Metaphor of the butcher and satipatthana

RobertK · March 2, 2023, 3:04am

I cited this sutta and a friend at dhammawheel had some great questions about it (see next post).
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html#modes

"And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu reflects on just this body according as it is placed or disposed, by way of the modes of materiality, thinking thus: ‘There are in this body the mode of solidity, the mode of cohesion, the mode of caloricity, and the mode of oscillation.’

"O bhikkhus, in whatever manner, a clever cow-butcher or a cow-butcher’s apprentice, having slaughtered a cow and divided it by way of portions, should be sitting at the junction of a four-cross-road; in the same manner, a bhikkhu reflects on just this body, according as it is placed or disposed, by way of the modes of materiality, thinking thus: ‘There are in this body the mode of solidity, the mode of cohesion, the mode of caloricity, and the mode of oscillation.’

"Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally… and clings to naught in the world

RobertK · March 2, 2023, 3:08am

nirodh27: If I use the butcher approach, so the deconstruction per se, how does it brings dispassion and foster non-clinging? In your experience how it happens? Seeing arising and ceasing by itself moves something? You see impermanence as a very subtle level. How does that helps non-clinging in your words? Imagine that you meditate for 2 months seeing the rupakalapas arise and cease all the time like a good butcher and you see of course the arising and ceasing. When you return to normal experience, what have you actually abandoned? What clinging you have removed? Was the clinging there at that level before?

Robert: The development of satipatthana/wisdom/vipassana , as I see it, runs along with the perception of anatta. And the theory (pariyatti) and direct experience (pattipati) support each other.
Regarding the butchering here is another sutta… I quote half of it below, but it is worthy of reading fully again and again (IMO).
https://suttacentral.net/mn146/en/bodhi … ight=false
Majjhima Nikāya
146. Advice from Nandaka

the venerable Nandaka told the bhikkhunīs:
.”
“Sisters, what do you think? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?” —“Impermanent, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, venerable sir.”

“Sisters, what do you think? Is the ear….the nose…the tongue…the body…the mind permanent or impermanent?”—“Impermanent, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because, venerable sir, we have already seen this well as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘These six internal bases are impermanent.’”

“Good, good, sisters! So it is with a noble disciple who sees this as it actually is with proper wisdom.

“Sisters, what do you think? Are forms…sounds…odours… flavours…tangibles…mind-objects permanent or impermanent?” —“Impermanent, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because, venerable sir, we have already seen this well as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘These six external bases are impermanent.’”

“Good, good, sisters! So it is with a noble disciple who sees this as it actually is with proper wisdom.

“Sisters, what do you think? Is eye-consciousness… … ear-consciousness…nose-consciousness…tongue-consciousness… body-consciousness…mind-consciousness permanent or impermanent?” —“Impermanent, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, venerable sir.”— “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because, venerable sir, we have already seen this well as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘These six classes of consciousness are impermanent.’”

“Sisters, suppose a skilled butcher or his apprentice were to kill a cow and carve it up with a sharp butcher’s knife. Without damaging the inner mass of flesh and without damaging the outer hide, he would cut, sever, and carve away the inner tendons, sinews, and ligaments with the sharp butcher’s knife. Then having cut, severed, and carved all this away, he would remove the outer hide and cover the cow again with that same hide. Would he be speaking rightly if he were to say: ‘This cow is joined to this hide just as it was before’?”

“No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because if that skilled butcher or his apprentice were to kill a cow…and cut, sever, and carve all that away, even though he covers the cow again with that same hide and says: ‘This cow is joined to this hide just as it was before,’ that cow would still be disjoined from that hide.”

Robert: Notice how some of the elements mentioned are material and some mental. But all are stressed as being impermanent and not self.
The way, as I see it, is breaking down what we took as some THING, into what is really present. And what is present is merely these elements. Without the Dhamma we are always immersed in a world of concepts, things that seem to last.

And the realities the concepts are based on are entirely ephemeral and conditioned- they are insignificant.

So the concepts are unreal and even the realities are almost nothing. This theory gradually sinks in and one can see, occasionally, how life is really exactly that, and only that.

nirodh27: Seeing arising and ceasing by itself moves something? You see impermanence as a very subtle level. How does that helps non-clinging in your words?

For example, some problem arises . Knowing that the ‘world’ as it were, has already fallen away, gone, how can there be the same level of attachment/aversion.
It can be seen that it is only the thinking about the issue that causes the unpleasant feeling, it becomes hard to take things too seriously.

bksubhuti · March 2, 2023, 5:23am

@RobertK try to explain why you posted this and if it is a previous discussion, try (if allowed) to post a single instead of two post … then the following Reponses can be responses.

Nripendra · January 6, 2024, 10:03am

How to do anicca-dassana?
How to do dukkha-dassana?
How to do anatta-dassana?

RobertK · January 6, 2024, 11:41am

This is the same as developing anattā-saññā and the others (dukkha and anicca). It is the development of satipatthana, vipassana and the noble eight-fold path.

Let’s look at the satipatthana sutta. Take the phrase: Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati "When he is going (a bhikkhu) understands: ‘I am going.’"

But how does this become the development of anattā-saññā?
the Commentary:

In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness.

So satipatthana is all about the developing of anattā-saññā.

But the knowledge of this meditator sheds the belief in a living being, knocks out the idea of a soul, and is both a subject of meditation and the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness.

Indeed, who goes, whose going is it, on what account is this going? These words refer to the knowledge of the (act of) going (the mode of deportment) of the meditating bhikkhu.

In the elucidation of these questions the following is said: Who goes? No living being or person whatsoever. Whose going is it? Not the going of any living being or person. On account of what does the going take place? On account of the diffusion of the process of oscillation born of mental activity. Because of that this yogi knows thus: If there arises the thought, “I shall go,” that thought produces the process of oscillation; the process of oscillation produces expression (the bodily movement which indicates going and so forth). The moving on of the whole body through the diffusion of the process of oscillation is called going. The same is the method of exposition as regards the other postures: standing and so forth. There, too, the yogi knows thus: If there arises the thought, “I shall stand,” that thought produces the process of oscillation. The process of oscillation produces bodily expression. The raising upright of the whole body from below owing to the diffusion of the process of oscillation is called standing. If there arises the thought “I shall sit,” that thought produces the process of oscillation. The process of oscillation produces bodily expression. The bending of the lower part of the body and the raising upright of the upper part of the body owing to the diffusion of the process of oscillation is called sitting. If there arises the thought, “I shall lie down,” that thought produces the process of oscillation. The process of oscillation produces bodily expression. The straightening or the spreading of the whole body horizontally or across, owing to the diffusion of the process of oscillation, is called lying down.

so whatever we do or don’t do is simply a process of mentality and materiality.
It all starts by studying and considering and graduallly the perception of anatta seeps in. It can’t really be hurried.
Just by reading this there is a little bit of understanding accumulating now… and that works its way.