Kontemplacija osećaja

U Satipaṭṭhana sutti Buda nam je ostavio instrukcije za četiri glavna tipa vežbanja i to kroz četiri oblasti na koje možemo da usmerimo pažnju i, posmatrajući svet u kojem živimo, učimo o tom svetu. Te četiri oblasti su telo, osećaji, um i sadržaji uma. Danas je najpopularniji metod vežbanja fokusiranje na telo, to jest na dah, kao jedan od objekata meditacije, mada ih ima još. Ali dah je nekako najpraktičniji. Uvek je sa nama. Mnogo ređe meditanti se odlučuju za drugu oblast po redu, a to su osećaji, vedanānupassana. I to je šteta. Jer su osećaji takođe dragocen učitelj.

Kada radimo vedanānupassanu, kontemplaciju osećaja, tada koristimo telesne senzacije i emocije kao objekat pažnje. Ali ono što takođe pokušavamo da uočimo je za nivo dublje od toga, a to su tri vrste bazičnih osećaja (na engleskom to prevode kao feeling tone) koji su zajednički imenitelj za sva ta iskustva. A to su prijatni osećaj, neprijatni osećaj i ni neprijatni ni prijatni, to jest neutralni osećaj. Pokušavamo da uočimo i razumemo mehanizam koji ih stvara, a on je vrlo dobro opisan u formuli uslovljenog nastanka (patiććasamuppāda): phassa paććaya vedana, kontakt rađa osećaj. Takođe pokušavamo da uočimo i razumemo šta je rezultat pojave tog osećava, što nam takođe otkriva formula uslovljenog nastanka: vedana paććaya tanhā, osećaj rađa žudnju.

Zašto je to važno? Zato što se na prelazu iz osećaja u žudnju nalazi najslabija karika celog lanca rađanja i umiranja, i na tom mestu lanac možemo prekinuti. To jest zaustaviti neprkidno kruženje u krugu samsare. Kako? Naravno, razumevanjem, znanjem. Jer kada razumemo pravu prirodu prijatnih, neprijatnih i neutralnih osećaja, a to je nestalnost, ne vezujemo se za njih, žudnja nema uporište, zato što su uviđamo toliko nepouzdani. Postaje nam jasno da to vezivanje može roditi jedino patnju. Kao kad bismo se jako vezali za divan cvet, koji će već sutra uvenuti. Ili na konjičkim trkama kladili na grlo za koje unapred znamo da nema šanse da pobedi. Dakle, kada razumemo kuda nas osećaji i vezivanje vode, da je sledeći korak žudnja, a onda neminovno i patnja, to razumevanje nas hladi od strasti, hladi od obmanutosti, i donosi sreću stišanosti, ohlađenosti, sreću unutrašnjeg mira.

Breathing Meditation Puzzle

Mindfulness of breathing or ānāpānasati has a prominent place among the meditation methods taught by the Buddha. This doesn’t come as a surprise, if we know this is exactly the method the Teacher used to attain his own enlightenment, but also to “generally dwell during rains residence”.1 Therefore, he qualified this type of mental training as a noble abode (ariya-vihāra), divine abode (brahma-vihāra) and Tathāgatha abode.2

Instructions for this meditation are given in a number of suttas, most elaborately in the Ānāpānasati Sutta (MN 118), but also in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (MN 10), Mahārāhulovada Sutta (MN 62) and the others. The drawback of all these instructions is that they come as an unchanged, fixed formula, which pose a problem in making sure their intended meaning is completely understood. This problem is reflected in a number of different old and modern interpretations of the Pāli text. One among several points of contention is Pāli compound “sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī”, which appears in the Canon 17 times,3 embedded in the following standard passage in Ānāpānasati Sutta:

“kathaṃ bhāvitā ca, bhikkhave, ānāpānassati kathaṃ bahulīkatā mahapphalā hoti mahānisaṃsā? idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu araññagato vā rukkhamūlagato vā suññāgāragato vā nisīdati pallaṅkaṃ ābhujitvā ujuṃ kāyaṃ paṇidhāya parimukhaṃ satiṃ upaṭṭhapetvā. so satova assasati satova passasati. dīghaṃ vā assasanto ‘dīghaṃ assasāmī’ti pajānāti, dīghaṃ vā passasanto ‘dīghaṃ passasāmī’ti pajānāti; rassaṃ vā assasanto ‘rassaṃ assasāmī’ti pajānāti, rassaṃ vā passasanto ‘rassaṃ passasāmī’ti pajānāti; ‘sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati; ‘passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘passambhayaṃ kāyasaṅkhāraṃ passasissāmī’ti sikkhati.”4

“And how, bhikkhus, is mindfulness of breathing developed and cultivated, so that it is of great fruit and great benefit? Here a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty hut, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, and established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out.

Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe” in long’; or breathing out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands: ‘I breathe out short.5 ‘ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body [of breath]‘; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body [of breath].’6 He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the bodily formation’;7 he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the bodily formation’.”‘8

This makes a well known first tetrad of the instructions on how to practice mindfulness of breathing. In this sutta, it is further augmented by additional twelve steps, which makes total of sixteen steps of instructions. But we are here concerned with the third element of the tetrad and the key term: sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī.

In deciphering its meaning, we should first turn to the Papañcasudāni, the commentary to the Majjhima Nikāya, and see what it has to say. Unfortunately, Buddhaghosa commented only on the introductory part of the sutta and the part that follows after the four tetrads on mindfulness of breathing. For better understanding of this sutta section he merely refers a reader to his later work, well-known Visuddhimagga.

In this compendium of Theravada orthodoxy, mindfulness of breathing explanation is part of the Chapter VIII, “Other Recollections as Meditative Subjects”. There, after quoting the source text from the sutta (interestingly, the one from Ānāpāna Saṃyutta, SN 54, and not from Majjhima Nikāya), Buddhaghosa had to say the following about the section we are interested in:

“171. (iii) He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in … I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body’: he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in making known, making plain, the beginning, middle and end9 of the entire in-breath body. I shall breathe out making known, making plain, the beginning, middle and end of the entire out-breath body’, thus he trains. Making them known, making them plain, in this way he both breathes in and breathes out with consciousness associated with knowledge. That is why it is said, ‘He trains thus: “I shall breathe in … shall breathe out …

174. Herein, in the first part of the system10 he should only breathe in and breathe out and not do anything else at all, and it is only afterwards that he should apply himself to the arousing of knowledge, and so on. Consequently the present tense is used here in the text, ‘He knows: “I breathe in” … he knows: “I breathe out”. But the future tense in the passage beginning ‘ “I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body” ‘ should be understood as used in order to show that the aspect of arousing knowledge, etc., has to be undertaken from then on.”11

Obviously the Buddhaghosa understands sabbakāya as a “whole body of breath”, with its three phases of beginning, middle and end. From that point on, this became the standard Theravāda interpretation of this passage, which has been repeated many times by various meditation teachers. But for some other interpreters this way od understanding didn’t seem to fit well with the next step in the practice, where Buddha again uses term kāya, but this time obviously referencing to the actual body. At the same time he doesn’t signal any change in the meaning of the same word, which is rather strange.

In the note to his translation of Ānāpānasati Sutta, Thanissaro Bhikkhu comments on this problem as following:

“The commentaries insist that “body” here means the breath, but this is unlikely in this context, for the next step — without further explanation — refers to the breath as “bodily fabrication.” If the Buddha were using two different terms to refer to the breath in such close proximity, he would have been careful to signal that he was redefining his terms (as he does below, when explaining that the first four steps in breath meditation correspond to the practice of focusing on the body in and of itself as a frame of reference). The step of breathing in and out sensitive to the entire body relates to the many similes in the suttas depicting jhana as a state of whole-body awareness (see MN 119).” 12

There is another book in the Pāli Canon, Patisambhidamagga, with a whole chapter dedicated to ānāpānasati. That “makes this the longest exposition of the subject in Pāli literature”.13 The authorship of this detailed analysis of different kinds of knowledge tradition ascribes to Venerable Sāriputta. Here, we find the following explanation of the third step of the first tetrad:

“42. (§48). “‘Experiencing the whole body,’ I shall breathe in, thus he trains himself; ‘experiencing the whole body,’ I shall breathe out, thus he trains himself.”

Body”: There are two bodies – the mentality-body and the materiality-body.

Feeling, perception, volition, sense-impression, attention-mentality and the mentality-body – and those (things) which are called the mental formations – this is the mentality-body.

The four great primaries and the materiality derived from the four great primaries – in-breath and out-breath and the sign for the binding (of mindfulness) – and those (things) which are called the bodily formations – this is the materiality-body.”14

Here we see that ambiguity of the pāli word kaya brought a new aspect. Namely, kaya, as body in English, can mean “physical body”, but also can mean a “group” of elements. Here, the word kāya is taken in this second meaning and two groups of elements are identified: those which constitute physical, material body and those who constitute mental “body”. Here’s what Pa-Auk Sayadaw says, obviously having in mind this passage from the Patisambhidamagga:

“There are two types of body in vipassana: the materiality-body (rūpa-kāya) and the mentality-body (nāma·kāya). The materiality-body is a group of twenty-eight types of materiality. The mentality-body is a group of consciousnesses and their associated mental factors. In other words, the two bodies are the five aggregates (khandha): materiality, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.”15

Based on this Abhidhammic analysis of kāya, the same author further comments on the passage we are analyzing here:

“Here, the whole body refers to the whole body of breath, not to the whole body from head to foot. Experiencing the whole body means you know the whole in-breath and out-breath from beginning, to middle, to end. And you knows it at the touching point only: at the nostrils-gate or upper lip.

The breath is nothing but a mass of mind-born kalāpas with nine types of materiality (rūpa): the earth element, water element, fire element, wind element, colour, odour, flavour, nutritive essence and the sound of the breath. Those kalāpas arise always as a body, that is why they are called a ‘body (kāya)’.”16

This indication of not one, but two types of bodies was maybe also what inspired Thai monk Buddhadasa Bhikkhu for understanding the word sabba as “all”, rather than “whole”. Following that, he understood the term sabba-kāya to mean “all bodies” and in step three of the tetrad talks about “experiencing all bodies”.

“In step three, the aim is to experience all kaya, all bodies. The essence of this step is to feel all bodies while breathing in and breathing out. While practicing the earlier steps of ānāpānasati, we began to observe that the breath conditions our flesh-and-blood body. This next step, therefore, does not involve anything new; we merely investigate this fact more profoundly, clearly, and carefully than before. We contemplate in a deeper way that there are two kaya (bodies). We should continuously observe this while breathing in and breathing out.”17

All this quotations are quite sufficient to conclude that Theravāda orthodoxy understands the meaning of our passage in a way that the meditator should keep uninterrupted attention on the full extent of every in-breath and out-breath, on all of its three phases: from the beginning, through the middle, to the end. Also, this attention should not follow movements of the breath while it’s entering the body or leaving it, but stay at the point where it touches the body for the first time, which is obviously at the area of nostrils. On the other hand, this approach was not the only one advocated within the Theravada practice.

It might be interesting here to compare this “classic” Theravada interpretation with some other old Buddhist schools in India.Thus we have a passage from Mahāvibhāṣā of the Sarvastivadins, which gives quite different explanation of the third step in the body mindfulness tetrad:

“Question: As one observes the wind of breath as entering by the nose and getting out by the nose, why is it said that ‘I breathe in and out perceiving the whole body’?
Answer: When mindfulness of breathing is not yet accomplished, one observes in-and-out-breath as entering and getting out by the nose. When mindfulness of breathing is accomplished, one observes breath as entering and going out through all the pores of the body, which is like a lotus root.” (T 27, 136a–b)”18

Thus Sarvastivadins take the word “body” quite literally and interpret “the whole body” as the entire physical body, with pores, involved in breathing. Knowing how Sarvastivādin ideas migrated into China through innumerable translations, it may not be a surprise that this interpretation is in accord with another one we find in the relevant parallels of the Chinese Agamas. For example, in Ekottarika-agama‘s parallel to Mahārāhulovada sutta (EA 17.1 at T II 582b2), the third step in the instructions also relates to focusing attention to the whole (physical) body. But after that comes interesting deviation. Namely, the next instruction directs meditator to be aware if the breath is present or not: “at the time when there is breathing, he knows it is there; at a time when there is no breathing, he knows it is not there”.

This could be related to noticing gaps between breaths. The other option is that this instruction points out to the fact that in the states of deep concentration, breath becomes very subtle and difficult to notice. On this phenomenon Visuddhimagga19 gives elaborate analysis and somewhat oddly warns meditator that once the breath becomes imperceptible he should not discontinue practice and leave, thinking that the meditation is over. On the other hand, instead discussing existence or disappearance of the breath, Pāli version of the first tetrad as a fourth and last instruction instructs towards tranquillising “bodily formation”.

On the same track with other sources from the Chinese Buddhist Canon, which sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī understand as “the whole body” stands Dhyānasamādhi Sūtra, a compilation of various texts related to meditation, whose translator was famous Kumārajīva (344-413):

“Mindfulness [during] ††† all breaths pervades the body, [while] being as well mindful of the out- and in-breaths. Completely contemplating the inside of the body [during] all out-breaths and in-breaths, awareness pervades and reaches inside the body up to the toes and the fingers and pervades every pore [on the surface of the body], just like water entering sand, aware from the feet to the hair [while] breathing out [and in], pervading every pore as well, just like water entering sand.”

However, this interpretation of the term sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī was not completely forgotten in the Theravāda Buddhism. In the 19th century it emerged in Myanmar with the U Ba Khin’s lineage of meditation teachers, going against the traditional explanation given by Buddhagosa. Thus S. N. Goenka advised that after the initial two steps, during the third one we expand our field of awareness: “the whole body must be felt”, in the sense that “with the help of the breath the whole body is felt inside … then it is also felt outside … on the surface of the body”.20 This means that after focusing on breath only, the meditator tries to feel whatever may be felt in the field of physical body. Similar to Dhyānasamādhi Sūtra, the meditator in the U Ba Khin/Goenka tradition is requested to systematically scan the whole body, from head to toes, moving methodically from one part to the next, “pervading every pore”.

With Goenka’s meditation method gaining popularity in the East and West, this approach to mindfulness of breathing also got a faithful advocates. Therefore, today we have a number of contemporary meditation teachers who follow the same interpretation of the sutta text. But not all decided to take side and some modern teachers find themselves somewhere in the middle of this spectrum. Let’s mention just one of them, Joseph Goldstein. In his book Mindfulness – A Practical Guide to Awakening, an elaboration on the Satipaṭṭhāna sutta, he shows himself being aware of both interpretations. Therefore, in a very skillful way, he tries to make room for both interpretations we are discussing in this essay:

“One trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body,” one trains thus, “I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body.” One trains thus: “I shall breathe in calming the bodily formations,” one trains thus: “I shall breathe out calming the bodily formation.’

…there are two interpretations of what it means in this context to experience the whole body. It can be taken in its literal meaning—that is, feeling the breath throughout the body or feeling the whole body as we breathe. The second interpretation of “experiencing the whole body” is found in the Buddhist commentaries, which say that this phrase refers to the whole “breath body.” This means that we train experiencing the beginning, middle, and end of each breath. We go from simply knowing whether the breath is long or short to feeling the breath more intimately, experiencing the entire flow of changing sensations with each in- and out-breath.

As mentioned earlier, both interpretations can be seen as different skillful means to apply at the appropriate time. If we’re too controlling of the breath, zeroing in on it may not be helpful. It might be better to be aware of the breath in the larger context of the whole body. On the other hand, if we’re somewhat spaced out, lost in the wandering mind, narrowing our focus to just the stream of sensations of the breath could strengthen our mindfulness and concentration.”21

Based on what has been discussed so far, to the best of my understanding, it seems that the term sabbakāyapaṭisaṃvedī in the Ānāpānasati Sutta instructions on body contemplation refers to the whole body and not to the “breath body”. If it would refer to the breath only and its three main points, that would be in a way repeating of the previous exercise in this tetrad. Since to know if the breath is short or long, we already need to clearly distinguish its beginning and end. On the other hand, when focusing on the whole body, we make the transition from focusing exclusively on the breath to observing a wider context in which this natural process occurs. Mindful connecting our breathing and body brings them in harmony. Now we are aware or “mindfully experiencing” the whole body rhythmically breathing. This starts to beneficially effect our body, so we are prepared for the next, and the last step of the tetrad. Since the breath has already become calm and steady by that time, we use it to calm the body as a whole. Thus harmonized, these two further affect the mind, dampening the constant resurfacing of the mental impurities and making the mind also steady and focused. Now we have a strong union of breath, body and mind, who supporting each other make up an excellent tool for observing and penetrating all physical and mental phenomena appearing in the field of our experience, from moment to moment. This is a safe way to liberating insight.

Ānāpānasati is one among several contemplations of the body, which use one of its functions, the breath. Therefore, its goal should be experiencing and calming the body, not experiencing and calming the breath. As I see it, breath is here just a tool. The same way as in cemetery contemplation a corpse is just a tool and not the goal. Or, in the contemplation of the postures, walking, siting, standing and laying down are just a tool, not a goal.

Notes

1 Padīpopama sutta (AN 54:8).

2 Icchānaṇgala sutta (SN 54:11)

3 Together with its variant “sabbakāyappaṭisaṃvedī”, it could be found in the following suttas: Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna sutta (DN 22), Satipaṭṭhāna sutta (MN 10), Mahārāhulovāda sutta (MN 62), Ānāpānassati sutta (MN 118), Kāyagatāsati sutta (MN 119), Ekadhamma sutta (SN 54:1), Kimila sutta (SN 54.10), Icchānaṅgala sutta (SN 54.11), Dutiyabhikkhu sutta (SN 54.16), Girimānanda sutta (AN 10:60), and in the Paṭisambhidāmagga (1.3 Chapter on Mindfulness of Breathing).

4 Ānāpānassati sutta (MN 118), Chattha Sangayana edition, electronic version published by the Vipassana Research Institute, lgatpuri, India 1997.

5 “The practice of mindfulness of breathing {ānāpānasati) involves no deliberate attempt to regulate the breath, as in hatha yoga, but a sustained effort to fix awareness on the breath as it moves in and out in its natural rhythm. Mindfulness is set up at the nostrils or the upper lip, wherever the impact of the breath is felt most distinctly; the length of the breath is noted but not consciously controlled. The complete development of this meditation method is expounded in MN 118. For an organised collection of texts on this subject, see Bhikkhu Nanamoli, Mindfulness of Breathing. See too Vsm VIII, 145-244.” (Bhikkhu Bodhi)

6 “MA: The phrase “experiencing the whole body” (sabbakayapatisamvedī) means that the meditator becomes aware of each in-and-out breath through the three phases of its beginning, middle, and end.” (Bhikkhu Bodhi)

7 “The “bodily formation” (kayasankhara) is defined at MN 44.13 as in-and-out breathing itself. Thus, as MA explains, with the successful development of the practice, the meditator’s breathing becomes increasingly quiet, tranquil, and peaceful.” (Bhikkhu Bodhi)

8 Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli & Bhikkhu Bodhi, The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya. Boston: Wisdom Publication, 1995, p. 943-944.

9 “What is meant is that the meditator should know what they are and be aware of them without his mindfulness leaving the tip of the nose to follow after the breaths inside the body or outside it, speculating on what becomes of them.” (Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli)

10 Step one and two of the tetrad.

11 Buddhaghosa, The Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga). Trans. Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society (1991), p. 266-67.

12 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html%23fn-2 (accessed on June 19, 2019)

13 Paravahera Vajiraññāṇa, Buddhist Meditation in Theory and Practice. Colombo: Godage International Publishers, 2008, p. 229.

14 Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli, The Path of Discrimination. London: Pali Text Society, 1992, p. 183.

15 Pa-Auk Sayadaw, Knowing and Seeing (4th Rev. Ed.). Singapore, Pa-Auk Meditation Centre, 2010, p. 248

16 Pa-Auk Sayadaw, The Only Way for the Realization of Nibbāna. 2012, p. 34.

17 Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, Mindfulness with Breathing: Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners, Trans. Santikaro Bhikkhu, Boston: Wisdom Publication, 1997, p. 57.

18 Quoted in: Tse-fu Kuan, Mindfulness in Early Buddhism. London: Routlege, 2008, p. 71-72.

19 VIII, 208; p. 286.

20 S. N. Goenka, Discourses on Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. Igatpuri, 1999, p. 30 and 31.

21 Josepg Goldstein, Mindfulness – A Practical Guide to Awakening. Boulder:Sounds True, 2013, p. 52.

Dijeta sa medijima

Vežba: Tokom jedne nedelje pokušaj da ne pratiš bilo kakve medije. To se odnosi na vesti, društvene mreže i zabavu. Nemoj da slušaš radio, podkaste ili CD-je; nemoj dag ledaš TV, filmove ili video; nemoj da čitaš novine, knjige ili časopise (onlajn ili štampane); nemoj da surfuješ internetom i ne prijavljuj se na svoje naloge na Facebooku ili Twitteru.

Ne, ovo ne znači da moraš zapušiti uši čim ti neko pomene neku vest, ali izbegavaj da budeš uvučena u konverzaciju o tom događaju. Ako ta osoba baš insistira, reci joj o svojoj neuobičajenoj dijeti. Naravno, možeš da nastaviš da čitaš ono što ti je neophodno za posao ili školu.

A šta u stvari radiš umesto svega toga? Deo ove vežbe svesnosti jeste i otkrivanje koje su alternative konzumiranju medija. Sugestija: radi nešto sopstvenim rukama i telom.

PODSETI SEBE

Prekri televizor komadom platna ili stavi znak na radio u kolima i na ekran kompjutera koji će te podsetiti: „Nema vesti i razbibrige ove nedelje“. Neka se časopisi gomilaju ili ih odmah preusmeri u korpu za otpatke. I tako bi to neko drugi radio da si otišla na godišnji – pa zašto ne sada?

OTKRIĆA

Smislila sam ovu vežbu za svog učenika koji je patio od vrlo raširenog problema – hronične anksioznosti niskog intenziteta. Na kraju šestodnevnog meditacijskog povlačenja podelio je sa mnom sreću zbog stanja mira u kojem se našao njegov um. Samo sat kasnije, tokom ručka, čula sam ga kako kao i obično ponovo gunđa kako je čitav ovaj svet u užasnom stanju. Pošto je po sopstvenom priznanju bio „zavisnik od medija“, odrastao u Njujorku, na dijetu sa medijima je pristao posle dosta premišljanja.

Tako je otkrio da je stanje njegovog uma dobro kada ujutro ustane i dok radi jutarnju meditaciju. Ali čim se ona završi, imao je naviku da dohvati šolju kafe i upali jutarnje vesti, „da vidim šta su kreteni opet sada zabrljali“. Tokom dijete sa medijima, na sopstveno čuđenje je otkrio da ako nije u toku sa najnovijim vestima, to i nije bilo toliko važno, bilo da je na poslu ili kod kuće. Međutim, u isto vreme je njegov um bio u mnogo mirnijem stanju, kao uostalom i njegova strpljiva supruga.

Jedna od poteškoća tokom ovakvog „povlačenja“ je naći neku aktivnost koja će ispuniti vreme obično utrošeno na medije. Možeš da meditiraš, prošetaš, igraš društvene igre sa svojom porodicom, skuvaš nešto za svoju dušu, pleviš u vrtu, fotografišeš, baviš se nekim umetničkim radom, učiš novi jezik, sviraš neki instrument ili jednostavno sediš na terasi i opuštaš se.

Može ti se učiniti da te to što ne znaš najnovije vesti čini inferiornom, lenjom ili glupom. Ljudi me nekad pitaju: „Šta ako se nešto važno dogodi, kao što je požar ili teroristički napad?“ Na to im odgovorim: „Ako je zaista važno, neko će te već obavestiti o tome“.

DUBLJE LEKCIJE

Prvih dvesta hiljada godina čovekove istorije bili smo izloženi vestima (i patnji) samo onih u našoj najbližoj okolini, u plemenu i selu. Gledali smo rođenje, bolest, smrt i ratove, ali sasvim ograničenih proporcija. Tek u poslednjih otprilike pola veka su mediji počeli da nam patnju čitavog sveta – ratovi, prirodne katastrofe, mučenja, glad – sipaju u uši i oči, dan za danom, dan za danom. Ta patnja za koju nismo u stanju da je izmenimo akumulira se u našem umu i srcu, pretvarajući nas u osobu koja pati. Kada naš um i srce postanu prepuni slika nasilja, razaranja i bola, moramo odvojiti neko vreme da ih ispraznimo.

Dijeta sa medijima je jedan od načina za to. (Meditacijsko povlačenje u tišini je još bolji.)

Zna se da ludi koji rade sa žrtvama nasilja pate od onoga što se naziva „sekundarna viktimizacija“. I oni su pogođeni tim nasiljem, iako samo slušaju o njemu, a nisu ga direktno doživeli. Od pronalaska televizora i večernjih vesti, svako do nas u određenoj meri pati od sekundarne viktimizacije, izazvane neprekidnom poplavom teških slika koje sa ekrana ulaze pravo u naš um – slike ubijanja, genocida, zemljotresa i katastrofalnih epidemija. Neprekidno bombardovanje stvara hroničnu anksioznost i čini nas potištenim. Ovaj svet je nesavršen, milioni nedužnih ljudi pate i mi ne možemo ništa da uradimo da to promenimo.

Ako nam pođe za rukom da smanjimo unos tih toksičnih slika, lakše će nam biti da izgradimo srce koje je otvoreno i um koji je miran i čist. To je najbolji temelj koji možemo imati ako poželimo da iskoračimo u svet i zaista načinimo neku pozitivnu promenu.

Zaključak: Kada neprekidno hranimo um negativnim vestima, on se od toga razboli. Daj svom umu dobar lek u vidu tišine, lepote i prijateljstva ispunjenog ljubavlju.

(Jan Chozen Bays: Kako krotiti divljeg slona i druge avanture sa svesnšću)

Calculation, hand gestures or something else…?

While translating Sippa sutta (Udana 9:3) today, I had a problem with the word muddāsippa in the list of crafts. After the search, I was even more confused by the various translations. So after half a day search, I came up with the following findings:

Sippa sutta (Udāna 3:9)
Ekacce evamāhaṃsu — “muddāsippaṃ sippānaṃ aggan”ti.

PTS:
Muddā (f.) [cp. (late?) Sk. mudrā] 1. a seal, stamp, impression; — rāja˚; the royal seal DhA i.21. Also with ref. to the State Seal at Miln 280, 281 in cpds. muddakāma (amacca) & mudda — paṭilābha.

2. the art of calculation mentioned as a noble craft (ukkaṭṭhaŋ sippaŋ) at Vin ;iv.7 (with gaṇanā & lekhā), as the first of the sippāni (with gaṇanā) at M ;i.85=Nd2 199 Further at Miln 3, 59, 78 sq., 178. Cp. BSk. mudrā in same sense (e. g. at Divy 3, 26, 58 in set lipyā, sankhyā gaṇanā, m.). Bdhgh’s expln of muddā D i.11 m.+gaṇanā (see DA i.95) as “hattha — muddā — gaṇanā is doubtful; since at Miln 78 sq. muddā & gaṇanā are two quite diff. things. See also Franke, ;Dīgha trsl. p. 18, with note (he marks muddā “Finger — Rechnen with?); and cp. Kern, Toev. i.166 s. v. muddā. The Dial. i.21 trsl. “counting on the fingers” (see Dial. i.21 22 with literature & more refs.). — ;hattha˚; is signlanguage gesture (lit. hand — arithmetic), a means of communicating (question & answer) by signs, as clearly evident fr. J ;vi.364 (hattha — muddāya naŋ pucchissāmi . . . muṭṭhiŋ akāsi, sā “ayaŋ me . . . pucchatiti ñatvā hatthaŋ vikāsesi, so ñatvā . . .; he then asks by word of mouth). — hattha — muddaŋ karoti to make a sign, to beckon J iii.528; cp. Vin v.163: na hatthavikāro kātabbo, na hattha — muddā dassetabbā.
— âdhikaraṇa the office of the keeper of the Privy Seal Chancellorship Miln 281.

Varous translations:
1. “In 3.9 occurs a list of crafts. The fifth is muddāsippa: communicating by gestures. The Commentary is of little help, merely adding ‘band gestures’. Woodward’s explanation of it as bargaining by signs or hand-touching employed by merchants is far-fetched and quite wrong according to the late l.B. Homer in a personal communication. Possibly it may have had a military significance as do the previous crafts, i.e. directing the course of the battle by signalling commands.” (John D. Ireland: “Notes on the Udāna”, Buddhist Studies Review, Vol. 9:2 [1992], p. 146).

2. “Finger-calculation-craft“. Also in the note 120: “The Commentary explains this as: hatthamuddāya gaṇanasippaṃ. See the article by Edgerton in BHSD, s.v. mudrā; and cf. also Divyāvadāna pp. 3, 26, etc.” (Anandajoti Bhikkhu: Udāna – Exalted Utterances, 2008 – online)

mudrā (In these mgs. not In Skt.), (1) (=Pall muddā., acc. to PTSD art of calculation; assoc. with ; acc. to DN comm. 1.95.19 hattha-muddā-gaṇanā., cf. Tib. below, while gaṇanā. Is acchiddaka-(q.v. CPD)-gaṇanā), some method of calculation, acc. to Tib. on LV (cf. DN comm. above) lag rtsls, hand-calculation, that is, presumably, figuring by using the fingers In some conventional way (Das renders this Tlb. lines or marks in the hands, palmistry, and so Burnouf on Divy 26.12 chiromancie, Introd. 237, but the regular context seems to disprove this); always in a list of arts learned by a young man, and associated with mathematical terms: between saṃkhyā and gaṇanā., LV 4.21; after saṃkhyā and gaṇanā, before dhāraṇā, Mv ii.423.15…” (Edgerton: Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Vol II, Dictionary, 1993.

3. “Signaling”. Also in the note: Reading muddā-sippaṃ with the Commentary. The Thai edition has muddha-sippam, which could mean phrenology, but that doesn’t fit in with the previous members of the list, all of which deal with military skills. (Bhikkhu Thanisaro: Sippa Sutta: Crafts – at Access to Insight site)

4. „The craft of gestures“ (Peter Masefeld: The Udāna, PTS 1997).

5. „Skill in conveyancing“* (D. M. Strong: The Udāna or the Solemn Utterances of the Buddha, Luzac, London 1902).

*conveyancing = the process of moving the legal ownership of property or land from one person to another. (Cambridge Dictionary – online)

6. “The craft of signs manual”** (F. L. Woodward: Verses of Uplift, PTS (1935).
Also in the note: “Muddā (secret gestures or grips). Comy. hatlha-muddāya gaṇasīsena sippaṃ. Cf MP. 3 n. 59, 78, where Rhys Davids trans. ‘conveyancing(!).’ I have heard palmistry suggested, but undoubtedly the ancient Indian practice of bargaining by signs is referred to. It is still done in Ceylon. I quote from the Times of Ceylon (August, 1930): ‘A gem transaction is never done by word of mouth. The dealer and the merchant, when negotiating for the purchase of a jewel, clasp each the other’s right hand under a handkerchief so that no one else in the room can discover what is being done. Offers for the gem are made by the merchant holding the joints of the dealer’s finger, a certain number of fingers, or tapping on his palm. Each action means a different sum, and when the transaction is over no one else is any the wiser as to the value of that gem. The merchant can then turn to another customer and possibly sell it for twice or trice the amount he paid the dealer for it.’ Cf also note p. 289 of Nānatiloka’s German trans. of Mil. Pañh.

As for the explanation in the commentary to Ud 3:9, hatthamuddāya gaṇanasippaṃ, I couldn’t figure out what that would exactly mean. Counting with the hand gestures!? What would be some real life situation? What has been counted by those gestures and for what purpose? And isn’t that the same as 7 and 8 in the list below, some kind of caltulation. So, it means there are three items which practically overlap. To much mathematics to me in such a short list.

This reminds me of translating gaddhabādhipubbo in MN 22, just for the sake of ahving some translation, as “formerly a vulture-trainer”!? Has anyone heard of training vultures? Therefore, it seems to me something doesn’t fit quite here.

So, let’s look again at the list:
1. hatthisippaṃ = the knowledge of elephant training
2. assasippaṃ = the knowledge of horse training
3. rathasippaṃ = the knowledge of driving (or making) chariot
4. dhanusippaṃ = the knowledge of archery
5. tharusippaṃ = the knowledge of swordsmanship
6. muddāsippaṃ = (Comm. “hatthamuddāya gaṇanasippaṃ”)
7. gaṇanāsippaṃ = the knowledge of counting
8. saṅkhānasippaṃ = the knowledge of calculation
9. lekhāsippaṃ = the knowledge of writing
10. kāveyyasippaṃ = the knowledge of poetry
11. lokāyatasippaṃ = the knowledge of natural philosophy
12. khattavijjāsippaṃ = the knowledge of governance.

It looks to me like twelve crafts which can be split into two groups: 1-6 about military and the 7-12 let’s say humanities.

Could it be that at the time of writing Commentaries some of the meanings of the word muddā were forgotten?

Od zemaljskog do kosmičkog Bude

Poznata je scena iz Mahaparinibbāna sutte kada Buda objavljuje da će za tri meseca umreti. Na to njegov lični pratilac Ānanda, potrešen zbog skorog gubitka voljenog učitelja, ode u stranu i zaplače. Kada čuje za to, Buda ga obodri da umesto naricanja snagu usmeri ka sopstvenom oslobođenju:

“Dosta je, Ananda! Ne tuži, ne nariči! Zar te nisam od samoga početka podučavao da sve što je drago i voljeno podložno je promeni, razdvajanju i raskidu? Za ono što je rođeno, nastalo, sastavljeno od različitih sastojaka i podložno propadanju kako neko može reći: ‘Neka se sačuva od propadanja!’? Tako nešto ne postoji. Dugo si vremena, Ananda, pomagao Tathāgati s ljubavlju u delu, reči i misli, skladno, plemenito, punog srca i preko svake mere. Velike su tvoje zasluge, Ananda! Sada treba da usmeriš svoju energiju i uskoro ćeš i ti biti oslobođen nečistoća.”

Dakle, sasvim jednostavno! Ne kukaj, već gledaj šta se u datoj situaciji najbolje može učiniti. I kasnije je Ānanda zaista učinio herojski napor i postao probuđen, nakon što ga je učitelj zauvek napustio. No, nismo svi Ānande, ne želimo svi da priznamo jednostavnu činjenicu da je i Buda obično ljudsko biće koje se rodi i neminovno umre. Želeli bismo nekako da Buda bude više od ljudskog bića, izvan zakona prolaznosti, jer, bože moj, on je ipak Buda! Kao da nam nije dovoljno to što je sam svojom snagom i mudrošću otkrio i ostavio nam u amanet kao svoje učenje, Dhammu. Takva želja dobila je svoj jasan izraz u mahayana budizmu, gde Buda sve manje i manje liči na istorijsku ličnost, a sve više na nekakvo božanstvo, koje nam se tek privremeno prikazalo kao obično ljudsko biće. U theravādi, Tathāgatha ili „onaj koji je stigao do istine“ podučava Dhammu i na kraju života dostiže potpuno utnuće (parinibbāna). Za njega s eposle toga strogo uzevši ne može reći da postoji, niti da ne postoji, niti i da u isto vreme i postoji i ne postoji, a isto tako ni da niti postoji, niti ne postoji. Sve ono što možemo reći jeste da on zauvek nestaje iz ovog kruga saṃsāre u kojem se vrtimo i u njega se više nikada neće vratiti.

Sa školama mahayana budizma je stvar potpuno drugačija. Pokušavajući da zadovolje žudnju sledbenika da nekako zauvek zadrže Učitelja kraj sebe, one razvijaju sliku Bude koji nastavlja da bude prisutan u ovom svetu i na neki način deluje u njemu, vođen beskrajnim saosećanjem. Precizno govoreći, njegova pozicija je negde između saṃsāre i nibbāne. To što su njegovi savremenici videli da se rodio nekakav Siddhattha Gotama i kasnije postao veliki učitelj samo je telo koje je Buda stvorio, takozvano „pojavno telo“ (nirmāṇa-kāya). U skladu sa indijskim teorijama o postojanju više „suptilnih“ tela, mahayana razvija još jedan sličan pojam manifestacije transcendentnog Bude, a to je „telo uživanja“ (samhoga-kāya). To je forma u kojoj se Buda manifestuje u nebeskim svetovima, gde podučava Dhammi druge bodhisattve ili napredne učenike koji su u stanju duboke meditacije. Treći i najviši oblik koji se naziva „telo učenja“ (dharma-kāya) i to je ono što Buda jeste „sam po sebi“. Ovaj kripitčan opis bi se mogao protumačiti tako da je veliko biće zapravo zbir (kāya) pročišćenih dobrih kvaliteta (dharma) koji sačinjavaju jednog Budu. No, počev od jedne od ranih mahayanskih škola, koja je nazvana yogacāra ili „praktikovanje yoge“, dharma-kāya se tumači kao krajnja istina stvari kakve jesu: večna, nepromenljiva istina kakvu uočavaju sve Bude, „takvost“ (tathatā). Bude u u ovom našem svetu, nirmāṇa-kāye, dolaze i prolaze, žive i umiru, kao što je to učinio i Gotama u petom veku pre naše ere. S druge strane, kosmički Bude ili samhoga-kāye provode nebrojene vremenske cikluse zvane kalpa podučavajući u svom nebeskom svetu, tzv. čistoj zemlji, i usput manifestujući se kao nirmāṇa-kāya iz milosrđa za nas ogrezle u materijalizmu. A šta rade dharma-kāye? PA, strogo uzevši, ne rade ništa. One su to što jesu ito im je dovoljno. A i nama.

Iz ovoga možemo izvući još jednu paralelu između theravāda i mahayāna budizma, a to je da je za ovaj prvi u svakom od vremenskih ciklusa nastajanja i nestajanja kroz koji prolazi ovaj naš svet moguće postojanje samo jednog Bude. U jednom trenutku istorije se pojavi neko ko otkrije „kakve stvari zaista jesu“, to saopšti onim koji su zainteresovani da ga čuju i pre ili kasnije okonča svoj ljudski život. Sa mahayānom stvari stoje radikalno drugačije kao što smo videli i otuda je u svakoj kalpi moguće postojanje bezbroj Buda, koji podučavaju svako u svojoj „čistoj zemlji“. Njima se pridružuje takođe čitava armija bodhisattvi, bića koja su na pragu probuđenja, ali ne žele da ga pređu dok ne pomognu i ostalim bićima da do njega stignu. Tako imamo čitav panteon nadnaravnih bića koja deluju i u ovom svetu: „nepomerljivi“ Aksobya Buda, „medicinski“ Buda Bhaisajya, Buda Amitābha „beskrajne svetlosti“, Avalotitešvara, Mañđušri ili bodhisattva mudrosti, „spasiteljica“ Tārā itd. itd. U skladu sa tim, mahayāna je razvila ogroman broj rituala iskazivanja poštovanja ovim bićima, naročito u školi čiste zemlje i u tibetanskom budizmu.

Eto tako, malo pomalo, od zemaljskog dođosmo do kosmičkog Bude. Dakle, ima za svakog ponešto, pa ko voli nek izvoli… †††

Ćattāri ariya-saććāni

U prvom govoru posle probuđenja, Buda je svoje učenje na pali jeziku (kojim je možda sam govorio ili je na njemu njegovo učenje kasnije zapisano) sažeo u jednu jedinu sintagmu: ćattāri ariya-saććāni. Šta bi to moglo da znači?

Ove dobro poznate reči se redovno prevode kao “četiri plemenite istine”. Očigledno ćattari je srodno našem „četiri“ i tu nema nekih većih problema. Dalje sledi složenica ariya-saććani, koja je sastavljena od ariya = „plemenit“ i saćća = „istina“, s tim što ovaj nastavak „-āni“ označava da se radi o množini imenice srednjeg roda. Dakle, kad sve sklopimo, više je nego očigledno da Buda govori o “četiri plemenite istine”, zar ne? Ne.

Tačnije, nije baš tako sigurno kao što se nama čini. Veliki pāli filolog K. R. Norman kaže da bi to zapravo bilo „najmanje verovatno“ značenje. Kao argument, navodi tumačenja ove sintagme u komentarima, gde se daje nekoliko mogućih značenja, a kao poslednje i otuda najmanje verovatno dato je upravo ovo koje mi redovno koristimo „plemenita istina“. Pre toga, kažu komentatori, sintagma može značiti: „istina plemenitog“, zatim „istina plemenitih“, pa „istina za plemenitog“, tj. istina koja će nekog učiniti plemenitim itd.

Da bismo se približili razumevanju, a pošto se radi o složenici, jasno je da moramo prvo raspakovati značenje svake od dve reči koje je čine, a onda utvrditi njihov međusobni odnos, kako bismo došli do najverovatnijeg značenja koje ovaj spoj ima. Pojam saćća (sansk. satya) u Kanonu se koristi u značenju „istina“, ali isto tako i kao „stvarnost“, ono što realno postoji. U nekim od upanišada koje su nastale pre Bude, kao što je recimo Bṛhadāraṇyaka (2.3), govori se o dva oblika Brahmana: sat, koji je smrtan, i tyam, koji je besmrtan. U daljem tekstu se implicira da je ovaj drugi ono „stvarno iza stvarnog (sayasya satyam iti), to jest da satya obuhvata čitavu stvarnost, koja je dvostruka po svojoj prirodi. Ovde takođe postoji veza sa sat, u značenju egzistencije.

Što se tiče značenja našeg pojma (ariya-) saćća iz Budinog prvog govora, više je razloga zašto je malo verovatno da on ovde znači „istina“. Prvo, u govoru je jasno rečeno da drugu ariya-saćća treba napustiti. Svakako da ne bismo želeli da napustimo „istinu“, ali bismo mogli poželeti da napustimo problematičnu „stvarnost“ ili „činjenicu“. Drugo, rečeno je da je Buda razumeo: „Ovo je dukkha ariya-saćća“, a ne „Ariya-saćća je: ‘Ovo je dukkha’“, što bi bila verovatnija formulacija da se na saćća misli kao na istinu, čiji je sadržaj izražen rečima koje su pod jednostrukim navodnicima. Dalje, jedina stvar koja može biti „istina“ jeste neki iskaz, tvrdnja, nešto izraženo rečima. Nešto što je rečeno o dukkha, makar samo „ovo je dukkha“, može biti istinito ili ne, ali dukkha sama po sebi može biti jedino istinska, verodostojna stvarnost ili činjenica. I to bio najbolji prevod za termin saćća.

Ostaje nam na kraju prvi deo složenice: arya. Kao imenica, on označava nekog ko je plemenit. U brahmanizmu je bio rezervisan za članove prve tri od ukupno četiri društvene klase i odnosio se na čistotu porekla i socijalnu superiornost. U budizmu ovaj pojam menja značenje i ukazuje na duhovnu pročišćenost od loših sadržaja uma kao što su zavist, mržnja, bes itd. Tako je Buda „plemenit“, kao i svi oni koju su postali delom ili potpuno probuđeni za činjenice života. Dakle, biti plemenit u budizmu postaje nešto što postižemo svojim trudom i istrajnošću, a ne pukim činom rođenja u određenoj klasi, kao u brahmanizmu. Dalje, kao pridev, ariya znači „plemenit“. Otuda se i za Budin put prakse, koji od običnih ljudi stvara plemenite, kaže da je i sam „plemenit“. I dok „istina“ može biti „plemenita“, situacija se menja kada saćća znači „činjenicu“ ili „realnost“. Jedna od ariya-saćća je i ona druga, koja govori o izvoru dukkhe. Buda kaže da njega treba napustiti, što naravno teško može biti „plemenito“. Na osnovu svega da se zaključiti da arya u ovom kontekstu najverovatnije označava nekog ko je „duhovno oplemenjen“, a ne da je saćća plemenita. Iz toga se nameće zaključak da bi sintagmu ariya-saćća bilo najpreciznije prevesti sa „istinska stvarnost za duhovno oplemenjenog“. Tako su četiri ariya-saćća najvažnije kategorije egzistencije, čiju punu važnost razume samo duhovno oplemenjena osoba. Naravno, ovo je jedan od mogućih gledanja na stvari, ali siguran sam da i “četiri plemenite istine” ostati i dalje u opticaju.

Magija žudnje

Žudnju je Buda na jednom mestu uporedio sa bojom koju sipamo u posudu sa vodom. Ona oboji tu vodu, umanji njenu prozirnost i da joj sasvim novi izgled. Slično je i sa žudnjom u tvom umu. Oboji ga, tako da neki predmeti koji su objekat pažnje dobiju privlačnost koju sami po sebi uopšte nemaju. Kada si opčinjen lepotom pojavnog, tada vidiš ono što hoćeš da vidiš, pre nego stvarnost. Vidiš iluziju da ti taj predmet, osoba ili situacija mogu doneti trajnu sreću. Nažalost, žudnja nikada ne rezultira takvom srećom. Čak i kada dobijemo to što želimo, osećaj zadovoljenosti je tako krhak i traje samo dotle dok se ne pojavi sledeća opsesivna želja ili žudnja. A ona se, kao što dobro znamo iz iskustva, pojavi vrlo, vrlo brzo.

A javlja se uvek kada neobuzdanu pažnju okreneš ka prijatnim osećajima, bilo da se radi o običnoj želji za parčetom torte, uživanju u muzičkoj predstavi ili sofisticiranoj razradi filozofskih ideja u našoj glavi. Tada te ona udaljuje od direktnog opažanja sadašnjeg iskustva i odvodi u svet nadanja i priželjkivanja. Um ispunjen žudnjom slep je za stvari kakve zaista jesu. Jer čula su negde drugde, u neprekidnoj potrazi za prijatnim podražajima, ostavljajući tako um bez zaštite. Da bi ga utvrdio, nije neophodno da promeniš to što vidiš, mirišeš, kušaš, čuješ, dodiruješ, nije nužno da oko sebe eliminišeš sve što je prijatno. Umesto toga, potrebna ti je kontrola nad sopstvenim reakcijama na ta prijatna iskustva, tako da ne reaguješ slepom žudnjom.

I šta konkretno možeš da uradiš u tom pravcu? Kreni od sasvim jednostavnih stvari. Recimo, razvij naviku da se tokom dana na svaki sat nakratko zaustaviš u svojim svakodnevnim aktivnostima. Ta kratka pauza treba da prekine uronjenost u dobro poznatu situaciju i pažnju okrene ka telu koje diše. Kakav je moj dah u ovom trenutku? Mogu i da osetim njegov smirujući efekat? Periodične pauze ove vrste u stanju su da zaustave bujicu uobičajenih žudnji koje ti malo-malo preplavljuju um, stvarajući tako onaj karakterističan osećaj zauzetosti: „Jao kad već pre prođe sat… dan… život!?“ Pauza ti vraća vreme koje u stvari imaš, izvlači te iz opsednutosti aktivnošću, produktivnošću, identitetom. Vraća ti slobodu da ponovo praviš izbor, umesto robotizovanog rada za pokretnom trakom. A izbor se sastoji u tome da kada se žudnja pojavi, možeš da je dovedeš u pitanje: Da li ja zaista želim tu stvar? Jeli ta situacija stabilna osnova za moju sreću? Koja je cena koju treba da platim za to, u vidu novca, vremena, napora održavanja statusa kvo, međusobnog sukobljavanja, zdravlja, samopoštovanja? Šta se dešava sa tom cenom na duže staze? Jesam li svestan da imam izbor da kažem „ne“?

Posmatrajući stvarnost iz te perspektive, možda ćeš doći do zaključka da zapravo ni ne želiš stvari za kojima žudiš. A ako se ne zaustaviš da bi sebi postavio neka od ovih ili sličnih pitanja, verovatno ćeš jednoga dana otkriti gomilu raznih, ni ne upotrebljenih drangulija u svom stanu ili drugu hrpu drangulija nagomilanih u svojoj glavi. Jer žudnja je takva, zgrabiće bilo šta joj se pojavi na vidiku samo da bi samu sebe održala – bilo šta ili bilo koga.

zaustavi se…

Zato je mudro da kroz periodična zaustavljanja tokom dana postaneš svestan već ranih znakova žudnje – onog inicijalnog zova ili sile koja ti pogled neprekidno skreće ka željenom objektu. Uoči tu razliku između sile žudnje i objekta ili opažaja koji ti je privlačan. Je li ta sila žudnje toliko prijatna koliko se nadaš da će biti iskustvo njenog objekta? Takođe, uoči da u trenutku ispunjavanja želje, žudnja već sledećeg momenta nestaje. Vrlo je važno ako uočiš razliku između ta dva događaja, koliko god ti se oni činili bliskim – dobijanje željenog i okončanje žudnje. Kada te dve stvari jasno vidiš, istraži svoje iskustvo kako bi odredio da li sreća dolazi od dobijanja toga što si želeo ili od okončanja žudnje. Da li postizanje toga što je bilo do malopre tako daleko čini sreću ili je možda tvoja sreća zapravo sreća olakšanja jer se više ne pečeš na vatri žudnje?

Posmatraj takođe žudnju koju osećaš sada. Za čime to ja žudim danas? Oseti kako te podbada i boji tvoj um čežnjom za nečim. Donesi svesnu odluku da napustiš tu čežnju. Ne upinji se da je nahraniš, jer ona je nezasita. To vrlo dobro znaš! Samo posmatraj šta se dešava kad odlučiš da je ostaviš za sobom i kreneš dalje. Kad jasno sebi predočiš da ćeš to za čime žudiš možda imati, a možda i nećeš. Da puvek postoje dve opcije, a ne samo jedna. Koja će se ostvariti zavisi od uslova koji ne zavise samo od tebe. Ali možeš li da se potom fokusiraš na olakšanje koje to napuštanje opsednutosti donosi, umesto da se beskrajno vraćaš na ono: „Da, ali ipak…“?