Buddhist Emotional Intelligence: Thirty-Six Moods to Choose From! | Ajahn Kovilo

bakawato arato sama buddasa
bakawato
arhat sama sambasa
bakawat
arhat sama
Okay.
So, I'm actually very curious who here
could actually actually experience some
of that joy of impermanence.
Okay. All right. some people and
interest or at le poss possibility of
interest in impermanence more people.
All right. Good. Good.
The poly word is ana. This is one of the
three characteristics of Buddhism. It's
definitely on Matt's sheet. Or if it's
not, you should add it Matt because uh
yeah.
Yeah. Good. It's there. Good.
So general question, how many types of
feeling did the Buddha speak about? How
many types of feeling? We got three.
Three. Three. Five. Six.
7. 14.
52.
108. Yeah. And you're all right. You're
all right. Um there's a fascinating and
endearing and it seems so believable
story sutra uh discourse from the Buddha
which starts out it's in the
Majimanikaya number 59 the uh many
different kinds of feelings suta and the
suta starts out with these two
practitioners. One of them is a
carpenter uh named Punchakunga and the
other one is named Udayen who is a monk
and he's somewhat of a rascally. He's a
rascally monk. There were rascally monks
even in the time of the Buddha. Um
it's a bit of an aside but in the vineia
in our monk's rules uh there is a story
involving uden which might be the first
recorded prank in history. So if uh you
remember ask me a question about that
afterwards and I will tell you about
that first prank in history. But
Panchakunga and Uden are talking about
just this point about feeling. And
Panchakunga asks Udian the monk he says
how many types of feeling are there? And
Udian says uh there are three. And Udian
then asks Panchaganga how many are
there? And Panchakunga says two. Uh, and
one of them disagrees with the other
one. He says, "No, there's pretty sure
there's three." And the other says, "No,
no, no. Pretty sure there's two." And
they go back and forth, back and forth.
Okay, there's two two types of feeling,
three types of feeling, two types of
feeling, three types of feeling. And
they couldn't agree. They couldn't
agree. And eventually, Ananda, who's the
Buddha's attendant monk, uh, foremost in
many things, uh, but he brings this to
the Buddha. He overhears this
conversation, brings it up to the Buddha
and the Buddha summons them to his
presence and asks them, "Okay, did you
say this?" And they both say that yes,
they did. And the Buddha then tells
Ananda that uh Panchakanga who said that
there were two, he was totally correct.
And he says that Udian who said that
there were three was also totally
correct. And that the Buddha will teach
depending on the character of the person
who he's speaking to. He will teach in
different ways. He says he taught two
types of feeling bodily and mental or
suka and duka. That's pain and pleasure.
He taught three types of feeling. That's
dooka, suka and neutral. So pleasant,
unpleasant and neutral. He says at times
he would teach five types of feeling or
vadina. That's suka duka. So bodily
uh pain, bodily pleasure, mental pain,
mental pleasure and mental equinimity.
He says he would teach six types of
feeling. That's feeling uh based on the
eye, feeling based on sounds, smells,
tastes, touch, and mind. So teaching six
types. He says he would also teach 18
types of feeling. He would teach 36
types of feeling. And he would even
teach 108 different types of feeling.
And this is the one time in the
polycanon where this number 108 comes
up. It has become a kind of a Buddhist
number. You'll find it in many different
lists in different um Buddhist Buddhist
contexts, but this is the one time it
comes up in in Terravada as the types of
feeling.
And it's fascinating. The Buddha says
that if one does not recognize what has
been well spoken as well spoken, then it
is natural that such a person will dwell
in discord in disharmony. Uh not in
line, not living in accord with the
people around them. They will speak
harsh words and stab each other with
mental daggers, stab each other with
verbal daggers. So he continued, uh, if
someone does acknowledge what has been
well spoken as well spoken, it's very
natural that people will live in
harmony, in concord, delighting in one
another's presence, build uh, blending
together like milk and water, or as we
say in Seattle, like coffee and oat
milk.
So it's just natural if you have this uh
epistemic humility. You have this
humility about the way that you
understand the dharma and actually able
to to listen to other people. Okay,
maybe maybe I don't have the full
picture. Maybe I do know a suta well,
but maybe said something else. And this
doesn't just for for dharma, but just in
our lives in general. Uh how much space
can we hold our own opinions and the
opinions of others with? And it's it's
it's important.
So I thought that I would go into
specifically that list of 36. And
honestly, giving a talk talking about 36
things is a bit it's a bit much. It's a
bit much. So I brought a whiteboard
for visuals. This is a whiteboard that
friends of Clear Mountain bought for
Ajan Nisso. He was thinking that he
might experiment with a practice of kind
of like Gandhi of like not speaking not
speaking at all like one day a week and
so we were given these whiteboards and
brought it to alms and uh didn't work so
well. It's it's harder than you might
think to write out your every every
thought but he might try that again at
some point in the future. But that's why
we have these whiteboards.
Um so the 36 uh the Buddha talked about
uh generally three types of feeling
you've got and these are even considered
as moods. So moods these are the the
mental aspect of uh what's pleasant
what's painful and what's neutral. So
suka means pleasant. Smanasa is mental
pleasure. So he talked about the the
joy. You have uh basically two different
types of joy and two different types of
grief here and here. And you've got two
different types of equinimity. So again
the mental aspects. So two different
types of mental joy, two different types
of mental grief, two different types of
mental equinimity.
And how that becomes 36 is because each
of these you can have uh mental joy
based on the eye, ear, nose, tongue,
body or mind, sight, sounds, smells,
taste, touch. Similarly with grief,
similarly with equinimity. And how we
have the two different types is you've
got what the Buddha called gaitta
which means it literally means household
household
joy, grief, and equinimity. And you've
got renuncient
joy, grief, and equinimity.
And so we've got a magnet because the
word gaya although it does mean a house
a household it's also about uh g is the
Sanskrit and poly root which means to
hold on. So a house is that which we
hold hold on to. So it's literally the
type of joy, grief and equinimity that
we hold on to unskillfully. These are
the type of joy, grief and equinimity
that keep us bounded to ssara. The
carcural or incarcerate or joy, grief
and equinimity of bondage. These are
things that keep us swirling around in
ssara.
and the renunciate nicma. This is the
type of joy, grief and equinimity which
lead us out of ssara which lead us to to
peace.
So what what are these?
Give me a minute.
Okay. So we have the joy of the
household life is a glimmer. It's when
we regard as again the sight, sound,
smells, taste, touch which are
agreeable, likable, enjoyable, connected
with sensual desire and provocative of
lust. So that's a basic English
translation of some poly stuff, but it's
basically all the stuff that we feed on
most of the time. You regard as a joy
when you go to see a movie, you love it
because okay, I've got some good movie
in front of me. Just got the image on
the screen and it's awesome and it's
exciting and we're excited by the the
glimmer and the sparkle of it.
And what the Buddha said uh he doesn't
just talk about these uh 12 or 36 types
of feeling but he says how we can use
them for the path. So he says relying on
these ones we can abandon these ones. So
what is the uh emancipatory the
renuncient the simplifying the leading
out of samsara joy. It's when you
recognize sight, sound, smells, taste,
and touch, which are wished for,
agreeable, likable, connected with
sensual desire, and provocative lust as
impermanent. And not just now, but all
the ones in the past, every sight,
sound, smell, taste, touch that we've
enjoyed in the past, and those which are
pleasant in the present, all of those
are subject to impermanence. And so
hopefully that's what we were able to
tap into and something that we can train
the mind in in meditation is learning to
appreciate this more subtle joy of
ephemererality. Okay. Yeah. This this is
pleasant. You don't have to uh destroy a
pleasant feeling that you have but you
can transmute it. You can kind of take
it to another level which is a bit more
safe. like whatever the pleasant movie
or the beautiful dude or dudet or
whatever the beautiful person, the
lovely sound, the wonderful smell, the
great taste, that's it's precarious.
It's precarious. It will it will change.
But if you're able to delight in the
changeability of that that this and all
other senses uh delights of the senses
they also pass. When you can delight in
that that's one step up and it's a safer
it's a less precarious type of joy. And
you can train in that you can train your
interest. Train your interest. Say okay
maybe that's maybe that's interesting
too. Yeah this is enjoyable but okay the
credits can be enjoyable too. or just
sitting alone with silence, you can more
and more tune into that sound of
silence, this uh underlying
tone in the auditory landscape
or the colors behind the eyes.
Scientists have there's a name for it.
It's called phosphine. That's the colors
that play of of shapes behind the eyes,
shape of colors. And there's actually
two other words, German words, lit and
grow, which mean your own light and your
own gray. So you close your eyes and
that darkness behind the colors, that's
your ien growl. It's your own personal
intrinsic gray. And it become
fascinating. And nobody else has your
own gray. And it's very interesting
because it's so impermanent. It just
looks like static on a TV.
Similarly with sounds, that sound of
silence is just so uh so changing.
Then you've got the sad face. You've got
the grief of the household life and the
grief of renunciation. Give me a second.
Boom.
You got the hook and you've got the
compass. So what is householder grief or
the grief which is connected with
attachment with holding on? It's when
you regard as a non- gain, as a loss.
When those beautiful, lovely, uh,
delicious, pleasant sounds, smells,
tastes, touch, when those change and you
regard it as a loss and you suffer
because of that. That's the grief of
household life. Oh, that thing that I
loved, that idea that I loved that has
changed and you suffer based on that.
That's the incarcerate, the carceral,
the bondage, the pain of bondage of
household life of holding on. And what
is this one is is fascinating. So if
you've fallen asleep, if you've thought
there's way too much numbers, I'm not
used to lists. I don't like any of this.
Wake up for this one because this is
interesting. So what is the grief, the
distress of renunciation? It is when you
regard those same uh the the change and
alteration of sight, sound, smells,
taste, touch,
you notice that all of the ones in
present and all of the ones in past were
of a nature to change. And then take
another step and think
when will I too enter upon and dwell in
that sphere,
that scope, that expanse that the noble
ones currently enter on and abide in.
And then based on that, you actually
develop a longing for space, a longing
for some kind of freedom. And that is a
type of grief. But it's a type of grief
which uh leads upwards. It's a useful
type of grief and it's not that big of a
change to the Buddha said relying on
this you can abandon that. So this is a
type of cognitive reframing. So when you
notice yourself just sad about something
there's nothing inherently bad or evil.
Certainly nothing evil about sadness.
But is it actually useful? And could you
just with a slight shift? Okay. Yeah.
This there is this sadness. But okay.
When
is there is there a space? Is it
possible to abandon the attachment
that's leading to this kind of sadness?
And based on that that provides a
compass to your life which even though
it is it is a grief, it is a distress.
It is it is a renunciate sadness. Okay,
it's sad. I'm not yet enlightened. I
don't yet have spaciousness around this.
But actually, I do believe that a human
mind can have spaciousness around this.
And just inclining towards that. Okay,
I've got a pain in my knee. And if you
need to to move, then that's totally
fine. but staying with it maybe a second
or two longer and thinking, "Yeah,
wouldn't it be great if I could just
remain with that first arrow?"
The Buddha talked about two arrows. So,
bodily pain is unavoidable, but the
mental suffering we add on top of it is
optional. And wouldn't it be amazing if
I could just stay with that first arrow
and not add that second arrow? Can I
imagine a space that's big enough bigger
than just my attachment to the the
grief? Just asking that question, it
shifts, it shifts the experience.
And then what are the type of carsal
householder holding on to neutral
feeling and renunciatory one? One more
second. Get ready.
Okay, it is the grief which is like a
dark cloud or I'm sorry, the neutral
feeling which is like a dark cloud and
the neutral feeling which is just like a
diamond. So neutral feeling of the
household life that's just the that's
the neutral feeling of me.
Okay. So, so the kind of boredom or
neutral feeling which a lot of us just
live our lives with, you know,
throughout the course of a day, it's
just me, it's not so it's not not so
great, you know, it's just kind of
boring, nothing super exciting, nothing
super depressing, just it's okay, it's
okay. And the
neutral feeling which is liberatory is
when you are able to take a step outside
of that. It's the type of neutral
feeling which is not zoning out which is
this type of neutral feeling but
actually zoning in. It's a neutral
feeling which is not based on diversity
but is based on singleness
and again the Buddha said that by
relying on this you can abandon that. So
just noticing that the mind is neutral.
The Buddha said that uh
what is dooka and suka? What is pleasant
and unpleasant about neutral feeling?
And he said neutral feeling is pleasant
when it's known and unpleasant when it's
not known. So that's rather interesting.
So neutral feeling is unpleasant when
it's not known. That's just the boredom
uh which we experience. But when you
notice that, when you recognize, okay,
my mind is just it's been zoned out for
some period of time and knowing that
there's actually it's you're on a
different level, different relationship
to that. And so you can just abandon
that by knowing the neutral feeling
and you can actually do different levels
of relying on this. So relying on the
emancipatory, the renuncient pleasure,
you can abandon the holding on to
pleasure. Same with grief, grief,
neutral, neutral. But you can also by
relying on emancipatory, liberatory
joy, you can abandon
liberatory grief.
So that's that's very interesting that
you can abandon
the grief which says, "Oh, when will I
to realizing impermanence?" The next
thought is, okay, can there be space
around this? And then when you realize,
okay, there can be space around that,
the sadness, the grief doesn't
immediately go away, but you're in a
much more stable spot. You've got more
cognitive space to move. And then
shifting from realizing that level of
impermanence, you can then move in a
direction of joy. just recognizing that
okay yeah there's there's space here and
that can actually be joyous and then
relying on this uh diamond here you can
abandon even the renuncient
joy so this is the move which is maybe
best embodied about the move from
uh second Janna to third Janna so if
anybody yeah we've had uh experience es
of of pleasure and joy which uh can
rightly hopefully we have uh rightly be
described as ecstasy or even rapture
and it's great it's awesome rapture
pleasure you know ecstasy it sounds
awesome and
if you train in that which the Buddha
says you can meditators say you can you
can get better at training in renuncient
joy Okay, renunciate rapture, renunciate
ecstasy, even you can get better. But
you come to a point when it's just so
vibratory, when the the level of energy
is just so the hum is just so much that
you're just like, "Okay, I need to chill
out." And that you can just go to a
higher level of equinimity, letting go
of that that vibratoriness, and you
actually go to a higher level of of
pleasure, the pleasure of of equinimity.
So this is yeah a way of speaking about
moods in Buddhism. It's a a framework
for conceiving a broader picture of the
emotional landscape of Buddhism which
yeah isn't that spoken about but the
Buddha did teach it. You should check
out the suta majima 137
uh I'm sorry
159 59 the many kinds of of feeling and
it's an interesting map to
yeah I
I suffer from something uh which
is very particular. It's definitely a uh
first world kind of problem but it comes
up in my meditation. I'll be meditating.
It happened this very morning. I was
meditating and our meditation session
was two hours on the weekends in the
morning. So meditating in that two-hour
session. Everything is going good and
then it came upon me. It was this word
play. this delicious word play about how
two words which I love. They they rhyme.
I figured out that they rhymed together.
And I just become obsessed with that
word play. And I call this particular
type of dooka the punishment. The
punishment.
It's the punishment. And it is. It
really is punishment. I was like I was
looking for the bliss of samadei
peace. I was looking for some of this or
some of this or at least some of this.
But then I become obsessed with this
pun, this wonderful delicious pun. And I
couldn't let it down for like 45
minutes. It was ridiculous.
But that pun was probably what might
call this this talk which is
Buddhism
versus moodism. Buddhism versus I know
it's not even that good. It is not even
that good. That's why it's a punishment.
And then I go and afflict you. I punish
you all. It's uh it's horrible. Mutually
afflictive.
But there is yeah a kind of uh
fetishization in America of moods. Like
don't you monk don't try to take away my
moods. Don't tell me what to do with my
moods. I'm going to do whatever I want
to do with my moods. Okay.
And see how that works. You know, how
how you know, I'm not trying to um you
know, gaslight anybody. you know, say
you shouldn't feel what you're feeling,
but also see if there is a a space for
asking about the utility of this mood
and is there wiggle room around this
mood and might I be able to reframe it
in a way which would be more helpful for
the path when you find yourself sad, say
you're in meditation or you're just in
daily life, um your partner left you or
you're just thinking about that thing
which you can no longer afford. board or
that car which got crashed or whatever
it is. Okay, that does suck and that is
sad and when will I too be able to enter
on and abide in that sphere, that
expanse, that spaciousness which the
noble ones currently enter in and abide
in. When can I have this spaciousness of
mind? It doesn't have to suffer of this.
Yeah. Okay. The feeling is still there.
I'm still I'm still sad about this. And
I've got a bigger horizon. I've got more
flexibility
because it's all permanent. It's all
permanent for me. It's always been
always impermanent for me and for
everybody for everybody else. And you
can work from that to just the joy of
being able to see. Yeah. Okay. Just
change. It's always been like that. And
you can notice it in any sense door. The
phosphine behind the eye, the sound of
silence,
the
glimmers that appear in different sense
door, the murmuring of the the hands or
the feelings in the body. And that
really is such a tactile, utterly
feelable most any of the time. You can
shift to any of these perceptions of
impermanence when you feel yourself
being locked into a particular type of
sadness or a particular type of joy.
It's good to be able to even shift out.
Yeah, this is enjoyable and I don't have
to stop it. And there's a higher level
of of joy that I can type into and even
a joy which is more stable than that. So
for those of you who hate lists, I
apologize. Um and we'll I think end the
the talk there.
All right.
And so we have time for questions. If
anybody here has a question, you can
raise your hand. And if anybody on Zoom
has a question, you can raise your hand.
And before there are any immediate
questions, I will tell you that first
prank in recorded history. And it's
possible some other religion has a prank
that's recorded, but this one is so
interesting and fascinating in that it's
recorded in a text that was put down uh
on palm leaf maybe 2300
years ago is fascinating. So this is
from the Buddha's um monk's rules. So
Udian who's in this story, he's the one
who's saying, "No, no, there's three
there's three feelings." He again is a
little bit scoundrelly, a little bit
rascally, but he is an awesome sewer.
He's very good at sewing. So he comes up
as the origin story for a lot of the
monks and nuns rules around robes. So in
this particular rule
uh uden is uh the eventual rule is that
a uh monk should not sew a robe for a
bikuni for a nun. And what is the origin
story? This involves Udian. So Udian
gets this idea. He's also he's you know
you know doing bad stuff with robes and
he's a little bit he's a little bit
sketchy in other realms as well. So he
gets this idea to sew this robe for a
nun and he sews it all up and then he
actually embroers on the back of the
robe a lewd image and the commentary.
Yeah, ridiculous. elude image and the
commentaries say it's actually an image
of two people having sex
on the back of this nun's robe. This is
from this is text from 2,300 years ago.
It's like way before Jackass the TV show
Udian original Johnny Knoxville.
Ridiculous.
And then he doesn't just give it to the
robe he uh to the nun. He folds it up
and he gives it to the nun. He says,
"Here's your robe. don't wear it until
you go out, you know, until you go out
to uh go outside the monastery. And
she's like, "Okay, sounds good." And she
does it, she wears it, and then all of
the other nuns, all of the villagers,
everybody around sees this scandalous,
lewd image on the back of her robe, and
they criticize, complain, and spread it
about. How can this Udian sew a LWD
image on the back of a nun's robe? And
so that's why we to this very day can no
longer sew robes for Aunis. So,
sketchy monks. So believable, though. So
believable. God, there's lots of stories
like that. Monks behaving badly. That
could be another name for the the vineia
or the monastic texts.
All right, good. I'm glad I got that out
of my system. I need to pun purge
sometimes. I need to purge all of my
enthusiasm sometimes.
Um, yeah. If anybody has any questions,
does any Yeah, please.
forgiveness.
>> Um there's something that I want to
forgive
within me. But in forgiving,
do I also have to forgive the person?
>> Yeah, it's a it's a really good
question. And in short, you don't have
to say anything to them. And the
Buddhist teachings are really about um
how we relate to
uh our own heart first and foremost. And
um you can look at forgiveness as one of
these or the pain that's causing the uh
the pain behind it as one of these these
two. And forgiveness is a way of moving
from this that just sees the pain that
the other person caused me into this.
Okay, there could be some some wiggle
room around this pain. And you can't you
can't force it. And you know it is it is
a matter of just you know being with it
and looking about the utility of not
forgiving versus uh forgiving. And uh
but you really can't force it and it's
not helpful to do that. Um
so sitting with it and being realistic
with yourself. Uh I think there was a
time when Ajan Sumido said that there
was a monk who he you know really felt
he should forgive and was trying and
trying and then eventually he just had
to write that person's name and put it
in a cupboard and thinking okay I'm
going to come back to this when I'm
ready for it. And then eventually I
think it was like six months or a year
before he was ready to actually forgive
that person. Um but there is
yeah the I think the kind of holding on
which prevents us from giving that
afflicts us first you know regardless of
whether we're not able to say the words
to the other person and
yeah there is
it's really worth reflecting on and
sitting with and being being with the
dis discomforter of of that um and
wanting your own well-being. So sitting
with that and I I would recommend
actually doing some meta practice for
yourself as your if it does come up like
this person hurt me in this way rather
than thinking I should forgive that
person just bring up loving kindness. I
want the best for myself regardless of
whether or not I forgive this person now
or later or ever. Okay. I I really I
really want the best for myself. Forget
the question of forgiveness. I want the
best for myself. Yeah, I just say sit
with that and then I think the wisdom
will emerge from that of how best to
approach forgiving the person or not or
just letting go in your own heart and
then never telling the person if that
seems like it would just stir up things
which didn't need to be stirred up. So
yeah, it's all
>> we've got some questions on Zoom. I
think Ry was first. Yeah, Ray, please.
Can you unmute Ray?
>> Hi. Um, this is Rey if you can hear me.
>> Yep, you're good.
>> Um,
hi Ajan. Um, this is like my fourth
service. Um, and I'm very new to
Buddhism, but I really appreciated what
you had to say. And I'm actually um in
school to become a therapist right now.
And and a lot of what you say actually
resonates with what I'm learning in
school. Um, and I'm I was curious um
because something that I learned about
that I think is very popular right now
in the zeitgeist is attachment theory.
And um thinking about healing is in
terms of healing in relationship and in
our connections to other people. Um, and
I know that's a different kind of
attachment than what you're talking
about today, but I was just curious, you
know, um,
like what Buddhism or what you might
have to say about like our attachment to
other people. Um, and the, you know,
necessity versus, you know, for survival
and versus, you know, I don't know the
dangers or I'm just curious. Yeah,
>> welcome Ray. Thank you. Um Alf, could
you get me a copy of the well-being
cascade? Do you have one? Um yeah, it's
a great question and it does seem in a
lot of Buddhist circles there's a lot of
kind of attachment shaming. You know you
hear about uh upadana or clinging
attachment as being just a cause of
suffering and upadana really is so what
there's in Buddhism what's called the uh
dependent origination which is the
causality of unhappiness
zu
um the causality of unhappiness and
there uh you see how you go from feeling
which leads to craving That's what all
of these are about which leads to
clinging upana and then that leads to
the whole mass of suffering. So upana uh
the root of that is ada which means to
hold. So it's a clingy type of holding
which does lead to suffering. But
there's also another word called sadana
which is the holding of the path. When
we chant the precepts when you say
samadei I undertake the practice of I
undertake the training to refrain from
killing the any living creature.
Samadana samadana and upadana. Upadana
is the clinging the attachment which
leads to suffering all this suckiness
and sadana is the type of holding which
leads to liberation. That's all of these
three. So you sumadana precepts. You
figure out a healthy way to hold on to
your precepts. You sumadana the mind.
You figure out a way to hold on to your
meditation object. It's like the the
clinging which would, you know, squash a
baby chicken versus, you know, the
holding which is just an utterly kind
way to nurture a baby chicken.
So, two types of of holding, two types
of uh and you have to get sensitive to
that because it really is preverbal.
It right now is my way of of holding on
to the next thing that I want to say to
my emotion to my feeling of liking or
disliking. Is this leading to suffering?
Is this a clinching which is going to
lead to more suffering or is it a
healthy holding which will really be
emancipatory? Um, so I hope that I hope
that helps. And uh just a plug. So
Alf did uh publish a reprinting of this
book which is called the well-being
cascade which is all about natural
passages to pomoia which is the joy of
the path and here we have uh basically
the causality. So whereas dependent
origination is the causality of
suffering, this book is all about the
causality of happiness where the Buddha
talks about different entry points for
getting to well-being. You hold precepts
or you practice meta or you uh practice
generosity or you practice meditation
and that leads to pamoja well-being
which leads to pi which is joy which
leads to suka which is happiness which
then leads to samadei which then leads
to concentration which then leads to
liberation. So, this book is all about
the causality of happiness, how to hold
in increasingly subtler and more
skillful ways. So, we got a bunch of
copies back there. And Alf, did we say
we we were going to keep you anonymous?
Sorry. We'll forget that I told you, but
let's give three sados to Alf for uh
doing that reprint. Sadu. Sadu. Sadu.
And don't tell anybody else that ALF was
the the reprinter of that, but do pick
up a coffee if you don't yet have one.
Um, so Ray, I hope that hit home in a
helpful way.
>> Thank you. Yeah, it does.
>> Hi, uh, John. I'm over here to your
right.
>> Oh, hey Sus.
>> So, I wanted to thank you for that
guided meditation on the discovering the
joy of sitting with impermanence.
And I've experienced the joy of sitting
with selfing when it gets thick or thin.
Um is the second of the three um
characteristics. And I'm wondering if
you could also say anything about
sitting with the joy of seeing Duca.
>> Yeah, very much. Very much. I think the
last this is this book is separated into
five sections. The first one is about
faith. How faith leads to pomoia or
well-being into joy, happiness,
concentration, liberation. Second
chapter is on generosity. Third chapter
is on gen uh uh precepts or keeping
sense of integrity. Uh then it's about
learning and then it's about wisdom. And
in the wisdom section there is this very
long section where the Buddha talks
about um noticing impermanence
the perception of impermanence whether
noticing impermanence of sound sounds
sight smells taste touch as leading to
pogo but also with anata how the
perception of not self can lead to pogo
or well-being and how the perception of
duca can lead to well-being as well. Why
I was sitting with moods this whole week
was because I did sit a Goinka retreat
two weeks ago and there you sit with a
lot of physical suffering and if you can
get that sense of remove. So there is we
naturally recoil all beings want to
avoid suffering and want to experience
happiness. They recoil from duca and
lean into suka. Um but having this this
wiggle room you know okay there is this
physical duca but can I tap into when
can I enter into that expanse that ayata
this space this spaciousness this
expanse that the noble ones dwell in
enter on which doesn't make a problem
out of this this was a great teaching
from Ajamasnau just don't make a problem
out of it don't make a problem out of it
that's a a really interesting teaching I
think specifically around being with
duka
So, can this dooka be here? And if it's
not going to, you know, make me break my
leg, it's not going to totally uh break
anything, then can I just not make a
problem out of it? That gives me that
wiggle room. And that can lead to
well-being in the present moment. It's
like I do have a bigger mind. My mind is
bigger. What happens with physical
dooka?
Why we suffer around it? Why it becomes
that second arrow is because it has
become our the aperture of our camera of
awareness has just totally shrunk down
to whatever that pain or our dislike. I
dislike that slurpee sound my homeboy
makes. Not not Jeniso. He doesn't like
it when I slurp. But
yeah, that thing that I dislike, I
dislike it because my awareness has
become so small that it's the biggest
thing in the world. The monk next to me
causes 99% of the world's suffering
because my aperture has become so small
and can my heart can your heart grow
bigger and you okay there's joy here
because I have the cognitive flexibility
to say I'm bigger the mind is bigger
than that so very good question thank
you thank you Suz and same with anata
notself
>> we've got Ed on zoom
>> um Ed please
>> thank Thank you, Ajan.
Um, I I think I heard an equation
between neutrality and equinimity
earlier and if that was if that's
correct, could you speak about that some
more?
>> Yeah, thank you. Um,
the poly word oopa is your used in
different contexts. So, oopa equinimity
or equipoise is one of the perfections.
It's the tenth of the spiritual
perfections. So this is the type of it's
this type of equinimity the equinimity
of the diamond which we can cultivate.
It's the the mind which can step up out
of uh you know our immerseness with
whatever we're feeling the small mind.
So equinimity which can also be well
translated as equipoise there is a
spiritual perfection which we should
should cultivate. Equinimity is also a
feeling. It is one of the the words used
when talking about five different types
of feeling. You've got duka or physical
suffering, suka, physical pleasure,
sinosa,
mental well-being, domina, mental grief,
and you've gota or there it's just a
feeling of neutrality or neither
pleasant nor unpleasant. Um so it is
used in different contexts and um yeah
this kind of blah face here the the
neutral mouthed one is just point to
that neutrality. It's not it's not so
exciting and it's not depressing. It's
not uh elevatory and it's not
downgrading. It's not worth a smile and
it's not worth a a frown. Um but
training the mind to be able to step up
out of that and it can relying on the
equinimity of the perfections this
renuncinity the renunciatory equinimity
which just does recognize that
that can be part of the the path. So a
little bit of uh back and forth um with
the language. Was that at all
clarifying?
>> Yes it was. I to me equinity feels
spacious and bright and joyous and uh
neutrality just has a very different
sense feeling to it.
>> Very very good point. Yeah. a note
there. What you're calling equinimity is
this equipoise. And people who have gone
to a Guinka retreat, that's what Goinka
uses this metaphor of like just as there
are two wings of a bird. One of them is
awareness and mindfulness and the other
one is equinimity. And the type of
equinimity he's pointing there is not a
neutrality but it is this one step up
this bright mind which which is part of
the path training in the the capacity to
uh oopa literally uh means to uh look
over or to look down. It has the root
which means uh to see. So it's the mind
which is able to to lift up and kind of
look down at a bit of remove. You're not
stuck in the the meer. the meer might
still be there. The muck might still be
there, but actually it's not a not a
problem. So, thank you for clarifying
that, Ed. And good to see you.
>> Thank you.
I'm thinking about I think I hope it's
clear when I say this how it relates to
what you already said but I do have a
question about the difference between um
we babaatana between craving for
non-being and uh dispassion and I was
wondering if that's captured in your
metaphor of the lens of the camera,
which I also I use that metaphor a lot.
I like that in terms of whether one's
holding tightly around in an aversive
way around something versus a much more
spacious view. In my mind, the reason
I'm asking is because in my practice,
those two can sort of blur into one
another
>> passion and
>> and and we babatan craving for n I'm
thinking of that suta where where I
don't remember but the the aesthetic
says to the Buddha um I am of the mind
or that nothing suits me and somewhere
in that suit says well that's closer to
where we want to be but it's still not
it and I'm just the reason I'm thinking
of passion is because it's so close to
liberation at least right but it's not
weabatana we babatana actually is a
defilement in a way so I just curious if
is that about the tight in your
understanding the tightness versus the
spacious
>> it is it is it's really helpful and um
just one skillful means to kind of
elaborating that metaphor of the
aperture of a camera it is it also there
is almost a felt sense in the eyes there
can become an intensity. When we
intensely dislike something or intensely
like something where the mind the eye
almost the muscles the orbicular
oculi muscle just tenses up or even the
the iris can can tense up to some degree
and being able to physically so that is
if it's on the aversive end of things
that is the viba tanha I don't want to
see mind clenching up and just relaxing
the muscles around the eyes is the level
of dispassion uh of easing up and you
can physically just do that exercise
with your eyes. Am I am I tensing up
either the muscles around the eyes? Can
I literally see the world more softly
rather than staring and shooting what's
called those verbal daggers or mental
daggers or daggers of the eyes? Can I
literally look at someone with kindly
eyes? So almost diffusing rather than
staring, glaring, just open up the field
of vision to almost notice that you're
looking through a single eye with blurry
with a blurry frame. It's like a single
eye and it doesn't I can't even point to
the frame of the eye. It just kind of
Okay, I can't see here, but I can see
here. Okay, can I just let the eye chill
out? The muscles around the eye just
relax. So that's a skillful means and
that viraa it is mentioned in that suta
this is the
joy grief and equinimity of viraa and
vbavatana or not wanting is always a
path which will lead to more ssara so
>> well thank you it's a a beautiful um
practice and metaphor and it speaks very
deeply to me because I have a visual
disability that um manifest as too
tightly focusing on things and what I've
had to learn is a soft focus. So that
was very intuitive actually. So thank
you.
>> Yes, I do.
>> And I think we might have time for one
maybe short one.
>> Yeah. Okay.
>> Hi. Um thanks Ajan. Um I'm Ren. Um I the
question I had if you'd comment on it is
um
I'm not a I'm not an experienced
practitioner and um in this meditation
it was really good. You were talking
about uh you know um um impermanence but
this time you mentioned uh the buzzing
in my ears which is kind of the sound of
silence and maybe we're all having it.
Um, but I was thinking about
uh the winds blowing through the trees,
you know, they're rustling leaves
outside and um kind of like, oh, I it's
not impermanent, but I become like part
of, you know, the wind again. Like when
you're hiking and you hear the, you
know, you hear the breeze through the
mountains and you kind of go, oh, we'll
be here forever, but we're not as
important as we think we are. sort of
like it was kind of a letting go, but it
was um feeling like part of something,
you know, endless, infinite, but not as
not as particular.
That's that's beautiful. And actually,
that does tie right into the final where
the Buddha talks about the equinimity or
the neutrality of um diversity. So, this
is just what we're bored because, okay,
it's not that great a show. The song
isn't that great. whatever my life is
just going to me but it's diversified
this is diversified neutrality whereas
this is the equinimity of unification
so leading and you can by relying on
this you can abandon this by relying on
unification so like you're saying okay
I'm actually you know one in a sense I
can kind of tap into that and some
people really can very viscerally into
that it's I'm less distracted the mind
is becoming more collected, more of a
piece. That's the equinimity of
unification. And the Buddha does
eventually take it one step forward
forward. We're saying by relying on the
equinimity of nonidentification,
you can abandon even that wonderful
blissful
equinimity of unification. So
nonidentification
but just where you're at. There's
definitely these are like stepwise you
can stay with this grief of renunciation
for
it's it's part it can be part of the
path. So it don't be afraid of it. The
joy of renunciation it's part of the
path. Don't be afraid of it. Same with
the equinimity of renunciation. It's
part of the path. So too that equinimity
of singularity of oneness of wholeness
of unification that's part of the path
and there's another step I'm not even
that not even that and even that the
Buddha said would be an even higher
level of of bliss so of well-being.
Yeah. Leading in the direction of of
nibbana. So yeah.