Rarely mentioned criteria of the 1st jhana

[ignobleone]

Commentaries usually describe the criteria of 1st jhana only in term of 5 jhana factors. IMO, there are two important points(criteria) from the main Nikayas that seemed to have been forgotten, rarely or even never mentioned/discussed by Buddhist monks/teachers. Those two criteria are:
1) kāmasaññā ceases, as mentioned in Anupubbanirodha Sutta (AN 9.31) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It depends on the translation of kāmasaññā. I believe it means kāma-based perception.
2) vācā ceases, as mentioned in Rahogata Sutta (SN 36.11) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
vācā means speech (verbal fabrication)

[reflection]

The five jhana factors mention what is present in the 1st jhana, but indeed there is also a lot that's disappeared, including speech (discursive thought) and all 5 senses (that's how I think we should interpret "the perception of sensuality").

Thanks for these references.

Reflection

[ignobleone]

The five jhana factors mention what is present in the 1st jhana, but indeed there is also a lot that's disappeared, including speech (discursive thought) and all 5 senses (that's how I think we should interpret "the perception of sensuality").

Thanks for these references.
Reflection

I think we should look at the pali words when equating terms here, to avoid ambiguity and to make the message clear for anyone. IMO "speech = discursive thought" is inappropriate, since speech is the translation of vācā while discursive thought is the translation of vitakka. If they have the same meaning, why there are two terms with different translations. Besides, vitakka is said to cease in the 2nd jhana, not in the 1st.
For kāmasaññā, yes kāma means sensuality (related to five sense doors), and we know saññā means perception. So I believe it's reasonable to translate it as "sense-based perception" (I wrote as kāma-based). To give the examples: visual perception, hearing perception, tactile perception, and so fort. But "the perception of sensuality" sounds rather confusing to me. If the example is the same, then it's just the matter of terminology.

[Zom]

The five jhana factors mention what is present in the 1st jhana, but indeed there is also a lot that's disappeared, including speech (discursive thought) and all 5 senses (that's how I think we should interpret "the perception of sensuality").

No, because according to SN 48.40 (and, btw, all standard sutta formulas) in the first jhana you feel pleasant bodily sensation. So there is, at least, tactile perception in the 1st jhana. Not only "the mind" as some teachers say.

[robertk]

Impossible to experience bodily feeling in jhana.

[Dmytro]

Hi,

1) kāmasaññā ceases, as mentioned in Anupubbanirodha Sutta (AN 9.31) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It depends on the translation of kāmasaññā. I believe it means kāma-based perception.

This is explained in more detail in Potthapada sutta:

"Quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, the monk enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. His earlier perception of sensuality ceases, and on that occasion there is a perception of a refined truth of rapture & pleasure born of seclusion. On that occasion he is one who is percipient of a refined truth of rapture & pleasure born of seclusion. And thus it is that with training one perception arises and with training another perception ceases.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta.

[daverupa]

Impossible to experience bodily feeling in jhana.

On first through fourth jhana:

Whatever there is there of form, feeling, perception, determinations, or consciousness, such ideas he sees as impermanent, as subject to pain, as a sickness, as a tumor, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as an alienation, as a disintegration, as a void, as not-self. He averts his heart from those ideas, and for the most peaceful, the supreme goal, he turns his heart to the deathless element, that is to say, the stilling of all determinations, the relinquishment of all substance, the exhaustion of craving, the fading of passion, cessation, extinction.

When it describes the four formless attainments, the phrase runs "Whatever there is there of feeling, perception, determinations, or consciousness, such ideas he sees as impermanent...".

If what you claim was true, this distinction would not be made - the difference, above, would not exist - because it would have been an instruction which was impossible to implement.

[robertk]

any insight happens after leaving the jhana. never while in jhana

[reflection]

The five jhana factors mention what is present in the 1st jhana, but indeed there is also a lot that's disappeared, including speech (discursive thought) and all 5 senses (that's how I think we should interpret "the perception of sensuality").

Thanks for these references.
Reflection

I think we should look at the pali words when equating terms here, to avoid ambiguity and to make the message clear for anyone. IMO "speech = discursive thought" is inappropriate, since speech is the translation of vācā while discursive thought is the translation of vitakka. If they have the same meaning, why there are two terms with different translations. Besides, vitakka is said to cease in the 2nd jhana, not in the 1st.
For kāmasaññā, yes kāma means sensuality (related to five sense doors), and we know saññā means perception. So I believe it's reasonable to translate it as "sense-based perception" (I wrote as kāma-based). To give the examples: visual perception, hearing perception, tactile perception, and so fort. But "the perception of sensuality" sounds rather confusing to me. If the example is the same, then it's just the matter of terminology.

My pali knowledge is small. However, about vitakka in the context of jhana, I think this is more correct:
"In the Abhidhamma it refers to "the mental factor that mounts or directs the mind onto the object".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitakka" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To me inner talking is just like speech, so think we can interpret speech like thought. Also because it is quite clear there is no talkative speech present... we are meditating, not conversating Why would anyone say that? Might as well say there is no playing soccer in jhana..

Anyway, just wanted to say the references are interesting.

I also think sense-based perception is a nice translation, based on what you wrote.

[daverupa]

any insight happens after leaving the jhana. never while in jhana

Alternatively, while in jhana. "Enters & remains" followed by ""With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to..." in MN 27 can be read with either assumption in place.

[farmer]

RobertK wrote:

Impossible to experience bodily feeling in jhana.

How do you interpret the bathman simile?

"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."

[Virgo]

RobertK wrote:

Impossible to experience bodily feeling in jhana.

How do you interpret the bathman simile?

"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."

Jhana is freedom from the sense sphere. So what is described happens not during the actual moment of jhana but directly afterwards when the concentration is still super deep, but still of the sense world, after one exits.

Kevin

[Nyana]

How do you interpret the bathman simile?

"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."

Better to follow the suttas and the word commentary of Peṭakopadesa 7.72:

• The twofold bodily and mental pain does not arise in one steadied in directed thought and evaluation, and the twofold bodily and mental pleasure does arise. The mental pleasure thus produced from directed thought is joy, while the bodily pleasure is bodily feeling.

SN 48.40 Uppaṭipāṭika Sutta states that the pain faculty (dukkhindriya) ceases completely in the first jhāna, the unhappiness faculty (domanassindriya) ceases completely in the second jhāna, the pleasure faculty (sukhindriya) ceases completely in the third jhāna, and the happiness faculty (somanassindriya) ceases completely in the fourth jhāna.

SN 48.37 Dutiyavibhaṅga Sutta informs us that the pleasure and pain faculties are born of body contact (kāyasamphassaja), whereas the happiness and unhappiness faculties are born of mind contact (manosamphassaja).

Taking all of the above passages into consideration we can deduce that the non-carnal joy (nirāmisā pīti) of the first jhāna is mental pleasure (cetasika sukha, i.e. somanassa) born of mind contact, and the non-carnal pleasure (nirāmisā sukha) of the first jhāna is bodily pleasure (kāyika sukha) born of body contact.

[ancientbuddhism]

Taking all of the above passages into consideration we can deduce that the non-carnal joy (nirāmisā pīti) of the first jhāna is mental pleasure (cetasika sukha, i.e. somanassa) born of mind contact, and the non-carnal pleasure (nirāmisā sukha) of the first jhāna is bodily pleasure (kāyika sukha) born of body contact.

Also, the Nirāmisa Sutta (SN.36.31) mentions that non-carnal bliss (contemplative pīti) is born from the seclusion of contemplative absorption (jhāna). And the Pīti Sutta (AN.5.176) describes further this bliss of seclusion:

• ‘Yasmiṃ bhante, samaye ariyasāvako pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja viharati. Pañcassa ṭhānāni tasmiṃ samaye na honti:
  
  Yampissa kāmūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. Yampissa kāmūpasaṃhitaṃ sukhaṃ somanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. Yampissa akusalūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. Yampissa akusalūpasaṃhitaṃ sukhaṃ somanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. Yampissa kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti.
  
  Yasmiṃ bhante, samaye ariyasāvako pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja viharati. Imānissa pañca ṭhānāni tasmiṃ samaye na hontīti.’
  
  “Venerable sir, when a noble disciple enters and remains in the bliss of seclusion, five things do not exist at that time; whatever displeasure and mental-distress connected with sensual pleasure – do not exist at that time; whatever pleasure and mental-happiness connected with sensual pleasure – do not exist at that time; whatever displeasure and mental-distress connected with unskillfulness – do not exist at that time; whatever pleasure and mental-happiness connected with the unskillfulness – do not exist at that time; whatever displeasure and mental-distress connected with skillfulness – do not exist at that time. When a noble disciple enters and remains in the bliss of seclusion – these five things do not exist at that time.”

This by default of what is not mentioned in this section indicates that it is pleasure and mental-happiness connected with skillfulness (of contemplative effort) that would exist at that time as non-carnal pīti born of seclusion.

[ignobleone]

My pali knowledge is small. However, about vitakka in the context of jhana, I think this is more correct:
"In the Abhidhamma it refers to "the mental factor that mounts or directs the mind onto the object".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitakka" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To me inner talking is just like speech, so think we can interpret speech like thought. Also because it is quite clear there is no talkative speech present... we are meditating, not conversating Why would anyone say that? Might as well say there is no playing soccer in jhana..

Anyway, just wanted to say the references are interesting.

I also think sense-based perception is a nice translation, based on what you wrote.

If I didn't recall it wrong, I remember reading from a book or online somewhere which translated vitakka as discursive thought. It was my mistake to rely on my memory (which is not good anymore, I guess) instead of looking up the meaning first (from dictionary, wikipedia, etc). You're right about vitakka. Anyway, I do think the same as you regarding speech. We can say inner conversation/talking in our head is a form of speech. It doesn't have to be talkative.