It seems to me that in the West we are coming from Cartesian mind-body dualism; part of the metaphysical worldview we learn through our culture is that the physical and the mental are two different things.
For example, in modern western medicine we have doctors for the physical body and psychologists for the mind, reflecting Cartesian dualism; the mind and body are two different things and we need two different professions/educations to heal and understand them.
However, ancient Ayurvedic medicine (1) does not seem to reflect mind body dualism as far as I can tell, but rather seems to emphasize the interconnected whole, i.e. no mind-body dualism.
Additionally, when I look at the EBT frameworks for human experience, like the five khandas, six sense bases, namarupa or even dependent origination, they don’t grok well with Cartesian dualism in my mind.
To speculate a bit, perhaps we need to look at the EBTs from a different metaphysical worldview than Cartesian dualism if we are to understand them?
Hi Mat, the problem I see with this argument is that you are essentially saying “Anybody who has practiced the jhana similes [with the understanding that the rapture is supposed to be in the body] know that the rapture is felt in the body”.
If the body in the jhana similes does not refer to the physical body, those above-mentioned people are not practicing the jhana similes, but something else. Therefore, the experience of rapture in the body cannot in itself be evidence that jhana-rapture is felt in the body.
Disregarding that, what do we mean when we say ‘rapture in the body’? Are we talking about touch-consciousness, or a mental rapture that has some physical manifestation? Or something else?