I have heard teachings using phrases like “just notice”, “no judging”, “it is just like this”.
The instruction seems to be to fully acknowledge whatever arises, without adding judgment.
If there is anger, notice it. If there is desire, notice it. Simply: “this is how it is.”
But what if the desire is to punch someone in the face? Or to drink an entire bottle of whiskey? Is this still “just what is”, or have we suddenly reintroduced judgment?
Because Buddhism also gives us very explicit precepts: don’t kill, don’t harm, don’t intoxicate the mind. In fact the very same teachers who give this teaching have their life completely regimented by countless rules that govern every little aspect of their behavior as far as I’ve been able to understand.
Precepts don’t sound like neutral observations of what is; they sound like clear evaluations of actions.
So here is my confusion: When teachers say “no judging”, what exactly is not being judged? There are actions that if they committed them they would have to leave the Sangha, so obviously they are constantly judged.
How does “it is like this” coexist, in actual practice, with ethical restraint, without turning mindfulness into either moral denial or quiet self-justification?
I’m sure there must be a distinction here that I’m missing, and I’d really appreciate help seeing it clearly.
DN22 “rid of covetousness and displeasure for the world”
It means don’t give rise to likes and dislikes. Wanting and aversion etc.
One way is to use no judgement to represent this. As if they cannot imagine being able to discriminate good and bad must come with reactions of likes and dislikes.
Of course, for untrained people, it does automatically comes up. But it can be trained to remove such reactions, that is part of the training in mindfulness.
Also, second answer.
I use the framework of goal language which includes the self concept, morality, judgement etc as one side. And method language, which uses terms like, “it’s good enough,” no judgement (which as explained above, actually means don’t like or dislike), no self concept.
If we understand which language is which, it’s easy to see how to use method language to attain the goal. When we are in general not governed by greed or hatred, it’s much easier to observe the precepts.
And not mixing the language around. Eg. Using no judgement in the arena of mortality is to interpret the statement which is meant as method language as goal language. Therefore there can be confusion. For the most part, using non-judgement I think is trying to undo the other type of error.
You aren’t hearing those things from people who teach from the suttas. If you want to know how those teachers reconcile with the suttas, you should as them.
Please try a search for “bare attention” here on the forum. It might answer your question as this has been discussed before.
Ah. I understood Ajahn Sumedho says things like this, and it looks like all monks in Europe follow his footsteps but perhaps I misunderstood. There was also a Venerable who in an answer to one of my questions here used the expression ‘it just is’.
He is very well know as not teaching directly from the suttas, and in fact teaching things that seem to contradict them. You have to keep in mind that he was a senior monk before any of our modern English translations of the suttas. He studied mostly from a very short (like, pocket size) anthology of suttas published by the BPS as a young monk along with instructions from his teacher Ajahn Chah. The monasteries where he lived (as the first and only English speaker) didn’t even have the very old PTS translations. So it’s not so surprising. This is not uncommon for Thai forest tradition.
MN 19 addresses this matter directly. In his Noble Quest, the Buddha-to-be was developing what would become the Seven Factors of Awakening:
Mindfulness
Investigation
Effort
Joy
Tranquility
Samadhi
Equanimity
With mindfulness , or “bare awareness” if you will, he observed what was going on in his mind. He then investigated the ramifications of these thoughts and where they led. Then he used Right Effort to take action:
The Four Right Efforts
Restrain
Abandon
Cultivate
Preserve
Mindfulness without investigation and effort leads nowhere. But following what he did leads to joy, tranquility, samadhi and equanimity.
When he had spoken, one of the mendicants said to him, “But sir, asserting what doctrine does the Buddha not argue with anyone in this world with its gods, Māras, and Divinities, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans? And how is it that perceptions do not underlie the Buddha, the brahmin who lives detached from sensual pleasures, without indecision, stripped of worry, and rid of craving for rebirth in this or that state?”
“Mendicant, judgments driven by proliferating perceptions beset a person. If they don’t find anything worth approving, welcoming, or getting attached to in the source from which these arise, just this is the end of the underlying tendencies to desire, repulsion, views, doubt, conceit, the desire for continued existence, and ignorance. This is the end of taking up the rod and the sword, the end of quarrels, arguments, and disputes, of accusations, divisive speech, and lies. This is where these bad, unskillful qualities cease without anything left over.”
So goal of no judgments is to finally achieve no judgments at all(nibbana) by not approving,welcoming anything. But we use judgements to act(i.e this teaching is better, etc) - so we can’t just stop judging.
We need to let go of judgements gradually. This is similar to how we use desire to achieve desireless. We let go of judgments that lead to more judgements(desire,repulsion,views,doubt,conceit,desire etc) - and be stable on the subtle judgements. When we realize that subtle judgements also cloud our minds we should release them and settle on a more subtler judgement or if possible no judgment(enlightenment).
Putting aside the obviously untenable “all you ever have to do is notice with no judging” approach, I would say there is some nuance in the suttas (and in later suggestions by ancient and modern teachers). For example MN20 gives a variety of approaches to distracting thoughts, and AN4.165 (and some other suttas that I can’t find right now) suggest that in some cases it is helpful to just endure things. In fact, the first three style of mindfulness meditation MN10 are mostly about observing, whereas the fourth points to abandoning hindrances and developing awakening factors. It does seem reasonable to do some observation first.
Furthermore, though I can’t find an explicit sutta quote about it, it is useful to make a distinction between what has come to be and what can be changed. In MN10 we see:
It’s when a mendicant who has sensual desire in them understands: ‘I have sensual desire in me.’ When they don’t have sensual desire in them, they understand: ‘I don’t have sensual desire in me.’ They understand how sensual desire arises; how, when it’s already arisen, it’s given up; and how, once it’s given up, it doesn’t arise again in the future.
That sensual desire has arisen cannot be changed. That it can be given up is possible.
