Vipassana

On the cultivation of insight/wisdom
Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Sun Mar 14, 2010 12:55 pm

Ben wrote:Well, it wouldnt be the first scriptural meditation source that was applicable to both jhana and vipassana: anapanasati sutta is a case in point.
regards

Ben
Hi Ben

My point is that a "vipassana meditation technique" as such was never taught by the Buddha. Jhana was. Anapanasati is recollection of the breath, which done properly culminates in jhana/samadhi, there is no switch which can be pressed to say that "now I will do anapanasati, the vipassana way". There is wrong meditation (meditation that does not lead to jhana) and there is Right meditation (meditation that leads to jhana).

Brizzy :smile:

User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Vipassana

Post by Ben » Sun Mar 14, 2010 1:14 pm

I suggest you read Ven Analayo's book.
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com..

Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:21 pm

Ben wrote:I suggest you read Ven Analayo's book.
I suggest you read the four Nikayas.
I just did a bit of research on the Dhyānasamādhi Sūtra. It appears to be a mahayana sutra written maybe a 1000 years after the Buddha. Only Mahayana dare put the suffix "sutra" in a title that was not from the Buddhas time. ( not to say I didnt find it interesting). However it seems strange that people are referring to Mahayana texts to try and estabish a lineage and antiquity to modern day Theravadin vipassana techniques.

Brizzy :smile:

BTW - Do you believe that eradicating sankharas is the Buddhas message, and if so where can this be found in the suttas?
Last edited by Brizzy on Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:58 am, edited 2 times in total.

Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:37 pm

Freawaru wrote:Hi Brizzi,
Brizzy wrote: Do you think that you might be taking to much for granted?
Often. But not in this case :tongue:
I have never come across the Buddha mentioning hatha yoga or any specific exercise other than walking.
Long breath, short breath, staying aware of breath: pranayama
satipatthana sutta wrote: "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. Just as a skilled turner or his apprentice, when making a long turn, discerns that he is making a long turn, or when making a short turn discerns that he is making a short turn; in the same way the monk, when breathing in long, discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short... He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This is well known yoga training.
satipatthana sutta wrote: "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself.
This gives the training a different direction. During hatha yoga states like this the awareness (sampajanna) is present, one discerns directly, now, in the present. But hatha yoga teaches to do something with this skill, just like the teachers of the Buddha taught how to develop into higher and higher jhanas. The Buddha instead gave it a different direction, namely to pay attention to the awareness itself, to practice this awareness to reduce the clinging.
As far as I am aware the four jhanas "As taught by the Buddha" are not to be found with yoga teachers or anyone else outside the Buddhas dispensation. The jhanas of Hindu origin are without discernment.
Discernment arises with awareness (sampajanna). It is present during jhana (and there is really no difference between Buddhist jhana and Hindu jhana, just look who taught the Buddha jhana in the first place: they were no Buddhists) as it arises from concentration on the right objects such as the sphere of nothingness. In all jhanic states one can practice discernment or choose to just enjoy the ride.

Brizzi, this is really the most important aspect of the Buddha's teaching: to discern between the experience itself (such as jhana or not jhana) and the awareness (sampajanna) that discerns it. If someone does not know this difference all the suttas are interpreted in the wrong context.
The jhanas of the Buddhas dispensation are the culmination of satipatthana.
Sure. Increasing concentration leads to jhana. Even in tandem with awareness. But the jhanas are still the jhanas, one can discern them, one knows the experience. The difference is the identification, the Buddha's teachers taught to be absorbed (lucidly) in the jhanas (say, the nothingness or "neither perception or non perception"), but for them the pleasant feeling of jhana entered and remained (because that is what they wanted). They identified with the jhanic state. The Buddha choose to pay attention to the awareness and observation rather than the experience itself, thus Liberating Himself from the experience and the identification with the state.

The point is to practice discernment during jhana one has to first experience jhana. Makes no sense otherwise.
The eightfold path IS a progressive path with right view as first, leading eventually to mindfulness culminating into the jhanas.
Yes, but one cannot have right view when the eye is shut. So one has to first open the eye, see and discern. Seeing and discerning lead to right view, that leads to memory (sati) to keep the eye open, that leads to concentration, that leads to jhana. Those suttas starting with right view imply that the practitioner has already opened the eye and sees.

I have often read people wanting to start with right view, but they don't know what right view is because their eye is closed. Right view is not something one can imagine by reading some suttas. One is not taming one's mind by this. The suttas compare the mind to an elephant (or a horse sometimes), and that one needs to tame it.
Quite excellent are well trained & completely tamed
Elephants and full-blooded horses, yet far better is
the one, who have tamed himself ....

Not by Taming elephants can one reach the beyond.
Only by Taming own mind can one reach the beyond.
http://what-buddha-said.net/Canon/Sutta ... htm#hapter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; XXIII The Elephant - Nagga
Taming one's mind is not too dissimilar to training an elephant. This is why the Buddha used the metaphor. To practice taming, controling one's mind and body (such as in hatha yoga) is the fundamental practice of the Dhamma vinaya. Taming leads to right view because the eye opens.
Hi Freawaru

Do you know what Right View is as defined by the Buddha? :tongue:
The Buddha says the requisite for right view is listening to the Dhamma.
Hatha yoga is a religion infatuated with the body. A healthy body maybe but not a healthy mind( if you go along with its religious teachings).
Nobody taught the Buddha the four jhanas that the Buddha went on to teach. There is a world of difference between the Hindu & Buddhist jhanas. Every jhana outside the Buddhas dispensation is wrong concentration. Right view leads onto Right thought etc. leading to right recollection leading to right jhana. Any other eightfold path is by its nature is wrong - wrong view leading to wrong thought etc. leading to wrong jhana.
Seeing and discerning as you put it cannot lead to right view. Right view has to be in place First.

Brizzy :smile:

User avatar
Monkey Mind
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:56 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest, USA

Re: Vipassana

Post by Monkey Mind » Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:15 pm

Brizzy wrote:
Hi Monkey Mind

Are you suggesting the Buddha did not teach the complete path? Most/All instances of stream entry are not in a meditative setting. A meditative setting is not required for jhana or path to arise. The most important aspect is that the Buddha requires people to "listen" to the Dhamma.

Brizzy :smile:
No, that is not what I am saying. Path is complete and thoroughly expounded. Others have already referenced the Satipatthana Sutta, Anapanasati Sutta, and others. If I understand the OP correctly, we are wondering how we derive specific vipassana techniques from those suttas. My comment was to illustrate that the suttas are focused on the content of what Buddha taught in discourse. I am hypothesizing that there might have been a lot of "material" that was so common-day that it was not recorded, based on the assumption that it would continue to be common day. I can read a dozen books about the martial art Aikido, but the knowledge I learn will be radically different than if I attend a dozen Aikido classes.
"As I am, so are others;
as others are, so am I."
Having thus identified self and others,
harm no one nor have them harmed.

Sutta Nipāta 3.710

User avatar
altar
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Great Barrington, MA

Re: Vipassana

Post by altar » Sun Mar 14, 2010 8:31 pm

I'm pretty sure the Buddha encouraged meditation, vipassana, and jhana. So if there was a meditation technique based on the four foundations of mindfulness, that led to insight, I don't see why he would discourage it (Obviously there can be specific cases, even a majority of the time at least in theory, where certain types of meditation would be less appropriate).
Then there is the sutta (I believe it is in Bhikkhu Bodhi's anthology, and therefore elsewhere, too) that talks of 4 ways his disciples progress: insight preceded by concentration, concentration preceded by insight, the two together, and the last I think is someone who after a while loses confusion regarding the dhamma.
Also, as for there not being mention of attaining stream entry in meditation, it's interesting, but there is mention of many techniques, or at least six or seven, that lead to the deathless (food, body, death, inconstancy in conditioned things, suffering in conditioned things, what else?...), suggesting that these contemplations can lead to stream-entry.
I'm not sure that Goenka is of the opinion that jhana is not fruitful, but I think that jhana is discouraged during his retreats (at least the "normal jhanas"). This might seem silly, strange, because the Buddha encouraged jhana. But I'm not sure it is silly or strange. The Buddha also encouraged metta. Yet if one's main meditation object is the body, it might make sense to tell oneself "Okay, don't focus on metta, now you're going to be mindful of the body." If metta arises during mindfulness of the body, okay, but still one stays mindful of the body, not switching to cultivation of metta. Maybe a person could do both, but many like to stay to one technique at a time. In the same way, a person might say, "Okay, don't focus on jhana, now you're going to just observe ("[just observing]" sensations being a common instruction in Goenka, no?)"
I mean, I don't know, but if a person went into a jhana during a Goenka retreat I don't think the take on it would be, "That's not the instructions," but the take might be, to just keeping being mindful... if a sensation crops up, it crops up...

User avatar
puthujjana
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:13 am
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Contact:

Re: Vipassana

Post by puthujjana » Sun Mar 14, 2010 8:32 pm

Hej Brizzy,

maybe you'll find this article interesting:

From Vipassana Hater to Vipassana Lover
http://theravadin.wordpress.com/2009/02 ... ana-lover/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
"Once you understand anatta, then the burden of life is gone. You’ll be at peace with the world. When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness and we can truly be happy."
- Ajahn Chah

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19959
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassana

Post by retrofuturist » Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:59 pm

Greetings Brizzy,

Related topic...

How important is technique?
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:00 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Brizzy,

Related topic...

How important is technique?
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)
Hi Retro

Interesting thread. I agree that "technique" can be over-emphasised. I prefer to use a more experential approach and I find the Buddhas similes and instructions invaluable in doing so.

Brizzy :smile:

Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:21 am

puthujjana wrote:Hej Brizzy,

maybe you'll find this article interesting:

From Vipassana Hater to Vipassana Lover
http://theravadin.wordpress.com/2009/02 ... ana-lover/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Hi puthujjana

Interesting, confusing and a little fanciful. Sati is reflection/contemplation/remembering - leading to samadhi/jhana, leading to understanding( although if it is a jhana as taught by the Buddha, a lot of understanding has already taken place in attaining that jhana). If "noting" can do all this great!

Brizzy :smile:

Freawaru
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Vipassana

Post by Freawaru » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:14 am

Hi Brizzy,
Brizzy wrote: Do you know what Right View is as defined by the Buddha? :tongue:
Do you? By own experience?
The Buddha says the requisite for right view is listening to the Dhamma.
And wise consideration. No wisdom, no wise consideration. Thus wisdom has to be achieved before Listening to the Dhamma can lead to right view.
Hatha yoga is a religion infatuated with the body. A healthy body maybe but not a healthy mind( if you go along with its religious teachings).
Hatha yoga is not a religion at all. I started practice during my atheism phase. It is a practice of physical exercise (asanas) compared with a practice of steadfast concentration on mind and body and a development of perpetual awareness. No need for any religious or ideological teachings.
Nobody taught the Buddha the four jhanas that the Buddha went on to teach.
Can you prove this? That the two highest jhanas were taught to him are described in the suttas. And as the others precede these I see no reason to assume otherwise.
There is a world of difference between the Hindu & Buddhist jhanas.
Describe their difference by your own experience, please, so that I can understand this statement. Describe your experience of what you call Hindu jhana and your experience of what you call Buddhist jhana.

Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:00 am

Freawaru wrote:Hi Brizzy,
Brizzy wrote: Do you know what Right View is as defined by the Buddha? :tongue:
Do you? By own experience?
The Buddha says the requisite for right view is listening to the Dhamma.
And wise consideration. No wisdom, no wise consideration. Thus wisdom has to be achieved before Listening to the Dhamma can lead to right view.
Hatha yoga is a religion infatuated with the body. A healthy body maybe but not a healthy mind( if you go along with its religious teachings).
Hatha yoga is not a religion at all. I started practice during my atheism phase. It is a practice of physical exercise (asanas) compared with a practice of steadfast concentration on mind and body and a development of perpetual awareness. No need for any religious or ideological teachings.
Nobody taught the Buddha the four jhanas that the Buddha went on to teach.
Can you prove this? That the two highest jhanas were taught to him are described in the suttas. And as the others precede these I see no reason to assume otherwise.
There is a world of difference between the Hindu & Buddhist jhanas.
Describe their difference by your own experience, please, so that I can understand this statement. Describe your experience of what you call Hindu jhana and your experience of what you call Buddhist jhana.
Hi Freawaru

Right view is the four noble truths. You ask do I understand "by my own experience", if you mean have I heard this/contemplated this and understood this, then the answer is yes( as I assume the majority of sincere Buddhists would have done so also). Right view is the starting point, without it we are not following the path.

Are you really saying that you have to have considered the Dhamma before you have actually heard it? :thinking:

Hatha yoga is one of the branches of hinduism.

You are assuming that the attainments taught to the Buddha were precipitated by the four jhanas (Buddhas jhanas). This is not stated, I see no reason to presume they did. In fact the Buddhas memory of first jhana was when he was a young boy, this itself is suggestive. The attainments taught to the Buddha, have philosophical bases - this itself is wrong view. Right view underpins the jhanas - re:- 8 fold path. It is easily conceivable that an attainment like the base of nothingness can be achieved without the four jhanas.

I dont know if it is right to describe my own personal experiences in meditation.

The differences would appear to be that "Hindu jhana" is overpowering and all consuming, where no discernment is possible (like your body/mind are totally absorbed until the energy propelling one into that type of concentration is used up. No awareness of body is maintained.
The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana. One only has to read the similes for jhana, to gain an idea of the process.

Brizzy :smile:

Freawaru
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Vipassana

Post by Freawaru » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:34 am

Hi Brizzi
Brizzy wrote: Right view is the four noble truths. You ask do I understand "by my own experience", if you mean have I heard this/contemplated this and understood this, then the answer is yes( as I assume the majority of sincere Buddhists would have done so also). Right view is the starting point, without it we are not following the path.
So you are saying that you already understand what the Buddha took so long to understand? Understanding the four noble truths is a synonym for Enlightenment.
Are you really saying that you have to have considered the Dhamma before you have actually heard it?
I am saying that "wise consideration" yoniso manasikara is a requirement for Right View. Yoniso manasikara arises from sati-sampajanna. There is no wise consideration without wisdom - so, yes, wisdom has to be developed before "Hearing Dhamma" can have the right effect.
Hatha yoga is one of the branches of hinduism.
While description of it's experiences and stages of development are in sanskrit and based on the Hindu mythology (that isn't that different from the Buddhist, btw), in itself it is not a branch of Hinduism:
In this treatise Swatmarama introduces Hatha Yoga as preparatory stage of physical purification that the body practices for higher meditation. The Asanas and Pranayama in Raja Yoga were what the Hindu Yogis used to physically train their body for long periods of meditation. This practice is called shatkarma.
The word Hatha is a compound of the words Ha and Tha meaning sun and moon ( हकारः कीर्तितः सूर्यष्ठकारश्चंद्र उच्यते | सूर्यचंद्रमसोर्योगाद्धठयोग निगद्यते || ), referring to Praana and Apaana, and also to the principal nadis (energy channels) of the subtle body that must be fully operational to attain a state of dhyana or samādhi.
Yoga means to yoke, or to join two things together, hence hatha yoga is meant to join together sun (masculine, active) energy with the moon (feminine, receptive) energy, thus producing balance and greater power in an individual.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatha_yoga" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Hatha yoga leads to the jhanas, the elements, the iddhis (siddhis).
You are assuming that the attainments taught to the Buddha were precipitated by the four jhanas (Buddhas jhanas). This is not stated, I see no reason to presume they did. In fact the Buddhas memory of first jhana was when he was a young boy, this itself is suggestive.
Many people experience the first jhana naturally, due to kamma of previous lives. There is nothing unusual about this.
It is easily conceivable that an attainment like the base of nothingness can be achieved without the four jhanas.
Are you speaking about your own experience of the base of nothingness here?
I dont know if it is right to describe my own personal experiences in meditation.
It is. If you want to further communicate with me you will have to. For I can't read your mind. Without knowing your experiences I cannot talk to you and explain to you what I mean. You won't understand what I write.
The differences would appear to be that "Hindu jhana" is overpowering and all consuming, where no discernment is possible (like your body/mind are totally absorbed until the energy propelling one into that type of concentration is used up. No awareness of body is maintained.
This is not so. One can control the jhanas, master them, enter and leave them at will. How could this be possible without awareness?

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana. One only has to read the similes for jhana, to gain an idea of the process.
Yes, and it is identical to the Hindu one.
Freawaru, are you implying that Arahants have sex or engage in sexual activity. The Buddha states in one of the suttas that craving can be overcome by craving and conceit by conceit etc. However in regard to the sexual act the Blessed One has advised the destruction of the bridge.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yes, and he clearly didn't mean it in it's biological sense. The sequence is: abandonment of food, then craving, then conceit, and then "sex"??? How much sense does this make?
If you want to read the Buddhas explanation of celibacy it is found here :- AN 7 47, the sutta actually mentions coitus in regard to celibacy.
How odd. I assumed that coitus is latin (literal meaning: unification) and not Pali.
Celibacy is to be celibate regarding the sexual act and sexual activity.
I see no prove in either sutta.

You mentioned this:

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana.
and we agree on this one. Do you really want to understand why I am sure that terms such as sex, celibacy, male and female, bhikkhu and bhikkhuni, don't refer to biology or society? If yes, answer me these questions, you don't have to write any personal information if you don't want to, just general answers to the general questions:

1) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes find it difficult to "get out" of this activity. I mean, do thoughts about it linger, say, you want to drive the car but thinking about the suttas still keeps on going on it's own?

2) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes loose the sense of time? Does it happen that you wanted to spend just a certain amount of time on it but when you finally remember to look at the watch it is much later than you expect it to be?

3) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that after emerging from it you find yourself noticing rather suddenly that you are actually hungry or thirsty, that there is physical pain, as if those had not been there while you had been engaged in that activity?

4) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that without stopping it and while still focused on that activity you find yourself noticing that you are not hungry or thirsty, that any physical pain you have felt before (say, you are ill and now watch a good movie) is absent, that you loose your sense of time and everything that is not required for the activity?

Brizzy

Re: Vipassana

Post by Brizzy » Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:07 pm

Hi Freawaru
Freawaru wrote:Hi Brizzi
Brizzy wrote: Right view is the four noble truths. You ask do I understand "by my own experience", if you mean have I heard this/contemplated this and understood this, then the answer is yes( as I assume the majority of sincere Buddhists would have done so also). Right view is the starting point, without it we are not following the path.
So you are saying that you already understand what the Buddha took so long to understand? Understanding the four noble truths is a synonym for Enlightenment.
Penetrating the four noble truths is the synonym.
Are you really saying that you have to have considered the Dhamma before you have actually heard it?
I am saying that "wise consideration" yoniso manasikara is a requirement for Right View. Yoniso manasikara arises from sati-sampajanna. There is no wise consideration without wisdom - so, yes, wisdom has to be developed before "Hearing Dhamma" can have the right effect.
You can only consider what you have heard.
Hatha yoga is one of the branches of hinduism.
While description of it's experiences and stages of development are in sanskrit and based on the Hindu mythology (that isn't that different from the Buddhist, btw), in itself it is not a branch of Hinduism:
I am sorry I dont understand. If its experiences & stages are based on Hinduism, then does it not make it Hinduism.
In this treatise Swatmarama introduces Hatha Yoga as preparatory stage of physical purification that the body practices for higher meditation. The Asanas and Pranayama in Raja Yoga were what the Hindu Yogis used to physically train their body for long periods of meditation. This practice is called shatkarma.
The word Hatha is a compound of the words Ha and Tha meaning sun and moon ( हकारः कीर्तितः सूर्यष्ठकारश्चंद्र उच्यते | सूर्यचंद्रमसोर्योगाद्धठयोग निगद्यते || ), referring to Praana and Apaana, and also to the principal nadis (energy channels) of the subtle body that must be fully operational to attain a state of dhyana or samādhi.
Yoga means to yoke, or to join two things together, hence hatha yoga is meant to join together sun (masculine, active) energy with the moon (feminine, receptive) energy, thus producing balance and greater power in an individual.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatha_yoga" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Hatha yoga leads to the jhanas, the elements, the iddhis (siddhis).
You are assuming that the attainments taught to the Buddha were precipitated by the four jhanas (Buddhas jhanas). This is not stated, I see no reason to presume they did. In fact the Buddhas memory of first jhana was when he was a young boy, this itself is suggestive.
Many people experience the first jhana naturally, due to kamma of previous lives. There is nothing unusual about this.
It is easily conceivable that an attainment like the base of nothingness can be achieved without the four jhanas.
Are you speaking about your own experience of the base of nothingness here?
I dont know if it is right to describe my own personal experiences in meditation.
It is. If you want to further communicate with me you will have to. For I can't read your mind. Without knowing your experiences I cannot talk to you and explain to you what I mean. You won't understand what I write.
The differences would appear to be that "Hindu jhana" is overpowering and all consuming, where no discernment is possible (like your body/mind are totally absorbed until the energy propelling one into that type of concentration is used up. No awareness of body is maintained.
This is not so. One can control the jhanas, master them, enter and leave them at will. How could this be possible without awareness?
Is this experience of "Absorption" meditation from your own experience?

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana. One only has to read the similes for jhana, to gain an idea of the process.
Yes, and it is identical to the Hindu one.
I see. If that is the case then Right samadhi is found in Hinduism! Right samadhi is based on the other 7 factors of the path & is not found in any other dispensation outside of the Buddhas.
Freawaru, are you implying that Arahants have sex or engage in sexual activity. The Buddha states in one of the suttas that craving can be overcome by craving and conceit by conceit etc. However in regard to the sexual act the Blessed One has advised the destruction of the bridge.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yes, and he clearly didn't mean it in it's biological sense. The sequence is: abandonment of food, then craving, then conceit, and then "sex"??? How much sense does this make?
I do not understand what point you are making.
If you want to read the Buddhas explanation of celibacy it is found here :- AN 7 47, the sutta actually mentions coitus in regard to celibacy.
How odd. I assumed that coitus is latin (literal meaning: unification) and not Pali.
Celibacy is to be celibate regarding the sexual act and sexual activity.
I see no prove in either sutta.
How can you not see the proof in AN 7 47. The Buddha actually describes different levels of sexual activity. It is absurd to think the Buddha was discussing anything other than sex.
You mentioned this:

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana.
and we agree on this one. Do you really want to understand why I am sure that terms such as sex, celibacy, male and female, bhikkhu and bhikkhuni, don't refer to biology or society? If yes, answer me these questions, you don't have to write any personal information if you don't want to, just general answers to the general questions:

1) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes find it difficult to "get out" of this activity. I mean, do thoughts about it linger, say, you want to drive the car but thinking about the suttas still keeps on going on it's own?

2) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes loose the sense of time? Does it happen that you wanted to spend just a certain amount of time on it but when you finally remember to look at the watch it is much later than you expect it to be?

3) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that after emerging from it you find yourself noticing rather suddenly that you are actually hungry or thirsty, that there is physical pain, as if those had not been there while you had been engaged in that activity?

4) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that without stopping it and while still focused on that activity you find yourself noticing that you are not hungry or thirsty, that any physical pain you have felt before (say, you are ill and now watch a good movie) is absent, that you loose your sense of time and everything that is not required for the activity?
I will not answer these questions :thinking: freawaru, because I do not wish to "want to understand why I am sure that terms such as sex, celibacy, male and female, bhikkhu and bhikkhuni, don't refer to biology or society"
The Buddha taught Dhamma with an open hand and there is no esoteric teaching in his dispensation.

:smile:

Freawaru
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Vipassana

Post by Freawaru » Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:31 pm

Hi Brizzy,
Brizzy wrote: I do not understand what point you are making.
And - as you said - neither are you interested in it. So I am ending this communication.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests