Why does almost everyone teach the brahmaviharas wrong?

Discussion
21

A standard formula in MN is:

"He abided pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; so above, below, around, and everywhere, and to all as to himself, he abided pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill will. "He abided pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with compassion…with a mind imbued with appreciative joy…with a mind imbued with equanimity, likewise the second, likewise’ the third, likewise the fourth; so above, below, around, and everywhere, and to all as to himself, he abided pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with equanimity, abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without
ill will. (MN83§5, Bodhi, see also MN43§31, MN50§40, MN52§8, MN127§7, translation Bodhi)

To all as to himself…

22

For me, the method taught by many (May I be happy…may my loved ones…my friends…strangers…enemies…) has never worked for me. I used to wonder why this was so until I heard Ven. Analayo say that he, being an anger type, experienced difficulty in arousing joy.

Some people (like me) don’t have an easily accessible established internal source of metta, compassion, mudita and equipoise to draw upon and radiate in all directions. So it’s much more effective for them to go about it in a different order or a different way.

Turning attention to kindness, gentleness, patience, generosity and wishes of well-being towards one’s pets and spouse gives rise to metta, compassion, joy and equipoise that one can then recognize in one’s self and then cultivate. It’s kind of a backdoor approach: once a person can find the brahmaviharas operating in themselves towards others, it can then be applied internally towards oneself and can then effectively radiate in all directions.

7 Likes
23

I wouldn’t call it false, it’s just unnecessary complicated …

The four sublime abidings are inherent in our being, so if one starts directly from the subject, then the object cools down naturally, but this is my experience so I’m not saying it should be so for others.

1 Like
24

I would agree. Only that I know also that it’s very hard actually for some people that I talked to. It’s more easy to start with yourself. And in my experience because I also used it because it’s taught that way in Pa Auk Monastery. I really don’t know where they got it from. Maybe coming from oral tradition.

Here is what I learned. There is no love bigger than for oneself. When one eventually feel that love for yourself. Then you can send that same love for others. When you eventually reach till the whole world and beyond. The love becomes bigger because it kinda level up your love. And love translates in your body into bliss.

First it just like chanting. But you should truly feel the truth of that feeling one day and eventually visualize sending the love or compassion energy that you feel inside you

Without that love that we perceive in us. How can we even think it being something that needs others to practice first?

The feeling must come in ourselves. It’s not from others

25

This is exactly the way I’ve always heard it explained. You begin where it is easiest to generate metta and expand step by step towards where it is most difficult. Being flexible in this way makes it a natural and joyful process of expanding one’s capacity for metta, rather than just following a theoretical hierarchy about how one is “supposed to” feel.

3 Likes
26

Yes, that’s exactly my point. It depends on the person. Some, like Ven Analayo, find the “May I …” method is not useful and so use one of the other approaches. Others have the opposite experience. A good teacher works with students to find what works for them.

5 Likes
27

Thank you for the sources and thoughts. Wiltshire is making good use of the Pali sources, unfortunately he’s not too clean with the Brahmin texts and sort of throws together terms and concepts. Indeed, at some pre-Buddhist time brahmaloka was established as the highest realm, and even later (still pre-Buddhist) it became thinkable to access this realm with the suitable atman. But Vedic brahmaloka doesn’t resemble the brahmaviharas. It is accessed through proper knowledge, especially about the journey of the fabricated atman, not through ethics, love, or kindness.

As it was mentioned above, “brahmavihara” is actually a rare term in the suttas, appearing only in AN 5.192, MN 83, and DN 17. In SN 54.11-12 it is applied to anapanassati.

DN 33 calls them the four appamañña limitlessnesses, a term which appears also in Snp 3.5 albeit referring only to metta.

So it’s correct, Brahmins had the concept of reaching brahmaloka, which however rather corresponds to brahmasahabyatā, i.e. ‘companionship with brahma’ (explicitly in DN 13), and not to the so-called brahmaviharas. This is probably confusing, so in other words: Brahmins had their ideas about being reborn in brahmaloka, but it was not through love and compassion.

(Unfortunately the wiki sources of Aronson and Harvey more or less just state that the brahmaviharas predate the Buddha, but refer only to a few suttas).

What is left then for possible pre-Buddhist sources of metta, karuna etc. are non-Brahmin practices. This is particularly plausible for Magadha/Kosala where karmic retribution was prevalent anyhow. Obviously the most essential guideline of Jains was ahimsa, and it is easy to imagine that if not Nataputta then another Jain teacher would have had a meditative practice based on kindness. The suttas could then be more or less correct with historical teachers like Sunetta who in AN 6.54 is called a titthakara ford-maker (which can, but doesn’t have to, refer to a Jain).

Unfortunately, we hardly have sources of early non-Buddhist non-Brahmin texts, so confirmation will rely mostly on how much we accept the sutta references. But just to give a possible external confirmation, the earliest Jain Acaranga Sutra (I.6.5.2) contains the following:

A Saint, with right intuition, who cherishes compassion (dayā) for the world, in the east, west, south, and north, should preach, spread, and praise (the faith), knowing the sacred lore. He should proclaim it among those who exert themselves…

At least compassion and the four directions resemble the Buddhist descriptions.

5 Likes
28

Given the Buddha’s propensity to make claims on his unique attainments and discoveries, perhaps a sign that these meditations existed previously is that he never claimed to have discovered them himself? :thinking:

4 Likes
29

Brahma-vihara (= catasso appamannayo the ‘four immeasurables’) is also considered as a kullaka-vihara ‘family-meditative state’ (cf. PTS: Pali-English Dictionary, pp. 494, 223).

30

I like what has been mentioned previously about cultivating Metta. I like to set the table for Metta with an initial focus on a person for whom I have unconditional love. I try to really engage that feeling, of Metta for that person, and then when I feel that the heart has opened, I find it easier to turn this energy and light of Metta back to myself. Part of this integration is trying to cultivate a wish and energy for kindness and wellbeing to myself, which is sometimes hard to do. But, I’m mindful that the complete practice allows for the cultivation of this boundless and unconditional kindness equally toward all corners of people and things in my life, even those that cause me angst or harm. But, if I can just get some moments of truly investing in myself a practice of self care and kindness, without fully cultivating same for Vladimir Putin, the Metta practice is very good. Mindful of this level of kindness and equanimity for myself, and its calming nature, it then sets the table for a deeper samatha/vipassana, possibly.

1 Like
31

“is considered” is vague. The main source for this is the Cullavagga, i.e. a late text, and the meaning of it is not clear from the context.

2 Likes
32

Some info:

The teachings of Nataputta are mentioned in: MN101 en MN14, MN56, SN42.8, AN3.47. It looks like Nataputta was very much concerned with kamma, especially the physical deed, which he saw as most important. More important than intention. According sutta he believed that any pain and pleasure was a kamma-vipaka, a result of a former good or bad deed. Misdeeds certainly lead to rebirth in misery, was his opinion. According sutta Nataputta believed dark kamma could be neutralised with austerity.
If physical kamma is the most important then killing ants without intention is also a strong misdeed, a very dark kamma leading to hell, although not intentionally. So maybe his ahimsa was rooted in his ideas about kamma? The priority he gave to the physical kamma?

33

Late text? So, how late is that for the term Kullaka-vihara?

34

If one develops the four Brahma Vihara’s, makes them strong, does this lead to the eradication of ill will , hate, violent tendencies, etc. or are those tendencies only strongly surpressed?

35

So hard to say. At least the Culavagga covers alleged events that took place 100 years after the Buddha’s passing. Scholars would argue their accurateness too, while others will of course accept them. A hint: the Cullavagga contains the term ‘pancanikaya’ which requires the five nikayas to already have been conceptualized. This term is unknown to the suttas. Apparently, there are also references to an existing abhidhamma. The estimates I’ve seen are around Asoka, maybe a bit earlier or later. So it would be ‘late’ as in ‘later than the early suttas’.

1 Like
36

6.1For 84,000 years King Makhādeva played games as a child, for 84,000 years he acted as viceroy, for 84,000 years he ruled the realm, and for 84,000 years he led the spiritual life after going forth here in this mango grove. 6.2Having developed these four Brahmā meditations, when his body broke up, after death, he was reborn in a good place, a Brahmā realm.

It’s fairly common to see the brahmavihara meditations mentioned being practiced in the path. Personally I don’t buy into the “mythological means late” thing. In any case, even if they are late, the people who set them down didn’t seem to have a problem with the idea that they were practiced outside of a Buddha’s sāsana. Same is true for the five precepts. They are standard things that we read about good people practicing in the past.

2 Likes
37

As Seniya pointed out above this reading is problematic - original Pāli probably meant “in every way”.

1 Like
38

Brahma-vihara is metta-vihara (kullaka-vihara), but is not mahapurisa-vihara (the ‘meditative state of great men’), which is sunnata-vihara.

1 Like
39

Oke, i did not know there is a translation issue. Thanks.

I very much like the idea of goodness. For me that is a kind of generic term for metta, karuna, upekkha, panna, mudita, ariya. Thinking about goodness warms the heart and makes me joyful too.

It looks like the most important obstacle for goodness to naturally flow is that one becomes to much a businessman in life. There is nothing spontaneous anymore about you. All you do is calculated, intentional, planned, invented (always connected to kamma). A businessman. Always thinking in profit, always goal-oriented, always ego-centric.

41

For me, a revelation has been a small situation, which I’ve shortly rewritten in here: Thoughts on "mudita" Perhaps there’s something in my opening msg or in the following thread to help your poor scratched head :slight_smile: