It doesn’t work for me because sallekha is getting rid of Identity View 
That is actually VERY important.
Here are the suttas that use sallekha.
1 Like
AN 5.181 mentions sallekha but doesn’t define it. It seems to be given as a positive meaning, and so seems to be the redefined term:
A person may be wilderness dweller because of stupidity and folly. Or because of wicked desires, being naturally full of desires. Or because of madness and mental disorder. Or because it is praised by the Buddhas and their disciples. Or for the sake of having few wishes, for the sake of contentment, self-effacement, seclusion, and simplicity.
Mandattā momūhattā
āraññiko hoti, pāpiccho icchāpakato āraññiko hoti, ummādā cittakkhepā āraññiko hoti, vaṇṇitaṃ buddhehi buddhasāvakehīti āraññiko hoti, appicchataṃyeva nissāya santuṭṭhiṃyeva nissāya sallekhaṃyeva nissāya pavivekaṃyeva nissāya idamatthitaṃyeva nissāya āraññiko hoti.
AN 5.190 is basically the same:
A person may eat only from the almsbowl because of stupidity and folly. Or because of wicked desires, being naturally full of desires. Or because of madness and mental disorder. Or because it is praised by the Buddhas and their disciples. Or for the sake of having few wishes, for the sake of contentment, self-effacement, seclusion, and simplicity.
Mandattā momūhattā pattapiṇḍiko
hoti, pāpiccho icchāpakato pattapiṇḍiko hoti, ummādā cittakkhepā pattapiṇḍiko hoti, ‘vaṇṇitaṃ buddhehi buddhasāvakehī’ti pattapiṇḍiko hoti, appicchataṃyeva nissāya santuṭṭhiṃyeva nissāya sallekhaṃyeva nissāya pavivekaṃyeva nissāya idamatthitaṃyeva nissāya pattapiṇḍiko hoti.
MN 10 - I cannot find the term in that sutta, perhaps the search on Voice generated an error?
DN 28:
Notice this suttas is talking about
any other ascetic or brahmin
And discussing:
If the wanderers following other paths were to see even a single one of these qualities in themselves they’d carry around a banner to that effect.
It’s contrasting the Buddha with people of other religions:
Others will have wrong view, but here we will have right view.’
‘Pare micchādiṭṭhī bhavissanti, mayamettha sammādiṭṭhī bhavissāmā’ti sallekho karaṇīyo. (11)‘Others will have wrong thought, but here we will have right thought.’
‘Pare micchāsaṅkappā bhavissanti, mayamettha sammāsaṅkappā bhavissāmā’ti sallekho karaṇīyo. (12)
In this context, we find the statement:
See, Udāyī, how the Realized One has so few wishes, such contentment, such self-effacement.
“Passa kho tvaṃ, udāyi, ‘tathāgatassa appicchatā santuṭṭhitā sallekhatā.
To me this seems quite possible that it’s using this term because in those days a good spiritual master was expected to be into sallekha. So, here the term is used with it’s redefined meaning, putting the Buddha at the top, the best practitioner of sallekha! Just like he’s a Brahmin (which he was not, according to the actual meaning of the word at the time).
That covers all instances you mentioned. (If you have the Pāli Reader, that’s probably a better way of searching the canon for terms, perhaps it would give more hits).
Sorry I mis-read the two AN suttas, and so have now edited by last post considerably. Please re-read if you read it already!
This is so interesting. The term is actually used in the Pali. Note that Bhante Sujato did not translate this segment in place. Voice will actually speak the following if you have Pali enabled. There is no English for it.
{
“scid”: “mn10:47.9”,
“pli”: “Sallekhasammādiṭṭhisatipaṭṭhaṃ,”,
“en”: “”
},
Yes. That would be consistent with the hypothesis that sallekha arises spontaneously out of jhana without recourse to any other practice.
Yet I find myself reluctant to embrace that hypothesis. From my own experience with meditation, I have found otherwise. In my own experience, I found that meditation is not enough. I do perform self-effacement practice just as the Buddha instructed Cunda (I learned a few new tricks there!). And that self-effacement has indeed caused a lot of suffering to vanish. And in reading the suttas, I have found even more corners of unmindfulness needing self-effacement. So when I meditate, I do indeed focus on self-effacement. Blissing out did not work for me.
It may work for you.
1 Like
I also wonder whether this sutta has been made up by combining two seperate sources, the first about how jhāna practice is not sallekha (perhaps non-Buddhist meaning of the term); the second (which could possibly be itself also composed of multiple sources) being rest of the suttas, starting:
1. The Exposition of Self-Effacement
I see no natural connection between these two halves, and I wonder if they were put together merely because the both had sallekha as their subject.
Also notice that the second half cannot be advice to people who are already practitioners of the 4 jhānas, since they have already overcome many of the obscurations to practice jhāna which the second hald discussed, such as:
‘Others will be overcome with dullness and drowsiness, but here we will be rid of dullness and drowsiness.’
‘Pare thinamiddhapariyuṭṭhitā bhavissanti, mayamettha vigatathinamiddhā bhavissāmā’ti sallekho karaṇīyo. (21)
Oh, so is the actual Pāli for that section also excluded here on Suttacentral? (I was searching for the Pāli term and found it nowewhere on the page). I really strongly feel that any excluded Pāli should be included - I understand that on paper it helps to abbreviate things (although the old book translations of the Nikayas that said ‘as in xxx sutta xxx chapter’ were horrifically annoying, requiring gymnastic feats of page turning just to read the whole sutta properly). But I think in this digital medium, including all repeated text would be very useful. Could still use colour of italics etc. to represent the fact that it’s also abbreviated in the source text. But for purpose of analysis of the canon, we really are helped if we can actually find what we are looking for, as in this example, so digital searches will be vastly helped by including the texts in full.
Or was it tdue to another issue? If you like, please quote the paragraph in full, unless it has been vovered already above.
That depends if you interpret sallekha as a practice, or a quality. From what @Gabriel_L was saying, and also from MN 8, I have been assuming that it refers to practice rather than a quality. The way I read your statement, that would require it to be a quality. The PED giving it as ‘austere penance’ also implies it’s practice, not a quality.
‘Otherwise’ meaning exactly which part of what I said seems invalid to you? I cannot see what you are refuting.
Have you done extensive and extended practice of the 4 jhānas?
So then you do practice the 4 jhānas? Because they are covered by his list:
‘Others will have wrong immersion, but here we will have right immersion.’
‘Pare micchāsamādhi bhavissanti,
mayamettha sammāsamādhī bhavissāmā’ti sallekho karaṇīyo. (18)
You seem to be using this term with very definite meaning. What is the meaning you are using, and how have you aquired it? So far i have seen no clear definition of it from the Buddha.
I would agree and perhaps you might be inclined to post that in Feedback?
Here is the JSON for MN10.
You do realize one cannot answer that question?
I can say that I pay a lot of attention to the instructions.
Ah OK. I am using it in the DN33 sense. This ongoing practice has been VERY helpful at weeding out suffering. I call it self-effacement because every bit of suffering I have found was a delight held onto by an illusional self (see MN1). If memory serves I think it is the fourth part of MN10:
And what is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the ending of defilements? A mendicant meditates observing rise and fall in the five grasping aggregates. ‘Such is form, such is the origin of form, such is the ending of form. Such are feelings … perceptions … choices … consciousness, such is the origin of consciousness, such is the ending of consciousness.’ This is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the ending of defilements.
Ah thanks. Unfortunately dealing with the data on that page is beyond me… but if you can extract from that the passage…? Although if it’s a case of a section that’s abbreviated because it’s somewhere else, we should be able to find a normal Suttacentral page with that on, and also translated which will be handy.
Why? Are you a monk and it’s a monk’s rule or something? I heard of rules against claiming magical powers, but are monks dissallowed from talking of their jhāna practice? Doesn’t Ajahn Brahm talk about his? Certainly the Buddha talked about his own a lot, and I think maybe his disciples also did? And many of his disciples openly declared their enlightenment also, even to the extent of having others memorise their proclamations!
Hard to discuss meditation if there are rules against it, and that would seem very unhelpful. I doubt the Buddha would have wanted that. But if there is a rule like that that you’re following, then I can respect that, but maybe say if that’s the case just to be clear.
Can you quote from the revelant part? If possible in Pāli and English.
1 Like
{
"scid": "mn10:47.4",
"pli": "Attamanā te bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti.",
"en": "Satisfied, the mendicants were happy with what the Buddha said."
},
{
"scid": "mn10:47.5",
"pli": "Satipaṭṭhānasuttaṃ niṭṭhitaṃ dasamaṃ.",
"en": ""
},
{
"scid": "mn10:47.6",
"pli": "Mūlapariyāyavaggo niṭṭhito paṭhamo.",
"en": ""
},
{
"scid": "mn10:47.7",
"pli": "Mūlasusaṃvaradhammadāyādā,",
"en": ""
},
{
"scid": "mn10:47.8",
"pli": "Bheravānaṅgaṇākaṅkheyyavatthaṃ;",
"en": ""
},
{
"scid": "mn10:47.9",
"pli": "Sallekhasammādiṭṭhisatipaṭṭhaṃ,",
"en": ""
},
{
"scid": "mn10:47.10",
"pli": "Vaggavaro asamo susamatto.",
"en": ""
}
I have been meditating for 4 decades. I only started reading suttas last year. The descriptions of the absorptions make sense to me but my Zen teacher Tanouye Roshi is dead so I can’t exactly go ask him to verify my experience.
1.11.43And what is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the ending of defilements?
Katamā cāvuso, samādhibhāvanā bhāvitā bahulīkatā āsavānaṃ khayāya saṃvattati?
1.11.44A mendicant meditates observing rise and fall in the five grasping aggregates.
Idhāvuso, bhikkhu pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu udayabbayānupassī viharati.
1.11.45‘Such is form, such is the origin of form, such is the ending of form.
Iti rūpaṃ, iti rūpassa samudayo, iti rūpassa atthaṅgamo.
1.11.46Such are feelings …Iti vedanā … pe …>
1.11.47perceptions …iti saññā …
1.11.48choices …iti saṅkhārā …
1.11.49consciousness, such is the origin of consciousness, such is the ending of consciousness.’
iti viññāṇaṃ, iti viññāṇassa samudayo, iti viññāṇassa atthaṅgamo.
1.11.50This is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the ending of defilements.
Ayaṃ, āvuso, samādhibhāvanā bhāvitā bahulīkatā āsavānaṃ khayāya saṃvattati. (5.4)
Another resource that goes into greater detail on identity and the grasping aggregates is MN44. Basically, this is what I focus on in meditation. Not bliss. Getting rid of delight. Relinquishing identity.
1 Like
It is not a knife. This is a knife.
1 Like
@Senryu, I think its important to understand the Sallekha sutta in view of other sutras.
And how is consciousness not scattered and diffused externally? Take a mendicant who sees a sight with their eyes. Their consciousness doesn’t follow after the features of that sight, and is not tied, attached, and fettered to gratification in its features. So their consciousness is said to be not scattered and diffused externally. When they hear a sound with their ears … When they smell an odor with their nose … When they taste a flavor with their tongue … When they feel a touch with their body … When they know a thought with their mind, their consciousness doesn’t follow after the features of that thought, and is not tied, attached, and fettered to gratification in its features. So their consciousness is said to be not scattered and diffused externally. That’s how consciousness is not scattered and diffused externally.
And how is their consciousness stuck internally? Take a mendicant who, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected. Their consciousness follows after that rapture and bliss born of seclusion, tied, attached, and fettered to gratification in that rapture and bliss born of seclusion. So their mind is said to be stuck internally.
Furthermore, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, a mendicant enters and remains in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and confidence, and unified mind, without placing the mind and keeping it connected. Their consciousness follows after that rapture and bliss born of immersion, tied, attached, and fettered to gratification in that rapture and bliss born of immersion. So their mind is said to be stuck internally.
Furthermore, with the fading away of rapture, a mendicant enters a… SuttaCentral
You wouldn’t have the insight practices that leads to liberation, if you exclusively did jhana practices: The Three Basic Facts of Existence: I. Impermanence (Anicca)
1 Like
Here is our conversation:
Since there is no mention of sallekha in the section you quoted, how does this qualify for you for as being the Buddha’s definition of sallekha? I cannot follow your reasoning.
1 Like
THat was such an amazing movie. Even more amazing was how the relationship between these two actors ended in suffering.
I am reading the translation, which does not use sallekha. Therefore my experience of the sutta is different than yours. Whatever I have read has proved of value to me in simplifying my life. I cannot make any scholarly claim as to accuracy or legitimacy. I am an engineer who accepts advice that works. I see that your understanding of sallekha is consistent and plausible. Yet I cannot apply it in any useful way to my own practice. Note that we both agree about the importance of jhana. Where we disagree is that you say jhana is enough and I say jhana is not enough. I say that jhana, like any other tool has to be used mindfully for best results.
Now it is possible for you to dismiss my experience and say that I know nothing of jhana or practice. Perhaps you are right. Yet that dismissal doesn’t help me improve my life. The translated suttas have been enormously helpful to me.
1 Like
That’s great that your reading has proved valuable for you. But regarding view, I don’t think it will do you any favours to believe you have received the definitive meaning of the Pāli term sallekha by reading a teaching which makes no mention whatsoever of sallekha. That approach doesn’t seem logical.
If you believe I have at any time ever said that that is my view, then please do quote me. But I cannot ever imagine saying such a thing.
I have never met anyone who has ever claimed otherwise. Right mindfulness is the seventh step on the jhāna path after all!
I don’t think there’s any need to defend against hypothetical dismissal. I don’t tend to overly dismiss people’s experience. I hope that my tone did not come across as such.
1 Like
Oh. I have misunderstood! Now I am quite confused about what we are disagreeing on.
Note that I also agree with you on the following:
But regarding view, I don’t think it will do you any favours to believe you have received the definitive meaning of the Pāli term sallekha by reading a teaching which makes no mention whatsoever of sallekha . That approach doesn’t seem logical.
My approach is to use intuition and logic in parallel to double-check each other. I mistrust any approach that relies on just intuition or logic.
If I might summarize, perhaps we are both uncertain on exactly how to interpret sallekha. I agree with the uncertainty. I have found a workable yet admittedly tenuous understanding of sallekha. I am not particularly attached to that interpretation and would happily swap it out for a better and actionable understanding. Perhaps we both need to wait for others to shed light on this.
Beyond what we have discussed above, I don’t know what to say. But you’re welcome to ask any specific questions if you like. I’ll try to answer if I can.
Now that you can logically see that you have gained your definition of sallekha from a sutta which makes no mention of nor reference to sallekha, what consequence does this have for your double-checking process?
Sure. I only just started looking into it from this conversation. That’s why I’m open to seeing definitions the Buddha might have given, but so far it seems that we have none. So I’ve been working on what evidence we do have, and in that process also eliminate arguments that are not based on evidence - that’s my process. Would be interested to hear from anyone else who’s looked into this in depth.
1 Like
You don’t miss a thing do you?
When logic is inconclusive, I trust intuition. In the mountains, this can be the difference between life and death. I do prefer it when both agree, it is much better than intuition alone.
1 Like
Right. So in this case logic has proven to be conclusive that that sutta is not a valid source for gaining any understanding of the term sallekha. That was my point.
Definitely both are important. But it’s good to hone them both, and let the benefits of both permeate us, and especially the logical evidence-based method when it comes to understanding what the Buddha meant by certain terms, through close examination of the actual evidence we have of his teachings, in the early texts.
You have just concluded that MN8 is useless in and of itself and that the Buddha’s exhortation to Cunda on sallekha may be useless.
That is a rather odd conclusion and one that I do not agree with. When I said “tenuous”, I meant that I do not have the background in Pali nor do I have the interest sufficient to investigate the “true” meaning of sallekha to satisfy you. I have faith in Bhante Sujato’s translation, given his status and exemplary scholarship.
I therefore find it logical to have faith in the translation and have verified its truth personally.
My concern about rejecting MN8 as not a valid source for gaining any understanding of the term sallekha is that one might meditate in bliss thinking it effective at ending the defilements in this very life. For those on the path of non-return, understanding and applying MN8 would be significant and important. For those content with stream-entry the understanding of MN8 could certainly be deferred to a later one of up to seven lives.