I am not going to continue this discussion further. Sorry, but I don’t have the energy, time or interest in another jhana wars discussion.
The topic of the thread was about the necessity of jhana for nibbana, not about the nature of jhana itself. That’s a separate (though related) topic. I think it’s my fault that the thread turned in this direction (i quoted a passage above which discussed this), but that was not my intention. I think if you want to discuss this topic you should open another thread.
I have pointed to numerous sources which discuss the issue ad nauseam. Getting into this debate further would just rehash what has already been said anyways.
Unification of mind with these seven factors as prerequisites is called noble right immersion ‘with its vital conditions’ and ‘with its prerequisites’.
@NgXinZhao, maybe because SN/SA plays an important role in the structure of the Tipitaka. Those who have read “all together” are likely to have such a view.
The text SN 45.28 does not have a corresponding SA counterpart. Also, the SN text indicates only the Pali term, “sattahaṅgehi”, with no any content. What are the seven factors in the sutta?
And what is noble right immersion with its vital conditions and its prerequisites?
There are right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness.
katamo ca, bhikkhave, ariyo sammāsamādhi saupaniso saparikkhāro? seyyathidaṃ — sammādiṭṭhi … pe … sammāsati.
This is because EBTs, such as the four Agamas/Nikayas, were not established at once in a complete form in the early Buddhist council. They were gradually expanded in the sequence SA/SN, MA/MN, DA/DN, EA/AN, of which SA/SN was the foundation, according to Ven. Yinshun (see pp. 9-11 in Choong Mun-keat’s Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism).
Thanks. Sorry, I was wrongly reading the textual content:
"At Savatthī. “Bhikkhus, I will teach you noble right concentration with its supports and its accessories. Listen to that….
“And what, bhikkhus, is noble right concentration with its supports and its accessories? There are: right view … right mindfulness. The one-pointedness of mind equipped with these seven factors is called noble right concentration ‘with its supports,’ and also ‘with its accessories.’” "
You need to change your title to “I don’t think (hard)jhana is needed to attain nibbana” imo because currently title and contents don’t match especially the late replies
Alright I have abandoned my wrong view that let alone hard jhana not even easy jhana is needed to attain nibbana so only ekaggata is needed to attain nibbana but I realize that’s wrong thanks for all who gives me knowledge in this thread
But I still think hard jhana is not needed to attain nibbana so only ekaggata and easy jhana that’s needed to attain nibbana but I can be wrong again for the second time so I have revised the title
Disagreement don’t arise anger in me because I never cling to any view I am always open to any view
I think jhana should be hard enough that you crave it and abandon sensuality but I don’t know how hard is “hard” here
No sir, previously I thought that both easy jhana and hard jhana are not needed to attain nibbana but now I think that only hard jhana that is not needed to attain nibbana
I don’t know if you ever read this document “A Study of Sukkhavipassaka in Pāli Buddhism” by Tzungkuen Wen.
As for me, the words of the ancient theras-commentators are very valuable, worthy of serious consideration.
Abstract
This thesis aims to explore the doctrine of sukkhavipassaka(“dry-insight practitioner”) in Pāli Buddhism. The focus of the thesis is to utilize the canonical and commentarial sources of the various Buddhist schools to evaluate the position of this doctrine in the history of early Buddhism. Since the early 20th century the sukkhavipassakadoctrine and its practice have been reemphasized by eminent meditation monks in Burma, and later they spread to other Buddhist countries in Asia and beyond. Some scholars, nevertheless, have cast doubts on the authenticity of the sukkhavipassaka doctrine. They argue that it is a later development, not recorded in the Pāli Nikāyas since the form-sphere jhāna (Skt. dhyāna) is always necessary for the realization of arahantship, or even for stream-entry, the first stage of enlightenment.
The first part of this thesis investigates the concept of the sukkhavipassakain the four Nikāyas. Many suttas in the Pāli Nikāyas imply an acknowledgement of noble beings who lack form-sphere jhānas; also many meditative techniques described in the suttas can be practised in the so-called dryinsight way. However, it is in the Pāli commentarial literature, which is discussed in the second part of this thesis that the sukkhavipassaka doctrine appears in a full-fledged form. The Pāli commentaries not only specify the concentration that dry-insight practitioners use to develop insight knowledge, but also reveal the advantages and disadvantages of the dry-insight meditative approach. In the third part of this thesis, the canonical and commentarial materials related to the Susīma Sutta which are preserved in schools other than the Theravāda are investigated. This thesis reveals that the concept of arahants who lack the first form-sphere jhāna is accepted not only by the Theravāda but also by the Sarvāstivāda, the *Satyasiddhisāstra, and the Yogacārabhūmiśāstra. Since various Buddhist schools in India unanimously advocate the idea that there are arahants who have not achieved the form-sphere jhāna, this research concludes that the dry-insight meditative approach and dry-insight arahants are not an invention by Theravādin commentators, but a common heritage which was most probably handed down from the time of the Buddha and then shared by various Buddhist schools.
