Yes, and I am a native English language speaker.
1 Like
Good. So what’s evaṁ and what is it being translated into in ‘when I have been doing this’ or "“when I’m practicing like this”?
1 Like
I’m afraid that you are not grasping my point.
Translation is not just a literal rendering of each word in the source language. It is creating a reading that conveys the sense of the original in an idiomatic way for the reader.
What you seem to be disagreeing with is the meaning of the text, not the translation.
2 Likes
Bhante, 
I see where you’re coming from.
But I don’t think that translation works well in AN4.11, showing that literalism isn’t always the answer.
I would probably translate it, following Monier-Williams’ dictionary, “when I am of such nature (that I easily attain the jhanas, or that I attained the jhana earlier)”, or following the commentaries as “having been”. My point is, we both translate it in a biased way, in light of how we understand the jhānas, but Bhante Sujato’s translations seems possible to me to be read both ways, and therefore is not biased.
Either way:
- The Bodhisattva sat down under the rose-apple tree before attaining first jhana
- He sat down under the Bodhi tree before he attained jhanas at his awakening
- Ānāpānassati, which includes jhanas, is always said to be done sitting down
- In the fourth jhāna simile one “sits down”
- The hindrances are abandoned and jhānas attained after sitting down in MN51
- In Thag9.1 the jhānas are attained when sitting down
- The Buddha says he feels exclusively pleasure (of 1st-3rd jhānas, it is implied) for seven days without moving in MN14
- (A bit ambigious, perhaps, but the jhānas are said to be how the Budda “lies down” in AN4.246)
- In DN16 he lays down before attaining the jhānas
- In this very sutta itself (AN3.63) the Buddha says he sits down before attaining the jhānas
From all this, and probably more, it seems to me that sitting (or lying), not moving, is a requirement for the jhānas. Opposed to all this we have a single sutta (in which the Buddha also explicitly says he sits down before attaining jhānas…) where our interpretation hinges on one ambiguous term evaṃbhūto. I don’t know, but I wouldn’t want my interpretation to depend on something like that.
(I also have lots of pragmatic issues. Why would one be able to move about, hear sounds, think, but not be able to speak, for example. But that’s another thread.)
5 Likes
Here we have samādhi occurring whilst walking.
Suppose a mendicant has got rid of desire and ill will while walking, and has given up dullness and drowsiness, restlessness and remorse, and doubt. Their energy is roused up and unflagging, their mindfulness is established and lucid, their body is tranquil and undisturbed, and their mind is immersed in samādhi. Such a mendicant is said to be ‘keen and prudent, always energetic and determined’ when walking.
Carato cepi, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno abhijjhābyāpādo vigato hoti, thinamiddhaṁ … uddhaccakukkuccaṁ … vicikicchā pahīnā hoti, āraddhaṁ hoti vīriyaṁ asallīnaṁ, upaṭṭhitā sati asammuṭṭhā, passaddho kāyo asāraddho, samāhitaṁ cittaṁ ekaggaṁ, carampi, bhikkhave, bhikkhu evaṁbhūto ‘ātāpī ottāpī satataṁ samitaṁ āraddhavīriyo pahitatto’ti vuccati.
AN 4.12
Here there is samādhi whilst being physically assaulted
My energy shall be roused up and unflagging, my mindfulness established and lucid, my body tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind immersed in samādhi. Gladly now, let fists, stones, sticks, and swords strike this body! For this is how the instructions of the Buddhas are followed.’
Āraddhaṃ kho pana me vīriyaṃ bhavissati asallīnaṃ, upaṭṭhitā sati asammuṭṭhā, passaddho kāyo asāraddho, samāhitaṃ cittaṃ ekaggaṃ. Kāmaṃ dāni imasmiṃ kāye pāṇisamphassāpi kamantu, leḍḍusamphassāpi kamantu, daṇḍasamphassāpi kamantu, satthasamphassāpi kamantu, karīyati hidaṃ buddhānaṃ sāsanan’ti.
MN 28
This doesn’t read like the 5 senses are cut off, and does read like someone can walk around whilst in Jhāna.
6 Likes
Also here
“Mendicants, there are five benefits of walking meditation. What five? You get fit for traveling, fit for striving in meditation, and healthy. What’s eaten, drunk, chewed, and tasted is properly digested. And immersion gained while walking lasts long. These are the five benefits of walking meditation.”
AN 5.29
5 Likes
Why should we prefer the non-literal translation here?
2 Likes
Sure, but the term samādhi is used more widely than jhānas. Jhāna is sammā samādhi, not all samādhi is sammā samādhi. The question we’re having is not whether one can walk with some sort of samādhi, but whether one can walk in the jhānas.
1 Like
Looks like it’s talking about Jhana to me. The same pericope is used as elsewhere (settled, still, collected) and in my first post it’s referring to the hindrances being abandoned. Doesn’t Sujato argue that samadhi always refers to Jhana?
2 Likes
When I was sleeping, I was in a dream state. In this state, I walk, run…However, this does not mean that I was physically walking or running from my bed. In fact, I was still sleeping in my bed.
When I was sleeping, I was in a dream state. In this state, if I walk, my walking is dreamy. If I run, my running is dreamy.
When my mind is no longer affected by the five hindrances, it can easily enter and remain in jhanas. In this state, it is filled with joy, happiness… Obviously, this is the celestial state. In this celestial state, if I walk, my walking is celestial, if I stand, my standing is celestial. However, this does not mean that I physically walk or stand on that occasion.
When my mind is filled with unconditional love, it is in the divine state. In this state, if I walk, my walking is divine, if I stand, my standing is divine. However, this does not mean that I physically walk or stand on that occasion.
When I have abandoned greed, hatred, delusion , cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, obliterated them so that they are no more subject to future arising. Seeing that, my mind is in a state of noble ones. When I am in such a state, if I walk, my walking is noble, if I stand, my standing is noble. However, this does not mean that I must physically walk or stand on that occasion.
That is how I understand AN3.63.
1 Like
Venerable, your argument is really interesting. So I reread the suttas several times carefully, and I noticed something.
In AN 3.63, the Buddha says that the meditator enters fourth jhana, and then he says :
Then, brahmin, when I am in such a state, if I walk back and forth, on that occasion my walking back and forth is celestial. If I am standing, on that occasion my standing is celestial. If I am sitting, on that occasion my sitting is celestial. If I lie down, on that occasion this is my celestial high and luxurious bed.
This is taken by some people as proof that one can walk in jhana.
And in MN 122, the Buddha says that the meditator enters fourth jhana, and then he says:
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to walking, they walk, thinking
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to standing, they stand, thinking
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to sitting, they sit, thinking
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to lying down, they lie down, thinking
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to talking, they think
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to thinking, they think
Reading carefully, I notice that unlike the body positions, the Buddha does not say “While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to talking, they talk, thinking”, but he does say “While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to talking, they think”.
So it doesn’t seem as clear to me that someone holding AN 3.63 as proof should take MN 122 as proof that one can speak in jhana.
However, it is true that in this translation of MN 122, it says that one is “thinking” in jhana (just look at the quotes above). But I don’t know if the word “thinking” here has the same meaning as vitakka and vicara. Perhaps the idea is to “comprehend” without relying on vitakka and vicara? I don’t know, I don’t know Pali at all.
And it seems to me that when the Buddha says “While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to thinking, they think”, we’re in the same situation as for speech: the Buddha says that the meditator’s mind can incline to use vitakka, but the Buddha doesn’t say that the meditator uses vitakka (but I have the impression that here you need to know Pali, which is not my case).
Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Please Venerable, do you think MN 122 is a sutta showing that one can walk in jhana?
“If, Ānanda, dwelling in this way, a bhikkhu’s mind inclines to walking, he walks: ‘Walking thus, the evil, unprofitable states of covetousness and grief will not invade me.’ Thus he is possessed of full awareness therein.
https://suttacentral.net/mn122/en/nyanamoli-thera?lang=fr&reference=main&highlight=false
The answer to this question is not clear to me.
That first post indeed says they abandoned the hindrances, but not that they attained jhana. You can abandon the hindrances without entering jhāna, because there is another thing you have to do, which is to become fully separated from kāmā (sensory experiences)". In fact, that this sutta specifically says “while walking” one abandons the hindrances but does NOT mentions jhāna or abandoning sensory experiences, I think speaks in favor of the non-bodily interpretation of jhana. I’d say it purposefully leaves “separated form sensory experiences” out, it and only mentions abandoning the hindrances, the latter of which I agree one can do while walking.
Bhante Sujato has stated samādhi has a broader meaning than jhānas as well, see Swift Pair of Messengers. So has Ānalayo, and I think most everybody, actually.
No, unless you believe one can also think in the fourth jhāna.
(Edit: what I said here before wasn’t right.)
Another text which uses very similar Pali is DN16: “‘Oh, how incredible, how amazing! Those who have gone forth remain in such peaceful meditations (vihārena viharanti).” It’s clear does not mean to say that they dwell in these meditations RIGHT NOW, but that they do so generally. The same is the case in MN122.
4 Likes
Thank you very much Bhante !
1 Like
Incidentally, there’s one argument to which I’m very sensitive and which gives me the strong impression that Anapanasati is talking about the breathing body and not the biological body.
Quite simply, the Buddha himself says this in MN 118:
Whenever a mendicant knows that they breathe heavily, or lightly, or experiencing the whole body, or stilling physical processes—at that time they’re meditating by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of covetousness and displeasure for the world. For I say that the in-breaths and out-breaths are an aspect of the body. That’s why at that time a mendicant is meditating by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of covetousness and displeasure for the world.
Whenever a mendicant practices breathing while experiencing rapture, or experiencing bliss, or experiencing mental processes, or stilling mental processes—at that time they meditate observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of covetousness and displeasure for the world. For I say that careful application of mind to the in-breaths and out-breaths is an aspect of feelings. That’s why at that time a mendicant is meditating by observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of covetousness and displeasure for the world.
This gives me the very strong impression that, in fact, Anapanasati is only about one particular type of “body” and “sensations”: the breath. And in fact, I’m inclined to think it’s the same for the other tetrads.
In fact, perhaps something that gives some people the impression that the Buddha is talking about a biological body is that these people don’t know that the Buddha has a rather “surprising” conception of breathing, since a nun places breathing in the category of bodily physical processes:
“Breathing is physical. It’s tied up with the body, that’s why breathing is a physical process.
(MN 44)
The first tetrad seems to focus on the physical body (breathing) but not on the biological body.
What do you think? It’s quite possible I’m talking nonsense…
1 Like
Dear Venerable @Sunyo , sorry to bother you, but please, I would like to have an information about Ajahn Brahm’s thought: does Ajahn Brahm think that one can practice insight meditation (often called vipassana - for example, contemplating impermanence) while being in jhana? In other words, for Ajahn Brahm, is it necessary to leave jhana in order to practice insight meditations?
[EDIT :
In his book Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond, Ajahn Brahm says this (and it seems to suggest that insight-centered meditation cannot be practiced during jhana):
That is how the Buddha described ānāpānasati. It’s a
complete practice that starts with just sitting down in a quiet place, on a comfortable seat, mindful of what’s in front of you and just watching the breath. Step by step—in steps that you know are within your ability—you reach these profound and blissful states called jhāna.
When you emerge from them, you have any one of these
four things to contemplate: anicca, the impermanence or uncertainty of things; virāga, the fading away of things; nirodha, cessation of self; and patiṇ issagga, letting go of all that’s “in here.” And if you reflect upon those things after
the experience of jhāna, then something is going to
happen. I often say that jhāna is the gunpowder and
reflection is the match. If you put the two together, then
there’s going to be a bang somewhere. It’s only a matter of
time.
Such one-pointedness in space produces the peculiar experience, only found in jhāna, of nondual consciousness, where one is fully aware but only of one thing, and from one
angle, for timeless periods. Consciousness is so focused
on the one thing that the faculty of comprehension is
suspended a while. Only after the one-pointedness has dissipated, and one has emerged from the jhāna, will one
be able to recognize these features of the first jhāna and
comprehend them all.
End of the EDIT]
Thank you in advance Venerable, and thank you again for your great benevolence and the quality of your arguments. I am extremely touched by the fact of being able to discuss with people who give their whole life to the practice of the Dhamma…
You are right about this. It is not clear that the talking happens “While a mendicant is practicing such meditation”, but it may well be implied. The fact that “their mind inclines to talking” suggests that it is close to happening.
There is no word. It just says so, “he”, followed by a quote, with the idea of thinking implied. This is a common construction in Pali. There is no real difference between this and the use of the word vitakka.
1 Like
Thank you very much Venerable @Brahmali ! Just to be sure, about the second part of your message, were you replying to something other than the one you quoted?
Sorry, it was a reply to this:
1 Like
In the Pali it is even clearer. It literally says, “I call the in-breaths-out-breaths a certain body (kāya) inside the body”. I would translate the phrase more like Bhante Sujato too, but now you can see that in Pali the breath is equated to being a kāya. So when earlier it says “experience the whole kāya”, the Buddha explains in this very same sutta that this means the whole breath.
This I take to mean “whole” as in from the beginning to the end and back. This is a progression from just noticing the length of the breath, for which you only need to know how much time there is between the beginning and end. You can lose some track of the breath in between those two end points, not being aware of the “whole breath”.
Some Sanskrit and Chinese parallels also do not use “(whole) body” for this step but “(whole) bodily activity”, which in context of meditation refers to the breath (MN44). (Not in context of Dependent Arising, where it refers to bodily karma.)
I’m not sure exactly how this relates to the question whether jhānas are bodily states or not, but perhaps you are referring to the wider use of kāya, going beyond just ‘physical body’. Indeed, you’re right, the word kāya has a much wider meaning than just physical body. But at times it also goes beyond any aspects of the body. Among other things, it also can refer to the person more generally, just like we say ‘somebody’.
In the third jhāna “by the kāya” (kāyena) means “by the person”, i.e. “personally”:
And with the fading away of rapture, they enter and remain in the third absorption, where they meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, personally (kāyena) experiencing the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’
The point is, one personally experiences the sukha one has heard about from the noble ones before.
Why do the noble ones declare something about this jhana but not the others? It could just be a quirk, but perhaps it’s because the third jhāna is in some limited sense the ultimate “blissful abiding” (sukhavihara), a term the noble ones mention in many suttas. In the fourth jhana the sukha ceases, so it’s not a sukhavihara anymore in a way (although it still is in a higher sense of the word). But regardless of why it is here, since such a statement by the noble ones is only found in the third jhāna formula, and kāyena is also only found in the third jhāna formula, it seems the two must go together, and they do very well. Elsewhere one is also said to experience “kāyena” (personally) what one has heard from others.
For example SN48.50, which I think Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi translated way too literally:
As to these things that previously I had only heard about, now I dwell having contacted them with the body [or “personally”] and, having pierced them through with wisdom, I see.
He makes the same mistake of being overly literal in the third jhana formula, in my view.
The word kāyena has the sense of ‘personally’ in many other places too, and it even refers to nibbāna sometimes. In AN9.43 it is explained what kāyena means with respect to the jhānas, and arūpas and the cessation of perception. 
Elsewhere nibbāna is also said to be experienced “kāyena”. (E.g. SN48.54, Iti73, AN6.46) Do we feel all those things “with the body”? No.
You answered your own question.
3 Likes