Questions on Abhidhamma (Bikkhu Bodhi)

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
Expedient Means
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:54 pm

Re: Questions on Abhidhamma (Bikkhu Bodhi)

Post by Expedient Means »

subaru wrote:Thanks for the post. :anjali:

I am not aware there are differences in the descriptions of Jhana in the Sutta vs Vism

Time to hit the books again..
Hi Subaru, I should have maybe been a little more clear. What I meant by instructions/descriptions were actually rather leaning more towards "instructions" seen as they have different descriptions on how to access jhana. After having a little read through the jhana debate sticky too, it seems some people incl. teachers, believe Sutta jhanas and Visuddhimagga jhanas differ in depth, which also contributed to my comment of "different descriptions".

You've probably seen it already, but here is the debate thread.

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=4597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Expedient Means
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:54 pm

Re: Questions on Abhidhamma (Bikkhu Bodhi)

Post by Expedient Means »

robertk wrote:Woul
d you agree that both jhana described in the Suttas and Visuddhimagga, regardless of their "depth" are both true/real jhana?
As subaro suggested, there is no difference beween mundane jhana in the visuddhimagga and the suttas. The ancient Commentaries - atthakatha- are merely the elucidators of the Buddha's word. They don't add any new concepts but do explain difficult aspects and give background to the pithy explanations in the Tipitaka.
This is exactly what I thought initially and is the reason I became a little confused after reading that people consider the jhanas "different" especially in terms of depth. Anyway, like I said earlier, the debate itself has its own thread :)

Thank you all who have contributed for your answers, its lead me into lost of new avenues. The answer I have derived myself from all the responses regarding what "real" jhana is that described exactly in the Suttas:

"There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters and remains in the first jhana: rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought and evaluation. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal.

If there are any deviations from this such as "talking in jhana" like the teacher Rob cited had claimed, then it is likely not a jhanic state.

Thanks
:anjali:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Questions on Abhidhamma (Bikkhu Bodhi)

Post by mikenz66 »

robertk wrote:Woul
d you agree that both jhana described in the Suttas and Visuddhimagga, regardless of their "depth" are both true/real jhana?
As subaro suggested, there is no difference beween mundane jhana in the visuddhimagga and the suttas. The ancient Commentaries - atthakatha- are merely the elucidators of the Buddha's word. They don't add any new concepts but do explain difficult aspects and give background to the pithy explanations in the Tipitaka.
I would have to disagree here. I don't think that the commentaries contradict the Tipitika. However, there are certainly many Pali terms in the commentaries that don't appear in the Tipitika, or are used differently. See, for example, Nyanatiloka's Appendix to his Buddhist Dictionary: http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... append.htm. Failure to appreciate these changes is one reason why people see more contradiction than is actually the case.

My understanding is that there are some key concepts that are prominent in later texts, but do not appear in the Tipitika, or in a far less developed form. For example, the minute division of experience into mind moments. One presumes that this analysis is based in the experience of skilled practitioners.

I emphasise that what I am saying is not a criticism of the ancient commentaries, but an effort to keep straight what is an isn't the word of the Buddha in the context of Classical Theravada. The ancient commentators compiled extremely useful practical advice and analysis, based on the experience of many practitioners, as we can see by the very detailed instructions in the Visuddhimagga.

There was certainly a development in the terminology of states leading up to jhana (access concentration for example). Whether the concept of what was "really jhana" also evolved is an interesting question, but possibly one better explored elsewhere.

:anjali:
Mike
Expedient Means
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:54 pm

Re: Questions on Abhidhamma (Bikkhu Bodhi)

Post by Expedient Means »

Hi everyone, I have another question regarding the rebirth consciousness.

Is it possible for a being to be born with, say, wisdom and non greed with tendencies of hate or wisdom and non hate with tendencies of greed? As far as I'm aware the double rooted consciousness never contains wisdom, which is always reserved for the triple rooted.
While on these lines, I'd just like a little more clarity on wisdom in this context. Is it to be born with the ability to understand the dhamma easily or is it to be born already seeing dhamma concepts naturally without this needing to be aroused? ( in a mundane sense of course).

Thank you :anjali:
Post Reply