Lightly edited transcript Filler words and caption errors removed by machine; the meaning is unchanged.
Delson works through MN 70, the Kitagiri Sutta, beginning with the Buddha's advice to abstain from eating at night and the monks who refused it. He then spends most of the talk on the Buddha's teaching about pleasant, painful and neutral feelings, arguing that the response to a feeling, not the feeling itself, decides whether unwholesome or wholesome states grow. He closes with the seven kinds of persons, the gradual training, and the need for relaxed, non-forceful effort, which he links to the 6R's.
Key points
- Whether unwholesome states grow or diminish depends on how one relates to a feeling: craving or clinging to pleasant feeling and aversion to painful feeling feed unwholesome states, while letting go of them and not clinging is what the Buddha recommends.
- Indifference (apathy, 'I don't care') is a subtle form of aversion, while equanimity means seeing things as they are without being pulled toward or pushed away from them.
- Effort (virya) should be right effort held in a relaxed way; Delson warns that forcing long sits or pushing for attainment leads to a broken or disturbed mind.
- The 6R's (recognize, release, relax, re-smile, return, repeat) are his practical way of applying this teaching when unwholesome states arise in meditation.
- The sutta describes seven kinds of persons, from one liberated in both ways to a faith follower, and a gradual training of faith, visiting a teacher, listening, memorizing, reflecting, zeal, and striving.
Suttas in this talk
Each opens the sutta on SuttaCentral.
Themes
Where this talk sits on the path
This talk belongs to a thread that runs along the whole path. It follows the thread of Daily life / ethics, Sutta study series.
Transcript
Opening the Kitagiri Sutta
Can everyone see this? Yep, I can see it. Yeah, yep, I can see it. All right, so this is Majjhima Nikaya 70, the Kitagiri Sutta, at Kitagiri. Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was wandering in the Kasi country, together with a large Sangha of bhikkhus. There he addressed the bhikkhus thus: "Bhikkhus, I abstain from eating at night. By doing so, I am free from illness and affliction, and I enjoy lightness, strength, and a comfortable abiding."
Come, because abstain from eating at night, by doing so you too will be free from illness and affliction, and you will enjoy lightness, strength and a comfortable abiding. So here the Buddha is probably one of the early proponents of intermittent fasting. Eating one meal a day, or eating before noon, which is what he initially introduced. It was a time before, when the monks would gather in the night and go for alms as well, but that would be too troublesome for lay people, or it could have been too troublesome for lay people. You have these figures and the shadows coming out from the trees looking for food. It could be a little disconcerting. But initially, he decided that, instead of doing the one meal a day, you just don't eat in the afternoon.
And this is generally for people who are taking the eight, ten or more precepts. So they say, "Yes, Venerable Sir." Then, as the Blessed One was wandering by stages in the Kasi country, he eventually arrived at a Kasi town called Kitagiri. There he lived in this Kasi town, Kitagiri. Now on that occasion, the bhikkhus led by Assaji and Punabbasuka were residing at Kitagiri. So these two monks were troublesome because they were not following the Vinaya as they should have, if they had been ordained, which they wore. So there's some background behind why they are mentioned, but essentially they weren't naughty monks, let's just say that.
Then a number of bhikkhus went and told them, "Friends, the Blessed One and the Sangha bhikkhus now abstain from eating at night. By doing so they are free from illness and affliction, and they enjoy health, strength and a comfortable abiding. Come, friends, abstain from eating at night. By doing so you too will be free from illness and affliction, and you will enjoy lightness, strength and a comfortable abiding." When this was said, the bhikkhus led by Assaji and Punabbasuka told those bhikkhus, "Friends, we eat in the evening, in the morning and in the day outside the proper time. And by doing so, we are free from illness and affliction, and we enjoy lightness, strength and a comfortable abiding.
Why should we abandon a benefit visible here and now and pursue a benefit to be achieved at a future time? We shall eat in the evening, in the morning, and in the day, outside the proper time." So they're not following the Vinaya here. And so they're saying, well, we eat three times a day, but we're fine. So why should we listen?
Since the bhikkhus were unable to convince the bhikkhus led by Assaji and Punabbasuka, they went to the Blessed One. After paying homage to him, they sat down at one side and told him all that had occurred, adding, "Venerable Sir, since we were unable to convince the bhikkhus led by Assaji and Punabbasuka, we have reported this matter to the Blessed One."
Then the Blessed One addressed a certain bhikkhu thus: "Come, bhikkhu, tell the bhikkhus led by Assaji and Punabbasuka in my name that the Teacher calls them." "Yes, Venerable Sir," he replied. And he went to the bhikkhus led by Assaji and Punabbasuka and told them, "The Teacher calls you, friends." "Yes, friend," they replied, and they went to the Blessed One. After paying homage to him, they sat down at one side. The Blessed One then said: "Is it true, friends, that a number of bhikkhus went and told you, 'Friends, the Blessed One and the Sangha now abstain from eating at night. Come, friends, abstain from eating at night'? And you told those bhikkhus, 'Friends, we eat in the evening,
Why should we abandon a benefit visible here and now to pursue a benefit to be achieved at a future time? We shall eat in the evening, in the morning and in the day outside the proper time." "Yes, Venerable Sir." "Bhikkhus, have you known me to teach the Dhamma in such a way as this? Whatever this person experiences, whether pleasant or painful or neither painful nor pleasant, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase.
Understanding the Buddha's question about feelings
So let's look at that question. What is he saying here? Whatever this person experiences, that is any kind of feeling, whether pleasant or unpleasant, or neither pleasant nor unpleasant, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase. And the answer is no, Venerable Sir. Why is the answer that? Because generally, when there are any experiences that arise, the mind is generally not having any kind of mindfulness.
So he's talking about it in a general sense, that somebody has an experience, whether that's pleasant or painful or neutral, there will be the inclination towards unwholesome states that may arise in the form of craving, identification, and so on. Have you not known me to teach the Dhamma in such a way as this? Here, when someone feels a certain kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish.
But when someone feels another kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase. Here, when someone feels a certain kind of painful feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish. But when someone feels another kind of painful feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase. Here, when someone feels a certain kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish. But when someone feels another kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase. Yes, Venerable Sir, that's a lot to unpack, so let's take it bit by bit. What is he talking about here?
He's saying when someone feels a certain kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish. What are we talking about here? We're talking about sensual pleasant experiences generally. When there are sensual experiences tied to the five cords of sensual stimulation, the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue and the body, then there is a liability for unwholesome states to increase and wholesome states to diminish.
But when you experience a different kind of pleasant feeling, which is a mental pleasant feeling, whether that's metta, or whether that's loving kindness or compassion or joy or equanimity, whether that's the first jhana, the second jhana, the third jhana, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth, the seventh, the eighth, whatever it is, therein unwholesome states diminish and wholesome states will increase. Here, when someone feels a certain kind of painful feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish. But when someone feels another kind of painful feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase. What are we talking about here? Again, we're saying, in this case, hindrances when they arise as painful feeling, or any kind of painful physical feeling through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, there is a liability for unwholesome states to arise, because we say, 'Oh, that hurts. Oh, I don't like it,' and then it changes into aversion and then clinging and so on.
But when someone has a painful feeling and says, and has some vega, so that is spiritual urgency, that's like, 'I don't like this and I want it to stop. I don't like the suffering that's arising. Is there a way out?' This leads to the diminishing of unwholesome states and the increasing of wholesome states. Here, when someone feels a certain kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish. What kind of neutral feeling would this be?
This would be indifference, apathy. It's the evil twin of equanimity. Indifference is like, 'I don't care, whatever, I just don't care.' And there's a flavour of aversion, if you think about it, because there's 'I'm choosing to ignore what's being done, but it's affecting me.' It's still affecting a sense of me, because I'm choosing to ignore it, and because of that identification, unwholesome states will increase and wholesome states will diminish. But if I have equanimity, which is a different kind of neither pleasant nor painful feeling, equanimity here says: I'm experiencing pain. I'm experiencing whatever it is, but I'm choosing to stay with it without being affected one way.
My mind and its attention is related to understanding things as they actually are. In the first case of indifference, I'm pushing away the things as they actually are. But in the second case, I have equanimity and I'm seeing the unwholesome states and I'm choosing to let them go. I'm seeing pain, but I have equanimity about the pain. Pain is there. Pain is not the issue. Pain is painful, obviously. Pain is suffering, obviously. It's physical, a kind of suffering, but the mental aspect of it is what creates the suffering. The mental aspect of it says, 'I don't like this pain, make it stop,' and makes it worse than it actually is, makes it seem more painful than it actually is. You will see this for yourself when you are meditating. There's an itch on your nose, and if you start paying attention to that itch, now the itch moves on to your neck, and then it moves through the entire body, and the only reason is because your attention to it is proliferating it.
We're not saying that we should ignore the pain. What we're saying is acknowledge the pain, acknowledge the irritation, acknowledge whatever it is, but from a standpoint of equanimity, seeing things as they actually are. When you do this, your mind is clear. It's like you are in the world, but not of it. You understand things as they are. Things are happening, but your mind remains, after a while, disenchanted and dispassionate.
The Buddha's own knowing of feelings
So he says, "Good, because, if it were unknown by me, unseen, unfounded, unrealized, uncontacted by wisdom, thus: here when someone feels a certain kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him, and wholesome states diminish, would it be fitting for me, not knowing that, to say, abandon such a kind of pleasant feeling?" "No, Venerable Sir." "But because it is known by me, seen, found, realized, contacted by wisdom thus: here when someone feels a certain kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him, and wholesome states diminish, that I therefore say, abandon such a kind of pleasant feeling." So in other words, the Buddha is saying: I have seen for myself, when I was a bodhisattva, I saw for myself that when such a feeling arose in me, if I tied the mind to it, if I tied my attention to it, no matter how pleasant it is, it led to my misfortune. It led to me having more suffering, with unwholesome states arising.
That's why I'm saying abandon those, let them go. If it were unknown by me, unseen, unfounded, unrealized, uncontacted by wisdom thus, here when someone feels another kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase, would it be fitting for me, not knowing that, to say, enter upon and abide in such a kind of pleasant feeling?
No, venerable sir, but because it is known by me, seen, found, realized, contacted by wisdom thus, here when someone feels another kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him, and wholesome states increase, that I therefore say enter upon and abide in such a kind of pleasant feeling. So again on the night of his enlightenment he saw this for himself: when I have these kinds of feelings, which are in conjunction with the jhanic factors or which are proliferative of the jhanic factors, when I have a pleasant mindset, when I have joy that is not tied to any of the physical sense bases, then I see that my mind starts to get collected, and by doing so unwholesome states diminish and wholesome states increase. Then I can still abide in that pleasant feeling. Why not abide in that pleasant feeling? It doesn't cause me harm.
It doesn't cause another person harm. Same thing with what he says. If it were unknown by me, but because it is known by me, contacted by wisdom, thus, here when someone feels a certain kind of painful feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish, that I therefore say abandon such a kind of feeling. So he notices when there's craving, when there's any kind of hindrance, what to do? Let it go, 6R's. If it were unknown by me, but because it is known by me, contacted by wisdom, thus, here when someone feels another kind of painful feeling, and unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase, that I therefore say enter upon and abide in such a kind of painful feeling. That's an interesting one. So he says enter upon and abide in such a kind of painful feeling. What he's saying is go with that, some vega, see where it leads you, because it will lead you to a search for a way out of suffering. If it were unknown by me, but because it is known by me
contacted by wisdom, thus, here when someone feels a certain kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish, that I therefore say abandon such a kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling. Indifference or ignorance is another one. Just not being aware, the lack of mindfulness, in itself is neither pleasant nor painful, although inherently painful because it leads to further craving, clinging and becoming, relating to suffering. So what do you do with that? Abandon it, let it go, 6R's. If it were unknown by me, but because it is known by me, contacted by wisdom, thus, here when someone feels another kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase, that I therefore say enter upon and abide in such a kind of neither painful nor pleasant feeling. That is equanimity. When I have equanimity, true equanimity of seeing things as they actually are without getting affected one way or the other, one way being attracted, one way being repulsed, and just being free of the dualities of attraction and repulsion.
And seeing things as they actually are, my mind will automatically disengage from identifying with any of that, and my mind will experience disenchantment. It'll be able to see for itself: if I go down this road, if I choose to do this, if I choose to pay attention to that, it's going to lead me into a cycle of suffering, and so I'm disenchanted from that. And I have this passion. Nothing sticks in the mind anymore, because I do not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work to do with diligence, nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more work to do with diligence. I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants with taints destroyed, who have lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reach the true goal, destroy the fetters of being, and are completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work to do with diligence.
Why is that? They have done their work with diligence. They have used mindfulness. They have utilized the four foundations of mindfulness. They have practiced and practiced and practiced. They have seen for themselves. They have uprooted craving and ignorance and the fetters. And so they are no more capable of being negligent. Imagine that, being incapable of being negligent. It's just not possible for such a person. I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds have not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme security from bondage, they still have work to do with diligence. Why is that?
Seven kinds of persons
Because when those venerable ones make use of suitable resting places and associate with good friends and nurture the spiritual faculties, they may, by realizing for themselves with direct knowledge here and now, enter upon and abide in the supreme goal of the holy life, for the sake of which clansmen rightly go forth from the home life into homelessness, seeing this fruit of diligence. For these, because I say they still have work to do with diligence. So there are people who are in training. They have yet to do the work. They have yet to perfect the ability to be fully diligent at all times, everywhere. But because they still have work to do, the Buddha is saying they still have to be diligent. They're not arahants yet. They haven't perfected their awakening yet. Now here's the interesting categorization of the seven kinds of people, because there are seven kinds of persons to be found existing in the world. What seven? They are: one liberated in both ways, one liberated by wisdom, a body witness, one attained to view, one liberated by faith, a
dhamma follower and a faith follower what kind of person is one liberated in both ways here some person contacts with the body now when he says body he's talking about the manamaya kosha or another way of looking at it is the mental body and abides in those liberations that are peaceful, immaterial, transcending forms, and his taints are destroyed by his seeing with wisdom. This kind of person is called one liberated in both ways. I do not say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence. Why is that? He has done his work with diligence. He is no more capable of being negligent. So let's break this down. This is an this is somebody who has made contact with their mind with the four form jhanas right abides in those liberations and the liberations that are peaceful and immaterial infinite space infinite consciousness nothingness neither perception and non-perception and they have destroyed their taints so such a person is able to traverse through any of those jhanas has traversed through all the eight jangas and experienced the destruction of the taints.
Such a person, for example, would be someone like Sariputta. What kind of person is one liberated by wisdom? Here, some person does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending forms, but his taints are destroyed by his seeing with wisdom. This kind of person is called one liberated by wisdom. I do not say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence. Why is that? He has done his work with diligence. He is no more capable of being negligent. This is somebody who has traversed through the first four jhanas and destroyed the taints. So initially we're talking about somebody who's gone through the eight jhanas, but here they've gone only up to the fourth jhana, but they've destroyed their taints, and therefore they're called liberated by wisdom. What kind of person is a body witness? Here, some person contacts with the body and abides in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending forms, and some of his taints are destroyed by his seeing with wisdom.
This kind of person is called a body witness, what is also known as a kayasakkhi. I say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence. Why is that? Because when that venerable one makes use of suitable resting places and associates with good friends and nurtures his spiritual faculties, he may, by realizing for himself with direct knowledge here and now, enter upon and abide in that supreme goal of the holy life, for the sake of which clansmen rightly go forth from the home life into homelessness, seeing this fruit of diligence. For such a bhikkhu I say that he still has work to do with diligence. So this person is somebody who's gone through the eight jhanas. He abides in the liberations of the first, second, third and fourth jhana and the formless attainments of infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness, neither perception nor non-perception, but he still has work to do; not all of his taints are destroyed. So this could be somebody who was a stream-enterer all the way up to an anagami, not yet having achieved arahantship.
What kind of person is one attained to view? Here, some person does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending forms. That means they're only the first four jhanas, or they've experienced the first four jhanas. But some of his taints are destroyed by his seeing with wisdom. So he is a stream-enter, and he has viewed at least a stream-enter, and he has reviewed and examined with wisdom the teachings proclaimed by the Tathagata. This kind of person is called one attained to view. I say of such a one that he still has work to do with diligence, because that person, seeing the fruit of diligence, for such a bhikkhu I say he still has work to do. He's just repeating the same thing. But a view-attainer is somebody who has attained right view by experiencing, but they have not yet gone on to arahantship. So such a person is
doing the practice in such a way that their mind comes to right view immediately, right? Such a person is essentially more attuned to the practice of right view. That's one way of saying it. They aren't necessarily a stream-enter with fruition. That's another way of saying it. They have attained view, but it hasn't been fully formed. What kind of person is one liberated by faith?
Here, some person does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending forms, but some of his taints are destroyed by his seeing with wisdom. His faith is planted, rooted, and established in the Tathagata. So there's the difference. Such a person, in the first case, has examined with wisdom. So his faculty of wisdom is very sharp. So in other words, a person will reflect on what the Buddha has said, reflect on the teachings, see for oneself the impermanence of arising and passing away. In the other case, in this case, liberated by faith, such a person is called liberated by faith because their faith in the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha is implanted, is rooted and established.
This kind of person is called one liberated by faith. I say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence. So this is, again, somebody at least with stream entry. What kind of person is a Dhamma follower? So I think I have to correct myself here, if I understood correctly. But we'll continue and I'll explain why. What kind of person is a Dhamma follower? Here, some person does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending form. So they have gotten to the fourth jhana. In all these cases where they are not abiding in any of the immaterial, that doesn't mean they haven't experienced jhana.
It just means they've gone up to the fourth jhana. You still need to experience jhana. And his taints are not yet destroyed by his seeing with wisdom. But those teachings proclaimed by the Tathagata are accepted by him after reflecting on them sufficiently with wisdom. Furthermore, he has these qualities: the faith faculty, the energy faculty, the mindfulness faculty, the concentration faculty, and the wisdom faculty. This kind of person is called a Dhamma follower. So if I understood correctly from my reading of some of the commentaries about this, and I think even because both of these notes on this, because there is a text called [unclear] and that talks about these different kinds of attainments, so these different kinds of people, so in the case of somebody who has attained to view and somebody who is liberated by faith, they could be a stream enterer and beyond, until anagami. But I think in the case of a Dhamma follower and the faith follower, they are just a stream enterer but without fruition, right? So they have these qualities, and they have yet to develop them.
That is to say, the faith faculty, the energy faculty, the mindfulness faculty, they're in the process of further developing those. But such a person is either a Dhamma follower, in which case they have reflected on the teachings, they have heard the teachings, and they say, 'Okay, I understand this,' and they have an experience through one of the first four jhanas, and then they see for themselves that this is the path. So they are a Dhamma follower. What kind of person is a faith follower? Here, someone does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial. Again, doesn't get into the formless jhanas, but furthermore he has sufficient faith in and love for the Tathagata. So he has sata, he has devotion, he has some level of, 'Yeah, this is probably the way.' And therefore he has these qualities: the faith faculty, the energy faculty, the mindfulness faculty, the concentration faculty, and the wisdom faculty. This kind of person is called the faith follower. I say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence.
Gradual training toward final knowledge
Let's move on, because this is all repeat. Now, this is very important. Here the book says, Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress. And how is final knowledge achieved by gradual training, gradual practice, gradual progress? Here, one who has faith in a teacher visits him. This is, in other words, you know that this person knows what they're talking about. In this case it could be the Buddha or a disciple of the Buddha.
When he visits him, he pays respect to him. He doesn't have contempt. He doesn't say, 'Oh, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about.' The moment you have contempt for a teacher, you are no longer going to be able to hear what they have to say. As a teacher, as a guide, if you notice what's happening, then don't waste your time any further. You're not here to try to convince anyone of anything. If a person is coming to you generally to understand the Dhamma, then they won't have contempt for it. But if a person is trying to test you, and you can notice that, don't waste your time, don't waste their time, don't waste your time. So when he pays respect to him, he gives ear, so he actually listens. One who gives ear hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, he memorizes it, so he examines it, and then he gains a reflective acceptance of those teachings. When he has gained a reflective acceptance of those teachings, zeal springs up in him. That is enthusiasm.
When zeal springs up in him, he applies his will. He tries and applies the Dhamma. He practices the Dhamma. Having applied his will, he scrutinizes. Having scrutinized, he strives. This word strive, it doesn't mean that I'm going to push. Having scrutinized, which means he self-reflects, he studies how his mind is working. He makes adjustments, and he keeps going.
Therefore, he realizes with the body, the mental body, the supreme truth, and sees it by penetrating it with wisdom. There has not been that faith, bhikkhus, and there has not been that visiting, and there has not been that paying of respect, there has not been that giving of ear, there has not been that hearing of the Dhamma, there has not been that memorizing of the Dhamma, there has not been that examining of the meaning of the Dhamma, and therefore there has not been that reflective acceptance of the teachings, nor that zeal, nor the application of will, nor the scrutiny, nor the striving. So he's talking to Asaji and the other guy.
You have lost your way. You have been practicing the wrong way. Just how far, bhikkhus, have these misguided men strayed from the doctrine and discipline? Bhikkhus, there is a four-phrased statement, and when it is recited, a wise man would quickly understand it. I shall recite it to you. Because, try to understand it. Venerable sir, who are we that we should understand the Dhamma? Because even with a teacher who is concerned with material things, an heir to material things, attached to material things, such haggling by the disciples would not be proper: if we get this we will do it, if we don't get this we won't do it. So that should be said when the teacher is the Tathagata who is utterly... So what should be said when the teacher is a Tathagata who's utterly detached from material things? In other words, when you have students who are bargaining, you know, oftentimes when Bhante would be
having the interviews, the one word he didn't like was 'but,' because you're haggling with the teacher. 'But what if I do this? But what if I do that? But what if, what if, what if, what if?' No, you're not hearing what's going on. You're not listening to what's being said. For a faithful disciple who is intent on fathoming the teacher's dispensation, it is natural that he conducts himself thus: 'The Blessed One is the teacher, I am a disciple, the Blessed One knows, I don't know.' For a faithful disciple who's intent on fathoming the dispensation, the teacher's dispensation is nourishing and refreshing. For a faithful disciple who's intent on fathoming the teacher's dispensation, it is natural that he conduct himself thus. This is a little troublesome, so let me break this down. 'Willingly let only my skin, sinews, and bones remain, and let the flesh and blood dry up on my body, but my energy shall not be relaxed so long as I have not attained what can be attained by manly strength, manly energy, and manly persistence.'
That's a troublesome statement. There you don't want to do that. This is, I can't, I wouldn't do this, and I don't think anyone should be doing this. This is going to cause you more harm than it is going to cause you freedom. But here I think the spirit of the message should be taken, which is virya. In modern standards, or by modern standards, the Buddha's culture was sexist, so obviously he's talking about manly, right? Their manly strength, manly energy, manly persistence. I have to strive, I have to be like a man, I have to have manly strength. That's virya. But really, what we're talking about when we say virya is having right effort and the right determination.
Sitting longer without forcing
Can I sit for a little longer? Can I sit for 10 more minutes? What is it that is causing me to come up from my sits? Can I not sit for longer? What is it that I can do to let go of the causes and conditions that are not allowing me to sit for longer periods of time? Now, the critics will say, 'Oh, he's saying we should sit for three hours, four hours, 10 hours, 12 hours, 15 hours, and that's how people get in trouble.' No, that's not how people get in trouble. People get in trouble because they don't listen. They think that they're going to be meditating for 10 hours, 15 hours, 12 hours, and all they do is they push and push and become one-pointed, and that's how they go crazy. That's how they break their mind. You want to sit for 10 hours? Do it in a relaxed way. I know of students, I know of participants, I know of meditators
who have done that on my retreats, who have sat for six, seven, eight hours, skipped lunch, skipped the tea, and just kept sitting, but their mind is relaxed. Their mind has nothing going on in it. Compare that to somebody who doesn't listen, who's a stupid idiot, who's a misguided person, and decides that they're going to sit for 10 hours until they become an arahant. And they push and push and push, and they forget to use the 6R's. They say, 'No, I will find a way, and I will do it.'
And they do this, and they break their mind. And they have all kinds of visions. They have all these kinds of things that happen. They become catatonic. They do all kinds of things. Because they don't listen. Because they think they know better. But for such a one, as the Buddha says, a faithful disciple who is intent on fathoming the dispensation, one of two fruits may be expected. One who is intent in such a way that he has energy. Virya is the energy, the effort, the right effort, making the diligent effort to notice when unwholesome states are arising, to let go of those unwholesome states, to bring up wholesome states and keep those wholesome states going just by merely resting in them.
This is what you're doing with the 6R's. You recognize, oh, here's an unwholesome state. You let go of it. You release. You relax and tranquilize. This is the main part people forget. Relax, re-smile, then come back to your object. Gentle does it. Slow and steady does it. And so two fruits may be expected, either final knowledge here and now, or if there is a trace of clinging, that is to say, there's still an attachment to the Dhamma. There's still an identification with the Dhamma. There's still a utilization of the Dhamma as a tool without realizing that even the Dhamma is essentially in the conditioned realm. There is non-return for such a person. That is what the Blessed One said. The bhikkhus were satisfied and delighted in the Blessed One's words.