SuttaCentral
Then there’s the idea the textual tradition are secondary to oral tradition.
But EBT, taken as a religion, asserts that “our”/“my” contemporary interpretation of the (supposed) letter of the texts supersedes centuries of oral lineage.
One’s own imaginings are better than guidance of a teacher with decades of experience who also learned from similar fore-bearers?
Paradox on all sides.
(by the way:
was this article referenced already?)
The experience is that the pleasant sensation grows in intensity until it explodes into an unmistakable state of ecstasy. This is Piti, which is primarily a physical experience. Physical pleasure this intense is accompanied by emotional pleasure, and this emotional pleasure is Sukha (joy) which is the fourth factor of the First Jhana.
!?!?!?
I would hardly listen to this nonsense.
Aren’t the EBTs talking about just the contrary, as in:
‘Don’t you know, you fool,
That maxim of the arahants?
Impermanent are all formations;
Their nature is to arise and vanish.
Having arisen, they cease:
Their appeasement is blissful.’
SN 1.11
What kind of appeasement is that emotional pleasure born of an explosion of ecstasy.
Piti (Rapture) is the primary quality of the first Jhana (born from seclusion of sense desires.)
So it is not a grasping of Rapture and pleasure/gladness (sukkha), it is not renouncing sense desires that this wholesome pleasure arises and we stay with it for a time.
Piti and sukkha of the jhanas are called blameless pleasure by the Buddha. He realized that under the rose apple tree the pleasure he experienced as a boy was blameless and would lead to awakening.
This is the pleasure that is not dependent upon the world we can use to get out of seeking worldly pleasures and eventually we let go even the blameless pleasure as we enter the arupa jhanas.
I thought I’d share this article series which looks at the jhānas from an EBT standpoint.
An overview of the series:
I think many people experience an initial 5 hindrance free samadhi, and think it is the first jhana, just because it is different enough from your normal state of mind. While it is definitely commendable being able to achieve such a state of samadhi the first jhana arises much deeper into that samadhi.
Without a sudden shift in what one is aware of in deep samadhi there wont be any 1st jhana. For it to be labelled as such it has to be distinct.
with metta
The sutta doesn’t say that. At the end it says “By not holding to fixed views, The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision, Being freed from all sense desires, Is not born again into this world.”
."
Hello
Till now i couldn’t find anywhere in the Suttas “passage of air through nostrils” as a support for absorption / attaining Jhanas.
The only expression i could find more or less related to the subject was “… and pays attention to the fore…” (Anapanasati Sutta) . But perhaps i missed something ?
Thanks
How do you interpret the anapanasati then if not as respiration?
With metta
It is about breathing yet we find in no sutta what is the best way to focus on breathing in terms of meditative absorption. So the following is mainly based upon my experience and other sources than the Suttas (except for 1.) :
The only one that we can infer from the suttas and still vaguely seems to be 1.
Bronkhorst in his book “Absorption” raises (indirectly) this problem: there are no precise indications as to which tool the Tatagata himself used to reach the Jhanas.
There are obviously different schools of thought regarding this. There is a view (which I’ve only heard on the Internet) that the Suttas are a complete manual. However, even the introductory section of the Anapanasati sutta: SuttaCentral suggests that the mendicants were getting considerable personal instruction. As do the “gradual training suttas” such as MN 107 SuttaCentral and suttas such as AN 4.94 SuttaCentral
As for the person who has neither serenity nor discernment: they should approach someone who has serenity and discernment and ask: ‘Reverend, how should the mind be stilled? How should it be settled? How should it be unified? How should it be immersed in samādhi?’ How should conditions be seen? How should they be comprehended? How should they be discerned?’ That person would answer as they’ve seen and known: …
The counterargument one hears is that
The Realized One doesn’t have the closed fist of a teacher when it comes to the teachings.
SuttaCentral
However, the suttas do seem much more clear about results than technique: the characteristics of the jhanas, the nature of understanding of various aspects of the Dhamma, …
Ancient and modern meditation manuals (such as the Visuddhimagga, or the dozens of books one can download and/or buy today) do go into detail of technique. And they differ quite a lot!
So perhaps the lack of detail on technique is deliberate. The results are important, whether you get there by focussing on the breath at the nostrils, or some other technique is not. You need the technique that works for you…
To be somewhat provocative, perhaps I could propose that technique is not Dhamma. The results are Dhamma. Check the results against the teachings, and don’t worry about where to focus on the breath, where to focus during walking meditation, what the correct way to enter jhana is, and so on…