Preparing for meditation - parimukha?

Discussion
41

Thanks for tickling my brain.

When performing a difficult task, one often focuses by setting the mouth.
To sit with the determination to end all defilements right now is not an easy task.
After lunch, one gets sleepy. It takes determination to stay awake.
When it rains it is wet and cold. Walking meditation outside takes determination.
If one is ill or in pain, sitting meditation takes determination.

So perhaps, there is a simple physical feeling of setting the mouth in determination to smash the Great Doubt now.

1 Like
42

That’s not quite true; it occurs in the Vinaya in the sense of one’s beard being shaved “around the mouth”. Whether that is a relevant meaning is, of course, up for grabs.

3 Likes
43

Thanks, I limited my search to the (earlier) suttas

44

This discussion reminded me of the (one and only) Goenka retreat I attended years ago.

Specifically, Goenkaji’s constant instructions to be aware of the breath “in the tri-eeengular area of the noe-striiills”. :slight_smile:

I realise now this was likely in line with understanding of parimukha-.

1 Like
45

Visuddhimagga as well for example.

It’s just weird that the most important general jhana-formula we have should always be introduced by breath meditation on the nostrils. Obviously there are other paths to jhana as well.

Looking at it from the distance it’s too specific - which is why translators were struggling to find a more general meaning in parimukha, like “in front” or “right there”

46

Dear Gabriel,
thank you for sharing your nice research and your personal takes on the matter. It is some time since then but perhaps some benefit can be derived from the following nevertheless. For me the most elegant and meaningful explanations stem from within the Abhidhamma and aṭṭhakathā traditions, in fact corroborating your hunch about parimokkha, though just indirectly.

The Vibhaṅga says that parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā refers, as is rather well known, to the tip of the nose and the “object of the opening” (mukhanimitte ; 1), to give a deliberately vague rendering. The latter is admittedly cryptic on its own, but the aṭṭhakathā specifies that mukhanimitta refers either to the upper lip (uttaroṭṭha), where the wind from the nose strikes against or (atha vā) that mukha is to be understood in the sense of outlet (niyyānaṭṭho; 2). The paṭisambhidāmagga-aṭṭhakathā, in commenting on this expression, lets us know that what is meant is the release from saṃsāra (saṃsārato niyyānaṭṭho; 3). The Vibhaṅga-aṭṭhakathā further says, in commenting on parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā, interestingly, that the area “near the mouth” (mukhasamīpe) is just another alternative, “sati which is turned towards an [unspecified] kammaṭṭhāna” 4) is also viable. The Majjhimanikāya-ṭīkā elaborates on this by saying that this means “having kept back outward sense objects, having just put in front (purakkhatvā) the [again unspecified] meditation subject” 5). These explanations have the benefit that they harmonize the passages you adduced and which, on their own, may appear incongruous.

For me personally, I do not see anything speaking against that this was so understood since the time of the earliest community, perhaps even by the Buddha himself, since multivalent (having many meanings) terms and concepts can be instanced readily. It is somewhat of a tangent and surely you have done your research on the matter yourself, but perhaps it is still worth quoting Norman regarding that literature, indicating thereby that many gems can be found therein:

[…] some parts of the commentaries are very old, perhaps even going back to the time of the Buddha, because they afford parallels with texts which are regarded as canonical by other sects, and must therefore pre-date the schisms between the sects. As has already been noted, some canonical texts include commentarial passages, while the existence of the Old Commentary in the Vinaya-piṭaka and the canonical status of the Niddesa prove that some sort of exegesis was felt to be needed at a very early stage of Buddhism.

Notes.

  1. "parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā”ti tattha katamā sati? yā sati anussati paṭissati … pe … sammāsati — ayaṃ vuccati “sati”. ayaṃ sati upaṭṭhitā hoti supaṭṭhitā nāsikagge vā mukhanimitte vā. tena vuccati “parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā”ti.
  2. Mukhanimitta nti cettha uttaroṭṭhassa vemajjhappadeso daṭṭhabbo, yattha nāsikavāto paṭihaññati; atha vā parīti pariggahaṭṭho, mukhanti niyyānaṭṭho, satīti upaṭṭhānaṭṭho.
  3. Tenāhaniyyānaṭṭhoti mukhasaddassa jeṭṭhakatthavasena saṃsārato niyyānaṭṭho vutto.
  4. Parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā ti kammaṭṭhānābhimukhaṃ satiṃ ṭhapayitvā, mukhasamīpe vā katvāti attho.
  5. kammaṭṭhānābhimukhan’ ’ti, bahiddhā puthuttārammaṇato nivāretvā kammaṭṭhānaṃyeva purakkhatvāti.
4 Likes
47

It’s a distinguishing feature of the first section on mindfulness of breathing in the Anapanasati sutta, that it contains no reference to morality. The instruction to “subdue greed & distress with reference to the world,” doesn’t appear until the second section. The reason is the Anapanasati and subsequent Satipatthana suttas contain a carefully graded introduction of morality and impermanence as a teaching strategy, referred to as “establishment” and “development.” The Anapanasati sutta being the first stage of practice, and so concerned with the establishment of factors, here simply the skill of remaining mindful is indicated:

“… setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes
in; mindful he breathes out.”—MN 118

1 Like
48

The Anapanasati sutta is taught to those who already have right view. Therefore, they would already have cultivated virtue well beforehand and have the whole 8fp (undeveloped but attained)

“…Bhikkhus, this assembly is free from prattle, this assembly is free from chatter. It consists purely of heartwood…” Mn118

49

The purifying of morality which develops through right effort and the noble eightfold path is not the prescribed morality of the precepts (training rules). The full passage from which your quote is taken (introduction to MN 118), shows a list of the levels of training beginning with mindfulness of breathing and progressing two steps above to the noble eightfold path, then further on to stream-entry and above. A stream- enterer does not achieve elimination of doubt by the mere following of rules, they need to prove for themselves that craving produces suffering, and renunciation results in the removal of suffering. This was achieved by the Buddha-to-be on his way to awakening, through employing right effort, and involves direct experience of both the harmful and beneficial effects:

"And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with sensuality arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with sensuality has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding.”

"As I noticed that it leads to my own affliction, it subsided. As I noticed that it leads to the affliction of others… to the affliction of both… it obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding, it subsided. Whenever thinking imbued with sensuality had arisen, I simply abandoned it, dispelled it, wiped it out of existence.”

[…]

"And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with renunciation arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with renunciation has arisen in me; and that leads neither to my own affliction, nor to the affliction of others, nor to the affliction of both. It fosters discernment, promotes lack of vexation, & leads to Unbinding.”—-MN 19

There are two forms of right speech, here is the mundane right speech the Buddha refers to when describing what the community of monks is “established” on, as contrasted with “developed”:

“And what is the right speech with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? Abstaining from lying, from divisive tale-bearing, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter. This is the right speech with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions.”—MN 117

50

Is it impossible that it literally means ‘in front of’? For example, if we assume that the meditator has their eyes open, then when we first sit down to meditation, could a first step just be to draw our attention away from ‘the world’ and put it on the still piece of ground right in front of us?

I ask this because attention in humans is very connected with our vision. And because I would assume our eyes are to be open, since I am not aware of any of the Buddha’s instructions to close them, and, the oldest meditation lineages all seem to have eyes open for meditation so far as I am aware. Are there any Buddhist meditation lineages other than the extremely modern Theravada vipassana lineages, which instruct eyes closed?

And if this cannot be the case, I would anyway be interested if anyone can give the earliest known evidence for the seven-point posture which is standard in Tibetan Buddhism, for example, and clearly has us having our eyes open but our gaze down. Does this way of having our eyes go back to the EBTs, or are they actually silent about eyes and gaze in seated meditation?

51

I confess that I am very far from having read everything that’s been said above, but a quick search didn’t show any of the following keywords, so I will share it below.

This is from the Cūḷavagga of the Vinaya Piṭaka, where it is clear that parimukhaṃ is a part of the beard area, most likely the moustache area, in the following sentence:

‘Na, bhikkhave, massu parimukhaṃ kārāpetabbaṃ’
the beard is not to be done [=cut/trimmed] parimukhaṃ

(ie. wearing a moustache is not allowed)

1 Like
52

my understanding of this is that the buddha’s instructions provide a gradated way of developing mindfulness of the body:

this starts with bringing basic awareness to the most readily knowable part of the body - the face (i.e., parimukha: pari = around, mukha = the face).

from there, the instructions (in the anapanasati sutta at least) direct us to the breath first.

following that and then to the whole of the body (sabbakāyapaṭisaṁvedī: sabba = whole, kāya = body, paṭisaṁvedī = experiencing).

finally the instructions direct us to the bodily fabrication (kāyasaṅkhāraṁ: kāya = body, saṅkhāraṁ = conditioned thing). i believe elsewhere the buddha teaches that the action of breathing is a bodily fabrication. hence, here, the buddha is directing us to awareness of the whole body as it is breathing in and out.

to me this makes sense: there’s a gradation of developing knowledge of increasingly greater aspects of the body - starting with just the face; then the breath; then the whole body; then the whole body as a breathing entity / unit / thing, and then, finally, calming down and quieting the whole body as a breathing thing.

that’s my understanding, though based on limited pali and just the anapanasati sutta.

1 Like
53

There’s nothing in the Anapanasati sutta about the face, Steps 1&2 breathing in long or short refer to the entire breath. Definitely the focus of the first tetrad is on the breath in the body, which is an essential awareness as a basis for developing the second tetrad on feeling. This piti contingent on the breathing is more likely to arise in the upper part of the body than the face.

While the Anapanasati sutta is addressed to monks, it is interesting to try and reconcile tetrads 1&2 with the advice to a layperson in Anguttara Nikaya 11.13, which are recollections preliminary to breath meditation according with the third tetrad instructions to ‘gladden and steady’ the mind:

“And when the mind is headed straight, the disciple of the noble ones gains a sense of the goal, gains a sense of the Dhamma, gains joy connected with the Dhamma. In one who is joyful, rapture arises. In one who is rapturous, the body grows calm. One whose body is calmed experiences ease. In one at ease, the mind becomes concentrated.”

Whatever the sequence, the relaxation of the body, arising of joy, and calmness of the mind are primal to Theravada.

54

There’s this:

parimukhaṁ satiṁ upaṭṭhapetvā

Which is definitely about the face. See my earlier post with evidence from the Vinaya

55

"MN 118 introduces the sixteen steps with a brief preamble:

“There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to
the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs
crosswise, holding his body erect, and establishing mindfulness to the
fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out.”

With the exception of one word, this preamble is self-explanatory. The one
word is parimukhaª, translated here as “to the fore.” The Abhidhamma, when
commenting on this passage, gives an etymological interpretation of this word,
saying that parimukha means “around the mouth” (pari = around; mukha = mouth
or face). In other words, when focused on the breath, you should focus on the
area around the mouth. However, the Vinaya (Cv.V.27.4) contains a prohibition
against dressing the hair of the parimukha. Because the same passage also
contains a separate prohibition against dressing the beard around the mouth as a
goatee, the Commentary interprets parimukha in this case as meaning “on the
chest.” Obviously, then, the word has several meanings, and the question is
whether it should be understood literally as meaning a particular section of the
body, or more idiomatically as bringing something to the forefront.
Evidence for this latter interpretation comes from passages in the Canon
where monks focusing on topics of meditation aside from the breath are
nevertheless described as having established mindfulness parimukhaª. For
example, in Udana 7:8, Ven. Mah›Kacc›yana establishes mindfulness parimukhaª
when engaged in mindfulness immersed in the body; in Majhima Nikaya 62, Ven. Rahula
establishes mindfulness parimukhaª when contemplating the theme of not-self
with regard to the five aggregates. Because it makes no sense to say that a
person contemplating either of these topics should focus awareness exclusively
on one part of the body to the exclusion of others—and because, in step 3 of the
first tetrad in breath meditation, the awareness will become whole-body
anyway—it makes more sense to interpret the phrase, “mindfulness established
parimukhaª” as an idiom for bringing mindfulness to the fore. In other words,
you bring the topic you plan to keep in mind up to the forefront of your
awareness."—Thanissaro

1 Like
56

I don’t think that neither what the venerable Ajahn nor the Commentary say makes much sense.

This is indeed what the word means

This is quite a flimsy argument. The passage prohibits various types of trimming the beard, and later speaks of “whiskers” which is another way of dressing facial hair “around the mouth”. So there is no reason why parimukham here can’t mean what it means by examining its component parts.

It seems to me that the Commentary has a highly questionable interpretation and that it is unsafe to hinge one’s entire understanding of meditation practice on this. If the Commentary got it wrong, then parimukham may well have only one meaning.

kayagatasati includes anapanassati, so here the argument is void

Again, rather flimsy argument. This may just be because passages of the suttas have been standardized for memorization purposes.

Then the thought occurred to Ven. Rahula, “Who, having been exhorted face-to-face by the Blessed One, would go into the town for alms today?” So he turned back and sat down at the foot of a tree, folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, & setting mindfulness to the fore.

The whole “sitting down for meditation” pericope is included, that doesn’t mean we can make far-fetched inferences from that. I notice there is a tendency for some scholar monks to make elaborate, far-fetched deductions from tiny sutta passages without taking into account the fact that the transmission process has been so chaotic that making such far-fetched inferences has become quite intellectually unsafe.

The good Ajahn doesn’t seem to acknowledge the simplification that may have occured along the way to make memorization simpler. Those who have made this simplification may not have been highly educated scholars with deep knowledge and understanding of all the ins and outs, they may just have been regular people struggling to memorize a passage.

Yes, but that’s not where it starts. It starts with the breath

1 Like
57

:rofl:

Yeah, parimukkha… [old post deleted for it was a mistake]

I have taken it as the object of meditation, whether that be the breath or anything else. I was happy to see the some commentaries apparently had the same idea, thanks A.Bhikkhu.

58

Fascinating. Though attempting to digest this evidence, would not ‘around the front’ type of meaning, be equally valid? That is to say, the hair ‘around the front (area)’ could be interpreted as being on the face or the chest, before they are both on the front, hence the need for commentarial clarification. And when it comes to “establishing mindfulness to the fore”, could this therefore also mean the placing of mindfulness to the front? And thereby be in line with the very standard ‘7 point posture’ of Mahayana, which includes the eyes being open (at least partially) and the gaze set front and downwards, i.e. to the ground in front of you.

59

Agree, spatial expansion is a basic principle in how meditation subjects are progressively arranged for example, wilderness, the expanse of the earth, the infinitude of space (Majhima Nikaya 121). The expansion from the breath to the body physically involves the suffusion of amorphous air into the bloodstream via the lungs, so recognition requires a different order of thought than verbal conceptualization, more of an awareness, on which the feeling of piti is dependent.

2 Likes
60

“I heard the dog bark.”
"That tree’s bark is coming off. "

"Joe’s favorite fruit is a date. "
"John and Jane went out on a date. "
"I hate to date myself, but i used to make mixed tapes of the radio. "
"What is your date of birth? "

“I train in the martial arts”
I traveled cross country on a train. "

These are all examples of words that look the same but have different meanings.

Is it possible that parimukha can just be a word with multiple meanings? Does that occur in pali?

1 Like