1.3.3. Cittānupassanā–Contemplation of the Mind

[Full title: The four foundations of mindfulness (cattaro satipaṭṭhāna)—(3): Cittānupassanā–Contemplation of the Mind]

The third satipaṭṭhāna practice shifts the focus of mindfulness from feelings to the mind. The instructions for the contemplation of the mind are as follows:

"He knows a lustful mind to be ‘lustful', and a mind without lust to be ‘without lust';
he knows an angry mind to be ‘angry', and a mind without anger to be ‘without anger';
he knows a deluded mind to be ‘deluded', and an undeluded mind to be ‘undeluded';
he knows a contracted mind to be ‘contracted', and a distracted mind to be ‘distracted';
he knows a great mind to be ‘great', and a narrow mind to be ‘narrow';
he knows a surpassable mind to be ‘surpassable', and an unsurpassable mind to be ‘unsurpassable';
he knows a concentrated mind to be ‘concentrated', and an unconcentrated mind to be ‘unconcentrated';
he knows a liberated mind to be ‘liberated', and an unliberated mind to be ‘unliberated.'"^[1]

The first three mental states listed in the satipaṭṭhāna instruction are lust (rāga), anger (dosa), and delusion (moha), the three main roots of all unwholesome mental events.^[2] The basic principle underlying contemplation of these three unwholesome roots, and also the more evolved stages of contemplation of feeling concerned with worldliness and unworldliness, is the ability to clearly distinguish between what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. Systematic development of this ability nurtures an intuitive ethical sensitivity which constitutes an important asset for one's progress on the path and a sure guide to proper conduct in daily life.

The Satipaṭṭhāna sutta presentseach of these three ‘roots' together with its respective opposite, the absence of lust, aversion, or delusion. This way of presentation is common in canonical usage, allowing the negative term to cover not only the opposite notion, but also to imply a wider range of meaning.^[3] Thus ‘non-anger', for example, could be just a state of mind free from irritation, but also a mind overflowing with loving kindness.

During actual meditation, each of these three unwholesome roots can subjectively manifest in a distinct manner: The fever of lust is comparable to being on fire within, the physical tension of anger to being overpowered and controlled by a forceful opponent, and the confusion of delusion to being hopelessly entangled in a net.^[4]

Several discourses refer to a tranquil state of mind, temporarily unaffected by any hindrance or mental defilement, as ‘luminous'.^[5] This luminous condition of the mind is its naturally undefiled state, since the defiling hindrances are specified as being ‘adventitious'.^[6] According to a passage in the Aṅguttara Nikāya, to come to know this luminous nature of the mind is a necessary requirement for mental development (cittabhāvanā).^[7] Thus, a possible way of putting the satipaṭṭhāna instructions regarding the absence of thethree root defilements into practice is to turn awareness to the mind's luminous condition, temporarily free from any defilement.^[8]

Taken in a more absolute sense, the mind unaffected by lust, anger, and delusion refers to the mind of an arahant.^[9] This indicates that contemplation of the mind is not only concerned with momentary states of mind, but also with the overall condition of the mind. In this way, to contemplate mind unaffected by lust, anger, or delusion, includes also awareness of the degree to which these three unwhole-some roots are no longer ‘rooted' in one's mental continuum.^[10]

The two mental states listed next for contemplation, contracted (saṃkhitta) and distracted (vikkhitta), both appear to have negative implications.^[11] The same two terms occur elsewhere, with inward ‘contraction' being the result of sloth and torpor, and external ‘distraction' the outcome of pursuing sensual pleasures.^[12] The commentaries on the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta indeed relate the ‘contracted' state of mind to sloth and torpor, while according to them the ‘distracted' mental state stands for restlessness.^[13]

The ability to balance the mind, by avoiding both ‘contraction' and ‘distraction', is an important skill required for the development of deeper levels of concentration or insight. The placing of these two mental states at this point in the instructions for contemplation of the mind points to the need to cultivate such balance, once one has at least temporarily moved beyond the reach of the unwholesome roots and is aiming towards the development of ‘higher' states of mind, such as are described in the remaining part of this satipaṭṭhāna.

The discourses often use the qualification ‘great' (mahaggata) in the context of tranquillity meditation, such as when describing the meditative practice of radiating the four divine abodes (brahmavihāra) in all directions.^[14] Similarly, in the Anuruddha Sutta ‘great' represents the ability to specially pervade a broad area with one's meditation object, in this case as the result of kasiṇa meditation.^[15] These instances support the commentarial explanation of this part of the satipaṭṭhāna instructions, according to which a ‘great' state of mind (mahaggata) is related to the development of absorption.^[16]

The same commentaries relate the next mental state mentioned for contemplation of the mind, the ‘surpassable' (sauttara) state of mind, also to the development of concentration.^[17] ‘Surpassable' then indicates the need to clearly recognise the constituents of a particular level of absorption to be overcome in order to proceed to a higher level of absorption.^[18] This finds support in the Sekha Sutta, which refers to the fourth absorption as a state of ‘unsurpassable' equanimity and mindfulness.^[19] On the other hand, in the discourses ‘unsurpassable' occurs frequently in relation to full awakening.^[20] Understood in this way, the present set of terms also includes the reviewing knowledge after realisation, when one investigate to which degree, ‘surpassable' or ‘unsurpassable', the mind has been freed from fetters and mental defilements.

The next term in the series, the ‘concentrated' (samāhita) state of mind, is self-explanatory. According to the commentaries, this expression includes access concentration and full absorption.^[21] Since in the discourses samādhi refers to concentration in the context of both the development of tranquillity and of insight, the expression ‘concentrated' mind has a fairly broad range of reference.

The qualification ‘liberated' (vimutta) frequently occurs in the discourses in relation to full awakening.^[22] Understood in this way, the ‘liberated' mind parallels the ‘unsurpassable mind' and the mind which is forever ‘without lust', ‘without anger', and ‘without delusion', all these being references to full awakening.^[23] The commentaries also relate the qualification ‘liberated' to temporary freedom from defilements during the practice of insight meditation.^[24] Elsewhere in the discourses the expression ‘liberated' mind occurs as well in relation to the development of concentration, as ‘freedom of the mind' (cetovimutti).^[25] Thus the ‘liberated' mind can be taken to refer to experiences of mental ‘freedom' in relation to both tranquillity and insight.

The objects for contemplation of mind are composed of sixteen types of minds, and their scope ranges from unwholesome to wholesome states. According to the Majjhimanikāya commentary, all these minds are mundane, and none of them is concerned with supramundane attain-ments such as the “path” (magga) and “fruit” (phala).^[26] Some of the types of minds listed above are not self-explanatory and require further clarification. According to the Majjhimanikāya comm.entary, a contracted mind (saṅk-hitta-citta) is a mind connected with sloth and torpor. Both the exalted mind (mahaggata-citta) and unsurpassable mind (anuttara-citta) refer to the mind in the form and formless spheres. A surpassable mind (sa-uttara-citta) refers to a mind in sensual sphere. The concentra-ted mind (samāhita-citta) is the mind of absorption concentration (appanā-samādhi) or access concentration (upacārasamādhi). The liberated mind (vipassanā-citta) is the mind that is liberated temporarily through insight knowledge or samatha jhāna.

Like the second satipaṭṭhāna, the contemplation of the mind comprises of continuous bare awareness to whatever mental state arises in the present moment. The practitioner is supposed to have no desire to either maintain the mental phenomena when they are agreeable or change them when they are disagreeable. The purpose of the bare awareness of the types of minds is simply to know their true natures as they really are. This feature of bare awareness can be better understood by contrasting it with other meditative methods in terms of the strategy of dealing with any arisen unwholesome states of mind. In the Vitakkasaṇṭhāna Sutta,^[27] the Buddha teaches five practical methods to remove any distracting unwholesome thoughts. Accordingly, if unwholesome thoughts connected with lust, hatred, and delusion arise due to certain causes (nimitta), the first antidote is to shift one’s attention to other causes that can lead to wholesomeness (such as samatha meditation subjects). If this first antidote does not work, then the second antidote should be applied, in which one reflects on the dangers of the arisen unwholesome thoughts. If this fails again, then the third antidote is to ignore these unwholesome thoughts by purposely forgetting them and giving them no attention. If the third method fails, the recommendded fourth antidote is to remove the cause of these thoughts. If it fails again and the unwholesome thoughts persist, the last resort is to “crush the mind with the mind” with teeth clenched and tongue pressed against the roof of mouth. The purpose of these five methods is to forcibly remove the unwholesome states of mind and to make the mind steady and concentrated; understanding the true nature of these unwholesome states of mind is not the concern of these methods. Although these five methods do not belong to the technique of contemplation of the mind proper, meditators can employ them occasionally as a complementary technique to satipaṭṭhāna practice in order to overcome those strong and persistent distracting unwholesome thoughts when their mindfulness and concentration are still weak.

In practicing the contemplation of the mind, meditators first come to realize various individual characteristics (sabhāvalakkhaṇa) of their minds: for example, some are with lust, hatred, or delusion; while some are concentrated and others are not. When the practice becomes mature, meditators, as the formula of the Satipaṭṭhāna sutta points out, come to realize the arising and passing away of these various minds.^[28] Knowing through personal experience that even minds of high spiritual value, such as a concentrated or liberated mind are arising and passing away leads meditators necessarily to a deep conviction of the Buddha’s teachings on the law of impermanence. There are many suttas in the Majjhima Nikāya,^[29] showing that meditators come to see the nature of impermanence in the mental phenomena in the form-sphere or formless jhāna experience. According to the Visuddhimagga, meditators can experience even the passing away of the mind of insight knowledge (vipassanā-citta) when they progress to the stage of the “knowledge of dissolution” (bhaṅga-ñāṇa) at least.^[30] In the discussion on the fourth satipaṭṭhāna below, this topic on the contemplation of minds will be further explored in terms of the specific sets of wholesome or unwholesome minds.

The same sixteen types of minds listed in the Satipaṭṭhāna sutta are also given in the suttas describing the supernormal power of reading another person’s mind.^[31] The way in which one with such supernormal power discerns another’s mind as described in the suttas seems near identical to the way in which one practices the contemplation of mind as described in the Satipaṭṭhāna sutta. This suggests that if one intends to contemplate another’s mind through personal experience, one must develop the supernormal power of reading another’s mind, which is attainable only after one masters the form-sphere jhānas.^[32] However, to reads another’s mind through supernormal power is apparently not a kind of specialty that is accessible to the majority of the Buddha’s disciples. More importantly, knowing another’s mind does not seem to be the purpose of the third satipaṭṭhāna practice, as the following words of the Buddha from the Aṅguttara Nikāya suggest: “Bhikkhu, if a bhikkhu is not skilled in the course of another’s mind, [he should resolve]: ‘I will be skilled in the course of my own mind’. Thus, bhikkhus, should you train yourselves”.^[33] Considered thus, experiencing and knowing anothers’ mind as it really is might not be a compulsory practice. It is only understanding of one’s own mind that can be seen as the requirement to be met by all meditators who want to succeed in practising the contemplation of mind.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

MN I, p. 59

[2]:

Taking rāga as a synonym for lobha. A detailed exposition of the three roots can be found in Nyaṇapoṇika: Good and Evil.

[3]:

Khantipālo: Calm and Insight, p 38.

[4]:

Dhp 251:.

[5]:

SN V, p. 92; AN I, p. 10; AN 3, p. 16

[6]:

AN I, p. 10

[7]:

AN I, p. 10

[8]:

AN I, p. 10

[9]:

MN I, p. 5; MN I, p. 236; SN I, p. 220;

[10]:

AN IV, p. 404

[11]:

Ja I, p. 82; Goenka, Satipaṭṭhāna, p. 5,

[12]:

SN V, p. 279; AN IV, p. 32

[13]:

MA I, p. 280; SN V, p. 279; MN III, p. 225; AN 5, p. 147

[14]:

MN II, p. 207

[15]:

MN III, p. 146

[16]:

MA I, p. 280

[17]:

MA I, p. 280; U Sãlananda, Four Foundations of Mindfulness, p. 94,

[18]:

MN I, p. 455

[19]:

MN I, p. 357

[20]:

DN II, p. 83; SN I, p. 124; AN I, p. 168; Th, p. 415

[21]:

MA I, p. 280

[22]:

MN I, p. 141; SN III, p. 45; Ud, p. 24; It, p. 33

[23]:

DN I, p. 84; MN I, p. 235; SN I 105

[24]:

MA I, p. 280; SN V, p. 157

[25]:

MN I, p. 296; AN III, p. 16

[26]:

MA I, p. 279: idha ekapadepi lokuttaraṃ na labbhati.

[27]:

MN 20/I, p. 118–122

[28]:

SA II, p, 99: SA I, p. 219:

[29]:

MN, 52, 64

[30]:

Vism, p. 641-42

[31]:

DN I, p. 79–80; MN I, p. 34; SN II, p. 121–22; AN III, p. 280–81

[32]:

SN, p. 52:12–14, 22–23

[33]:

AN V, p. 92, 96, 98