Micca Samadhi

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
Shebop
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:15 am

Micca Samadhi

Post by Shebop »

Hello all,
could you please help me to understand what is exactely meant by micca samadhi. Obviously it is a form of samadhi, so one will experience similar/same states as in sama-samadhi? Is the micca 'just' about one's intention and if - how can an unwholesome intention lead to a samadhi-state?
In my meditation yesterday something interessting happened, namely that an unwholesome wish popped up in my mind after a long period of silence. After thinking that wish, the meditation went much deeper instantly. My ability to hear stopped and after the meditation it took me a while to be able to move my body again. This state was no different from other meditation experiences I had and which were definately sama-samadhi.
The unwholesome wish and the minds response in yesterdays meditation puzzles me.

Does anyone know how the Buddha defines micca-samadhi? Does he give explanations?
Thankful for hints and help - Shebop
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Shebop,

I can't give you a good reference right now, but my experience is that it is possible to get into a calm, concentrated, state, but with little mindfulness or energy, so no investigation. This essentially becomes just a kind of pleasant resting place.

Recognising such a state can be tricky, since it can be very pleasant.

:anjali:
Mike
Shebop
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:15 am

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Shebop »

Thanks Mike!
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by cooran »

Hello Shebop, all,

This might be of interest miccha-samadhi (wrong concentration).

MN 117
Maha-cattarisaka Sutta: The Great Forty


I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. There he addressed the monks: "Monks!"

"Yes, lord," the monks replied.

The Blessed One said, "Monks, I will teach you noble right concentration with its supports and requisite conditions. Listen, and pay close attention. I will speak."

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

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
David2
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:09 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by David2 »

I think an example for micca samadhi can be the samadhi one is experiencing during playing a video game.
One can be very concentrated during it, can be very absorbed, but normally, he isn't aware of any of the 4 satipatthanas: body, feelings, mind and dhammas.
One can not develop sati without being aware of at least one satipatthana. Without sati, samadhi is micca samadhi.
upekha
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 12:39 pm

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by upekha »

Ven. Nyanatiloka's Buddhist dictionary gives the definition of Micca Samadhi as


"Wrong Concentration ( Micca Samadhi) is concentration associated with all karmically unwholesome ( akusala) consciousness."

with metta

Upekha
User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2707
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Zom »

As I see it - Wrong Samadhi means absorbtion or one-pointedness of the mind on unskilful objects. For example, when someone is fully absorbed by this or that sensual pleasure - he is in Wrong Samadhi.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Cittasanto »

Shebop wrote:Hello all,
could you please help me to understand what is exactely meant by micca samadhi. Obviously it is a form of samadhi, so one will experience similar/same states as in sama-samadhi? Is the micca 'just' about one's intention and if - how can an unwholesome intention lead to a samadhi-state?
In my meditation yesterday something interessting happened, namely that an unwholesome wish popped up in my mind after a long period of silence. After thinking that wish, the meditation went much deeper instantly. My ability to hear stopped and after the meditation it took me a while to be able to move my body again. This state was no different from other meditation experiences I had and which were definately sama-samadhi.
The unwholesome wish and the minds response in yesterdays meditation puzzles me.

Does anyone know how the Buddha defines micca-samadhi? Does he give explanations?
Thankful for hints and help - Shebop
Hi Shebop
Micca-samadhi, or as I like to think of it, dissident focus, can be characterised as dewlling in unskilled mental states without the application of Samma-vyama, upright effort, to overcome them.
Have a look at MN108, where the mind overcome by the hindrences are wrong absorption, jhana, the four Jhanas are the standard definition of Sammasamadhi. and samadhi isn't necesarily only Jhana, Samadhi has many nuanced meanings, depending on the context, The great 40, MN117, shows that the entire path supports Samma-samadhi, the fourth Jhana can attained while walking according to one sutta (there is a thread on this question of walking anf the fourth Jhana, and I think the sutta referenced their is in MN). essentially the great 40 is a teaching upon the development of Samadhi, up until it culminates in the Jhanas, but to say before this there is no focus, samadhi, before Jhana would not take into account what is happening, the samadhi group of the path (effort, mindfulness and concentration) or the gradual path, remember samma means complete, so the parts of the path as defined in the suttas are showing what these folds in there fully developed forms.
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
Zom
Posts: 2707
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Zom »

the fourth Jhana can attained while walking according to one sutta
Impossible ,)
Shebop
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:15 am

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Shebop »

Thank you all for your answers! I will go through the mentioned sutas as well.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Cittasanto »

Zom wrote:
the fourth Jhana can attained while walking according to one sutta
Impossible ,)
Then explain MN 122 Maha-suññata Sutta: The Greater Discourse on Emptiness.
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
Rui Sousa
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 4:01 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Rui Sousa »

I think this passage may be helpfull:

MN 108
Gopaka Moggallana Sutta: Moggallana the Guardsman

It wasn't the case, brahman, that the Blessed One praised mental absorption of every sort, nor did he criticize mental absorption of every sort. And what sort of mental absorption did he not praise? There is the case where a certain person dwells with his awareness overcome by sensual passion, seized with sensual passion. He does not discern the escape, as it actually is present, from sensual passion once it has arisen. Making that sensual passion the focal point, he absorbs himself with it, besorbs, resorbs, & supersorbs himself with it.

"He dwells with his awareness overcome by ill will...

"He dwells with his awareness overcome by sloth & drowsiness...

"He dwells with his awareness overcome by restlessness & anxiety...

"He dwells with his awareness overcome by uncertainty, seized with uncertainty. He does not discern the escape, as it actually is present, from uncertainty once it has arisen. Making that uncertainty the focal point, he absorbs himself with it, besorbs, resorbs, & supersorbs himself with it. This is the sort of mental absorption that the Blessed One did not praise.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
With Metta
Shebop
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:15 am

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Shebop »

That answers my questions. Thanks a lot Rui Sousa!!!!!!
User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2707
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Zom »

Then explain MN 122 Maha-suññata Sutta: The Greater Discourse on Emptiness.
What to explain there? I don't see it is said that someone does 4th jhana while walking.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Micca Samadhi

Post by Cittasanto »

Zom wrote:
Then explain MN 122 Maha-suññata Sutta: The Greater Discourse on Emptiness.
What to explain there? I don't see it is said that someone does 4th jhana while walking.
The "imperturbable" usually denotes the four formless attainments. In this context, though, it means the fourth jhana and the first two formless attainments based on it: the dimension of the infinitude of space and the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness.

but this discussion can continue elsewhere, like the thread regarding it here
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
Post Reply