Analysis of the Posture for Meditation

Analysis of the Posture for Meditation

Question: The posture for the purpose of meditation has been described as “ nisidati pallamkam abujithwa…’ in the Sathipattana Sutta. According to the Sutta, one has to sit in the lotus position with the body irect and keep the mindfulness in front. What I do not understand is how a person without an upright spine or other spinal distortions manages to proceed with the meditation? Could you kindly elaborate on this Venerable Sir.

Answer: This is a very good question. Meditators need to be fully aware of the real meaning behind these references in the Sutta if they want to reap expected benefits.

In the Sutta, a particular sitting position is reffered to as “ nisidati pallamkam …”. Why is it? The society in this particular era was full of healthy, noble practices. Healthy practices prevalent in this society were referred to as “ good postures”. The Yogi sage Patanjali talked about postures first. Good body positions were meant to be “good postures “, as those helped achieve expectations of life, in the ancient time. In this background, the lotus position was considered to be an ideal posture for promoting health. This posture promoted blood circulation within the body smoothly. As an initial step to mediation practice, the lotus posture was recommended as the ideal sitting position at the outset. However, the Buddha had not recommended the lotus posture as the only position for meditation practice. The Buddha advocated that meditation could be practiced in any posture, viz; sitting, walking, standing and lying. Meditation practice was initiated with the help of the lotus posture.

Then, we need to talk about the meaning behind the verse “ ujum kayam panidhaya…”. The common understanding about this verse is to “keep the body erect”. The misinterpretation of the word “kaya”, in terms of conventional meaning, has led to a confusion. The functional meaning of the word “kaya” is “action” . As the body consists of numerous actions, overall actions were referred to as “body” (kaya). “kaya” means the action of the mind. When we take physical bodies, they have different configurations. Some have erect spines; some have crooked spines; some are born with distorted bodies. If this is the case, persons with crooked spines, distorted bodies are not in a position to practice meditation, as they do not conform to the prerequisite of maintaining an erect, upright body position during meditation. In these circumstances, could we assume that the Buddha had recommended an upright body position for meditation practice? Could there be any inconsistencies in the Sathipattana Sutta in this regard? Certainly not. Therefore, “ujum kayam” refers only to “maintaining an upright position with regard the “mental action”. What is meant by the “action of the mind”? The main purpose of a meditator is to abandon defilements from the mind. The mind should be directed towards this purpose. So, action of the mind should be “upright” in order to achieve the purpose of suppressing defilements. All attempts at suppression of suffering from the mind should be upright. Meditator’s verbal, physical and mental action should be conducted without defilements in a straight forward manner. These should not be half-hearted actions. The meditator has to be vigilant to ensure that the action of the mind takes place for the only purpose of suppressing defilements. The ultimate meaning of the phrase “ujum kayam”, therefore, is the action of the mind. So, one can maintain this “upright state of the mind” while sitting, standing, walking and lying.

Then, let’s take the section of “ parimukam sathim upattethva…”, meaning keeping mindfulness at the front. As no specific location has been mentioned, the general tendency is to fix the mindfulness at the tip of the nose. This is a grave situation. This is contrary to what the Buddha had taught. Mindfulness means observing the mind. The Buddha meant arousing, awaking the mind for the purpose of observing the action of mind, with the phrase parimukam sathim upattethva. So, in this case a meditator needs to awaken the mind to observe the mind which is associated with the action of breathing and breathing out. Breathing is a spontaneous action. A meditator should awaken his mind to observe this spontaneous action, making sure that his observation is taking place without attachment or aversion. The objective should be to ensure that observation of the action of the mind is taking place in an upright manner, devoid of defilements. When a meditator  proceed with the action of observing the mind in this manner, until appropriate conditions are met internally, he begins to experience blissful mental states. When the meditator experiences these blissful mental states, he begins to realize this to be the rightful, true meditation technique, if one expects real bliss in this life.

Also, in terms of the verse “so satova assasati sato passasati...”, in and out breathing should come under the radar of mindfulness. Mindfulness should occupy throughout the process of natural in and out breathing. When this is possible, a meditator is able to watch the mind, devoid of any attachment or aversion. If a mediator attempts to watch the breath with mindfulness, that may imply the need for conscious breathing followed by mindfulness. This is a misconception. Breathing is a natural, spontaneous process for which we have no direct control. So, we need to follow the scientific method taught by the Buddha in this respect. Some meditators tend to manipulate the process of breathing in order to establish mindfulness on in and out breathing. Certain occasions these improper practices have led to sickness such as abdominal discomfort and bloating. I hope this description would clear most of your uncertainties with regard to anapana sati meditation.