The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
perkele
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by perkele »

Cittasanto wrote:if one considers that this is more visudhimagga than sutta, and that the sutta's sugest that it isn't quite as strong... the claim does fall flat on it's face.
Excuse me. I have difficulty interpreting this statement. It's more Visuddhimagga than Sutta, the Pa Auk teachings, yes. What do you mean with "the suttas suggest that it isn't quite as strong"? What is not quite as strong?
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by Cittasanto »

perkele wrote:
Cittasanto wrote: if one considers that this is more visudhimagga than sutta, and that the sutta's sugest that it isn't quite as strong... the claim does fall flat on it's face.
Excuse me. I have difficulty interpreting this statement. It's more Visuddhimagga than Sutta, the Pa Auk teachings, yes. What do you mean with "the suttas suggest that it isn't quite as strong"? What is not quite as strong?
sorry
If one considers that the basis of the Pa Auk system and description of Jhana is the Visudhimagga rather than the Sutta's. And that the Sutta's Jhanas aren't considered to be as strong as the Visudhimagga's jhanas.
not that they are not powerful... but that it could be argued that the visudhimagga raises the level of focus... up one level from the Sutta's.
Is that clearer.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
perkele
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by perkele »

Cittasanto wrote:
perkele wrote:
Cittasanto wrote: if one considers that this is more visudhimagga than sutta, and that the sutta's sugest that it isn't quite as strong... the claim does fall flat on it's face.
Excuse me. I have difficulty interpreting this statement. It's more Visuddhimagga than Sutta, the Pa Auk teachings, yes. What do you mean with "the suttas suggest that it isn't quite as strong"? What is not quite as strong?
sorry
If one considers that the basis of the Pa Auk system and description of Jhana is the Visudhimagga rather than the Sutta's. And that the Sutta's Jhanas aren't considered to be as strong as the Visudhimagga's jhanas.
not that they are not powerful... but that it could be argued that the visudhimagga raises the level of focus... up one level from the Sutta's.
Is that clearer.
Okay. I understand now what you were talking about (I think).
But I don't see it that way. I don't see in how far the "Visuddhi Magga jhanas" are supposed to be stronger than the "Sutta jhanas". I think the descriptions in the Visuddhi Magga are just more detailed. Might it not be that that is really all there is to it? A stronger definition doesn't necessary make for a stronger object of definition. The Visuddhi Magga definitions may just be a bit redundant and over-determined, because the people got too doubtful otherwise. They were more comfortable with more details they could check to see if they were really on to it. And so these definitions were elaborated upon by people who knew the jhanas, just to give those who wanted to learn them more points of orientation, although the sutta definitions would point to exactly the same state if one was really on to it. But I have no experience to relate to. So these are just my speculations.
However, to come back to the argument you provided, how would the idea that the jhanas as defined in the Visuddhi Magga are stronger than as defined in the Suttas make those claims to having reached jhanas as defined in the Visuddhi Magga invalid, in the sense that they are not "genuine" jhana as defined in the Suttas? If the Visuddhi Magga definition was assumed to be weaker than the "genuine" jhana as defined in the Suttas, then this argument would make sense. But this way around it doesn't. Or have I missed the point and you meant the opposite of what I interpreted?
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by Cittasanto »

perkele wrote: Okay. I understand now what you were talking about (I think).
But I don't see it that way. I don't see in how far the "Visuddhi Magga jhanas" are supposed to be stronger than the "Sutta jhanas". I think the descriptions in the Visuddhi Magga are just more detailed. Might it not be that that is really all there is to it? A stronger definition doesn't necessary make for a stronger object of definition. The Visuddhi Magga definitions may just be a bit redundant and over-determined, because the people got too doubtful otherwise. They were more comfortable with more details they could check to see if they were really on to it. And so these definitions were elaborated upon by people who knew the jhanas, just to give those who wanted to learn them more points of orientation, although the sutta definitions would point to exactly the same state if one was really on to it. But I have no experience to relate to. So these are just my speculations.
However, to come back to the argument you provided, how would the idea that the jhanas as defined in the Visuddhi Magga are stronger than as defined in the Suttas make those claims to having reached jhanas as defined in the Visuddhi Magga invalid, in the sense that they are not "genuine" jhana as defined in the Suttas? If the Visuddhi Magga definition was assumed to be weaker than the "genuine" jhana as defined in the Suttas, then this argument would make sense. But this way around it doesn't. Or have I missed the point and you meant the opposite of what I interpreted?
Personally I do not practice by-way-of the Visudhimagga, so I am relying on teachers such as Leigh Brasington and others who are more experienced in the different ways for the comparison. But I do see your point and to an extent agree.
But my point was in agreeing with what you said, the claim that the Jhanas can not be mastered... any-more falls flat on its face when there is this wealth of experience of people who (may have different opinions about how strong it is...) do still reach and master the factors which make Jhana Jhana at each level.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
perkele
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by perkele »

Cittasanto wrote:But my point was in agreeing with what you said, the claim that the Jhanas can not be mastered... any-more falls flat on its face when there is this wealth of experience of people who (may have different opinions about how strong it is...) do still reach and master the factors which make Jhana Jhana at each level.
Ah, I see. So the answer to this question
perkele wrote:Or have I missed the point and you meant the opposite of what I interpreted?
is yes.

Thanks for clearing it up. I misunderstood you completely. But I think you also expressed yourself a bit vaguely in your original post. :tongue:
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by Cittasanto »

perkele wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:But my point was in agreeing with what you said, the claim that the Jhanas can not be mastered... any-more falls flat on its face when there is this wealth of experience of people who (may have different opinions about how strong it is...) do still reach and master the factors which make Jhana Jhana at each level.
Ah, I see. So the answer to this question
perkele wrote:Or have I missed the point and you meant the opposite of what I interpreted?
is yes.

Thanks for clearing it up. I misunderstood you completely. But I think you also expressed yourself a bit vaguely in your original post. :tongue:
Either way it is good.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
marc108
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:10 pm

Re: The possibility of Jhana and enlightenment

Post by marc108 »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:just today I read in another discussion here someone claiming that the higher Jhanas (above the first) were no longer available either.

thats just silly! Jhanas are a natural state of mind, their availability does not disappear. I can give a handful of teachers, just off the top of my head, who teach all 4 Jhanas from experience.
"It's easy for us to connect with what's wrong with us... and not so easy to feel into, or to allow us, to connect with what's right and what's good in us."
Post Reply