SuttaCentral
Well, I think I rather meant this process as described for example in SN 35.61:
Ear consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds. The meeting of the three is contact.
I should perhaps have phrased my sentence a little differently.
The sound is there, but the ear is not receptive, so no ear consciousness arises.
It’s hard to understand how the meaning of a word should be different because of the number.
Does that sutta say anything about saññā?
Hi, Bhante. I was wondering, how does the meditator -without experiences of the body during those three jhanas- know that:
Here are some examples in English I found on Google 
‘Look at the wood’ vs. ‘look at the woods’ is probably the most straightforward one. In singular it means a piece of wood, in plural it means a forest.
I struggle to think of examples in my native Norwegian though; it probably varies from language to language how common this is. English is kind of a hot mess let’s be honest 
Edit: Actually, in Norwegian the singular force means ‘cancer’ (the disease), while the plural means forces (as in ‘the forces of nature’ but not including armed forces). There’s no logic to this, you just have to know it.
That’s a good point.
The other consideration here is that Nirodha Samapatti is “the cessation of perception and feeing” - no sounds, smells, tastes, sights - and no feeling of the body.
Or, in Nirodha Samapatti, the skandhas cease … meaning that, because sense consciousness has been abandoned, there is no way to hold on to the binding between form, feeling, impulse, and perception.
We also have “neither perception nor non-perception” as the precursor to Nirodha Samapatti … in other words, a transitional state where consciousness (sense consciousness) is in the process of being abandoned … for example, one knows that they are in the presence of sense media, but cannot decipher that media into anything “meaningful”.
Because they do not decipher the media it cannot be called perception, but because they also recognize the media as media it is cannot be called “non-perception”.
I believe the highest attainment taught by the Buddha was a supermundane state where all sense perception has been abandoned. I do not think the ultimate goal of abandonment of skhandas and absolutely no perception of the body occurs in the lower jhanas. And I strongly believe that no perception of the body, “Unbinding”, and being conscious (ie. “aware”) of that state should be differentiated from the “unconscious jhana” that is sometimes “espoused”.
I see the lower jhanas as stepping stones towards that goal; wherein the senses are deliberately detached from - in this case we have five senses, but because the tongue and the body are both tactile sense organs (if you think about it), there are four stages of deliberate detachment from the senses. The bliss and rapture of the jhanas are just the body in a state of detachment from the senses.
The bliss and jhana are what we would feel all of the time if we were withdrawn from the senses and not “slaves” to them.
Thanks for the clarification, Preston. 
I did indeed overlook the quotes, reading too quickly. But these texts also don’t say that the 5 senses cease only in the formless attainments.
They just say the formless attainments “can be known with purified (parisuddhena) mind consciousness released from the five senses”. Where does it say “explicitly” that in the jhanas there are still the five senses, and that they cease only in the formless attainments? To me, that is what you add to it.
I belief the key aspect in this statement is parisuddhena, not the five senses. It’s only in the fourth jhana that the mind becomes purified, namely in equanimity and mindfulness, (upekkha-sati-parisuddhim). Then this purity continues in the formless states. But the five senses already ceased in the first jhana (or even before that generally).
It’s a bit like I would say to my (hypothetical) child: When you get your driver’s license, then with our car you can go into town. This doesn’t mean the car appears the at the moment he gets his driver’s license. We had that car already. Likewise, in the jhanas the 5 senses were already abandoned, but only at the fourth does it become purified in equanimity—with which the 4 formless attainments “can be known”.
Not the greatest analogy, but I think you get my argument.
But that discussion aside, this passage clearly speaks favorably of abandoning the five senses. So that kind of “absorption” (I prefer ‘unification’) away from the five senses was something encouraged by the Buddha, at whatever level we think it is achieved (at the first jhana or the formless states). Therefore, as DeadBuddha pointed out before, if people try to aim for these mind-only states, they are safe either way.
Let’s say (just hypothetically) that I and others with similar ideas are wrong about the jhanas and there was still physical sense perception them. In that case, if people practice to go into the mind-only realm, they’ll at worse just overshoot the mark, and end up in the formless states. That’s way less problematic than if I were right, and they were satisfied with something lower than the jhanas.
However, I know this may sound arrogant, but I’m sure I’m not wrong.
Hi bhante, 
Every Pali dictionaries I have list the two meanings of kāma of ‘desire’ and ‘object’. I just quoted the Critical Pali Dictionary because it indicates this use of the singular and plural, but it’s in all of them.
But it is not “because of” the number that the meaning changes. It is because of the context. The number is just an extra indication we can use in this particular case of kāma.
Words can have multiple meanings, as everybody knows. If I say ‘match’, some people will think of a sports game, others of a small stick to light a candle. The two meanings of kāma are not as far apart as the two meanings of ‘match’, but they are still distinctly separate.
Now, it just happens to be the case that one of the two meanings of kāma is used solely (or almost solely) in the plural, and the other in the singular. But it is not the number that makes for the different meaning by itself. The number is a consequence of how the word is used. And we can use that to know which meaning applies.
Let’s imagine that ‘matches’ (plural) would always be used in the sense of a ‘fire lighting sticks’ and ‘match’ (singular) always in the sense of a game. Of course that’s not true in English, so it’s not a great example, but that’s how it basically works with kāma. We can tell by it’s number what it means.
And in case of the jhanas the context also indicates this. Sense desire is already included in the “unwholesome qualities”, the five hindrances, which are abandoned when one enters the first jhana. The other thing that is abandoned, the kāmehi, refers to the sense objects.
There is no good reason why the Buddha would isolate one of the five hindrances and mention it twice; also there are many text that indicate that kāmehi refers to the objects.
Or how do you understand this formula?
It’s a very unfortunate over-literal translation of the word kāya, which indeed sometimes means ‘body’ but also can mean ‘person’, just like ‘somebody’ means a person and not a body. When Bhikkhu Bodhi for example translates “he realizes the supreme truth with the body (kāya)” (AN4.113), this is obviously way too literal. You don’t experience the truth with the body; it means you experience the truth personally, or “with your own experience”.
With respect to the passage you mentioned, the PTS dictionary says:
Best to be grouped here is an application of kāya in the sense of the self as experiencing a great joy; the whole being, the “inner sense,” or heart.
This “inner sense” is the mind, which experiences the joy and bliss.
The pīti (joy/rapture/delight) of the jhanas is called pītimano, delight of the mind. Hence the suttas say: “When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil.” This means you focus so much on the mental rapture, the body becomes so tranquil that you can’t feel it anymore. Then also sukha arises because of that, which is also a mental feeling.
“When the mind is full of rapture” doesn’t rhyme with “their body gets drenched, steeped, filled, and spread with piti”. But the word ‘body’ is incorrect, that’s the problem.
I explained all this in much more detail in the workshops and youtube video I posted earlier. The similes also make it clear (to me) that the senses are abandoned.
See here for my translation of the passage:
[By abandoning the hindrances and 5 senses] you drenched, suffused, filled, and pervaded your experience with delight and bliss caused by the separation [from the 5 senses], so that there is no single part of your whole experience that is not pervaded with it.
I do admit that the suttas aren’t as clear about this as I could have hoped. But there are a lot of preconceptions about them, which makes people not see alternative interpretations. This is especially unfortunate if those people can only read English translations.
Hi Bhante,
My first post about the formless was in response to an interesting claim made by @josephzizys about the nature of embodiment in EBT. I have no intention of entering into the jhana debate here. I did not make a claim about the five senses being present in jhana or not (although I do disagree with what you say in your post).
Heh, I’m also certain I’m not wrong about jhana and have a very different view to yours. Funny how that works isn’t it? I am open to new evidence, but frankly it’s very unlikely that anyone on this forum could provide something new I haven’t seen already. A big issue I see in this debate (on both sides) is a lack of attention to the full semantic range of various words used related to jhana. I think for most people if they go through every single example in the canon of each word (and phrase like ‘upasampajja viharati’ for example) in the jhana formula without ignoring those cases that go against their interpretation and without attempting rationalization they can completely settle the debate for themself. Probably you agree. The questions of OP would be completely answered if they did so, since these issues IMO are very clear after doing this type of word-inventory. The problem is that doing this well (and objectively) can take many hours of work.
Anyways, that’s enough ‘meta-jhana-debate’ discussion from me.
Thank you so much Venerable! I find your arguments really interesting.
In English, we sometimes say “I love you with all my heart”. Here, of course, “heart” should not be interpreted in the anatomical and biological sense, but in an emotional sense. I have the impression that what you’re explaining sounds like that, and it sounds really interesting to me.
Its really almost the reverse of what @Sunyo says IMO (I am sure this opinion comes as no suprise to anyone)
Thinking and pondering cease in 2nd jhana (mental)
Elation ceases in 3rd jhana (emotion)
Pain ceases in 4th jhana (hedonic tone, a “physical” phenomena, i.e harder to trancend than mere personal thought, or mental state, or whatever).
This progressive development of calm amd stillness works its way down from an agitated mind, through agitated (rapturous) emotion, through to “physical” phenomena like pleasure and pain.
That the orthodox Theravada position is almost the opposite of this should be nonsuprise when even the pre-sectarian SN/SA corpus speaks of canonical times when the jhana tradition had been lost by the majority of monks who now claimed to be liberated by “wisdom” rather than jhana.
Bhante, thank you for your reply.
Regarding AN4.113, IMHO when the Buddha used the phrase dukkhito vā kālaṅkato vā, we should look at it in the same way as we look at the first Noble Truth specially regarding “illness is suffering and death is suffering”. Hence, again IMHO the word kāya in that sutta should be understood as physical body.
In addition, I found this paragraph below in the sutta regarding Mindfulness of the Body (MN119).
… nāssa kiñci sabbāvato kāyassa vivekajena pītisukhena apphuṭaṁ hoti. Tassa evaṁ appamattassa ātāpino pahitattassa viharato ye gehasitā sarasaṅkappā te pahīyanti. Tesaṁ pahānā ajjhattameva cittaṁ santiṭṭhati sannisīdati ekodi hoti samādhiyati. Evampi, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kāyagatāsatiṁ bhāveti.
We can find the words kāyassa and kāyagatāsatiṁ in the paragraph above. Please tell me do you think the Buddha would use the term kāya in one same paragraph/context but actually He was referring to two different meanings?
Thank you in advance.
No doubt that’s true for English. However let’s get back to the specific case.
As someone who pm’d me said it well,
This clearly shows the need to switch meanings so as to fit into a particular view of jhana.
Apart from those in the Aj Brahm school of thought and those who go by the Visuddhimagga’s idea of jhana, I don’t know of anyone who accepts that plural definition kama in Margaret Cone’s dictionary.
Greetings Bhante,
You mention:
The body is the main problem associated with existence and renewed existence IMO.
It is said that our bodies are our past kamma. And it is said that we are heirs to our kamma.
I see release from the body as a direct correlate to the abandoning of the perceptions. And as the highest attainment (ie. Nirodha Samapatti).
Perception and Mind are bond servants of the body.
The Buddha said:
AN4.45
If one knew & entered a samma samadhi (jhana) without losing it, they will be at least a non returner or higher (if not an Arahant). I doubt anyone has reached this level nowadays.
I suggest keep practice till one has the true knowledge & of course verify it.
Only 4th jhana will completely settle all physical discomfort because the five senses are well purified and can let go & know the ayatana. This is also when one has stop breathing (i.e. breathing cease). No/little breathing, body will automatically balance/cool.
Here is the passage which show the physical body is not yet perfected cool (passadhi) before 4th Jhana on MN 127 due to impurities (i.e. hindrances).
Keyword is:
kāyaduṭṭhullampi na suppaṭippassaddhaṁ
…
For by means of a simile some wise people understand the meaning of what is said.
Upamāyapidhekacce viññū purisā bhāsitassa atthaṁ ājānanti.Suppose an oil lamp was burning with impure oil and impure wick.
Seyyathāpi, āvuso kaccāna, telappadīpassa jhāyato telampi aparisuddhaṁ vaṭṭipi aparisuddhā.Because of the impurity of the oil and the wick it burns dimly, as it were.
So telassapi aparisuddhattā vaṭṭiyāpi aparisuddhattā andhandhaṁ viya jhāyati;In the same way, take some mendicant who meditates determined on pervading ‘corrupted radiance’.
evameva kho, āvuso kaccāna, idhekacco bhikkhu ‘saṅkiliṭṭhābhā’ti pharitvā adhimuccitvā viharati,Their physical discomfort is not completely cooled, their dullness and drowsiness is not completely eradicated, and their restlessness and remorse is not completely eliminated.
tassa kāyaduṭṭhullampi na suppaṭippassaddhaṁ hoti, thinamiddhampi na susamūhataṁ hoti, uddhaccakukkuccampi na suppaṭivinītaṁ hoti.Because of this they practice absorption dimly, as it were.
So kāyaduṭṭhullassapi na suppaṭippassaddhattā thinamiddhassapi na susamūhatattā uddhaccakukkuccassapi na suppaṭivinītattā andhandhaṁ viya jhāyati.When their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in the company of the gods of corrupted radiance.
Hey, preston, that’s understandable. Sorry for implying something you didn’t say. But when you said “the 5 senses ceasing in the formless” I read it as ceasing only at that moment. Because we also don’t say that the “hindrances cease in the formless”; we say they cease in the first jhana. With the topic at hand being whether there is physical sensation in the jhanas or not, I hope you can see why I replied as I did.
Lol. True. As soon as I pressed ‘post’ I kinda knew I shouldn’t have posted the last line, but I saw you were already replying. I didn’t want to edit my post anymore.
Anyway, I actually disagree that “they can completely settle the debate for themself” by reading the suttas. That’s why I said that last thing, actually. Because the suttas can clearly be interpreted both ways. Only experience will settle the debate.
That’s nice to hear. And yes, it is a bit like that, but not completely. Because kāya just can’t be translated with a single word. It doesn’t mean ‘touching the highest truth with the body’ in Pāli either. Because kāya doesn’t mean ‘body’ in this instance. (And likewise in the jhana similes.)
I would like to say again that if you have any doubt about whether in the jhanas there is physical sensation or not, it probably doesn’t really matter as long as you don’t “give up” on the deeper states of mind, which some people belief are attained only at the arūpas. Just practice for their “arūpas”, and you’ll be safe either way, as you implied earlier. 
To come back to your original question, to which I replied:
This is also the understanding of the suttas:
“And where does the arisen pain (dukkha) faculty cease without remainder? Here, bhikkhus, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhana”. (SN48.40, Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation)
Hey joseph, You’re very reliable, becaues I can always trust upon you to disagree with me! haha 
This “liberated by wisdom” is commonly thought to refer to somebody who is liberated through the four jhanas, not needing the arūpas. So in that case jhana didn’t get lost.
And if anything has gotten lost, I would argue it’s because people made it easier, because they lowered the bar. The kind of “jhana” some people teach nowadays can’t really get lost because most people can attain them with relative ease.
In fact, today between pindapat and lunch I had 5 minutes to meditate and I attained the “fourth jhana” according to some descriptions. 
(or according to how I understand them)
Where did you acquire this claim? According to the following table, there is a wide range of rebirths available to those with jhana attainment.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html
None of those states automatically imply non-returning.
On the same subject, those practicing “brahmavihara” can, if they understand it well and practice it well, abide in:
See: AN4.125