Do you have anything on brahmanical samadhi, because as far as I know the outcome to most systems whose aim is moksa is ananda. Thank you
Well, it does seem that the jhÄnas were practiced before Buddhism, whether by brahmanical ascetics or others. DN 1, the BrahmajÄla Sutta, has the following relevant passage:
There are some ascetics and brahmins who have this doctrine and view: āWhen this self amuses itself, supplied and provided with the five kinds of sensual stimulation, thatās how this self attains ultimate extinguishment in the present life.ā That is how some assert ultimate extinguishment for an existing being in the present life.
But someone else says to them: āThat self of which you speak does exist, I donāt deny it. But thatās not how this self attains ultimate extinguishment in the present life. Why is that? Because sensual pleasures are impermanent, suffering, and perishable. Their decay and perishing give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress. Quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, this self enters and remains in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected. Thatās how this self attains ultimate extinguishment in the present life.ā That is how some assert ultimate extinguishment for an existing being in the present life.
But someone else says to them: āThat self of which you speak does exist, I donāt deny it. But thatās not how this self attains ultimate extinguishment in the present life. Why is that? Because the placing of the mind and the keeping it connected there are coarse. But when the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, this self enters and remains in the second absorption ā¦ the third absorption ā¦ the fourth absorption ā¦
Yes, mokį¹£a is often described in terms that include Änanda, such a sat-cit-Änanda. But this is quite compatible with the jhÄnas, or at least the first three.
Yes, according the suttaās the Buddha saw sensual pleasure as low and not worth pursuing. And this is different from the kind of pleasure of jhana. But according the suttaās he also saw rupa and arupa raga, fetters, becoming attached to this kind of happiness.
Calm is not the same as pure. Purifying mind means that defilement are not surpressed but become uprooted. The mind really becomes more dispassionate in effortless way. Jhana is not purifying in itself, i believe. You can also see this in the fact that jhana can even become a base for raga. I believe there is only one thing able to purify, wisdom, seeing with wisdom.
If the bright kamma of jhana can give rise to rebirth, also that is a way to understand that jhana is in this situation not connected to purity.
I do not doubt this. The suttaās are very clear. In 4th jhana mind is extremely wieldy. All suttaās describe 4th jhana like this. Why do you doubt all this? This idea that mind becomes totally unable to use, apply, direct in jhana, or enters some blanc state, i have no idea what this all must mean. I feel it are really weird ideas about jhana. No sutta describes such as jhana. We are not allowed to talk about these things from experience but i feel there are many weird ideas about jhana.
I can only share with you that i feel there are really strange ideas about jhana. All those that describe jhana as without perception are certaily wrong. That i do not doubt. Suttaās also never say such. Jhana is never about loosing awareness. I never seen such.
I understand this like this: One does not have the noble Path yet fully if one still has some notion there is a self/I am entering and abiding in jhana. For someone who really knows, like Sariputta, there is not even a sense of me entering jhana. This is expressed in a sutta. At this moment i do not know which anymore, but there surely is such a sutta. When me and mine making is absent there is only mind entering jhana. There is only change in awareness happening. That what knows becomes more and more subtle and refined. But jhana entry without any notion of me, is only for someone who truly has uprooted all defilements. That is not a prerequisite for entering jhana.
Who is it that directs the mind in such a state? Thereās no one or no thing there, no sense of willful controlling, directing, etc. Mindfulness surely is there, but not as something that can be willed to go in any direction.
I guess you can interpret the sutta descriptions of jhanas in many ways. I prefer the interpretations of actual trained monastics (and even among those it may be possible to discern who has actually experienced the absorptions theyāre talking about).
I think that the taboo related to not talking about oneās jhanic experiences relates mostly to monastics? In the past I have observed that when talking about oneās own deep meditation experiences, the next time you meditate might not be as easy as it was before. I think itās because by talking about those experiences in a social situation, you might identify with certain conceptions of what is being presented as happening during your meditation, and then those āsolidifiedā expectations can become counterproductive for the meditative stillness to happen (more obstacles to overcome). That is why I personally prefer not to dwell too much on the subjective descriptions related to jhanas etc, itās actually to guard my own meditation process.
If i give you the instructing, suppose i do, to look at something, you may believe that this instruction is received, understood and being effected by a self. A self that understands the instruction, a self that directs the mind upon that something etc.
But Buddha teaches, i believe, this never truly happens. Even what receives the info and understands that instruction is not a self. Nor that what directs the mind is a self. Never ever. In no situation.
I believe Buddha teaches that there is never really a self that understands, knows, applies the mind, directs the mind, is mindfull, has wisdom, applies insight, has plans, intentions, desires etc. Not in daily life and not in jhana tooā¦
Still, even without the presence of a real self that understands and directs the mind, a real self that is mindfull, a real self that uses that powersā¦ there is understanding, there is the ability to direct the mind, there is the ability to be mindfull, there is the ability to make use of the powers, there is the initiative ability too.
Mind is very wieldy in 4th jhana is a consistent description of it.
āWho directs the mindā is even in daily life a wrong question. Directing the mind does never depend on the existence of a self.
I understand that choice. But it is also not like this that all monastics describe jhana in the same way. The most strange things happen when there is talk about jhana.
I agree. But i personally have no reason to believe that mind in 4th jhana is not extremely wieldy like the suttaās consistently describe.
Just as a PSA it is a pacittiya (confessable offence) for monastics to talk about real attainments (like jhanas), but it is a parajika (explusion from monastic life) to lie about attainments (though there is an exception for an honest overestimation).
I just feel like this cat about now
Or similarly
Hereās the thing @BethL - which is likely not news to you but makes my head just spin
Just to elaborate by paraphrasing ideas Iāve heard or read over the last 6 months, hereās what Iāve got
Jhanas have to be in light, but nope Jhanas can be in dark ā¦ there are 4 , or 8, even 9, ā¦ itās in order too, except when itās 1-2 skip a few ā¦. thereās one way in, 4 ways in, 5 ways in, and even from zero to the arupaās in 1 step, ā¦. you canāt intentionally think in that state, then oh yes of course u can, ā¦. that past life recall comes from 4, yet a whole bunch of little kids have seeming recall of past lives having never in this current existence gotten in anything even remotely resembling these states, ā¦. that even 1 can get someone stream entry, but something that might look like 4 might be lesser than 1 ā¦ getting to stream entry guarantees you no more than 6 more lives, but also that you canāt have that happen if u donāt / didnāt actually agree to āslow suicideā up front ā¦ the after effects last a while, as well as the after effects are permanent, ā¦. Iām sure I could come out with even more of these contradictions too
Who are you supposed to listen to ??? Seriously???
I donāt actually expect you to answer that last line/ question btw ā¦ it would just be another view and I still wouldnāt know what was correct or not. I m starting to wonder how any of you guys can even be sure yourselves.
I also find it difficult when there are several teachers whom I trust (monastic teachers whose ethical conduct seems impeccable and whose knowledge of the dhamma is very deep and vast), and yet, those teachersā teachings on some matters of the path contradict each other. Perhaps in those situations itās good to reflect on your own experiences and trust your own insights regarding those matters.
Hereinā¦ the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness. (The disciple), aloof from sensuality, aloof from evil conditions, enters on the first trance, which is accompanied by thought directed and sustained, which is born of solitude, easeful and zestful, and abides therein.
(SN 48.10; tr. Pali Text Society vol. V p 174)
I believe the āself-surrenderā that Gautama called for here is a surrender of the exercise of will in physical activity, the surrender of volition in physical activity, not necessarily the surrender of will in mental activity.
āOne-pointednessā I believe is the singular location of the consciousness associated with āI amā in the body.
That singularity has been the study of modern neurobiology and medicine, and there are cases on record of individuals who experienced themselves being in two places at one time (likely due to the malfunction of organs connected with the sense of balance), but those cases are extremely rare. So weāre talking about something more than a vanity of self, when we talk about the singular location of consciousness in the body at any given moment.
I would say that the fourth concentration is marked by activity of the body that takes place solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness. Gautamaās description:
Again, a (person), putting away easeā¦ enters and abides in the fourth musing (concentration); seated, (one) suffuses (oneās) body with purity by the pureness of (oneās) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (oneās) mind. ā¦
(AN 5.28, tr. PTS vol. III p 18-19; parentheticals paraphrase original).
Gautama made clear through his choice of words (ānot one particleā¦ that is not pervadedā) that the mind can remain one-pointed, even as the body is suffused with āpurity by the pureness of mindā.
The cessation of the exercise of will in the activity of the mind, of the exercise of volition in feeling and perceiving, belongs to the last of the āincorporealā states.
Thatās the way I understand it.
Itās actually fairly easy to vet-out teachers talking about Jhana than it is to find a reliable source. And to be honest, I havenāt found any teacher who explains these things better than the Nikaya/Agama sources.
The most simple analogy I have is chasing after a potential romantic interest. If one tries too hard at it, it usually backfires. Thinking x + y = z doesnāt often work.
Jhanas are a by-product of an advanced practitioner striving towards the end of dukkha. Itās an inevitability. One should focus rather on the ultimate goal, that is, cessation of dukkha, and jhanas will follow.
Two important take aways from the concept of jhana for me is that:
- Mind is more malleable when itās comfortable rather than when itās stressed. Greater & subtler experiences of bliss enable a mind to think clearly.
- As the bliss of jhanas are refined, mind realizes that earlier experiences once thought of as bliss are just as troublesome and uncomfortable, and true ease is found in subtler and subtler experiences, to the point of cessation of experience and freedom from conditioned reality.
All other topics (light, dark, nimittas, bodily, out of body, this and that) I believe, should be understood in this framework.
āKeep It Simple, Sillyā. Unfortunately, thereās whole sectors devoted to keeping it complicated as to have people depend on the teachers.
Well I better go find those sources then and read for myself. Thx
https://suttacentral.net/arv?view=normal&lang=en
This is a brilliant summary of core principles of Nikayas/Agamas. Without the fluff, without the commentarial exegesis, so on.
Jhanas / Ayatanas are found under āFour Absorptionsā and āFour formless attainmentsā.
Thatās all I rely on.
Fist bump ā¦ thank you so much for just making that way easy for me
No. Jhana are in the moment volitionally produced temporary states that are a pleasant abiding here and now. If a Buddha wants to enter and abide in jhana he can apply his mind to enter and abide in it. Or others. It are not by-products of practice.
If one has some power to concentrate one will probably be able to enter and abide in jhana. The idea that one must so noble or advanced to enter and abide in jhana ā¦wellā¦how advanced was Buddha as child when he entered and abides in jhana?
Such thinking is not conducive to the goal i feel @Dogen . What one needs is that development that one is at ease with things that are not comfortable.
If one only start to welcome comfort that goes totally wrong.
True ease is really only found in having no wish for comfort and pleasant temporary states at all.
@Green it feels like youāre preaching now and negating what Dogen said. Thatās how it comes across to me. Isnāt it possible to entertain what he said without totally negating it?
Letās see whatās transpiredā¦
Seeing how Buddha attained jhana as a kid involuntarily, it means itās a by-product of the conditions that enable it, even without a conscious efforts towards it (even if a seasoned meditator can learn to enter and leave these states at will).
You seem to have a different view on what I meant by āadvanced practitionerā. Buddha was certainly an advanced being and practitioner in his lifes in samsara. He was far along the eightfold path even as a child.
If itās raining and I have an umbrella, Iāll use it to shield myself from the rain and not subject myself to rain, cold, sickness and trouble.
Some of our actions are going to get us wet, some are going to get us damp. Trying to pretend thereās no difference between the two is not practical, not compassionate. Buddha found enlightenment not through his starvation but after eating his rice-puding.
While I donāt actually disagree with your last statement, the way to go there can be conditioned by chasing after ease & comfort, very practically, rather than shaming people for choosing comfort over discomfort.
Otherwise, shaming people for valuing ease and comfort results in enabling abusive relationships. One may take up such a mantle, but they should never suggest it to others. I can only suggest people to care the best for themselves, as did Buddha.