How do you define mindfulness (sati)?

Discussion
, ,
41

What about “recollection” for sati?

We all know, for example, that the attractive objects of the senses (including the mind) are anicca, dukkha and anattā.

In daily life though, do we really look at things in this way, when various forms of dainty “dishes” appear? Sati could be seen as the “recollection” that enables us to do so, to bring our minds to see things as they REALLY are, in other words living with indriyasamvara. A sort of living up to what one knows only too well - IN THEORY.

Sampajañña would be “having one’s wits about one”, “clear-headedness”, keeping the mind alert and in the present, not drifting of into past or future - or theories. “Age quod agis”, as they say - do what you are doing.

1 Like
42

this is traditional translation of anussati which to be sure is based on the sati root but i think may have a narrower application

43

Here’s my translation of this passage:

Sammāsatiñce bhavaṃ dhammapadaṃ garahati paṭikkosati, ye ca hi muṭṭhassatī asampajānā samaṇabrāhmaṇā te bhoto pujjā te bhoto pāsaṃsā.
If you reject the basic principle of right mindfulness, then you must honor and praise those ascetics and brahmins who are unmindful, with no situational awareness.

Sammāsamādhiñce bhavaṃ dhammapadaṃ garahati paṭikkosati, ye ca hi asamāhitā vibbhantacittā samaṇabrāhmaṇā te bhoto pujjā te bhoto pāsaṃsā.
If you reject the basic principle of right samādhi, you must honor and praise those ascetics and brahmins who are scattered, with wandering minds.

As you can see, muṭṭhassatī is translated by BB as “muddle-minded” and by me as “unmindful”. Both are correct, I feel mine is a little more idiomatic.

We’re both using “wandering” for vibbhanta. This term is essentially used only in this kind of context and to describe a mendicant who has disrobed. The underlying meaning is to “spin, whirl” like a wheel. I’m not entirely happy with “wandering” here; perhaps “go astray”.

In any case, it’s a little hard to draw too much of a conclusion from these short phrases, since they are essentially just employing standard antonyms.

3 Likes
44

since i’m a stranger to the suttas, my knowledge on this is weak. but i think this might be helpful ; bhikkhu Analayo mentions something like this in his “perspectives on satipatthana, 2014”

44 In the case of mindfulness of breathing, for example, as pointed out by Bodhi 2011: 32, “the breath is something occurring in the present, not in the past, which means that in this context sati is attentiveness to a present event, not recollection of the past.” Thus when Gethin 2011: 270 conceptualizes the same practice to mean that “one has to remember that what it is one should be doing is remembering the breath”, I think his usage of the term “to remember” is intended to be understood in a rather broad sense, as a way of reflecting the fact that mindfulness holds things in mind and. thereby performs a function akin to remembering, but not in the sense that during mindfulness of breathing one is actually remembering something from the past. While I appreciate Gethin’s attempt to bridge the sense of sati as present-moment awareness and its nuances related to memory, I think it can become problematic if the aspect of remembering is given excessive emphasis. An example is Ṭhānissaro 2012: 86, who having confined sati to memory then has to find another term for present-moment awareness, which he allocates to clear knowing,sampajañña. His take on sati then makes it difficult for him to appreciate the qualities of receptivity and bare observation in mindfulness to such an extent that the satipaṭṭhāna instructions on their own appear incomplete to him and in need of supplementation; cf. Ṭhānissaro 2012: 150. In order to avoid such problems, I think we have to handle the memory aspect of mindfulness in a way that allows for the _essential qualities of sati as a receptive form of present-moment awareness to remain._

so,can Sati be defined as ;" bare attention",“receptivity”,"awareness of the present moment?

1 Like
45

I think another way of picking apart sati and sampajañña is relating them to the senses. The five “lower” senses are all functioning in the present, they are not concerned with past or future… in fact they cannot perceive the past even if you tried — that’s a mental function. So training in sampajañña alone, training in sampajañña before sati (as per the Gradual Training), is training in the 5 lower senses and I would say and it is a “presentness” training. What is happening “right now” is perceptible to the senses (situational awareness), the mind (manas) would just get in the way.

Now, you could say that there is a mental function that keeps the mind from following thought-trains into the past or future, and I guess that would be sati the recollector. I heard Joseph Goldstein once give the simile of training a puppy that I think highlights the sati functions and attitude quite well. You gently tell the puppy to “stay”, “stay”, “stay”… and when it inevitably wanders off you gently pick it up and bring it back and return to telling it to “stay”. Picking it up and bringing it back is sati (recollecting or remembering what you were doing), as is the retaining with the stay command.

Then, sati training as a distinct and more advanced practice I would say emphasizes one vs many. So, whereas sampajañña training was concerned with many perceptions (the various impressions at the 5 sense gates) and was a training in retaining presence, sati is upholding one percept. The breath sensation for example.

46

Mindfulness means recollection (to remember or keep in mind). It is only possible to recollect a mental thing. It is not possible to be mindful of breathing because breathing is a physical thing. The mind can only be mindful (remember) to be aware (conscious) of the breathing. Awareness is a mental thing. The mind remembers to be aware or conscious. Mindfulness is ‘sati’. Being conscious is ‘vinnana’. Mindfulness (sati) is not awareness (vinnana) & awareness is not mindfulness.

For me, ‘mindfulness of breathing’ is an extremly poor & deceptive translation of ‘ananapasati’. For me a better translation is ‘mindfulness when, while or with breathing’.

To murder another person requires attentiveness to a present event but murdering is not Buddhist mindfulness. Soldiers are also trained to be mindful but this is wrong mindfulness.

[quote=“sandundhanushka, post:44, topic:3184”]mindfulness holds things in mind
[/quote]
Mindfulness does hold things in mind but it does not hold the breathing in the mind. Mindfulness keeps the mind clear of the five hindrances; i.e., holds the clear mind in mind.

Sati is remembering. It is remembering to keep the mind clear of the five hindrances; remembering to abandon covetousness & distress (per MN 10; MN 118); remembering to keep right view in the mind (per MN 117).

The resultant convergence on breathing happens automatically. For example, SN 48.10 states jhana is reached by making ‘letting go’ (‘vossagga’) the meditation object. Once the mind is clear of the five hindrances & once craving is let go of, no particularly effort is required for the mind to converge with the breathing.

For me, mindfulness is not present-moment awareness. The mind/consciousness by its very own nature has present-moment awareness. Thus, mindulness serves the function to keep the mind free from the hindrances/obstacles to present-moment awareness.

If the mind concentrates too hard, with too much power, energy & force, it will be in the present moment but have very poor quality of concentration. This is because that mind is concentrating with craving.

Mindfulness is like a vaccuum cleaner that constantly mops up craving & other obstacles to the mind’s inherent conscious nature. AN 1.49 states “luminous is the mind”. Mindfulness remembers to keep the mind luminous. That luminous mind will automatically converge with the breathing because, to the beginning level luminous mind, the breathing is the grossest sense object.

I think it is best to stick to the suttas.

Mindfully one abandons wrong view, mindfully one enters upon and abides in right view: this is one’s right mindfulness. MN 117

They meditate… by being …mindful… rid of desire and aversion for the world. MN 10; MN 118

Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil, let himself get distracted outside? SN 47.20

In summary, mindfulness (sati) remembers to watch the breathing (rather than watch TV) but what watches (anupassi) the breathing is not mindulness. What watches the breathing is consciousness (‘passa’/‘vinnana’).

:deciduous_tree:

47

It is if you think of mindfulness as something that keeps attention steady and focused in one place. I don’t see any conflict between this and the suttas you mentioned.

2 Likes
48

I did not use the word ‘attention’, just as the suttas (MN 118; MN 10) do not use the word ‘attention’ (‘manasikara’). For me, introducing the word ‘attention’ just makes even more confusion.

The meditation suttas use the words ‘anupassi’ (‘observes’) & ‘sati’ (‘mindful’).

…a bhikkhu abides contemplating (anupassi) the body as a body, ardent, fully aware (sampajanna) and mindfully (sati) having put away covetousness and grief for the world.

Based on the suttas, the meditator experiences ‘anupassi’ of breathing, which is why the 1st tetrad is called ‘kayanupassana’ rather than ‘kayasati’.

Where does the sutta ever mention being ‘mindful’ of the breathing? The sutta refers to observing (anupassi), knowing (pajānāti), experiencing/feeling (paṭi­saṃ­vedī) & tranquilizing breathing.

“Breathing in long, he knows: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing out long, he knows: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he knows: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he knows: ‘I breathe out short.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing sabba kaya’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out experiencing sabba kaya’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the bodily formation.’

Regardless, ‘anapanasati’ is about much more than just observing breathing.

For me, the translation should be similar to as follows:

And what, monks, is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself (as a result of being) ardent, aware & mindfully putting away greed & distress with reference to the world

In the four noble truths, the Buddha taught craving is to be abandoned so why would the Buddha teach watching breathing instead of abandoning craving? Will watching breathing with craving achieve the goal?

49

You also mentioned SN 47.20 which does use the word ‘attention’:

In the title (Ānā­pā­nassa­ti­sutta). You can’t observe something without keeping your attention on it.

50

[quote=“raivo, post:49, topic:3184”]Taṃ kiṃ maññatha, bhikkhave, api nu so puriso amuṃ telapattaṃ amanasikaritvā bahiddhā pamādaṃ āhareyyā”ti?

“What do you think, bhikkhus, would that man stop attending to that bowl of oil and out of negligence turn his attention outwards?”
[/quote]

Imo, the lack of attention (amanasikaritvā) here does not appear to refer to mindfulness. The lack of mindfulness here appears to be the “negligence” (pamādaṃ). I have noticed mindfulness (sati) & apamādaṃ (heedfulness) are often used as synonyms (but not ‘manasikara’).

SN 54.8 uses in the same sentence the two words ‘attention’ & ‘mindfulness’ therefore it appears the two words cannot be synonyms:

ayameva ānā­pā­nassa­ti­samā­dhi sādhukaṃ manasi kātabbo.

should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness in-&-out breathing.

:seedling:

My original point was ‘mindfulness of breathing’ is a questionable translation of Ānā­pā­nasa­ti. Since the word “of” does not actually exist in the compound ‘Ānā­pā­nasa­ti’, your reference to ‘observing’ & ‘attention’ again appear to not explicitly fit here.

I posted, for me, the term “mindfulness when/with/while breathing” better reflects the meaning of ‘Ānā­pā­nasa­ti’ because the most important element of the practise is remembering to not cling to the meditation objects & remembering to not regard the meditation objects as ‘self’.

51

According to my opinion ,clear comprehension (sampajañña ) is a result of sustained mindfulness maintained without interruption. And due to uninterrupted and sustained mindfulness the yogi acts with clear comprehension during his daily activities.

Since I am just expressing my thoughts,
Please correct me if my interpretation is wrong. :slight_smile:

52

My understanding is sampajañña has a wisdom component. It is more than just having a clear mind. It is also knowing what, how, the purpose & the context of what you are doing in meditation.

For example, a hindrance arises. The mind clearly comprehends: (i) this is a hindrance; (ii) this is the nature of the hindrance (eg. born from ignorance, leads to harm, does not lead to peace, is impermanent, not-self, etc); & (iii) this is the method to overcome that hindrance.

It is not a result of mindfulness but something brought to mind by mindfulness. There are various wisdoms taught by the Buddha and mindfulness selects, delivers & applies the appropriate wisdom for the specific situation. Mindfulness plus the appropriate wisdom equals sampajanna.

I like this short video on the subject: YouTube :seedling:

4 Likes
53

Thanks @Deeele , that video contains the holding a bird simile I was looking for (although the reference was uncited).

Ajahn Jayasaro seems to me to be a real “meditation monk”.

54

I’ve seen this said before, but I’ve not seen any direct evidence for it in the suttas, where am I missing the " one at a time" instructions Bhante?

1 Like
55

The Satipatthana Sutta, each time, says puna ca param. “And again …”.

1 Like
56

hmm… im not quite clear how that insinuates a linear progression though, any clarification on that Bhante?

also Sati (f.) [Vedic smṛti: see etym. under sarati2] memory, recognition, consciousness, D i.180; ii.292; Miln 77 – 80 intentness of mind, wakefulness of mind, mindfulness alertness, lucidity of mind, self – possession, conscience self – consciousness

this definition the Miln 77-80 before intentness/wakefullness of mind, I’m assuming this is a reference but is this definition saying that the “mindfulness” definition of sati is only seen from the one reference, or not brought about before it?

ie has “mindfulness” been “tacked on” to Sati.

I’ve been doing an investigation and pondering these four words, Sati, sampajaññā, Appamāda, and yoniso manasikāra… these four seem to be almost synonymous, although Im sure some one with more scholarly experience of the suttas might see them in more distinct terms, the idea floating around in my head is that these four terms together seem to be what we think of in modern parlance as “mindfulness”, or at the very least work in concert with each other in some respect, your thoughts on this Bhante?

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

1 Like
57

How does it not? I can’t imagine how you’d say it any more clearly. The interpretive problem is, rather, this: Given that the texts explicitly say it’s a progressive sequence, how do we reconcile this with the fact that many of the exercises as given in the sutta now don’t really appear to be progressive.

  • sati: “mindfulness”, continuity of awareness, keeping on bearing in mind; opp. scattered, diffuse.
  • sampajañña: “situational awareness”, contextual understanding of a situation; opp. confusion, cluelessness, not getting what’s going on.
  • appamāda: “diligence”, applying energy consistently and with integrity; opp. being lazy or careless.
  • yoniso manasikāra: “rational focus”, paying attention to a problem or phenomenon in such a way as to reveal the underlying cause; opp. trying to solve or understand the problem by doing the same thing that caused it in the first place.
5 Likes
58

Sati & appamada may be somewhat synonymous. Sampajaññā & yoniso manasikāra (which may represent one of many applications/types of sampajaññā) may also be somewhat synonymous.

However, sati (which is said to be of the concentration faculty) and sampajanna (which is said to be of the wisdom faculty) cannot be synonymous (based on this samadhi vs panna distinction).

A common analogy is that of using an axe. Mindfulness remembers to continually hold & use the axe and sampajanna is the axe.

The non-discernment of a difference between sati & sampajanna is generally indicative of one’s meditative technique. Those attempting to engage ‘yogic’ meditation techniques, such as directly pushing the mind onto the breathing, generally do not discern a difference. Where as those employing a ‘non-attachment’ technique to constantly keep the mind non-attached (such as described in SN 48.10 as a way to reach jhana) clearly discern the difference.

MN 117, for example, provides an accurate description of how mindfulness uses wisdom.

One makes an effort to abandon wrong view and to enter upon right view: this is one’s right effort. Mindfully one abandons wrong view, mindfully one enters upon and abides in right view: this is one’s right mindfulness. Thus these three states run and circle around right view, that is, right view, right effort and right mindfulness. MN 117

MN 122 contains a series of passages that describe how sampajjana clearly knows/discerns what is going on in the mind, i.e., sampajjana knows/discerns the mind does not enter & settle into voidness & imperturbability; sampajjana knows/discerns the mind enters & settles into voidness & imperturbability; sampajjana knows/discerns the mind is free from unwholesome states; etc. Here, sampajanna is clearly described as ‘discernment’ rather than ‘remembering’ or ‘keeping in mind’ (sati).

SN 48.10 explains the differences between the mindfulness, concentration & wisdom faculties. Here, mindfulness is defined as ‘remembering’, similar to MN 117. I personally think there is a problem with the general translation of Right Mindfulness, in that it seems to infer mindfulness means ‘observing’ four objects rather than ‘remembering to observe’ four objects. Otherwise, it infers the primary task is to observe four objects rather than ‘remembering to abandon covetous & distress’ in relation to those four objects.

Also, general translations such as ‘mindfulness OF breathing’ do not help since they infer mindfulness means being ‘observant’ (anupassi) of breathing (rather than remembering to keep the breath & other dhammas, such as sampajanna, in mind).

:seedling:

1 Like