SuttaCentral
Hello.
While reading Acharya Buddharakkhita’s book on Mettā I came across this peculiar passage, in regards to Mettā-bhāvanā. I’m not aware of any early text supporting it. Is anyone aware of a text supporting/ dissupporting this statement? Is this a popular thought? Perhaps it’s found in one of the many ancient commentaries this Venerable drew from?
Mettā (^_^).
Ven. Buddharakkhita is paraphrasing what’s stated in the Brahmavihāra chapter of the Visuddhimagga. As far as I know, there’s nothing in the suttas that would either support or contradict the Visuddhimagga’s advice.
As to the popularity of this instruction, you will find it heeded in any Theravada meditation sub-tradition that teaches mettabhāvanā and bases its instructions on those of the commentators; e.g. the Mahasi tradition.
Here’s the original passage:
For loving-kindness should not be developed at first towards the following four kinds of persons: an antipathetic person, a very dearly loved friend, a neutral person, and a hostile person. Also it should not be developed specifically towards the opposite sex, or towards a dead person.
But if he develops it towards a dead person, he reaches neither absorption nor access. A young bhikkhu, it seems, had started developing loving-kindness inspired by his teacher. His loving-kindness made no headway at all. He went to a senior elder and told him, “Venerable sir, I am quite familiar with attaining jhāna through loving-kindness, and yet I cannot attain it. What is the matter?” The elder said, “Seek the sign, friend, [the object of your meditation].” He did so. Finding that his teacher had died, he proceeded with developing loving-kindness inspired by another and attained absorption. That is why it should not be developed towards one who is dead.
I only read AN 10.177 recently and it seems at least tangentially relevant. The sutta is about rites and gifts of food for the dead rather than metta. In that case, it says only those actually in the ghost realm would benefit from such offerings (not other realms). If a dead relative isn’t there, it says that other relatives or other inhabitants of that realm there would benefit (and the donor themselves would benefit too).
I can imagine some reasons why metta (loving-kindness) as absorption practice may not be as effective when directed toward deceased individuals:
Besides dealing with the challenges that already arise when practicing metta with a living person, someone practicing with a deceased individual would also need to contend with the obstacles mentioned earlier. This additional layer of complexity can make the absorption process even harder, if not impossible.
Alright! Thank you for the reference, as to extent to which I agree with the Visuddhimagga that Mettā should not be cultivated to the other sex and the dead…
Oh yes, on the same topic of offerings, we have this in Kp 7.
“May this be for our relatives! May our relatives be happy!”
If you give it a read, the Sutta also says to have anukampa for the dead relatives, here translated as compassion. It does seem to have overlap with Mettā especially the “may our relatives be happy!” bit.
Yes this makes sense, thank you for the thoughtful reply. It would be quite disastrous and at best unpleasant for some going through strong grief to think about their relatives during meditation. I think it would be better if Mettā was cultivated to the dead after one already has sufficient amount of it developed in his heart during meditation, that way it wouldn’t harm him.
I’m not quite sure whether Lord Buddha ever really intended or taught Mettā meditation to be used as a happiness beam!
I think it’s highly beneficial actually to think about your dead relatives’ good qualities like “Oh my mother always used to feed the stray dogs, may she have been reborn in a good place! May she be happy!” I’m not sure I see a reason why a person with a healthy, non grieving mind wouldn’t be able to develop Jhāna this way! Perhaps if you could explain to me that’d be wonderful
I’m not referring to a literal transference of good vibes to the intended object, although I don’t exclude such possibility.
I think that grief is not the main obstacle, but rather a lack of coherence between the aimed being and the mental image created for meditation. Because there isn’t clarity in forming that mental image, that very lack of clarity would hinder the practice. That’s just a guess; I still can’t state this with certainty.
The reason for this is that the dead person, having changed form, will be out of the focus of Mettā-projection. The object of Metta always is a living being, and the thought-force will become ineffective if the object is not alive.
I think that if someone were able to know the actual form of a loved one (i.e., whether they were reborn as a deva, a peta, a human being, etc.) and then send mettā to that new form of existence, their practice would probably be effective. But that doesn’t happen for most practitioners.
My father died from cancer about 15 years ago. It took a bit less than a year from diagnosis to his death. During that time I invested time and effort to love my dad in many ways and genuinely appreciated all that he brought to my life. Granted he made lots of mistakes, some very harmful and painful for me, but in his later years he really made a lot of effort to make it up to me, probably as much as he was capable of.
After his diagnosis, I made a point to ensure that there wasn’t anything left unsaid that I needed to say or ask, no unfinished business. I knew that he knew how much I loved, appreciated and cared for him and he likewise for me.
So when he died, I felt nothing but joy and gratitude. Of course, if I had the choice, I would have chosen for him to not die, but that was out of my control. So I focused not on what I lost, but what I gained. Whenever I thought of my dad, I easily directed my mind to joy, happiness and gratitude and today my mind is naturally inclined that way. Whenever I think of him, genuine joy and gratitude instantly and exclusively arises.
It’s not necessarily on topic here with metta, but for a dead person where metta isn’t appropriate, cultivating thoughts of love, gratitude, joy, goodwill towards others is appropriate. Cultivating those thoughts while people are alive means that it will be there when they die because the mind is already inclined that way.
Also, when one hears about random people who die, the mind inclines towards good thoughts.
