what, bhikkhus, is striving by restraint?..
(2) “And what is striving by abandonment?..
(3) “And what is striving by development?..
(4) “And what is striving by protection? Here, a bhikkhu protects an arisen excellent object of concentration: the perception of a skeleton, the perception of a worm-infested corpse, the perception of a livid corpse, the perception of a festering corpse, the perception of a fissured corpse, the perception of a bloated corpse.

Here, corpse contemplations seem to sit off to the side on their own, as an optional fourth category. But how does this differ from generic wanderer practices?

Bhikkhus, these ten perceptions, when developed and cultivated, are of great fruit and benefit, culminating in the deathless, having the deathless as their consummation. What ten?

(1) The perception of impermanence,
(2) the perception of non-self,
(3) the perception of death,
(4) the perception of the repulsiveness of food,
(5) the perception of non-delight in the entire world,
(6) the perception of a skeleton,
(7) the perception of a worm-infested corpse,
(8) the perception of a livid corpse,
(9) the perception of a fissured corpse, and
(10) the perception of a bloated corpse.

These ten perceptions, when developed and cultivated, are of great fruit and benefit, culminating in the deathless, having the deathless as their consummation.

This set splices the cemetery contemplations into a nice, cohesive Dhamma practice, I think.

4 Likes
3

Since we’re practicing this through imagination and reflection (due to the unavailability of a real decaying corpse ) what about imagining our own body in a state of decomposition ? Some practitioners ( e.g. ven. Analayo ) use contemplation of death prior to cemetery contemplation. In fact, this is advantageous for the practitioner to imagine his own body thrown away to a charnel ground to perish.

Thus,if you’re going to contemplate on the inevitability of death and the impermanence of your own body comparison is not required if you’re going to use your own body for cemetery contemplation. And it would be weird to imagine another body and to compare it with our body since we’re practicing this merely through imagination. In Buddha’s era decaying corpses were not rare to be seen. Therefore comparing your own body with the corpse in decay would’ve been practical. But since we have no corpses in decay imagination of our own body in decomposition might be beneficial.

1 Like
4
5

[quote=“sandundhanushka, post:3, topic:3754”]
Thus,if you’re going to contemplate on the inevitability of death and the impermanence of your own body comparison is not required[/quote]

These aren’t cemetery contemplations.

That’s how I see it.

Well, but without actual imagery in memory, I expect that most people end up imagining their body with cartoon anatomy images, Halloween skeletons, movie zombies, and other silliness. I don’t see this sort of thing heading in the right direction.

The internet can provide images of every stage of corpse decay; we don’t have charnel grounds, but we have Google picture searches such as “charnel ground body”.

One caveat, though, via SN 54.9 (this needs a SC translation):

Then the monks — [thinking,] “The Blessed One, with many lines of reasoning, has given a talk on the unattractiveness [of the body], has spoken in praise of [the perception of] unattractiveness, has spoken in praise of the development of [the perception of] unattractiveness” — remained committed to the development of [the perception of] unattractiveness in many modes & manners. They — ashamed, repelled, & disgusted with this body — …took the knife.

6

Now this is one of the major disadvantages of this practice. If you’re going to generate repulsion and disgust this leads to mental depression. This should be practiced in order to realise the impermanence of the body and to stay detached from it. According to my perspective a rough image of the decaying corpse would be sufficient (the actual appearance is not required and if one tries to make the experience realistic it might create repulsion and disgustion ) if impermanence is clearly manifested. Ajhan sumedho says in one of his dharma talks " asubha meditation is not getting disgusted with the human body but, to stay dispassionate and cool. " As a summary the purpose of this practice is to realise the impermanent nature of a body ,to realise that death is inevitable as well as to stay detached from the body and from the bodies of others .

2 Likes
7

Then what kind of a result do you expect by cemetery contemplation ?

With metta :slight_smile:.

8

Dispassion, if done correctly. Why do you ask?

9

Yes , I do agree dispassion is the ultimate result of it. But we shouldn’t ignore the minorities.

MN 10 : 1.6. The charnel ground contemplations

Furthermore, a monastic, just as if they were to see a corpse thrown in the charnel ground—dead for one, two, or three days, bloated, livid, and festering—they’d compare it with their own body: ‘This body is also of that same nature, that same kind, and cannot go beyond this.

EĀ 12.1 : A rotten corpse

“Further, bhikkhus, the practitioner meditates on the corpse of one who has died one day ago or one week ago. It is distended, fetid, and impure. Then he meditates on his own body and sees that his own body is no different. This very body of his will not be able to escape death.

MN 119 : And again, monks, it is as if a monk might see, thrown aside in a cemetery a body that had been dead for one day or for two days or for three days, swollen, discoloured, decomposing; so he focuses on this body itself, thinking: ‘This body too is of a similar nature, a similar constitution, it has not got past that (state of things).

According to the pali version and it’s parallels versions through cemetery contemplation the yogi understands that his body too is of similar fate of that of the decaying corpse, and this simultaneously gives us the message that death is inevitable. As humans we’re generally aware that death is inevitable but cemetery contemplation gives us the opportunity to experience it practically. Thus, the corpse is frequently subjected to change and this itself will help us to cultivate anicca sañña regarding the body.

10

i don’t see why we shouldn’t do that if it works. the purpose of 31 body parts contemplation is for “kaama-raagassa pahaanaaya”/sensuality and lust removal, and the purpose of 9 cemetary contemplations is for “asmi-maana-samuggataaya” / uprooting the “I” subtle self conceit. so if imagination can accomplish that, then the practice is doing its job.

1 Like