Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by danieLion »

Sylvester wrote: 2. From a praxis perspective, I need to know what the texts actually mean, and I wasted many years of my study and practice believing VT's discursive Jhana model. I've seen more than enough of VT's attempts to (a) exploit the English reader's unfamiliarity with Pali grammar to change the connotation of Pali texts (especially in the temporal grammatical constructions), and (b) re-writing Pali texts to suit his Jhana model. It was extremely difficult for me to shake off my previous faith in his translations - there was something very powerful to cling on to, namely identification of my meditations with his "jhanas". It would be far easier for me to rest on my laurels, having fulfilled his Jhana criteria, but a critical reading of the texts simply does not allow me the luxury of such a lie any longer.
Why are you blaming your misunderstandings of Thanissaro's teachings on the good Reverend? Where's the personal responsibility and accountability? You've concocted a conspiracy theory about Rev. T's ulterior motives that is actually a reflection of your own failures.

Did you overlook his teachings like this?
Sometimes you read about teachers who turn out to be major disappointments. They do really horrible things to their students, and the students complain that they've been victimized. But in nearly every case, when you read the whole story, you realize that the students should have seen this coming. There were blatant warning signals that they chose to ignore. You have to be responsible in choosing your teachers, choosing your path. Once you've chosen the path that looks likely, you have to be responsible in following it, in learning how to develop your own sensitivity in following it. Because after all, what is the path that the Buddha points out? There's virtue, there's concentration, and there's discernment. These are all qualities in your own mind. We all have them to some extent. Learning how to develop what's in your own mind is what's going to make all the difference. The Buddha's discernment isn't going to give you awakening; his virtue and concentration aren't going to give you awakening. You have to develop your own. Nobody else can develop these things for you. Other people can give you hints; they can help point you in the right direction. But the actual work and the actual seeing is something you have to do for yourself.

So the question is: Are you mature enough to want this path? Are you mature enough to follow it through? Nobody's forcing you. Just realize the dangers of not following this path and make your choice.URL
Or these?
If you go to a teacher, saying you've had a certain experience, and the teacher identifies it as a level of jhana or a level of insight, can you be sure? Do you really want to hand those judgments over to somebody else? Or do you want to learn how to judge things on your own, so that you can trust yourself? If you let the other people do the judging, there's always going to be an element of doubt: Do they know what they're saying? At the same time, you're absolving yourself of any responsibility. Discernment becomes their duty and not yours. That's not a good attitude for a meditator to take. You've got to learn to look, to try a few things.URL
Or these?
So as a teacher, he tried to instill in his students these qualities of self-reliance, ingenuity, and a willingness to take risks and test things for themselves. He did that not only by talking about these qualities, but also by forcing you into situations where you'd have to develop them. Had he always been there to confirm for you that, "Yes, you've reached the third jhana," or, "No, that's only the second jhana," he would have short-circuited the qualities he was trying to instill. He, rather than your own powers of observation, would have been the authority on what was going on in your mind; and you would have been absolved of any responsibility for correctly evaluating what you had experienced. At the same time, he would have been feeding your childish desire to please or impress him, and undermining your ability to deal with the task at hand, which was how to develop your own powers of sensitivity to put an end to suffering and stress. As he once told me, "If I have to explain everything, you'll get used to having things handed to you on a platter. And then what will you do when problems come up in your meditation and you don't have any experience in figuring things out on your own?"
URL

Or these?
It's like going out in the wilderness. You read the maps, you make your plans, but when you get out in the forest you realize that the forest doesn't look like the map. The map has splotches of solid pale green with red lines and little symbols on it. But when you look around yourself in the forest, you don't see those splotches, symbols, or lines. Now, the lines are relevant: They symbolize the paths through the forest. They give you a sketchy idea of what's out there. But you have to realize that there's a lot more out there than just the pale greens and reds of the map. There are actual trees, actual animals, actual changes in the lay of the land. So you make plans based on the map, but be prepared to throw your plans overboard as you meet up with new and unexpected things. This is an important part of the training: how to deal with the unexpected.URL
Or these?
Some people want to have all kinds of guarantees before they embark on this training, but you can't really guarantee anything. You can guarantee that when you reach the goal it's going to be good, but how much is that guarantee worth for someone who hasn't experienced it yet? Just one more thing to take into consideration. The Buddha, when he embarked on his quest, had no guarantee that all the sacrifice was going to be worth it, that he was going to find the deathless, or even that he was going to survive. But he had reached a point in his life where he realized that if he didn't at least try it, he would feel that his life had been wasted. And so for him it was a huge experiment. There was a lot of risk and a lot of uncertainty. And yet he was willing to take the risk and to face the uncertainty.

For us, it's not quite that drastic. We have people who've gone before. There's the question of whether we can trust them and believe them, but then look at the alternative: a life lived devoted to the pursuit of sensual pleasures, trying to squeeze happiness out of things that are going to die and that we'll have to leave in the end — if not before the end. So at the very least you say, "Well, there's a possibility here. Let's give it a try." Try to have that sense of adventure. Be open to new things and learn how to deal with uncertainties.

Earlier today we were talking about the maps for the jhanas. When you try to apply the map to your actual experience, it's going to be uncertain for a while. You read the description of directed thought and evaluation, rapture and all, and the question is: What do those terms correspond to in your actual experience? You may have some ideas, but they may be wrong. Is that going to stop you from practicing? It shouldn't. It should simply alert you to the fact that you're going to be dealing in uncertainties for a while. When you place labels on your experiences, they have to be post-it notes, signposts to use in the meantime until you get a better sense of the terrain. The surest of the signposts is the one for the fourth jhana — when the in-and-out breath stops and stays stopped for the duration of that state of mind — but that's all the way in the fourth. So how are you going to know the signposts for one, two, and three? Well, you guess for the time being and you attach a few notes here, a few notes there. And have the confidence that when you find something more certain, you're going to be in a position to rearrange the notes if need be.URL
Now, to get back to the OP.

As Ñāṇa put it in this post
Ñāṇa wrote:But the heart of the matter is the assertion made by Ven. Brahmavamso and his associates that he is teaching the Buddha's sammāsamādhi, and that most everyone else isn't.
This is something which clearly cannot be said of Ven. T.

So, why are you trying to villainize the good Reverend? Do you really think he deserves the blame you've tried to attribute to him? I'm sorry you feel misled, but the fault is not Rev. T's.

It's yours.
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by danieLion »

Sylvester wrote:...would you indulge me by telling me what you think kāmā in the 1st Jhana's vivic'eva kāmehi pericope means?
No.

You tell me what you think first and we'll see how it goes.
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by Sylvester »

danieLion wrote:
Why are you blaming your misunderstandings of Thanissaro's teachings on the good Reverend? Where's the personal responsibility and accountability? You've concocted a conspiracy theory about Rev. T's ulterior motives that is actually a reflection of your own failures.

...
So, why are you trying to villainize the good Reverend? Do you really think he deserves the blame you've tried to attribute to him? I'm sorry you feel misled, but the fault is not Rev. T's.

It's yours.

Actually, by all accounts, I've been a great success in his "Jhana" model. His position on meditation is very very clear and there's no mistaking what he says and means. Which is why it was so easy for me to identify with his road-maps and cling onto those landmarks he calls "Jhana". I merely point out that what Ven T says in his teachings is not necessarily what the suttas say in the original Pali . The disillusionment is realising that I had been short-selling myself by using his interpretations.

I do not need to concoct a conspiracy theory about Ven T. I let the Pali speak for itself, instead of relying on obvious mistranslations that clearly have a translation agenda. I let the Pali speak for itself, instead of being led by English grammar into interpretations which are not present in the Pali. If you reject the critical approach for a pious one, that's OK. Perhaps, with time, when you decide to invest in Pali studies, you would confront the cross-roads of faith in Ven T's translations versus the texts speaking directly to you. But, I do not consider it to be villainizing Ven T if I point out how his translations and interpretations are unwarranted and contradict the Canon on several scores.

Which is why I cannot understand you cite Geoff's complaint about Ajahn Brahm's belief in the "rightness" of his Jhana teachings. If someone is passionate enough about the Dhamma, he will speak up for what he believes to be right. As does Ven T in criticising competing Jhana models, as does Geoff in well argued papers. You seem to relish taking potshots at Ajahn Brahm, although I've only seen expressions of disagreement and dismissal, without any genuine attempt at argument.
Sylvester wrote:
...would you indulge me by telling me what you think kāmā in the 1st Jhana's vivic'eva kāmehi pericope means?

No.

You tell me what you think first and we'll see how it goes.
Why do you keep evading the issue? You may perhaps wish to examine if this passage has any relevance -
"Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin does not understand as it really is what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. He thinks: 'I do not understand as it really is what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. Now, there are recluses and brahmins who are wise, clever, experienced in controversy, who wander about demolishing the views of others with their wisdom. If, without understanding, I were to declare something to be wholesome or unwholesome, they might cross-examine me about my views, press me for reasons and refute my statements. If they should do so, I might not be able to reply. If I could not reply, that would distress me, and that distress would be an obstacle for me.' Therefore, out of fear and loathing of being cross-examined, he does not declare anything to be wholesome or unwholesome. But, when questioned about this or that point, he resorts to evasive statements and to endless equivocation: 'I do not take it thus, nor do I take it in that way, nor do I take it in some other way. I do not say that it is not, nor do I say that it is neither this nor that.'

DN 1
For the record, I take kāmā in the 1st Jhana's vivic'eva kāmehi pericope to mean the 5 bāhira āyatanā (external bases), namely rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa and phoṭṭhabba. I do not take this to include "sensual desire", as that is addressed by the other seclusion formula "vivicca akusalehi dhammehi"
User avatar
reflection
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by reflection »

Guys, this is not about Venerable Thanissaro, not about Venerable Brahmavamso. Neither is it about Sylvester or danieLion or reflection or whoever. So may I ask you to keep it a bit impersonal? I understand you defending your positions, but the last posts really represent nothing substantial, or nothing that's already been said. You got the freedom to say whatever you want of course, but this is just me asking as a dhamma friend to another dhamma friend to keep it a bit ontopic.
User avatar
marc108
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:10 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by marc108 »

Sylvester wrote: I merely point out that what Ven T says in his teachings is not necessarily what the suttas say in the original Pali . The disillusionment is realising that I had been short-selling myself by using his interpretations.
could you expand on this please?
"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."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by mikenz66 »

reflection wrote:Guys, this is not about Venerable Thanissaro, not about Venerable Brahmavamso. Neither is it about Sylvester or danieLion or reflection or whoever. So may I ask you to keep it a bit impersonal? I understand you defending your positions, but the last posts really represent nothing substantial, or nothing that's already been said. You got the freedom to say whatever you want of course, but this is just me asking as a dhamma friend to another dhamma friend to keep it a bit ontopic.
Good idea.

Many teachers, ancient and modern, teach quite deep absorptions. It seems rather clear in the ancient commentaries that those deep absorptions involve mental objects.E.g. see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamma%E1%B ... Dh%C4%81na" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamma%E1%B ... and_jhanas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Or for modern teachers Pa Auk Sayadaw's books http://www.buddhistelibrary.org/library ... ?aapath=69" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; or Shaila Catherine's book on Pa Auk Sayadaw's approach http://imsb.org/books/wwd.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As I understand it, Reflection started this thread to enquire how these approaches either evolved from, or are implicit in, the suttas. I would highly reccomend Shaila's book in investigating that, since she gives copious quotes from Sutta, as well as Abhidhamma and Commentary.

Venerables Thanissaro and Brahm each have their particular interpretations of the Suttas. I don't follow either of them in terms of practice, but I have found teachings from both of them interesting and illuminating. There are clearly many other teachers and practitioners who agree or disagree with either (or both) of them.

It seems to me to be a little pointless to rehash these arguments about whether Vens Thanissoro, Brahm, or neither, are "correct". I think that it would be more fruitful to simply discuss what the suttas do say, and to that end Sylvesters comments about the translations of some of those passages are very relevant.

:anjali:
Mike
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by Sylvester »

marc108 wrote:
Sylvester wrote: I merely point out that what Ven T says in his teachings is not necessarily what the suttas say in the original Pali . The disillusionment is realising that I had been short-selling myself by using his interpretations.
could you expand on this please?

Hi marc

I mentioned an example in this post -

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p196525" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A scholar was obviously relying on Ven T's translation of DN 9, not realising that the translation was wrong. The scholar ended up criticising the sutta on the basis of the English mistranslation! What is at stake in this mistranslation is the dilution of the absorption model in DN 9 (ie no thoughts or intentions in all the Jhanas and Arupas) into no thoughts/intentions only in the Base of Nothingness.

There are a fair number of other mistranslations in DN 9, but I won't dwell on those, as they are not relevant to the issue of thinking and analysis within the Jhanas.

In the previous page, we discussed AN 9.37's treatment of samādhi -
Ekamidāhaṃ, āvuso, samayaṃ sākete viharāmi añjanavane migadāye. Atha kho, āvuso, jaṭilavāsikā bhikkhunī yenāhaṃ tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā maṃ abhivādetvā ekamantaṃ aṭṭhāsi. Ekamantaṃ ṭhitā kho, āvuso, jaṭilavāsikā bhikkhunī maṃ etadavoca— ‘yāyaṃ, bhante ānanda, samādhi na cābhinato na cāpanato na ca sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritagato, vimuttattā ṭhito, ṭhitattā santusito, santusitattā no paritassati. Ayaṃ, bhante ānanda, samādhi kiṃphalo vutto bhagavatā’ti?

308Evaṃ vutte, sohaṃ, āvuso, jaṭilavāsikaṃ bhikkhuniṃ etadavocaṃ— ‘yāyaṃ, bhagini, samādhi na cābhinato na cāpanato na ca sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritagato, vimuttattā ṭhito, ṭhitattā santusito, santusitattā no paritassati. Ayaṃ, bhagini, samādhi aññāphalo vutto bhagavatā’ti. Evaṃsaññīpi kho, āvuso, tadāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedetī”ti.

Ven T's translation -

Once, friend, when I was staying in Saketa at the Game Refuge in the Black Forest, the nun Jatila Bhagika went to where I was staying, and on arrival — having bowed to me — stood to one side. As she was standing there, she said to me: 'The concentration whereby — neither pressed down nor forced back, nor with fabrication kept blocked or suppressed — still as a result of release, contented as a result of standing still, and as a result of contentment one is not agitated: This concentration is said by the Blessed One to be the fruit of what?'

"I said to her, 'Sister, the concentration whereby — neither pressed down nor forced back, nor with fabrication kept blocked or suppressed — still as a result of release, contented as a result of standing still, and as a result of contentment one is not agitated: This concentration is said by the Blessed One to be the fruit of gnosis.'[1] This is another way of being percipient when not sensitive to that dimension."
Ven T translates kiṃphalo as a genitive tappurisa, which is grammatically possible, even if rare. This leads to the aññāphalo also being translated as a genitive tappurisa ("fruit of gnosis"), which Ven T identifies as Arahanta. The effect of this translation would be to limit the na sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritagata samādhi to the Arahants, and taking out of the reach of anyone else.

While it is grammatically possible to do this, this flies in the face of clear passages elsewhere that the na sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritagata samādhi refers to the Jhanas. Instead of translating kiṃphalo as "fruit of what?", it could have been more conventionally translated as "of what fruit?" The aññāphalo would then be translated as "the fruit that issues in aññā", where aññā is inflected in the dative, instead of the genitive, within the compound. The aññā need not necessarily refer only to Arahanta, as it can refer to Stream Entry as well. Alternatively, DN 34's section on Fives suggests that the aññā may be synonymous with the 5 ñāṇa that one attains in respect of sammāsamādhi, including the ñāṇa that sammāsamādhi is na sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritagata.

This mistranslation goes to the core of the debate - just how much will of the will/volition survives in the Jhanas? Is there enough will/volition in the Jhanas to carry out analysis and rumination?
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

I'm rather disinclined to allow DN 9 in my ruminations on this subject. I will elaborate, as necessary.

With respect to the idea that
the anupassati encountered in satipaṭṭhāna (which admits of a bare awareness connotation), samanupassati suggests a much more analytical and discursive character
I can agree with the discursive character of samanupassati, but is it not the case that it is present for all four jhanas in AN 9.36? So, I don't see what point 'B', above, serves. (I also disagree with the connotation you've ascribed to anupassati, but that may be tangential here.)

So, we are left with your injunction to
pay heed to the grammatical construction of the locative absolute used in that pericope
Can you please elaborate here? -This would be with respect to the statement
I do not see any clear reason to suggest that there is a substantive change between the arising of jhana and the direction of attention as instructed.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by Sylvester »

Hi dave
daverupa wrote:I'm rather disinclined to allow DN 9 in my ruminations on this subject. I will elaborate, as necessary.
Pls do elaborate. I would hope you'll throw in some heavy duty Textual Criticism, given than DN 9 has a lovely parallel in DA 28. The Chinese follows the Pali very closely, to the extent of mirroring DN 9's -
'Thinking is bad for me. Not thinking is better for me.'

有念為惡。 無念為善

If I were to think and will, these perceptions of mine would cease, and a grosser perception would appear.

彼作是念 時。彼微妙想不滅 更麤想生。 (the Chinese inserts a "subtle" 微妙 to qualify the 1st perception, and may have mistakenly negated the cessation 滅 of that subtle perception. Alternatively, the Chinese passage was referring only to the Base of Nothingness, but this would lead to the ridiculous result of 2 perceptions occupying the same time)

What if I were neither to think nor to will?

我 今寧可不為念行。

So he neither thinks nor wills, and as he is neither thinking nor willing, that perception ceases and another, grosser perception does not appear.

不起思惟。彼不為念 行。不起思惟已。微妙想滅。麤想不生。
It looks as if DA 28 shares DN 9's very absorbed model of jhana, and these 2 texts do not seem to be the outcome of fiddling by their respective Abhidharmikas.

With respect to the idea that
the anupassati encountered in satipaṭṭhāna (which admits of a bare awareness connotation), samanupassati suggests a much more analytical and discursive character
I can agree with the discursive character of samanupassati, but is it not the case that it is present for all four jhanas in AN 9.36? So, I don't see what point 'B', above, serves. (I also disagree with the connotation you've ascribed to anupassati, but that may be tangential here.)
Samanupassati is indeed placed in some relation to all 4 jhanas. My point is this - if samanupassati were discursive and samanupassati occurs during a jhana, how is that possible for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Jhanas, where vacīsaṅkhāras are absent? The issue then translates into a query whether the 1st Jhana retains vacīsaṅkhāras of sufficient force to samanupassati. If we say that it does, then the AN 9.36 series is disturbed and samanupassati ceases to be a common denominator, ie samanupassati will be read to occur within 1st Jhana, but can only occur after 2nd Jhana etc.

So, we are left with your injunction to
pay heed to the grammatical construction of the locative absolute used in that pericope
Can you please elaborate here?
When the locative absolute formed of a past participle (eg samāhite) is used, it means that the verb's action under that past participle has been completed, before the next action (abhininnāmeti) takes place. To signify the continuation of a past action in conjunction with a subsequent verb, the past action is denoted by a genitive case and its noun is also inflected in the genitive case. I know it sounds circular, but I can only cite how the grammars treat this temporal distinction. The genitive absolute is the go-to construction to indicate contemporaneity, since the other construction is uncertain, eg using the absolutive (following Geiger), but its more standard function is to indicate a completed past action, or sometimes the infinitive (following Gombrich).

:anjali:
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

Sylvester wrote:Pls do elaborate.
I have sent a PM, since it's argument's example is long and off-topic here. Nevertheless, I think we can pursue a fruitful inquiry here, specifically:
Sylvester wrote:My point is this - if samanupassati were discursive and samanupassati occurs during a jhana, how is that possible for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Jhanas, where vacīsaṅkhāras are absent? The issue then translates into a query whether the 1st Jhana retains vacīsaṅkhāras of sufficient force to samanupassati. If we say that it does, then the AN 9.36 series is disturbed and samanupassati ceases to be a common denominator, ie samanupassati will be read to occur within 1st Jhana, but can only occur after 2nd Jhana etc.
Where do we learn, again, that vacīsaṅkhāras cease in jhanas 2-4? Or, why is samanupassati a vacīsaṅkhāra? Why is the series disturbed; I do not follow there. "But can only occur after 2nd Jhana etc." is not explained, and seems to contradict the idea that vacīsaṅkhāras cease there.

There are assumptions and threads here which I do not seem to recognize. Perhaps I'm simply obtuse; these arguments don't follow, but I'm no philologist, so the gaps are great.

:candle:
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by Sylvester »

Ouch! I'm nursing a Heideggerian sized migraine from reading your PM. But I'll soldier on. I wonder what you think about my post about the Formless bits here - http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 80#p197550" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
Where do we learn, again, that vacīsaṅkhāras cease in jhanas 2-4?
The 2nd Jhana pericope which provides -
with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance.

...vitakkavicāranaṃ vūpasamā ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ cetaso ekodibhāvaṃ avitakkaṃ avicāraṃ samādhijaṃ pitisukhaṃ dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.
as well as MN 44 -

What are verbal fabrications? ...Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. ...Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications.

katamo vacīsaṅkhāro? ...Vitakkavicārā vacīsaṅkhāro. ...Pubbe kho āvuso visākha vitakketvā vicāretvā pacchā vācaṃ bhindati. Tasmā vitakkavicārā vacīsaṅkhāro.
Or, why is samanupassati a vacīsaṅkhāra?
I would not say that samanupassati is a vacīsaṅkhāra. I would say that the action samanupassati would require vacīsaṅkhāra. Notice how MN 44 reads - vitakkavicārā as a compound of nouns. But the definition then moves on to discuss the 2 denominative verbs vitakketi and vicāreti derived from the nouns. This suggests to me that this definition is formalising an analysis for thought activity (thinking) being driven by a form of intention (vacīsaṅkhāra).
Why is the series disturbed; I do not follow there. "But can only occur after 2nd Jhana etc." is not explained, and seems to contradict the idea that vacīsaṅkhāras cease there.
In the suttas, a series is used to contrast different members of the series, but a thread will also run through the series. This thread will be the common denominator. If we read samanupassati in AN 9.36 as being discursive, it must mean that samanupassati is being driven by vitakkavicārā. But, vitakkavicārā being absent in anything from the 2nd Jhana upwards, would either -

1. contradict the hypothesis that samanupassati is discursive; or
2. require that samanupassati happens during 1st Jhana, but happens after arising from 2nd Jhana etc.

The 2nd possibility would mean that samanupassati is qualitatively different in 1st Jhana versus the higher jhanas, thereby breaking the thread that unifies that series.

This suggests that a 3rd possibility is the most plausible, where samanupassati is discursive yet relates to all the 4 jhanas in the same way, namely it happens not within the jhanas, but after one arises from it. In these cases, I am of the view that the present tense verb samanupassati is not used in a narrative sense but as an imperative. There is nothing in the present tense to indicate contemporaneity of the viharati (abides in jhana) and samanupassati (regards).
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

Ah, thank you for the details. In that case, it seems we have here some instructions for not becoming fixated internally. But also, form is still within view during the jhanas. This will mean a distinct sort of experience, as against the more common formless aspirations.

As to the other thread, even if the two formless attainments of the Buddha's former teachers and the later formless structure are perhaps similar in name only, I as yet set them aside, thus far, due to the heuristic to which you have been subjected. The wild gesticulation of it, as that thread succinctly puts it, I must apologize for. It is still being worked out, though the structure itself is settling.

:alien:
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
reflection
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by reflection »

Well, you lost me. :tongue:

Let me just say I don't think you don't have to be a linguist to be a Buddhist. ;)
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by Sylvester »

Hi again
daverupa wrote:Ah, thank you for the details. In that case, it seems we have here some instructions for not becoming fixated internally. But also, form is still within view during the jhanas. This will mean a distinct sort of experience, as against the more common formless aspirations.
And I was wondering when the rūpa argument would pop up. :tongue:

If you were suggesting that the presence of rūpasañña in the 4 Jhanas is indicative of phassa/contact with the 5 kāmā of rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa and phoṭṭhabba, it is worth noting that this conception of rūpa is an Abhidhamma innovation. Sue Hamilton's "Identity and Experience" (Cap 1) traces how the Abhidhamma explains rūpa in terms of the 5 "material" senses and their respective objects. Dmytro has also helpfully observed this as well in this post - http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 99#p193298" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Hamilton makes these points -
...the Theravada Buddhist tradition has generally understood the term updi nipa specifically
to refer to the senses (usually taken to be the physical sense organs) and
their corresponding sense objects, collectively called gatanas. A typical
definition of upa'di rCpa is given in the Dhammasanganiof the Abhidhamma,
where it is stated to refer to ten of the gatanas (that is excluding the sixth
sense, manas, and its corresponding object, dhammZ).16 In the Vibhanga the
same ten 6yatunas are in turn described as the four great elements which are
derived," which amounts to the same thing put differently

...Given such prominent mention of the senses in the Sutta Pitaka, and
given that it is obvious to us that there are physical organs corresponding to
at least five of the senses (so one might equally obviously assume that they
are part of the ru'pakkhandha), it is also conversely notable that nowhere in
the Sutta Pitaka are the senses, or their corresponding sense objects, explicitly
stated to be part of the riipakkhandha, and none of the passages which is
specifically describing the riipakkhandha includes any of them as upEdd nipa.

...With regard to the increasingly 'physical' understanding of the senses,
not only does the later tradition explicitly classify the senses as riipa, but the
later texts also give long and elaborate physical descriptions of the sense
organs.

(sorry, too lazy to clean up the diacritics)
It might be worth noting this oft-unnoticed little axiom proposed in MN 28, after its exposition on the 4 dhātu -
"Friends, just as when — in dependence on timber, vines, grass, & clay — space is enclosed and is gathered under the term 'house,' in the same way, when space is enclosed in dependence on bones, tendons, muscle, & skin, it is gathered under the term, 'form.'
Hamilton makes the same observation about "space" being classified as rūpa.

A little further down the sutta, it embarks on an exposition of phassa. All 6 contacts yield the rūpakkhandha, not just the so-called 5 "material" senses.

I don't think we're any nearer to resolving the mystery of whether rūpasañña means perception of the physical body in jhana, based merely on the presence of rūpasañña. Hamilton makes the point that in the Suttas, their detailed explanation of each dhātu posits an "abstract" conception of rūpa. Certainly, the Abhidhammic and Commentarial explanations (eg to DN 15) which are more "solid" could support your point but the Suttas, prima facie, seem to work on a more conceptual level.

As for the "fixated internally" (presumably MN 138?), some delicious hints from the Chinese parallel will be explored by Ven Analayo in the future.

:anjali:
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Purely mental absorption (jhana) in the suttas

Post by daverupa »

All 6 contacts yield the rūpakkhandha, not just the so-called 5 "material" senses.
Yes of course; the aggregates operate across each of the sense spheres. The presence of rupasanna is noteworthy because of the comparative lack of it in the arupa list, which is obvious at first. But when you consider that arupa attainments are fairly standard brahmana fare (see especially the last section of Snp), this becomes a significant differentiation, does it not?
MN 36 wrote:"I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana...
It seems to be the Buddha's discovery, one which does not require the prerequisites which seem to be needed by arupa seekers, and one which uniquely includes rupasanna.

It seems clear rupasanna was assumed to be impossible, therefore, in these arupa states which were making the rounds, which seems significant as well since it suggests that the abstract potential of the term 'rupa' in this context may not be indicated. (After all, namarupa does not allow of an interpretation which amounts to namanama, does it?)

I note that I don't have the Pali for
Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder — saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within and without — would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal.
which may be pertinent?
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Post Reply